Temozolomide versus standard 6-week radiotherapy versus hypofractionated radiotherapy in patients older than 60 years with glioblastoma: the Nordic randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with glioblastoma are older than 60 years, but treatment guidelines are based on trials in patients aged only up to 70 years. We did a randomised trial to assess the optimum palliative treatment in patients aged 60 years and older with glioblastoma. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were recruited from Austria, Denmark, France, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey. They were assigned by a computer-generated randomisation schedule, stratified by centre, to receive temozolomide (200 mg/m(2) on days 1-5 of every 28 days for up to six cycles), hypofractionated radiotherapy (34·0 Gy administered in 3·4 Gy fractions over 2 weeks), or standard radiotherapy (60·0 Gy administered in 2·0 Gy fractions over 6 weeks). Patients and study staff were aware of treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN81470623. FINDINGS: 342 patients were enrolled, of whom 291 were randomised across three treatment groups (temozolomide n=93, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=98, standard radiotherapy n=100) and 51 of whom were randomised across only two groups (temozolomide n=26, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=25). In the three-group randomisation, in comparison with standard radiotherapy, median overall survival was significantly longer with temozolomide (8·3 months [95% CI 7·1-9·5; n=93] vs 6·0 months [95% CI 5·1-6·8; n=100], hazard ratio [HR] 0·70; 95% CI 0·52-0·93, p=0·01), but not with hypofractionated radiotherapy (7·5 months [6·5-8·6; n=98], HR 0·85 [0·64-1·12], p=0·24). For all patients who received temozolomide or hypofractionated radiotherapy (n=242) overall survival was similar (8·4 months [7·3-9·4; n=119] vs 7·4 months [6·4-8·4; n=123]; HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·63-1·06; p=0·12). For age older than 70 years, survival was better with temozolomide and with hypofractionated radiotherapy than with standard radiotherapy (HR for temozolomide vs standard radiotherapy 0·35 [0·21-0·56], p<0·0001; HR for hypofractionated vs standard radiotherapy 0·59 [95% CI 0·37-0·93], p=0·02). Patients treated with temozolomide who had tumour MGMT promoter methylation had significantly longer survival than those without MGMT promoter methylation (9·7 months [95% CI 8·0-11·4] vs 6·8 months [5·9-7·7]; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·34-0·93], p=0·02), but no difference was noted between those with methylated and unmethylated MGMT promoter treated with radiotherapy (HR 0·97 [95% CI 0·69-1·38]; p=0·81). As expected, the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the temozolomide group were neutropenia (n=12) and thrombocytopenia (n=18). Grade 3-5 infections in all randomisation groups were reported in 18 patients. Two patients had fatal infections (one in the temozolomide group and one in the standard radiotherapy group) and one in the temozolomide group with grade 2 thrombocytopenia died from complications after surgery for a gastrointestinal bleed. INTERPRETATION: Standard radiotherapy was associated with poor outcomes, especially in patients older than 70 years. Both temozolomide and hypofractionated radiotherapy should be considered as standard treatment options in elderly patients with glioblastoma. MGMT promoter methylation status might be a useful predictive marker for benefit from temozolomide. FUNDING: Merck, Lion's Cancer Research Foundation, University of Umeå, and the Swedish Cancer Society

Osimertinib in T790M-positive and -negative patients with EGFR-mutated advanced non-small cell lung cancer (the TREM-study)

Abstract Objectives: In non-small cell lung cancer patients with acquired resistance to first- or second-generation EGFR-TKIs, osimertinib is approved in the presence of the T790 M resistance mutation. We assessed the efficacy of osimertinib in both T790M-positive and T790M-negative patients. Materials and methods: The TREM-study is an investigator-initiated, multi-centre, single-arm, phase 2 clinical trial conducted in five Northern European countries. Patients with progression on at least one previous EGFR-TKI were assigned to treatment with 80 mg of osimertinib daily until radiological progression or death. Patients were included regardless of the presence of T790 M. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Results: Of 199 included patients, 120 (60 %) were T790M-positive, 52 (26 %) were T790M-negative and 27 (14 %) had unknown T790M-status. 24 % had brain metastases and 15 % had an ECOG performance status of 2. Overall ORR was 48 % (95 % CI, 41 %–55 %), 60 % (51 %–69 %) for T790M-positive patients and 28 % (15 %–41 %) for T790M-negative patients, p < 0.001. ORR for patients with co-occurring del19 vs L858R was 61 % vs 32 %, p = 0.001. Duration of response was similar between the T790M-positive and –negative groups (11.8 vs 10.7 months, p = 0.229). Overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.9 months (95 % CI, 7.4–10.5), and 10.8 vs 5.1 months for T790M-positive vs –negative patients (HR 0.62, p = 0.007). Median overall survival (OS) was 17.9 months (95 % CI, 14.4–21.3). For T790M-positive vs –negative median OS was 22.5 vs 13.4 months, (HR 0.55, p = 0.002). Conclusions: This study confirms the efficacy of osimertinib for T790M-positive patients. There was also clinically significant activity of osimertinib in a proportion of T790M-negative patients. Clinical trial registration: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02504346)

DNA methylation-based age acceleration observed in IDH wild-type glioblastoma is associated with better outcome-including in elderly patients

Elderly patients represent a growing proportion of individuals with glioblastoma, who however, are often excluded from clinical trials owing to poor expected prognosis. We aimed at identifying age-related molecular differences that would justify and guide distinct treatment decisions in elderly glioblastoma patients. The combined DNA methylome (450 k) of four IDH wild-type glioblastoma datasets, comprising two clinical trial cohorts, was interrogated for differences based on the patients' age, DNA methylation (DNAm) age acceleration (DNAm age "Horvath-clock" minus patient age), DNA methylation-based tumor classification (Heidelberg), entropy, and functional methylation of DNA damage response (DDR) genes. Age dependent methylation included 19 CpGs (p-value ≤ 0.1, Bonferroni corrected), comprising a CpG located in the ELOVL2 gene that is part of a 13-gene forensic age predictor. Most of the age related CpGs (n = 16) were also associated with age acceleration that itself was associated with a large number of CpGs (n = 50,551). Over 70% age acceleration-associated CpGs (n = 36,348) overlapped with those associated with the DNA methylation based tumor classification (n = 170,759). Gene set enrichment analysis identified associated pathways, providing insights into the biology of DNAm age acceleration and respective commonalities with glioblastoma classification. Functional methylation of several DDR genes, defined as correlation of methylation with gene expression (r ≤ -0.3), was associated with age acceleration (n = 8), tumor classification (n = 12), or both (n = 4), the latter including MGMT. DNAm age acceleration was significantly associated with better outcome in both clinical trial cohorts, whereof one comprised only elderly patients. Multivariate analysis included treatment (RT, RT/TMZ→TMZ; TMZ, RT), MGMT promoter methylation status, and interaction with treatment. In conclusion, DNA methylation features of age acceleration are an integrative part of the methylation-based tumor classification (RTK I, RTK II, MES), while patient age seems hardly reflected in the glioblastoma DNA methylome. We found no molecular evidence justifying other treatments in elderly patients, not owing to frailty or co-morbidities

Intracranial effect of osimertinib in relapsed EGFR-mutated T790M-positive and -negative non-small cell lung cancer patients: results from a phase II study

Abstract Introduction: Osimertinib is effective for relapsed T790M-positive patients with brain metastases. The high brain permeability suggests that also such patients without T790M could benefit. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of osimertinib on brain metastases in both T790M-positive and -negative patients. Methods: The TREM-study was an investigator-initiated phase II, single-arm, multi-institutional clinical trial conducted in Northern Europe. Patients with resistance to prior EGFR-TKIs received osimertinib until radiological progression, unacceptable toxicity or death. Baseline brain scans were performed in patients with known or suspected brain metastases and repeated every 8–12 weeks. We assessed intracranial efficacy in patients with baseline brain metastases. Results: Brain metastases were detected in 48/199 patients at baseline. Of these, 63% were T790M-positive, 27% -negative and 10% had unknown T790M-status. The majority (73%) of the patients had received prior whole brain radiotherapy and additionally 8% had received stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS). Brain scans were available for review for 42 patients. The intracranial progression free survival was 39.7 versus 3.5 months for T790M + and T790M- patients, respectively (p < 0.001). The overall intracranial disease control rate (iDCR) was 81%, and for T790M + and T790M- patients the DCR was 89% versus 55%, respectively. The estimated risk of CNS progression was 0.8% at 6 months and 6% at 12 months for T790M-positive patients, and 14% and 17% at 6 and 12 months, respectively, for the T790M-negative. Conclusions: This subgroup analysis confirms CNS efficacy of osimertinib in patients with the T790M resistance mutation, while other treatment options should be considered for EGFR-TKI relapsed T790M-negative patients with brain metastases

Osimertinib in non-small cell lung cancer with uncommon EGFR-mutations:a post-hoc subgroup analysis with pooled data from two phase II clinical trials

Abstract Background: Osimertinib is standard of care for EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. The efficacy of the drug in patients with mutations other than the common deletion in exon 19 and L858R in exon 21 is largely unknown. Methods: We identified patients with uncommon EGFR-mutations from two prospective clinical phase II, single-arm studies for previously treated patients and untreated patients, respectively, and pooled data for this analysis. All patients received treatment with osimertinib 80 mg daily until radiological progression or death. The primary endpoint of both trials was objective response rate (ORR), with progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and intracranial efficacy as key secondary endpoints. Circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) was analysed before and two weeks after treatment initiation in the first line cohort. Results: Of 299 enrolled patients in the two trials, 21 patients with uncommon mutations were identified; 12 patients had a single mutation (G719X or L861Q), one patient had L861Q and an exon 20 insertion, and 8 patients had compound mutations with G719X and either L861Q or S768I. Three of the 10 pretreated patients had the T790M resistance mutation. ORR was 47.6% and disease control rate (DCR) 85.7%. The median duration of response (DoR) was 7.9 months. Among 11 patients treated with osimertinib in first line, ORR was 63.6% vs. 30.0% of 10 previously treated patients. The median PFS was 5.5 months in both groups. Patients with G719X-compound mutations had a higher response rate (62.5% vs. 38.5%), a longer median PFS (13.7 vs. 3.5 months) and median OS (29.3 vs. 7.5 months) than patients with other mutations. Most first line treated patients (81.8%) displayed a reduction in ctDNA after two weeks of treatment. Conclusions: Osimertinib demonstrates activity in patients with uncommon EGFR-mutations, and especially for G719X-compound mutations

Geriatric assessment is superior to oncologists’ clinical judgement in identifying frailty

Background: Frailty is a syndrome associated with increased vulnerability and an important predictor of outcomes in older cancer patients. Systematic assessments to identify frailty are seldom applied, and oncologists’ ability to identify frailty is scarcely investigated. Methods: We compared oncologists’ classification of frailty (onc-frail) based on clinical judgement with a modified geriatric assessment (mGA), and investigated associations between frailty and overall survival. Patients X70 years referred for medical cancer treatment were eligible. mGA-frailty was defined as impairment in at least one of the following: daily activities, comorbidity, polypharmacy, physical function or at least one geriatric syndrome (cognitive impairment, depression, malnutrition, falls). Results: Three hundred and seven patients were enroled, 288 (94%) completed the mGA, 286 (93%) were rated by oncologists. Median age was 77 years, 56% had metastases, 85% performance status (PS) 0–1. Overall, 104/286 (36%) were onc-frail and 140/288 (49%) mGA-frail, the agreement was fair (kappa value 0.30 (95% CI 0.19; 0.41)), and 67 mGA-frail patients who frequently had localised disease, good PS and received curative treatment, were missed by the oncologists. Only mGA-frailty was independently prognostic for survival (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.14; 2.27; P¼0.007). Conclusions: Systematic assessment of geriatric domains is needed to aid oncologists in identifying frail patients with poor survival.publishedVersio

Vinorelbine and gemcitabine vs vinorelbine and carboplatin as first-line treatment of advanced NSCLC. A phase III randomised controlled trial by the Norwegian Lung Cancer Study Group

BACKGROUND: Platinum-based doublet chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), but earlier studies have suggested that non-platinum combinations are equally effective and better tolerated. We conducted a national, randomised study to compare a non-platinum with a platinum combination. METHODS: Eligible patients had stage IIIB/IV NSCLC and performance status (PS) 0–2. Patients received up to three cycles of vinorelbine 60 mg m(−2) p.o.+gemcitabine 1000 mg m(−2) i.v. day 1 and 8 (VG) or vinorelbine 60 mg m(−2) p.o. day 1 and 8+carboplatin area under the curve=5 (Calvert's formula) i.v. day 1 (VC). Patients ⩾75 years received 75% of the dose. Endpoints were overall survival, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), toxicity, and the use of radiotherapy. RESULTS: We randomised 444 patients from September 2007 to April 2009. The median age was 65 years, 58% were men and 25% had PS 2. Median survival was VG: 6.3 months; VC: 7.0 months, P=0.802. Vinorelbine plus carboplatin patients had more grade III/IV nausea/vomiting (VG: 4%, VC: 12%, P=0.008) and grade IV neutropenia (VG: 7%, VC: 19%, P<0.001). Infections, HRQoL and the use of radiotherapy did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: The two regimens yielded similar overall survival. The VG combination had only a slightly better toxicity profile