A Bayesian adaptive randomized phase II multicenter trial of bevacizumab with or without vorinostat in adults with recurrent glioblastoma.
Bayesian adaptive trial design
bevacizumab
progression free survival
recurrent glioblastoma
vorinostat
Journal
Neuro-oncology
ISSN: 1523-5866
Titre abrégé: Neuro Oncol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100887420
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 10 2020
14 10 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
14
3
2020
medline:
24
4
2021
entrez:
14
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bevacizumab has promising activity against recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). However, acquired resistance to this agent results in tumor recurrence. We hypothesized that vorinostat, a histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor with anti-angiogenic effects, would prevent acquired resistance to bevacizumab. This multicenter phase II trial used a Bayesian adaptive design to randomize patients with recurrent GBM to bevacizumab alone or bevacizumab plus vorinostat with the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS) and clinical outcomes assessment (MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor module [MDASI-BT]). Eligible patients were adults (≥18 y) with histologically confirmed GBM recurrent after prior radiation therapy, with adequate organ function, KPS ≥60, and no prior bevacizumab or HDAC inhibitors. Ninety patients (bevacizumab + vorinostat: 49, bevacizumab: 41) were enrolled, of whom 74 were evaluable for PFS (bevacizumab + vorinostat: 44, bevacizumab: 30). Median PFS (3.7 vs 3.9 mo, P = 0.94, hazard ratio [HR] 0.63 [95% CI: 0.38, 1.06, P = 0.08]), median OS (7.8 vs 9.3 mo, P = 0.64, HR 0.93 [95% CI: 0.5, 1.6, P = 0.79]) and clinical benefit were similar between the 2 arms. Toxicity (grade ≥3) in 85 evaluable patients included hypertension (n = 37), neurological changes (n = 2), anorexia (n = 2), infections (n = 9), wound dehiscence (n = 2), deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (n = 2), and colonic perforation (n = 1). Bevacizumab combined with vorinostat did not yield improvement in PFS or OS or clinical benefit compared with bevacizumab alone or a clinical benefit in adults with recurrent GBM. This trial is the first to test a Bayesian adaptive design with adaptive randomization and Bayesian continuous monitoring in patients with primary brain tumor and demonstrates the feasibility of using complex Bayesian adaptive design in a multicenter setting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Bevacizumab has promising activity against recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). However, acquired resistance to this agent results in tumor recurrence. We hypothesized that vorinostat, a histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor with anti-angiogenic effects, would prevent acquired resistance to bevacizumab.
METHODS
This multicenter phase II trial used a Bayesian adaptive design to randomize patients with recurrent GBM to bevacizumab alone or bevacizumab plus vorinostat with the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints of overall survival (OS) and clinical outcomes assessment (MD Anderson Symptom Inventory Brain Tumor module [MDASI-BT]). Eligible patients were adults (≥18 y) with histologically confirmed GBM recurrent after prior radiation therapy, with adequate organ function, KPS ≥60, and no prior bevacizumab or HDAC inhibitors.
RESULTS
Ninety patients (bevacizumab + vorinostat: 49, bevacizumab: 41) were enrolled, of whom 74 were evaluable for PFS (bevacizumab + vorinostat: 44, bevacizumab: 30). Median PFS (3.7 vs 3.9 mo, P = 0.94, hazard ratio [HR] 0.63 [95% CI: 0.38, 1.06, P = 0.08]), median OS (7.8 vs 9.3 mo, P = 0.64, HR 0.93 [95% CI: 0.5, 1.6, P = 0.79]) and clinical benefit were similar between the 2 arms. Toxicity (grade ≥3) in 85 evaluable patients included hypertension (n = 37), neurological changes (n = 2), anorexia (n = 2), infections (n = 9), wound dehiscence (n = 2), deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (n = 2), and colonic perforation (n = 1).
CONCLUSIONS
Bevacizumab combined with vorinostat did not yield improvement in PFS or OS or clinical benefit compared with bevacizumab alone or a clinical benefit in adults with recurrent GBM. This trial is the first to test a Bayesian adaptive design with adaptive randomization and Bayesian continuous monitoring in patients with primary brain tumor and demonstrates the feasibility of using complex Bayesian adaptive design in a multicenter setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32166308
pii: 5804658
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noaa062
pmc: PMC7686463
doi:
Substances chimiques
Bevacizumab
2S9ZZM9Q9V
Vorinostat
58IFB293JI
Types de publication
Clinical Trial, Phase II
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, N.I.H., Intramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1505-1515Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA016672
Pays : United States
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : K24 CA160777
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Références
Nat Med. 2001 Apr;7(4):437-43
pubmed: 11283670
Oncologist. 2009 Nov;14(11):1131-8
pubmed: 19897538
J Neurooncol. 2018 Apr;137(2):349-356
pubmed: 29264836
Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006 Sep;5(9):769-84
pubmed: 16955068
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2017 Mar;111:94-102
pubmed: 28259301
Neoplasia. 2000 Jul-Aug;2(4):306-14
pubmed: 11005565
Neuro Oncol. 2015 Jun;17(6):862-7
pubmed: 25572329
Cancer Cell. 2009 Mar 3;15(3):220-31
pubmed: 19249680
Cancer Res. 2012 Apr 1;72(7):1773-83
pubmed: 22447568
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Feb 20;29(6):771-6
pubmed: 21172882
Clin Trials. 2015 Apr;12(2):113-5
pubmed: 25649109
Mol Cancer Res. 2004 Jan;2(1):36-42
pubmed: 14757844
Clin Trials. 2015 Apr;12(2):102-6
pubmed: 25649106
Neurotherapeutics. 2017 Apr;14(2):321-332
pubmed: 28083806
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Sep 10;30(26):3258-63
pubmed: 22649140
CNS Oncol. 2013 Jan;2(1):49-65
pubmed: 23750318
J Clin Invest. 2003 May;111(9):1287-95
pubmed: 12727920
J Clin Oncol. 2003 May 1;21(9):1722-7
pubmed: 12721247
Oncol Rep. 2007 Mar;17(3):647-51
pubmed: 17273746
Nature. 1993 Apr 29;362(6423):841-4
pubmed: 7683111
J Neurooncol. 2006 Oct;80(1):27-35
pubmed: 16598415
Genes Dev. 2001 Oct 15;15(20):2675-86
pubmed: 11641274
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 10;27(32):5459-68
pubmed: 19826124
J Clin Oncol. 1990 Jul;8(7):1277-80
pubmed: 2358840
Clin Trials. 2015 Apr;12(2):110-2
pubmed: 25649110
Oncologist. 2018 Feb;23(2):157-e21
pubmed: 29133513
Int J Mol Sci. 2018 Apr 18;19(4):
pubmed: 29670046
EMBO J. 2001 Dec 17;20(24):6969-78
pubmed: 11742974
Neuro Oncol. 2010 Mar;12(3):233-42
pubmed: 20167811
Neuro Oncol. 2012 Jan;14(1):93-100
pubmed: 22028388
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Apr 20;27(12):2052-8
pubmed: 19307505
Cancer Res. 2004 Jun 1;64(11):3731-6
pubmed: 15172975
Surg Neurol Int. 2019 Jul 05;10:137
pubmed: 31528472
Drug Resist Updat. 2004 Aug-Oct;7(4-5):289-300
pubmed: 15533766
Clin Cancer Res. 2018 Feb 15;24(4):737-743
pubmed: 28814435
Clin Trials. 2015 Apr;12(2):107-9
pubmed: 25649111
Cancer Cell. 2012 Jan 17;21(1):82-91
pubmed: 22264790