Bevacizumab in real-life patients with recurrent glioblastoma: benefit or futility?
Bevacizumab
Glioblastoma
Overall survival
Patients
Quality of life
Journal
Journal of neurology
ISSN: 1432-1459
Titre abrégé: J Neurol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0423161
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2023
May 2023
Historique:
received:
20
06
2022
accepted:
01
02
2023
revised:
31
01
2023
medline:
27
4
2023
pubmed:
23
2
2023
entrez:
22
2
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Angiogenesis plays a key role in glioblastoma, but most anti-angiogenic therapy trials have failed to change the poor outcome of this disease. Despite this, and because bevacizumab is known to alleviate symptoms, it is used in daily practice. We aimed to assess the real-life benefit in terms of overall survival, time to treatment failure, objective response, and clinical benefit in patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. This was a monocentric, retrospective study including patients treated between 2006 and 2016 in our institution. 202 patients were included. The median duration of bevacizumab treatment was 6 months. Median time to treatment failure was 6.8 months (95%CI 5.3-8.2) and median overall survival was 23.7 months (95%CI 20.6-26.8). Fifty percent of patients had a radiological response at first MRI evaluation, and 56% experienced symptom amelioration. Grade 1/2 hypertension (n = 34, 17%) and grade one proteinuria (n = 20, 10%) were the most common side effects. This study reports a clinical benefit and an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. As the panel of therapies is still very limited for these tumors, this work supports the use of bevacizumab as a therapeutic option.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36813928
doi: 10.1007/s00415-023-11600-w
pii: 10.1007/s00415-023-11600-w
doi:
Substances chimiques
Bevacizumab
2S9ZZM9Q9V
Angiogenesis Inhibitors
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2702-2714Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.
Références
Stupp R, Masson WP, van den Bent MJ et al (2005) Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 352(10):987–996
pubmed: 15758009
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa043330
Koshy M, Villano JL, Dolecek TA et al (2012) Improved survival time trends for glioblastoma using the SEER 17 population-based registries. J Neurooncol 107:207–212
pubmed: 21984115
doi: 10.1007/s11060-011-0738-7
Di Carlo DT, Cagnazzo F, Benedetto N, Morganti R, Perrini P (2017) Multiple high-grade gliomas: epidemiology, management, and outcome. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurosurg Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10143-017-0928-7
doi: 10.1007/s10143-017-0928-7
pubmed: 29138949
Bahadur S, Sahu AK, Baghel P et al (2019) Current promising treatment strategy for glioblastoma multiform: a review. Oncol Rev 13(2):417
pubmed: 31410248
pmcid: 6661528
doi: 10.4081/oncol.2019.417
Chen S, Le T, Harley BAC, Imoukhuede PI (2018) Characterizing glioblastoma heterogeneity via single-cell receptor quantification. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 6:92
pubmed: 30050899
pmcid: 6050407
doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00092
Hanif F, Muzzafar K, Perveen K, Malhi SM, Simjee ShU (2017) Glioblastoma multiforme: a review of its epidemiology and pathogenesis through clinical presentation and treatment. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 18(1):3–9
pubmed: 28239999
pmcid: 5563115
Shergalis A, Bankhead A 3rd, Luesakul U, Muangsin N, Neamati N (2018) Current challenges and opportunities in treating glioblastoma. Pharmacol Rev 70(3):412–445
pubmed: 29669750
pmcid: 5907910
doi: 10.1124/pr.117.014944
Perrin SL, Samuel SM, Koszyca B et al (2019) Glioblastoma heterogeneity and the tumour microenvironment: implications for preclinical research and development of new treatments. Biochem Soc Trans 47(2):625–638
pubmed: 30902924
doi: 10.1042/BST20180444
Han S, Liu Y, Cai SJ et al (2020) IDH mutation in glioma: molecular mechanisms and potential therapeutic targets. Br J Cancer 122(11):1580–1589
pubmed: 32291392
pmcid: 7250901
doi: 10.1038/s41416-020-0814-x
Saadeh FS, Mahfouz R, Assi HI (2018) EGFR as a clinical marker in glioblastomas and other gliomas. Int J Biol Markers 33(1):22–32
pubmed: 28885661
doi: 10.5301/ijbm.5000301
Lu VM, O’Connor KP, Shah AH et al (2020) The prognostic significance of CDKN2A homozygous deletion in IDH-mutant lower-grade glioma and glioblastoma: a systematic review of the contemporary literature. J Neurooncol 148(2):221–229
pubmed: 32385699
doi: 10.1007/s11060-020-03528-2
Brito C, Azevedo A, Esteves S et al (2019) Clinical insights gained by refining the 2016 WHO classification of diffuse gliomas with: EGFR amplification, TERT mutations, PTEN deletion and MGMT methylation. BMC Cancer 19(1):968
pubmed: 31623593
pmcid: 6798410
doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-6177-0
Cakar B, Muslu U, Bozkurt E et al (2018) Angiogenesis inhibition on glioblastoma multiforme cell lines (U-87 MG and T98G) by AT-101. J Oncol Sci 4(2):65–69
doi: 10.1016/j.jons.2018.06.002
Das S, Marsden PA (2013) Angiogenesis in glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 369(16):1561–1563
pubmed: 24131182
pmcid: 5378489
doi: 10.1056/NEJMcibr1309402
Folberg R, Maniotis AJ (2004) Vasculogenic mimicry. APMIS 112(7–8):508–525
pubmed: 15563313
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0463.2004.apm11207-0810.x
Kreisl TN, Kim L, Moore K et al (2009) Phase II trial of single-agent bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab plus irinotecan at tumor progression in recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 27(5):740–745
pubmed: 19114704
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.3055
Field KM, Simes J, Nowak AK et al (2015) Randomized phase 2 study of carboplatin and bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 17(11):1504–1513
pubmed: 26130744
pmcid: 4648304
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nov104
Carra E, Barbieri F, Marubbi D et al (2013) Sorafenib selectively depletes human glioblastoma tumor-initiating cells from primary cultures. Cell Cycle 12(3):491–500
pubmed: 23324350
pmcid: 3587450
doi: 10.4161/cc.23372
Batchelor TT, Mulholland P, Neyns B et al (2013) Phase III randomized trial comparing the efficacy of cediranib as monotherapy, and in combination with lomustine, versus lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 31(26):3212–3218
pubmed: 23940216
pmcid: 4021043
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.47.2464
Lombardi G, Zustovich F, Farina P et al (2013) Hypertension as a biomarker in patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with antiangiogenic drugs: a single-center experience and a critical review of the literature. Anticancer Drugs 24(1):90–97
pubmed: 23075631
doi: 10.1097/CAD.0b013e32835aa5fd
Wick W, Platten M, Wick A et al (2015) Current status and future directions of anti-angiogenic therapy for gliomas. Neuro Oncol 18(3):315–328
pubmed: 26459812
pmcid: 4767238
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nov180
Cohen MH, Shen YL, Keegan P et al (2009) FDA drug approval summary: bevacizumab (Avastin®) as treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. Oncologist 14(11):1131–1138
pubmed: 19897538
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2009-0121
Balañá C, Etxaniz O, Bugés C et al (2011) Approval denied by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for bevacizumab in the treatment of high-grade glioma recurrence: a good idea or a grave error? Clin Transl Oncol 13(3):209–210
pubmed: 21421467
doi: 10.1007/s12094-011-0642-9
Dirven L, van den Bent MJ, Bottomley A et al (2015) The impact of bevacizumab on health-related quality of life in patients treated for recurrent glioblastoma: results of the randomised controlled phase 2 BELOB trial. Eur J Cancer 51(10):1321–1330
pubmed: 25899986
doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.03.025
Gramatzki D, Roth P, Rushing EJ et al (2018) Bevacizumab may improve quality of life, but not overall survival in glioblastoma: an epidemiological study. Ann Oncol 29(6):1431–1436
pubmed: 29617713
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdy106
Wick W, Gorlia T, Bendszus M et al (2017) Lomustine and bevacizumab in progressive glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 377(20):1954–1963
pubmed: 29141164
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1707358
Friedman HS, Prados MD, Wen PY et al (2009) Bevacizumab alone and in combination with irinotecan in recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol 27(28):4733–4740
pubmed: 19720927
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.8721
Desjardins A, Reardon DA, Coan A et al (2012) Bevacizumab and daily temozolomide for recurrent glioblastoma. Cancer 118(5):1302–1312
pubmed: 21792866
doi: 10.1002/cncr.26381
Desjardins A, Herndon JE 2nd, McSherry F et al (2019) Single-institution retrospective review of patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab in clinical practice. Health Sci Rep 2(4):e114
pubmed: 31049419
pmcid: 6482327
doi: 10.1002/hsr2.114
Li Y, Ali S, Clarke J et al (2017) Bevacizumab in recurrent glioma: patterns of treatment failure and implications. Brain Tumor Res Treat 5(1):1–9
pubmed: 28516072
pmcid: 5433944
doi: 10.14791/btrt.2017.5.1.1
Ranjan S, Skorupan N, Ye X et al (2020) Patterns of bevacizumab use in patients with glioblastoma: an online survey among experts in neuro-oncology. Neurooncol Pract 7(1):52–58
pubmed: 32257284
Nagpal S, Harsh G, Recht L (2011) Bevacizumab improves quality of life in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Chemother Res Practice 2011:1–6
doi: 10.1155/2011/602812
Torres IJ, Mundt AJ, Sweeney PJ et al (2003) A longitudinal neuropsychological study of partial brain radiation in adults with brain tumors. Neurology 60(7):1113–1118
pubmed: 12682316
doi: 10.1212/01.WNL.0000055862.20003.4A
Brown PD, Jensen AW, Felten SJ et al (2006) Detrimental effects of tumor progression on cognitive function of patients with high-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol 24(34):5427–5433
pubmed: 17135644
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.5605
Chinot OL, Wick W, Mason W et al (2014) Bevacizumab plus radiotherapy-temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 370(8):709–722
pubmed: 24552318
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1308345
Gilbert MR, Dignam JJ, Armstrong TS et al (2014) A randomized trial of bevacizumab for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 370(8):699–708
pubmed: 24552317
pmcid: 4201043
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1308573
Sharma A, Low J, Mrugala MM (2019) Neuro-oncologists have spoken—the role of bevacizumab in the inpatient setting. A clinical and economic conundrum. Neurooncol Pract 6(1):30–36
pubmed: 31385984
Allegra CJ, Yothers G, O’Connell MJ et al (2013) Bevacizumab in stage II-III colon cancer: 5-year update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project C-08 trial. J Clin Oncol 31(3):359
pubmed: 23233715
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.44.4711
Herrlinger U, Schäfer N, Steinbach JP et al (2016) Bevacizumab plus irinotecan versus temozolomide in newly diagnosed O6-methylguanine–DNA methyltransferase nonmethylated glioblastoma: the randomized GLARIUS trial. J Clin Oncol 34(14):1611–1619
pubmed: 26976423
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.4691
Boxerman JL, Zhang Z, Safriel Y et al (2013) Early post-bevacizumab progression on contrast-enhanced MRI as a prognostic marker for overall survival in recurrent glioblastoma: results from the ACRIN 6677/RTOG 0625 Central Reader Study. Neuro Oncol 15(7):945–954
pubmed: 23788270
pmcid: 3688018
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/not049
Arevalo OD, Soto C, Rabiei P et al (2019) Assessment of glioblastoma response in the era of bevacizumab: longstanding and emergent challenges in the imaging evaluation of pseudoresponse. Front Neurol 10:460
pubmed: 31133966
pmcid: 6514158
doi: 10.3389/fneur.2019.00460
Kim WY, Lee HY (2009) Brain angiogenesis in developmental and pathological processes: mechanism and therapeutic intervention in brain tumors. FEBS J 276(17):4653–4664
pubmed: 19664069
pmcid: 2847309
doi: 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2009.07177.x
Gatto L, Franceschi E, Tosoni A et al (2021) Distinct MRI pattern of “pseudoresponse” in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme treated with regorafenib: Case report and literature review. Clin Case Reports 9(8):e04604
doi: 10.1002/ccr3.4604
Österlund P, Soveri L, Isoniemi H et al (2011) Hypertension and overall survival in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with bevacizumab-containing chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 104(4):599–604
pubmed: 21304526
pmcid: 3049598
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.2
Lombardi G, De Salvo GL, Brandes AA et al (2019) Regorafenib compared with lomustine in patients with relapsed glioblastoma (REGOMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 20(1):110–119
pubmed: 30522967
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30675-2
Zhong J, Ali AN, Voloschin AD et al (2015) Bevacizumab-induced hypertension is a predictive marker for improved outcomes in patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. Cancer 121(9):1456–1462
pubmed: 25557543
doi: 10.1002/cncr.29234
Carvalho B, Lopes RG, Linhares P et al (2020) Hypertension and proteinuria as clinical biomarkers of response to bevacizumab in glioblastoma patients. J Neurooncol 147(1):109–116
pubmed: 31974803
doi: 10.1007/s11060-020-03404-z
Rahbar A, Cederarv M, Wolmer-Solberg N et al (2016) Enhanced neutrophil activity is associated with shorter time to tumor progression in glioblastoma patients. Oncoimmunology 5(2):e1075693
pubmed: 27057448
doi: 10.1080/2162402X.2015.1075693
Bambury R, Teo M, Power D et al (2013) The association of pre-treatment neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio with overall survival in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. J Neurooncol 114(1):149–154
pubmed: 23780645
doi: 10.1007/s11060-013-1164-9
Massara M, Persico P, Bonavita O et al (2017) Neutrophils in gliomas. Front Immunol 8:1349
pubmed: 29123517
pmcid: 5662581
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01349
Tecchio C, Cassatella MA (2014) Neutrophil-derived cytokines involved in physiological and pathological angiogenesis. Angiogenesis, Lymphangiogenesis Clin Implic 99:123–137
doi: 10.1159/000353358
Bertaut A, Truntzer C, Madkouri R et al (2016) Blood baseline neutrophil count predicts bevacizumab efficacy in glioblastoma. Oncotarget 7(43):70948
pubmed: 27487142
pmcid: 5342600
doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.10898
Trifiletti DM, Alonso C, Grover S et al (2017) Prognostic implications of extent of resection in glioblastoma: analysis from a large database. World Neurosurg 103:330–340
pubmed: 28427986
doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.04.035
Gittleman H, Lim D, Kattan MW et al (2017) An independently validated nomogram for individualized estimation of survival among patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: NRG Oncology RTOG 0525 and 0825. Neuro Oncol 19(5):669–677
pubmed: 28453749
Chaichana KL, Jusue-Torres I, Lemos AM et al (2014) The butterfly effect on glioblastoma: is volumetric extent of resection more effective than biopsy for these tumors? J Neurooncol 120(3):625–634
pubmed: 25193022
pmcid: 4313925
doi: 10.1007/s11060-014-1597-9
Puhalla S, Elmquist W, Freyer D et al (2015) Unsanctifying the sanctuary: challenges and opportunities with brain metastases. Neuro Oncol 17(5):639–651
pubmed: 25846288
pmcid: 4482864
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nov023
Louveau A, Smirnov I, Keyes TJ et al (2015) Structural and functional features of central nervous system lymphatic vessels. Nature 523(7560):337–341
pubmed: 26030524
pmcid: 4506234
doi: 10.1038/nature14432
Weenink B, French PJ, Sillevis Smitt PA et al (2020) Immunotherapy in glioblastoma: current shortcomings and future perspectives. Cancers 12(3):751
pubmed: 32235752
pmcid: 7140029
doi: 10.3390/cancers12030751
Yu MW, Quail DF (2021) Immunotherapy for glioblastoma: current progress and challenges. Front Immunol 12:676301
pubmed: 34054867
pmcid: 8158294
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.676301