Refine
Year of publication
- 2022 (5) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (5)
Language
- English (5) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (5)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (5)
Keywords
- nivolumab (2)
- temozolomide (2)
- Deep brain stimulation (1)
- Glioblastoma (1)
- Hardware erosion (1)
- Impulse generator (1)
- MGMT (1)
- MGMT promoter (1)
- Obesity (1)
- PD-L1 (1)
Institute
- Medizin (5)
Background: Nearly all patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma experience recurrence following standard-of-care radiotherapy (RT) + temozolomide (TMZ). The purpose of the phase III randomized CheckMate 548 study was to evaluate RT + TMZ combined with the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab (NIVO) or placebo (PBO) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (NCT02667587).
Methods: Patients (N = 716) were randomized 1:1 to NIVO [(240 mg every 2 weeks × 8, then 480 mg every 4 weeks) + RT (60 Gy over 6 weeks) + TMZ (75 mg/m2 once daily during RT, then 150-200 mg/m2 once daily on days 1-5 of every 28-day cycle × 6)] or PBO + RT + TMZ following the same regimen. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients without baseline corticosteroids and in all randomized patients.
Results: As of December 22, 2020, median (m)PFS (blinded independent central review) was 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.9-11.8) with NIVO + RT + TMZ vs 10.3 months (95% CI, 9.7-12.5) with PBO + RT + TMZ (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3) and mOS was 28.9 months (95% CI, 24.4-31.6) vs 32.1 months (95% CI, 29.4-33.8), respectively (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.3). In patients without baseline corticosteroids, mOS was 31.3 months (95% CI, 28.6-34.8) with NIVO + RT + TMZ vs 33.0 months (95% CI, 31.0-35.1) with PBO + RT + TMZ (HR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.9-1.4). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse event rates were 52.4% vs 33.6%, respectively.
Conclusions: NIVO added to RT + TMZ did not improve survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated or indeterminate MGMT promoter. No new safety signals were observed.
Background: Addition of temozolomide (TMZ) to radiotherapy (RT) improves overall survival (OS) in patients with glioblastoma (GBM), but previous studies suggest that patients with tumors harboring an unmethylated MGMT promoter derive minimal benefit. The aim of this open-label, phase III CheckMate 498 study was to evaluate the efficacy of nivolumab (NIVO) + RT compared with TMZ + RT in newly diagnosed GBM with unmethylated MGMT promoter.
Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to standard RT (60 Gy) + NIVO (240 mg every 2 weeks for eight cycles, then 480 mg every 4 weeks) or RT + TMZ (75 mg/m2 daily during RT and 150–200 mg/m2/day 5/28 days during maintenance). The primary endpoint was OS.
Results: A total of 560 patients were randomized, 280 to each arm. Median OS (mOS) was 13.4 months (95% CI, 12.6 to 14.3) with NIVO + RT and 14.9 months (95% CI, 13.3 to 16.1) with TMZ + RT (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.58; P = .0037). Median progression-free survival was 6.0 months (95% CI, 5.7 to 6.2) with NIVO + RT and 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.9 to 6.7) with TMZ + RT (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.65). Response rates were 7.8% (9/116) with NIVO + RT and 7.2% (8/111) with TMZ + RT; grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse event (TRAE) rates were 21.9% and 25.1%, and any-grade serious TRAE rates were 17.3% and 7.6%, respectively.
Conclusions: The study did not meet the primary endpoint of improved OS; TMZ + RT demonstrated a longer mOS than NIVO + RT. No new safety signals were detected with NIVO in this study. The difference between the study treatment arms is consistent with the use of TMZ + RT as the standard of care for GBM.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02617589
Highlights
• Consider tissue expanders for challenging DBS cases in PD patients with hardware erosion.
• Placement of tissue expander is essential in planning the reconstruction.
• MRI-compatibility of the tissue expander is paramount for shortening the total duration of anesthesia.
• Role of routine skin biopsies to identify PD patients at additional risk for developing scalp defects should be investigated.
Purpose: The role of obesity in glioblastoma remains unclear, as previous analyses have reported contradicting results. Here, we evaluate the prognostic impact of obesity in two trial populations; CeTeG/NOA-09 (n = 129) for MGMT methylated glioblastoma patients comparing temozolomide (TMZ) to lomustine/TMZ, and GLARIUS (n = 170) for MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma patients comparing TMZ to bevacizumab/irinotecan, both in addition to surgery and radiotherapy.
Methods: The impact of obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) was investigated with Kaplan–Meier analysis and log-rank tests. A multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed including known prognostic factors as covariables.
Results: Overall, 22.6% of patients (67 of 297) were obese. Obesity was associated with shorter survival in patients with MGMT methylated glioblastoma (median OS 22.9 (95% CI 17.7–30.8) vs. 43.2 (32.5–54.4) months for obese and non-obese patients respectively, p = 0.001), but not in MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma (median OS 17.1 (15.8–18.9) vs 17.6 (14.7–20.8) months, p = 0.26). The prognostic impact of obesity in MGMT methylated glioblastoma was confirmed in a multivariable Cox regression (adjusted odds ratio: 2.57 (95% CI 1.53–4.31), p < 0.001) adjusted for age, sex, extent of resection, baseline steroids, Karnofsky performance score, and treatment arm.
Conclusion: Obesity was associated with shorter survival in MGMT methylated, but not in MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma patients.