The clinical trials landscape for glioblastoma: is it adequate to develop new treatments?

Background There have been few treatment advances for patients with glioblastoma (GBM) despite increasing scientific understanding of the disease. While factors such as intrinsic tumor biology and drug delivery are challenges to developing efficacious therapies, it is unclear whether the current clinical trial landscape is optimally evaluating new therapies and biomarkers. Methods We queried ClinicalTrials.gov for interventional clinical trials for patients with GBM initiated between January 2005 and December 2016 and abstracted data regarding phase, status, start and end dates, testing locations, endpoints, experimental interventions, sample size, clinical presentation/indication, and design to better understand the clinical trials landscape. Results Only approximately 8%-11% of patients with newly diagnosed GBM enroll on clinical trials with a similar estimate for all patients with GBM. Trial duration was similar across phases with median time to completion between 3 and 4 years. While 93% of clinical trials were in phases I-II, 26% of the overall clinical trial patient population was enrolled on phase III studies. Of the 8 completed phase III trials, only 1 reported positive results. Although 58% of the phase III trials were supported by phase II data with a similar endpoint, only 25% of these phase II trials were randomized. Conclusions The clinical trials landscape for GBM is characterized by long development times, inadequate dissemination of information, suboptimal go/no-go decision making, and low patient participation.

[1]  J. Woodcock,et al.  Master Protocols to Study Multiple Therapies, Multiple Diseases, or Both. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  G. Parmigiani,et al.  Bayesian adaptive randomized trial design for patients with recurrent glioblastoma. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[3]  G. Reifenberger,et al.  MGMT testing—the challenges for biomarker-based glioma treatment , 2014, Nature Reviews Neurology.

[4]  Monique L. Anderson,et al.  Compliance with results reporting at ClinicalTrials.gov. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  Edward S. Kim,et al.  Broadening Eligibility Criteria to Make Clinical Trials More Representative: American Society of Clinical Oncology and Friends of Cancer Research Joint Research Statement. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  Lorenzo Trippa,et al.  Brain Malignancy Steering Committee clinical trials planning workshop: report from the Targeted Therapies Working Group. , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[7]  J. Wason,et al.  A comparison of Bayesian adaptive randomization and multi‐stage designs for multi‐arm clinical trials , 2014, Statistics in medicine.

[8]  Lorenzo Trippa,et al.  Combining progression-free survival and overall survival as a novel composite endpoint for glioblastoma trials. , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[9]  R. Stupp,et al.  Withholding temozolomide in glioblastoma patients with unmethylated MGMT promoter--still a dilemma? , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[10]  B. Alexander,et al.  Point/counterpoint: randomized versus single-arm phase II clinical trials for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma , 2017, Neuro-oncology.

[11]  J. Barnholtz-Sloan,et al.  CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2007-2011. , 2012, Neuro-oncology.

[12]  Kristine R Broglio,et al.  Detecting an overall survival benefit that is derived from progression-free survival. , 2009, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[13]  Jill S. Barnholtz-Sloan,et al.  CBTRUS Statistical Report: Primary Brain and Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2008-2012 , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[14]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. , 2004, JAMA.

[15]  Quynh-Thu Le,et al.  Future cancer research priorities in the USA: a Lancet Oncology Commission. , 2017, The Lancet. Oncology.

[16]  Claus Belka,et al.  Current status and perspectives of interventional clinical trials for glioblastoma – analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov , 2017, Radiation Oncology.

[17]  Lorenzo Trippa,et al.  Bayesian Baskets: A Novel Design for Biomarker-Based Clinical Trials. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[18]  G. Parmigiani,et al.  Designing Clinical Trials That Accept New Arms: An Example in Metastatic Breast Cancer. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[19]  C. Cobbs,et al.  MGMT methylation in glioblastoma: tale of the tail. , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[20]  S. Ramsey,et al.  Commentary: practicing on the tip of an information iceberg? Evidence of underpublication of registered clinical trials in oncology. , 2008, The oncologist.

[21]  T. Cloughesy,et al.  Adult Glioblastoma. , 2017, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[22]  A. von Deimling,et al.  Enzastaurin before and concomitant with radiation therapy, followed by enzastaurin maintenance therapy, in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma without MGMT promoter hypermethylation. , 2013, Neuro-oncology.

[23]  Lorenzo Trippa,et al.  Biomarker-based adaptive trials for patients with glioblastoma--lessons from I-SPY 2. , 2013, Neuro-oncology.

[24]  Yuan Ji,et al.  Subgroup-Based Adaptive (SUBA) Designs for Multi-arm Biomarker Trials , 2014, Statistics in biosciences.

[25]  Lorenzo Trippa,et al.  Progression-free survival: too much risk, not enough reward? , 2014, Neuro-oncology.

[26]  Brian M Alexander,et al.  Adaptive Global Innovative Learning Environment for Glioblastoma: GBM AGILE , 2017, Clinical Cancer Research.

[27]  Lorenzo Trippa,et al.  Adding experimental arms to platform clinical trials: randomization procedures and interim analyses. , 2018, Biostatistics.

[28]  Adam G. Dunn,et al.  A systematic review of the processes used to link clinical trial registrations to their published results , 2017, Systematic Reviews.

[29]  James Topping,et al.  Compliance with results reporting at ClinicalTrials.gov. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  James J. Cimino,et al.  Linking ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed to Track Results of Interventional Human Clinical Trials , 2013, PloS one.

[31]  J. Barnholtz-Sloan,et al.  Complete prevalence of malignant primary brain tumors registry data in the United States compared with other common cancers, 2010 , 2016, Neuro-oncology.