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.

BACKGROUND RTOG 0625/ACRIN 6677 is a multicenter, randomized, phase II trial of bevacizumab with irinotecan or temozolomide in recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). This study investigated whether early posttreatment progression on FLAIR or postcontrast MRI assessed by central reading predicts overall survival (OS). METHODS Of 123 enrolled patients, 107 had baseline and at least 1 posttreatment MRI. Two central neuroradiologists serially measured bidimensional (2D) and volumetric (3D) enhancement on postcontrast T1-weighted images and volume of FLAIR hyperintensity. Progression status on all posttreatment MRIs was determined using Macdonald and RANO imaging threshold criteria, with a third neuroradiologist adjudicating discrepancies of both progression occurrence and timing. For each MRI pulse sequence, Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and log-rank test were used to compare OS between cases with or without radiologic progression. RESULTS Radiologic progression occurred after 2 chemotherapy cycles (8 weeks) in 9 of 97 (9%), 9 of 73 (12%), and 11 of 98 (11%) 2D-T1, 3D-T1, and FLAIR cases, respectively, and 34 of 80 (43%), 21 of 58 (36%), and 37 of 79 (47%) corresponding cases after 4 cycles (16 weeks). Median OS among patients progressing at 8 or 16 weeks was significantly less than that among nonprogressors, as determined on 2D-T1 (114 vs 278 days and 214 vs 426 days, respectively; P < .0001 for both) and 3D-T1 (117 vs 306 days [P < .0001] and 223 vs 448 days [P = .0003], respectively) but not on FLAIR (201 vs 276 days [P = .38] and 303 vs 321 days [P = .13], respectively). CONCLUSION Early progression on 2D-T1 and 3D-T1, but not FLAIR MRI, after 8 and 16 weeks of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy has highly significant prognostic value for OS in recurrent GBM.

[1]  A. Sahgal,et al.  Pseudoprogression Following Chemoradiotherapy for Glioblastoma Multiforme , 2010, Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques.

[2]  Dieta Brandsma,et al.  Clinical features, mechanisms, and management of pseudoprogression in malignant gliomas. , 2008, The Lancet. Oncology.

[3]  P. Wen,et al.  Response criteria for glioma , 2008, Nature Clinical Practice Oncology.

[4]  Tracy T Batchelor,et al.  VEGF-targeted cancer therapy strategies: current progress, hurdles and future prospects. , 2007, Trends in molecular medicine.

[5]  H. Poulsen,et al.  Irinotecan and bevacizumab in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme , 2011, Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy.

[6]  J. Buckner,et al.  The relationship between six-month progression-free survival and 12-month overall survival end points for phase II trials in patients with glioblastoma multiforme. , 2007, Neuro-oncology.

[7]  Darell D. Bigner,et al.  Phase II Trial of Bevacizumab and Irinotecan in Recurrent Malignant Glioma , 2007, Clinical Cancer Research.

[8]  P. Wen,et al.  Novel anti-angiogenic therapies for malignant gliomas , 2008, The Lancet Neurology.

[9]  David L. Cardozo,et al.  THE CANADIAN JOURNAL OF NEUROLOGICAL SCIENCES , 2002 .

[10]  S. Hansen,et al.  A phase II trial with bevacizumab and irinotecan for patients with primary brain tumors and progression after standard therapy , 2012, Acta oncologica.

[11]  T. Mikkelsen,et al.  Efficacy, safety and patterns of response and recurrence in patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas treated with bevacizumab plus irinotecan , 2009, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[12]  Bart Neyns,et al.  Pseudoprogression after radiotherapy with concurrent temozolomide for high-grade glioma: clinical observations and working recommendations. , 2009, Surgical neurology.

[13]  M. Mrugala,et al.  Bevacizumab for recurrent malignant gliomas: efficacy, toxicity, and patterns of recurrence. , 2009, Neurology.

[14]  D. Barboriak,et al.  A change in the apparent diffusion coefficient after treatment with bevacizumab is associated with decreased survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. , 2012, The British journal of radiology.

[15]  M. J. van den Bent,et al.  Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse in the treatment of gliomas , 2009, Current opinion in neurology.

[16]  C. Balañà,et al.  Bevacizumab plus irinotecan in recurrent malignant glioma shows high overall survival in a multicenter retrospective pooled series of the Spanish Neuro-Oncology Research Group (GEINO) , 2012, Anti-cancer drugs.

[17]  Martin J. van den Bent,et al.  Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  A. Brandes,et al.  Disease progression or pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy treatment: pitfalls in neurooncology. , 2008, Neuro-oncology.

[19]  J. Cairncross,et al.  Population-Based Study of Pseudoprogression after Chemoradiotherapy in GBM , 2009, Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques.

[20]  R. Mirimanoff,et al.  Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. , 2009, The Lancet. Oncology.

[21]  D. Born,et al.  Pseudoprogression: Relevance With Respect to Treatment of High-Grade Gliomas , 2011, Current treatment options in oncology.

[22]  Andrew E. Sloan,et al.  Early necrosis following concurrent Temodar and radiotherapy in patients with glioblastoma , 2007, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[23]  Susan Chang,et al.  Pseudoprogression and pseudoresponse: Challenges in brain tumor imaging , 2009, Current neurology and neuroscience reports.

[24]  Jonathan R. Young,et al.  Advances in MRI Assessment of Gliomas and Response to Anti-VEGF Therapy , 2011, Current neurology and neuroscience reports.

[25]  A. Brandes,et al.  MGMT promoter methylation status can predict the incidence and outcome of pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[26]  H. Friedman,et al.  Experience with irinotecan for the treatment of malignant glioma. , 2009, Neuro-oncology.

[27]  Albert Lai,et al.  Cell invasion, motility, and proliferation level estimate (CIMPLE) maps derived from serial diffusion MR images in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab , 2011, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[28]  W. Pope,et al.  Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Criteria: Implementation Challenges in Multicenter Neuro-Oncology Trials , 2011, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[29]  P. Gutin,et al.  Antiangiogenic agents in the treatment of recurrent or newly diagnosed glioblastoma: Analysis of single-agent and combined modality approaches , 2011, Radiation oncology.

[30]  John Sampson,et al.  Bevacizumab plus irinotecan in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. , 2007, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[31]  Tracy T Batchelor,et al.  Comparison of linear and volumetric criteria in assessing tumor response in adult high-grade gliomas. , 2006, Neuro-oncology.

[32]  Rémy Guillevin,et al.  Response assessment in recurrent glioblastoma treated with irinotecan-bevacizumab: comparative analysis of the Macdonald, RECIST, RANO, and RECIST + F criteria. , 2012, Neuro-oncology.

[33]  T. Mikkelsen,et al.  Bevacizumab alone and in combination with irinotecan in recurrent glioblastoma. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[34]  J. Uhm.  Updated Response Assessment Criteria for High-Grade Gliomas: Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group , 2010 .

[35]  P. Wen,et al.  A "vascular normalization index" as potential mechanistic biomarker to predict survival after a single dose of cediranib in recurrent glioblastoma patients. , 2009, Cancer research.

[36]  A G Sorensen,et al.  Pseudoprogression and Pseudoresponse: Imaging Challenges in the Assessment of Posttreatment Glioma , 2011, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[37]  R. Jain,et al.  Serial magnetic resonance spectroscopy reveals a direct metabolic effect of cediranib in glioblastoma. , 2011, Cancer research.

[38]  P. Keegan,et al.  FDA drug approval summary: bevacizumab (Avastin) as treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. , 2009, The oncologist.

[39]  Patrick Y Wen,et al.  End point assessment in gliomas: novel treatments limit usefulness of classical Macdonald's Criteria. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[40]  Dieta Brandsma,et al.  Incidence of early pseudo‐progression in a cohort of malignant glioma patients treated with chemoirradiation with temozolomide , 2008, Cancer.

[41]  Jianhui Zhong,et al.  Changes in relative cerebral blood volume 1 month after radiation-temozolomide therapy can help predict overall survival in patients with glioblastoma. , 2010, Radiology.

[42]  Bradley J Erickson,et al.  Validation of neuroradiologic response assessment in gliomas: measurement by RECIST, two-dimensional, computer-assisted tumor area, and computer-assisted tumor volume methods. , 2006, Neuro-oncology.

[43]  P. Wen,et al.  Effect of adding temozolomide to radiation therapy on the incidence of pseudo-progression , 2009, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[44]  T. Cascino,et al.  Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. , 1990, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[45]  Asif Ahmad,et al.  Bevacizumab and irinotecan therapy in glioblastoma multiforme: a series of 13 cases. , 2008, Journal of neurosurgery.

[46]  G. Yancopoulos,et al.  Vessel cooption, regression, and growth in tumors mediated by angiopoietins and VEGF. , 1999, Science.

[47]  Tom Mikkelsen,et al.  Response as a predictor of survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. , 2011, Neuro-oncology.

[48]  Alexander Radbruch,et al.  Relevance of T2 signal changes in the assessment of progression of glioblastoma according to the Response Assessment in Neurooncology criteria. , 2012, Neuro-oncology.

[49]  P. Wen,et al.  Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology , 2011, Current oncology reports.

[50]  Paul S Mischel,et al.  Quantitative volumetric analysis of conventional MRI response in recurrent glioblastoma treated with bevacizumab. , 2011, Neuro-oncology.

[51]  T. Mikkelsen,et al.  Imaging response criteria for recurrent gliomas treated with bevacizumab: Role of diffusion weighted imaging as an imaging biomarker , 2010, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[52]  Mei-Yin Polley,et al.  Assessment of perfusion MRI-derived parameters in evaluating and predicting response to antiangiogenic therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. , 2011, Neuro-oncology.