Clinical end points in recurrent glioblastoma: Are antiangiogenic agents friend or foe?

Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy

Volumn 11, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 657-660

  Franceschi, Enrico ^a   Brandes, Alba A ^a  

^a BELLARIA HOSPITAL   (Italy)

Author keywords

bevacizumab; end points; glioblastoma; overall survival; progression free survival

Indexed keywords

ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITOR; BEVACIZUMAB; CHLOROETHYLNITROSOUREA DERIVATIVE; FOTEMUSTINE; IRINOTECAN; NITROSOUREA DERIVATIVE; TEMOZOLOMIDE;

BRAIN TUMOR; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURVIVAL; DRUG APPROVAL; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG MECHANISM; GLIOBLASTOMA; GLIOMA; HUMAN; OVERALL SURVIVAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; PROTEIN FUNCTION; PROTEIN TARGETING; RECURRENT CANCER; REVIEW; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ANGIOGENESIS INHIBITORS; ANTIBODIES, MONOCLONAL; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENTS; DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS; GLIOBLASTOMA; HUMANS; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VASCULAR ENDOTHELIAL GROWTH FACTOR A;

EID: 79955870858     PISSN: 14737140     EISSN: 17448328     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/era.11.44     Document Type: Review

References (23)

1. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 352(10), 987-996 (2005).
2. Wick W, Puduvalli VK, Chamberlain MC et al. Phase III study of enzastaurin compared with lomustine in the treatment of recurrent intracranial glioblastoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 28(7), 1168-1174 (2010).
3. Batchelor T, Mulholland P, Neyns B et al. The effcacy of cediranib as monotherapy and in combination with lomustine compared to lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a Phase III randomized study. Neuro-Oncology 12(Suppl. 4), iv75 (2010).
4. Brandes AA, Tosoni A, Franceschi E et al. Fotemustine as second-line treatment for recurrent or progressive glioblastoma after concomitant and/or adjuvant temozolomide: a Phase II trial of Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia (GICNO). Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 64(4), 769-775 (2009).
5. Chi AS, Sorensen AG, Jain RK, Batchelor TT. Angiogenesis as a therapeutic target in malignant gliomas. Oncologist 14(6), 621-636 (2009).
6. Stark-Vance V. Bevacizumab and CPT-11 in the treatment of relapsed malignant glioma. Presented at: World Federation of Neuro-Oncology Second Quadrennial Meeting. Edinburgh, Scotland, 4-7 May 2005 (Abstract 342).
7. Bokstein F, Shpigel S, Blumenthal DT. Treatment with bevacizumab and irinotecan for recurrent high-grade glial tumors. Cancer 112(10), 2267-2273 (2008).
8. Cloughesy TF, Prados MD, Wen PY et al. A Phase II, randomized, non-comparative clinical trial of the effect of bevacizumab (BV) alone or in combination with irinotecan (CPT) on 6-month progression free survival (PFS6) in recurrent, treatment-refractory glioblastoma (GBM). J. Clin. Oncol. (Meeting Abstracts) 26(15 Suppl.), 2010b (2008).
9. Vredenburgh JJ, Desjardins A, Herndon JE 2nd et al. Bevacizumab plus irinotecan in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J. Clin. Oncol. 25(30), 4722-4729 (2007).
10. Vredenburgh JJ, Desjardins A, Herndon JE 2nd et al. Phase II trial of bevacizumab and irinotecan in recurrent malignant glioma. Clin Cancer Res, 13(4), 1253-1259 (2007).
11. Kreisl TN, Kim L, Moore K et al. 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 (2009).
12. 18F] fuorothymidine positron emission tomography: a pilot study. J. Clin. Oncol. 25(30), 4714-4721 (2007).
13. Wen PY, Macdonald DR, Reardon DA et al. Updated response assessment criteria for high-grade gliomas: response assessment in neuro-oncology working group. J. Clin. Oncol. 28(11), 1963-1972 (2010).
14. Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC Jr, Cairncross JG. Response criteria for Phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma. J. Clin. Oncol. 8(7), 1277-1280 (1990).
15. Brandes AA, Franceschi E. New agents and new end points for recurrent gliomas. J. Clin. Oncol. 29(9), e245-e246 (2011).
16. Soria JC, Massard C, Le Chevalier T. Should progression-free survival be the primary measure of effcacy for advanced NSCLC therapy? Ann. Oncol. 21(12), 2324-2332 (2010).
17. Panageas KS, Ben-Porat L, Dickler MN, Chapman PB, Schrag D. When you look matters: the effect of assessment schedule on progression-free survival. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 99(6), 428-432 (2007).
18. Committee for Medical Products for Human Use. Appendix 1 to the Guideline on the Evaluation of Anticancer Medicinal Products in Man. EMEA CPMP/EWP/205/95/Rev 3, London, UK (2008).
19. Federal Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry. Clinical Trial Endpoints for the Approval of Cancer Drugs and Biologics. US Department of Health and Human Services, MD, USA (2007).
20. Prentice RL. Surrogate endpoints in clinical trials: defnition and operational criteria. Stat. Med. 8(4), 431-440 (1989).
21. Ballman K V, Buckner JC, Brown PD 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. Neuro. Oncol. 9(1), 29-38 (2007).
22. Franceschi E, Brandes AA, Tosoni A et al. Can OS-6 replace PFS-6 as a primary endpoint in Phase II studies on glioblastoma patients given antiangiogenetic drugs? J. Clin. Oncol. (Meeting Abstracts) 28(15 Suppl.), 2022 (2010).
23. Ocana A, Amir E, Vera F, Eisenhauer EA, Tannock IF. Addition of bevacizumab to chemotherapy for treatment of solid tumors: similar results but different conclusions. J. Clin. Oncol. 29(3), 254-256 (2010).