Bevacizumab plus radiotherapy-temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Medicine, http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1308345 New England Journal ofAccess to the published version may require subscription. N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published paper. Permanent link to this version:http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-89503T h e ne w e ngl a nd jou r na l o f m e dicine n engl j med 370;8 nejm

BackgroundDuligotuzumab, a novel dual-action humanized IgG1 antibody that blocks ligand binding to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3), inhibits signaling from all ligand-dependent HER dimers, and can elicit antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. High tumor-expression of neuregulin 1 (NRG1), a ligand to HER3, may enhance sensitivity to duligotuzumab.MethodsThis multicenter, open-label, randomized phase II study (MEHGAN) evaluated drug efficacy in patients with recurrent/metastatic (R/M) squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) progressive on/after chemotherapy and among patients with NRG1-high tumors. Patients received duligotuzumab (1100 mg IV, q2w) or cetuximab (400 mg/m2 load, 250 mg/m2 IV, q1w) until progression or intolerable toxicity. Tumor samples were assayed for biomarkers [NRG1, ERBB3, and human papillomavirus (HPV) status].ResultsPatients (N = 121) were randomized (duligotuzumab:cetuximab; 59:62), median age 62 years; ECOG 0–2. Both arms (duligotuzumab vs. cetuximab, respectively) showed comparable progression-free survival [4.2 vs. 4.0 months; HR: 1.23 (90% confidence interval (CI): 0.89–1.70)], overall survival [7.2 vs. 8.7 months; HR 1.15 (90% CI: 0.81–1.63)], and objective response rate (12 vs. 14.5%), with no difference between patients with NRG1-high tumors or ERBB3-low tumors. Responses in both arms were confined to HPV-negative patients. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (duligotuzumab vs. cetuximab, respectively) included infections (22 vs. 11.5%) and GI disorders (17 vs. 7%), contributing to higher rates of serious AEs (41 vs. 29.5%). Metabolic disorders were less frequent with duligotuzumab (10 vs. 16%); any grade rash-related events were less with duligotuzumab (49 vs. 67%).ConclusionWhile several lines of preclinical evidence had supported the premise that the blockade of HER3 in addition to that of EGFR may improve outcomes for patients with R/M SCCHN overall or specifically in those patients whose tumors express high levels of NRG1, this study provided definitive clinical evidence refuting this hypothesis. Duligotuzumab did not improve patient outcomes in comparison to cetuximab despite frequent expression of NRG1. These data indicate that inhibition of EGFR alone is sufficient to block EGFR–HER3 signaling, suggesting that HER2 plays a minimal role in this disease. Extensive biomarker analyses further show that HPV-negative SCCHN but not HPV-positive SCCHN are most likely to respond to EGFR blockage by cetuximab or duligotuzumab.

Background. We assessed the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (BEV) through multiple lines in patients with recurrent glioblastoma who had progressed after first-line treatment with radiotherapy, temozolomide, and BEV. Patients and Methods. TAMIGA (NCT01860638) was a phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial in adult patients with glioblastoma. Following surgery, patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma received first-line treatment consisting of radiotherapy plus

2005^ Background: GBM has a high disease burden and poor prognosis, and impacts negatively on HRQoL. Symptomatic therapies for GBM, such as corticosteroids (CS), may impact patient status negatively Methods: AVAglio, a randomized, double-blind, placebo (P)-controlled trial in patients (pts) ≥18 yrs with newly diagnosed GBM, evaluated the addition of Bv or P (10mg/kg, q2w) to 6 wks of T (75mg/m2/d) + RT (2Gy, 5d/wk) followed by 28 treatment-free days, then 6 cycles of T (150–200 mg/m2/d, 5d q4w) with Bv or P (10 mg/kg, q2w), and then single-agent Bv or P (15 mg/kg, q3w) until disease progression (PD)/unacceptable toxicity. Co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed PFS and overall survival. Secondary endpoints included HRQoL (EORTC QLQ-C30 and BN20, with 5 prespecified domains based on relevance in GBM). HRQoL time to definitive deterioration (TDD) was defined as time from randomization to ≥10 point deterioration from baseline with no subsequent improvement, PD, or death. Exploratory endpoints included KPS and CS use. Results: Baseline characteristics were well balanced. Bv significantly prolonged PFS (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55–0.74, p<0.0001; median 10.6 vs 6.2 mo) and delayed TDD in HRQoL compared with P (p<0.0001; Table). Functional independence (KPS ≥ 70%) was maintained during PFS in both arms (median Bv vs P: 9 vs 6 mo). Among pts on CS (≥ 2mg) at baseline, discontinuation (≥ 5 consecutive days) was more frequent with Bv than P (66% vs 47%). In pts off CS at baseline (< 2mg), time to CS initiation was significantly longer with Bv than P (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57–0.88; median 12.3 vs 3.7 mo). Conclusions: Addition of Bv to RT/T provided a clinically meaningful and statistically significant PFS improvement associated with stable/improved HRQoL and KPS, and reduced CS requirement. Clinical trial information: NCT00943826. [Table: see text]

No abstract