IMPORTANCE Clinical outcomes for glioblastoma remain poor. Treatment with immune checkpoint blockade has shown benefits in many cancer types. To our knowledge, data from a randomized phase 3 clinical trial evaluating a programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitor therapy for glioblastoma have not been reported.OBJECTIVE To determine whether single-agent PD-1 blockade with nivolumab improves survival in patients with recurrent glioblastoma compared with bevacizumab. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSIn this open-label, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial, 439 patients with glioblastoma at first recurrence following standard radiation and temozolomide therapy were enrolled, and 369 were randomized. Patients were enrolled between September 2014 and May 2015. The median follow-up was 9.5 months at data cutoff of January 20, 2017. The study included 57 multicenter, multinational clinical sites.INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized 1:1 to nivolumab 3 mg/kg or bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks until confirmed disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, or death. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary end point was overall survival (OS).RESULTS A total of 369 patients were randomized to nivolumab (n = 184) or bevacizumab (n = 185). The MGMT promoter was methylated in 23.4% (43/184; nivolumab) and 22.7% (42/185; bevacizumab), unmethylated in 32.1% (59/184; nivolumab) and 36.2% (67/185; bevacizumab), and not reported in remaining patients. At median follow-up of 9.5 months, median OS (mOS) was comparable between groups: nivolumab, 9.8 months (95% CI, 8.2-11.8); bevacizumab, 10.0 months (95% CI, 9.0-11.8); HR, 1.04 (95% CI, 0.83-1.30); P = .76. The 12-month OS was 42% in both groups. The objective response rate was higher with bevacizumab (23.1%; 95% CI, 16.7%-30.5%) vs nivolumab (7.8%; 95% CI, 4.1%-13.3%). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were similar between groups (nivolumab, 33/182 [18.1%]; bevacizumab, 25/165 [15.2%]), with no unexpected neurological TRAEs or deaths due to TRAEs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEAlthough the primary end point was not met in this randomized clinical trial, mOS was comparable between nivolumab and bevacizumab in the overall patient population with recurrent glioblastoma. The safety profile of nivolumab in patients with glioblastoma was consistent with that in other tumor types.

A B S T R A C T PurposeA randomized, phase III, placebo-controlled, partially blinded clinical trial (REGAL [Recentin in Glioblastoma Alone and With Lomustine]) was conducted to determine the efficacy of cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, either as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine versus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Patients and MethodsPatients (N ϭ 325) with recurrent glioblastoma who previously received radiation and temozolomide were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to receive (1) cediranib (30 mg) monotherapy; (2) cediranib (20 mg) plus lomustine (110 mg/m 2 ); (3) lomustine (110 mg/m 2 ) plus a placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival based on blinded, independent radiographic assessment of postcontrast T1-weighted and noncontrast T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain scans. ResultsThe primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS) was not significantly different for either cediranib alone (hazard ratio [HR] ϭ 1.05; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.50; two-sided P ϭ .90) or cediranib in combination with lomustine (HR ϭ 0.76; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.08; two-sided P ϭ .16) versus lomustine based on independent or local review of postcontrast T1-weighted MRI. ConclusionThis study did not meet its primary end point of PFS prolongation with cediranib either as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine versus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma, although cediranib showed evidence of clinical activity on some secondary end points including time to deterioration in neurologic status and corticosteroid-sparing effects.

Purpose This open-label, prospective, multicenter single-arm phase II study combined bevacizumab (BV) with radiation therapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ) for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). The objectives were to determine the efficacy of this treatment combination and the associated toxicity. Patients and Methods Seventy patients with newly diagnosed GBM were enrolled between August 2006 and November 2008. Patients received standard RT starting within 3 to 6 weeks after surgery with concurrent administration of daily TMZ and biweekly BV. After completion of RT, patients resumed TMZ for 5 days every 4 weeks and continued biweekly BV. MGMT promoter methylation was assessed on patient tumor tissue. A University of California, Los Angeles/Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles (KPLA) control cohort of newly diagnosed patients treated with first-line RT and TMZ who had mostly received BV at recurrence was derived for comparison. Results The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 19.6 and 13.6 months, respectively, compared to 21.1 and 7.6 months in the University of California, Los Angeles/KPLA control cohort, and 14.6 and 6.9 months in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-National Cancer Institute of Canada cohort. Correlation of MGMT promoter methylation and improved OS and PFS was retained in the study group. Comparative subset analysis showed that poor prognosis patients (recursive partitioning analysis class V/VI) may derive an early benefit from the use of first-line BV. Toxicity attributable to RT/TMZ was similar, and additional toxicities were consistent with those reported in other BV trials. Conclusion Patients treated with BV and TMZ during and after RT showed improved PFS without improved OS compared to the University of California, Los Angeles/KPLA control group. Additional studies are warranted to determine if BV administered first-line improves survival compared to BV at recurrence.