BACKGROUND: Bevacizumab has recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). However, patterns of relapse, prognosis, and outcome of further therapy after bevacizumab failure have not been studied systematically. METHODS: We identified patients at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center with recurrent GBM who discontinued bevacizumab because of progressive disease. RESULTS: There were 37 patients (26 men with a median age of 54 years). The most common therapies administered concurrently with bevacizumab were irinotecan (43%) and hypofractionated reirradiation (38%). The median overall survival (OS) after progressive disease on bevacizumab was 4.5 months; 34 patients died. At the time bevacizumab was discontinued for tumor progression, 17 patients (46%) had an increase in the size of enhancement at the initial site of disease (local recurrence), 6 (16%) had a new enhancing lesion outside of the initial site of disease (multifocal), and 13 (35%) had progression of predominantly nonenhancing tumor. Factors associated with shorter OS after discontinuing bevacizumab were lower performance status and nonenhancing pattern of recurrence. Additional salvage chemotherapy after bevacizumab failure was given to 19 patients. The median progression-free survival (PFS) among these 19 patients was 2 months, the median OS was 5.2 months, and the 6-month PFS rate was 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Contrast enhanced MRI does not adequately assess disease status during bevacizumab therapy for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). A nonenhancing tumor pattern of progression is common after treatment with bevacizumab for GBM and is correlated with worse survival. Treatments after bevacizumab failure provide only transient tumor control.
BACKGROUND:Bevacizumab has recently been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). However, patterns of relapse, prognosis, and outcome of further therapy after bevacizumab failure have not been studied systematically. METHODS: We identified patients at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center with recurrent GBM who discontinued bevacizumab because of progressive disease. RESULTS: There were 37 patients (26 men with a median age of 54 years). The most common therapies administered concurrently with bevacizumab were irinotecan (43%) and hypofractionated reirradiation (38%). The median overall survival (OS) after progressive disease on bevacizumab was 4.5 months; 34 patients died. At the time bevacizumab was discontinued for tumor progression, 17 patients (46%) had an increase in the size of enhancement at the initial site of disease (local recurrence), 6 (16%) had a new enhancing lesion outside of the initial site of disease (multifocal), and 13 (35%) had progression of predominantly nonenhancing tumor. Factors associated with shorter OS after discontinuing bevacizumab were lower performance status and nonenhancing pattern of recurrence. Additional salvage chemotherapy after bevacizumab failure was given to 19 patients. The median progression-free survival (PFS) among these 19 patients was 2 months, the median OS was 5.2 months, and the 6-month PFS rate was 0%. CONCLUSIONS: Contrast enhanced MRI does not adequately assess disease status during bevacizumab therapy for recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). A nonenhancing tumor pattern of progression is common after treatment with bevacizumab for GBM and is correlated with worse survival. Treatments after bevacizumab failure provide only transient tumor control.
Authors: Michael R Mancuso; Rachel Davis; Scott M Norberg; Shaun O'Brien; Barbara Sennino; Tsutomu Nakahara; Virginia J Yao; Tetsuichiro Inai; Peter Brooks; Bruce Freimark; David R Shalinsky; Dana D Hu-Lowe; Donald M McDonald Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Katrin Lamszus; Ulrike Ulbricht; Jakob Matschke; Marc A Brockmann; Regina Fillbrandt; Manfred Westphal Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: P Kunkel; U Ulbricht; P Bohlen; M A Brockmann; R Fillbrandt; D Stavrou; M Westphal; K Lamszus Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: E T Wong; K R Hess; M J Gleason; K A Jaeckle; A P Kyritsis; M D Prados; V A Levin; W K Yung Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: L E Gaspar; B J Fisher; D R Macdonald; D V LeBer; E C Halperin; S C Schold; J G Cairncross Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1992 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Tracy T Batchelor; David A Reardon; John F de Groot; Wolfgang Wick; Michael Weller Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2014-11-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Mekhail Anwar; Annette M Molinaro; Olivier Morin; Susan M Chang; Daphne A Haas-Kogan; Sarah J Nelson; Janine M Lupo Journal: Radiat Res Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 2.841
Authors: Mohamed A Hamza; Jacob J Mandel; Charles A Conrad; Mark R Gilbert; W K Alfred Yung; Vinay K Puduvalli; John F DeGroot Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Antonio Omuro; Timothy A Chan; Lauren E Abrey; Mustafa Khasraw; Anne S Reiner; Thomas J Kaley; Lisa M Deangelis; Andrew B Lassman; Craig P Nolan; Igor T Gavrilovic; Adilia Hormigo; Cynthia Salvant; Adriana Heguy; Andrew Kaufman; Jason T Huse; Katherine S Panageas; Andreas F Hottinger; Ingo Mellinghoff Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2012-12-14 Impact factor: 12.300