Balaña Carmen, Estival Anna, Pineda Estela, Sepúlveda Juan, Mesía Carles, Del Barco Sonia, Gil-Gil Miguel, Hardy Max, Indacoechea Alberto, Cardona Andrés Felipe
Medical Oncology Service, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol, IGTP, Badalona 08916, Spain (C.B., A.E., M.H., A.I.); Medical Oncology Service, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona 08036, Spain (E.P.); Medical Oncology Service, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid 28041, Spain (J.S.); Medical Oncology Service, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Hospital Duran i Reynals - IDIBELL, Hospitalet de Llobregat 08907, Spain (C.M., M.G.-G.); Medical Oncology Service, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Hospital Trueta, Girona 17007, Spain (S.d.B.); Clinical and Translational Oncology Group, Institute of Oncology, Clínica del Country, Bogotá, Bogotá c. 318, Colombia (A.F.C.).
Neurooncol Pract. 2017 Mar;4(1):15-23. doi: 10.1093/nop/npw004. Epub 2016 Dec 9.
The use of bevacizumab for recurrent glioblastoma is controversial. Here we show data on patients who responded to bevacizumab, then stopped bevacizumab for any reason other than progression and were rechallenged with bevacizumab at the time of subsequent progression.
This retrospective study included 28 patients, classified in 2 cohorts: those for whom the first exposure to bevacizumab (BEV-1) was first-line treatment for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (Bev-F; = 12) and those for whom BEV-1 was second- or third-line treatment for recurrent disease after standard treatment (Bev-S; = 16).
All patients received standard radiotherapy plus temozolomide. Bev-F patients also received concomitant bevacizumab. All 28 patients received a total of 57 treatment lines with bevacizumab (12 first-line and 45 second- or further-line). Twenty-nine lines were rechallenges (BEV-2 [ = 26] or BEV-3 [ = 3]). Objective response to rechallenge was 58.6% and clinical benefit was 89.6%. Overall survival (OS) was 55 months for RPA class IV and 26.7 months for RPA class V patients ( = .01). OS was 26.7 months for Bev-F patients and 52.1 months for Bev-S patients ( = .004). Post-progression survival was 20 months for Bev-F patients and 39.6 months for Bev-S patients (HR = 0.26; = .007).
This is the largest study to examine the impact of a bevacizumab rechallenge in glioblastoma patients who had responded to previous bevacizumab treatment but who stopped before progression. Our findings indicate that these patients can attain a second response or clinical benefit from re-introduction of bevacizumab. The potential benefit from intermittent versus continuous treatment warrants comparison in clinical trials.
贝伐单抗用于复发性胶质母细胞瘤的治疗存在争议。在此,我们展示了对贝伐单抗有反应、然后因病情进展以外的任何原因停用贝伐单抗、并在后续病情进展时再次接受贝伐单抗治疗的患者的数据。
这项回顾性研究纳入了28例患者,分为2个队列:首次接触贝伐单抗(BEV-1)作为新诊断胶质母细胞瘤一线治疗的患者(Bev-F;n = 12),以及BEV-1作为标准治疗后复发性疾病二线或三线治疗的患者(Bev-S;n = 16)。
所有患者均接受了标准放疗加替莫唑胺治疗。Bev-F患者还接受了同步贝伐单抗治疗。所有28例患者共接受了57个疗程的贝伐单抗治疗(12个一线疗程和45个二线或后续疗程)。29个疗程为再次治疗(BEV-2 [n = 26]或BEV-3 [n = 3])。再次治疗的客观缓解率为58.6%,临床获益率为89.6%。RPA IV级患者的总生存期(OS)为55个月,RPA V级患者为26.7个月(P = 0.01)。Bev-F患者的OS为26.7个月,Bev-S患者为52.1个月(P = 0.004)。进展后生存期,Bev-F患者为20个月,Bev-S患者为39.6个月(HR = 0.26;P = 0.007)。
这是一项规模最大的研究,旨在探讨对先前贝伐单抗治疗有反应但在病情进展前停药的胶质母细胞瘤患者再次使用贝伐单抗的影响。我们的研究结果表明,这些患者再次使用贝伐单抗可获得二次缓解或临床获益。间歇治疗与持续治疗的潜在获益值得在临床试验中进行比较。