Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Discussion session - CNS tumours

5284 - Second-line treatment of bevacizumab plus lomustine versus bevacizumab plus irinotecan in patients with recurrent glioblastoma

Date

20 Oct 2018

Session

Poster Discussion session - CNS tumours

Presenters

Joana Simões

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2018) 29 (suppl_8): viii122-viii132. 10.1093/annonc/mdy273

Authors

J.C.D.L. Simões, N.T. Tavares, C. Borges, S. Meireles, C. Fernandes, A. Costa, C. Caeiro, M. Damasceno

Author affiliations

  • Medical Oncology Department, Centro Hospitalar de São João, 4200-319 - Porto/PT
More

Resources

Abstract 5284

Background

Evidence for second-line treatment of recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) is scarce and no standard of care is established. A Dutch phase II trial (BELOB) reported promising results with bevacizumab plus lomustine with improved overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Therefore, a phase III trial (BELOREC) described maintenance of a PFS improvement; however, OS was not improved. Despite the negative trials, bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy is widely used in rGBM.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of adult patients with a first recurrence of a GBM (WHO grade 4) after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy, in the period between 2007 and 2017, at our institution. We selected patients treated with bevacizumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks and irinotecan 125 mg/m2 every 2 weeks (BVZ+IRI) or with lomustine 90 mg/m2 every 6 weeks (BVZ+LOM). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and prognostic factors assessed by univariate analysis and by the Cox regression model.

Results

Of the 154 patients included, the median age was 57 years (19-77) and 64.3% (n = 99) were men. Almost 90% were ECOG-PS 0-1 and the median treatment time was 3 months (0-29). About 70% (n = 108) of the patients were treated with BVZ+IRI and almost 30% (n = 46) with BVZ+LOM. 9-months OS was 37.6% in the BVZ+IRI group, with a median of 7 months (95% CI 5.92-8.08), and 57.3% in the BVZ+LOM group, with a median of 9 months (95% CI 4.55-13.45). For 6-months PFS, it was 35.9% in the BVZ+IRI group, with a median of 4 months (95% CI 3.13-4.87), and 40.6% in the BVZ+LOM group, with a median of 5 months (95% CI 4.29-5.71). In the univariate analysis, BVZ+LOM (p = 0.04), corticotherapy doses response (p = 0.03) and proteinuria (p = 0.04) were prognostic factors for OS. BVZ+LOM (HR 0.49; IC 95% 0.25-0.94; p = 0.03) and corticotherapy doses response (HR 0.52; IC 95% 0.28-0.98; p = 0.04) had a positive impact on OS in multivariate analysis. The most frequent toxicities were trombocitopenia (34.3% in BVZ+IRI and 43.5% in BVZ+LOM; p = 0.28), neutropenia (28.7% and 21.7%; p = 0.37) and leucopenia (23.1% and 17.4%; p = 0.43).

Conclusions

According to our data, and despite the samples size difference, BVZ+LOM has a positive prognostic impact in OS comparing to BVZ+IRI.

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Joana Simões.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Editorial Acknowledgement

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings