4.2 Review

Pharmacotherapies for the treatment of glioblastoma - current evidence and perspectives

Journal

EXPERT OPINION ON PHARMACOTHERAPY
Volume 17, Issue 9, Pages 1259-1270

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/14656566.2016.1176146

Keywords

Glioblastoma; temozolomide; bevacizumab; clinical trial; immunotherapy

Funding

  1. Acceleron
  2. Actelion
  3. Bayer
  4. Isarna
  5. Merck Sharp Dohme
  6. Merck Co.
  7. Novocure
  8. PIQUR Therapeutics
  9. Roche

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Glioblastoma, the most common malignant brain tumor, exhibits a poor prognosis with little therapeutic progress in the last decade. Novel treatment strategies beyond the established standard of care with temozolomide-based radiotherapy are urgently needed. Areas covered: We reviewed the literature on glioblastoma with a focus on phase III trials for pharmacotherapies and/or innovative concepts until December 2015. Expert opinion: In the last decade, phase III trials on novel compounds largely failed to introduce efficacious pharmacotherapies beyond temozolomide in glioblastoma. So far, inhibition of angiogenesis by compounds such as bevacizumab, cediranib, enzastaurin or cilengitide as well as alternative dosing schedules of temozolomide did not prolong survival, neither at primary diagnosis nor at recurrent disease. Promising strategies of pharmacotherapy currently under evaluation represent targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) with biomarker-stratified patient populations and immunotherapeutic concepts including checkpoint inhibition and vaccination. The clinical role of the medical device delivering 'tumor-treating fields' in newly diagnosed glioblastoma which prolonged overall survival in a phase III study has remained controversial. After failure of several phase III trials with previously promising agents, improvement of concepts and novel compounds are urgently needed to expand the still limited therapeutic options for the treatment of glioblastoma.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available