4.6 Article

A randomized phase II study of everolimus in combination with chemoradiation in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: results of NRG Oncology RTOG 0913

期刊

NEURO-ONCOLOGY
卷 20, 期 5, 页码 666-673

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/nox209

关键词

everolimus; glioblastoma; mTOR inhibition; phase II trial; radiation sensitizer

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute
  2. NRG Oncology Operations [U10CA180868]
  3. NRG Oncology SDMC [U10CA180822]
  4. Novartis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This phase II study was designed to determine the efficacy of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor everolimus administered daily with conventional radiation therapy and chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Patients were randomized to radiation therapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide with or without daily everolimus (10 mg). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and treatment-related toxicities. A total of 171 patients were randomized and deemed eligible for this study. Patients randomized to receive everolimus experienced a significant increase in both grade 4 toxicities, including lymphopenia and thrombocytopenia, and treatment-related deaths. There was no significant difference in PFS between patients randomized to everolimus compared with control (median PFS time: 8.2 vs 10.2 mo, respectively; P = 0.79). OS for patients randomized to receive everolimus was inferior to that for control patients (median survival time: 16.5 vs 21.2 mo, respectively; P = 0.008). A similar trend was observed in both O-6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase promoter hypermethylated and unmethylated tumors. Combining everolimus with conventional chemoradiation leads to increased treatment-related toxicities and does not improve PFS in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Although the median survival time in patients receiving everolimus was comparable to contemporary studies, it was inferior to the control in this randomized study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据