Abstract CT007: Tumor treating fields added to standard chemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM): Final results of a randomized, multi-center, phase III trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) is a novel, anti-mitotic, physical treatment. Alternating electrical fields (TTFields) at an intermediate frequency of 200 MHz (1-3 V/cm) are delivered continuously to the brain by a patient-operated, wearable medical device (Optune™, Novocure Ltd.). An international, multicenter, prospective, randomized phase 3 trial (EF-14) is testing the efficacy of adding TTFields to standard adjuvant temozlomide (TMZ) chemotherapy in newly diagnosed GBM. We report the final and mature results of all 695 patients (pts) enrolled (median follow-up > 3 years, minimum follow-up > 24 months) including five year survival rates. Methods: Within 7 weeks after the end of concomitant chemo-radiotherapy (TMZ/RT) and stratification for extent of resection and MGMT status, pts were randomized (at a 1:2 ratio) to either standard adjuvant TMZ alone (150-200 mg/m2/d x 5d) or TMZ and TTFields. Eligible pts had a newly diagnosed GBM, non-progressive after TMZ/RT, performance status of ≥70%, adequate hematological, liver and renal function. The primary endpoint is progression free survival (PFS; determined by blinded central radiology review), with overall survival (OS) as a powered secondary endpoint. Results: 695 pts were randomized (7/09 - 11/14). Patient characteristics are balanced, median age 56 years (range 19-83), 87 % had undergone tumor resection, 13 % a biopsy only. One third of tumors were MGMT methylated. Median time from end of radiotherapy to randomization was 37 days. The median number of adjuvant (maintenance) TMZ cycles was 6 and 5 cycles, for TTFields/TMZ and TMZ alone, respectively. All analyses are intent-to-treat. The median PFS is 6.7 months (95%CI 6.1-8.1) for the pts treated with TTFields/TMZ versus 4.0 months (CI 3.8 - 4.4) for TMZ alone (hazard ratio 0.63, p=0.00005). Median OS from randomization is 20.9 months versus 16 months for the TTFields/TMZ and TMZ alone, respectively, with a hazard ratio of 0.63 (CI 0.53-0.76), p=0.00006. Median time from initial diagnosis until completion of TMZ/RT with subsequent randomization was 3.7 months, equal in both arms. The landmark 2 and 5-year survival rates are 43% (CI 39-48%) vs 31% (CI 25-38) and 13% (CI 9-18) vs 5% (CI 2-11); p=0.0008 and 0.0037, respectively. The significant improvement in OS was seen across all patient subgroups regardless of age, extent of resection, performance status, gender, geography or MGMT methylation status. Only compliance with TTFields treatment was predictive of outcome, with pts who were treated for more than 18 hours/day (monthly average) living significantly longer than pts treated for less than 18 hours/day. Conclusions: This final analysis of the EF-14 trial demonstrate consistent superior PFS and OS in pts treated with maintenance therapy including both TTFields and TMZ compared with maintenance TMZ alone. With a hazard ratio for survival of 0.63, the magnitude of improvement when adding TTFields is comparable to the benefit observed with TMZ 12 years ago. Tumor Treating Fields are a welcome addition to the treatment armamentarium in GBM, and defines a new standard of care. This innovative regional treatment modality that can due to the absence of overlapping toxicity easily be combined with standard chemotherapy holds promise as a regional tumor treatment modality in other solid tumors. Citation Format: Roger Stupp, Monika E. Hegi, Ahmed Idbaih, David M. Steinberg, Benoit Lhermitte, William Read, Steven A. Toms, Gene H. Barnett, Garth Nicholas, Chae-Yong Kim, Karen Fink, Andrea Salmaggi, Frank S. Lieberman, Jay-Jiguang Zhu, Lynne Taylor, Giuseppe Stragliotto, Andreas F. Hottinger, Eilon D. Kirson, Uri Weinberg, Yoram Palti, Zvi Ram, on behalf of the EF-14 trial investigators. Tumor treating fields added to standard chemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM): Final results of a randomized, multi-center, phase III trial [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT007. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-CT007
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».