Cargando…

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)

PURPOSE: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, a noninvasive, anti-mitotic treatment modality, is approved for recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) and newly diagnosed GBM based on phase III, EF-11 (NCT00379470) and EF-14 (NCT00916409) studies, respectively. The EF-19 study aimed to evaluate efficacy a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Jay-Jiguang, Goldlust, Samuel A., Kleinberg, Lawrence R., Honnorat, Jérôme, Oberheim Bush, Nancy Ann, Ram, Zvi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9568629/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36239858
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12672-022-00555-5
_version_ 1784809680420208640
author Zhu, Jay-Jiguang
Goldlust, Samuel A.
Kleinberg, Lawrence R.
Honnorat, Jérôme
Oberheim Bush, Nancy Ann
Ram, Zvi
author_facet Zhu, Jay-Jiguang
Goldlust, Samuel A.
Kleinberg, Lawrence R.
Honnorat, Jérôme
Oberheim Bush, Nancy Ann
Ram, Zvi
author_sort Zhu, Jay-Jiguang
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, a noninvasive, anti-mitotic treatment modality, is approved for recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) and newly diagnosed GBM based on phase III, EF-11 (NCT00379470) and EF-14 (NCT00916409) studies, respectively. The EF-19 study aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of TTFields monotherapy (200 kHz) vs physicians’ choice standard of care (PC-SOC; EF-11 historical control group) in rGBM. METHODS: A prospective, post-marketing registry study of adults with supratentorial rGBM treated with TTFields therapy was conducted. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS; intent-to-treat [ITT] population) and secondary endpoint was OS per-protocol (PP). Subgroup and toxicity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Median OS (ITT population) was comparable with TTFields monotherapy vs PC-SOC (7.4 vs 6.4 months, log-rank test P = 0.053; Cox test hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI], 0.66 [0.47–0.92], P = 0.016). The upper-bound HR (95% CI) was lower than pre-defined noninferiority (1.375 threshold). In the PP population, median OS was significantly longer for TTFields monotherapy vs PC-SOC (8.1 vs 6.4 months; log-rank test P = 0.017; Cox test HR [95% CI], 0.60 [0.42–0.85], P = 0.004). TTFields therapy showed increased benefit with extended use (≥ 18 h/day [averaged over 28 days]). TTFields therapy-related adverse events (AEs) by body system were lower vs PC-SOC: mainly mild-to-moderate skin AEs. CONCLUSION: In the real-world setting, TTFields monotherapy showed comparable (ITT population) and superior (PP population) OS vs PC-SOC in rGBM. In line with previous results, TTFields therapy showed a favorable safety profile vs chemotherapy, without new safety signals/systemic effects. Trial registration: NCT01756729, registered December 20, 2012. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12672-022-00555-5.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9568629
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95686292022-10-16 Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19) Zhu, Jay-Jiguang Goldlust, Samuel A. Kleinberg, Lawrence R. Honnorat, Jérôme Oberheim Bush, Nancy Ann Ram, Zvi Discov Oncol Research PURPOSE: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, a noninvasive, anti-mitotic treatment modality, is approved for recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) and newly diagnosed GBM based on phase III, EF-11 (NCT00379470) and EF-14 (NCT00916409) studies, respectively. The EF-19 study aimed to evaluate efficacy and safety of TTFields monotherapy (200 kHz) vs physicians’ choice standard of care (PC-SOC; EF-11 historical control group) in rGBM. METHODS: A prospective, post-marketing registry study of adults with supratentorial rGBM treated with TTFields therapy was conducted. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS; intent-to-treat [ITT] population) and secondary endpoint was OS per-protocol (PP). Subgroup and toxicity analyses were conducted. RESULTS: Median OS (ITT population) was comparable with TTFields monotherapy vs PC-SOC (7.4 vs 6.4 months, log-rank test P = 0.053; Cox test hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI], 0.66 [0.47–0.92], P = 0.016). The upper-bound HR (95% CI) was lower than pre-defined noninferiority (1.375 threshold). In the PP population, median OS was significantly longer for TTFields monotherapy vs PC-SOC (8.1 vs 6.4 months; log-rank test P = 0.017; Cox test HR [95% CI], 0.60 [0.42–0.85], P = 0.004). TTFields therapy showed increased benefit with extended use (≥ 18 h/day [averaged over 28 days]). TTFields therapy-related adverse events (AEs) by body system were lower vs PC-SOC: mainly mild-to-moderate skin AEs. CONCLUSION: In the real-world setting, TTFields monotherapy showed comparable (ITT population) and superior (PP population) OS vs PC-SOC in rGBM. In line with previous results, TTFields therapy showed a favorable safety profile vs chemotherapy, without new safety signals/systemic effects. Trial registration: NCT01756729, registered December 20, 2012. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12672-022-00555-5. Springer US 2022-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC9568629/ /pubmed/36239858 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12672-022-00555-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Zhu, Jay-Jiguang
Goldlust, Samuel A.
Kleinberg, Lawrence R.
Honnorat, Jérôme
Oberheim Bush, Nancy Ann
Ram, Zvi
Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)
title Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)
title_full Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)
title_fullStr Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)
title_full_unstemmed Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)
title_short Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (EF-19)
title_sort tumor treating fields (ttfields) therapy vs physicians’ choice standard-of-care treatment in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: a post-approval registry study (ef-19)
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9568629/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36239858
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12672-022-00555-5
work_keys_str_mv AT zhujayjiguang tumortreatingfieldsttfieldstherapyvsphysicianschoicestandardofcaretreatmentinpatientswithrecurrentglioblastomaapostapprovalregistrystudyef19
AT goldlustsamuela tumortreatingfieldsttfieldstherapyvsphysicianschoicestandardofcaretreatmentinpatientswithrecurrentglioblastomaapostapprovalregistrystudyef19
AT kleinberglawrencer tumortreatingfieldsttfieldstherapyvsphysicianschoicestandardofcaretreatmentinpatientswithrecurrentglioblastomaapostapprovalregistrystudyef19
AT honnoratjerome tumortreatingfieldsttfieldstherapyvsphysicianschoicestandardofcaretreatmentinpatientswithrecurrentglioblastomaapostapprovalregistrystudyef19
AT oberheimbushnancyann tumortreatingfieldsttfieldstherapyvsphysicianschoicestandardofcaretreatmentinpatientswithrecurrentglioblastomaapostapprovalregistrystudyef19
AT ramzvi tumortreatingfieldsttfieldstherapyvsphysicianschoicestandardofcaretreatmentinpatientswithrecurrentglioblastomaapostapprovalregistrystudyef19