4.7 Article

Phase III Randomized Trial Comparing the Efficacy of Cediranib As Monotherapy, and in Combination With Lomustine, Versus Lomustine Alone in Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 31, Issue 26, Pages 3212-3218

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2012.47.2464

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. AstraZeneca
  2. Millennium
  3. Pfizer
  4. Mario Campone
  5. Novartis
  6. Boehringer Ingelheim
  7. Apogenix
  8. Eli Lilly
  9. Roche
  10. Merck
  11. Celgene
  12. Genetech Oncology
  13. ImmunoCellular Therapeutics
  14. Diffusion Pharmaceutical
  15. Med-Immune
  16. Myrexis
  17. Sanofi-Aventis
  18. EMD-Serono
  19. Dyax

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose A randomized, phase III, placebo-controlled, partially blinded clinical trial (REGAL [Recentin in Glioblastoma Alone and With Lomustine]) was conducted to determine the efficacy of cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, either as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine versus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Patients and Methods Patients (N = 325) with recurrent glioblastoma who previously received radiation and temozolomide were randomly assigned 2:2:1 to receive (1) cediranib (30 mg) monotherapy; (2) cediranib (20 mg) plus lomustine (110 mg/m(2)); (3) lomustine (110 mg/m(2)) plus a placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival based on blinded, independent radiographic assessment of postcontrast T1-weighted and noncontrast T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain scans. Results The primary end point of progression-free survival (PFS) was not significantly different for either cediranib alone (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.50; two-sided P = .90) or cediranib in combination with lomustine (HR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.08; two-sided P = .16) versus lomustine based on independent or local review of postcontrast T1-weighted MRI. Conclusion This study did not meet its primary end point of PFS prolongation with cediranib either as monotherapy or in combination with lomustine versus lomustine in patients with recurrent glioblastoma, although cediranib showed evidence of clinical activity on some secondary end points including time to deterioration in neurologic status and corticosteroid-sparing effects. (C) 2013 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available