4.6 Article

Phase I/IIa trial of fractionated radiotherapy, temozolomide, and autologous formalin-fixed tumor vaccine for newly diagnosed glioblastoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY
卷 121, 期 3, 页码 543-553

出版社

AMER ASSOC NEUROLOGICAL SURGEONS
DOI: 10.3171/2014.5.JNS132392

关键词

brain tumor immunotherapy; glioblastoma; clinical trial; autologous formalin-fixed tumor vaccine; temozolomide; oncology

资金

  1. Tsukuba University Hospital

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Object. Temozolomide (TMZ) may enhance antitumor immunity in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). In this paper the authors report on a prospective Phase I/IIa clinical trial of fractionated radiotherapy (FRT) concomitant with TMZ therapy, followed by treatment with autologous formalin-fixed tumor vaccine (AFTV) and TMZ maintenance in patients with newly diagnosed GBM. Methods. Twenty-four patients (age 16-75 years, Karnofsky Performance Scale score >= 60% before initiation of FRT) with newly diagnosed GBM received a total dose of 60 Gy of FRT with daily concurrent TMZ. After a 4-week interval, the patients received 3 AFTV injections and the first course of TMZ maintenance chemotherapy for 5 days, followed by multiple courses of TMZ for 5 days in each 28-day cycle. Results. This treatment regimen was well tolerated by all patients. The percentage of patients with progression-free survival (PFS) >= 24 months was 33%. The median PFS, median overall survival (OS), and the actuarial 2- and 3-year survival rates of the 24 patients were 8.2 months, 22.2 months, 47%, and 38%, respectively. The median PFS in patients with a delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) response after the third AFTV injection (DTH-2) of 10 mm or larger surpassed the median length of follow-up for progression-free patients (29.5 months), which was significantly greater than the median PFS in patients with a smaller DTH-2 response. Conclusions. The treatment regimen was well tolerated and resulted in favorable PFS and OS for newly diagnosed GBM patients.

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