4.7 Article

Bevacizumab Plus Irinotecan in Recurrent WHO Grade 3 Malignant Gliomas

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 14, 期 21, 页码 7068-7073

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0260

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NIH, Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, MID [5 P50 CA108786, 5 P50 NS20023, 4 R37 CA11898]
  2. Preston Robert-Tisch Brain Tumor Center Research Fund
  3. Bryan Class Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Although patients with newly diagnosed WHO grade 3 malignant glioma have a more favorable prognosis than those with WHO grade 4 malignant glioma, salvage therapies following recurrence offer essentially palliative benefit. We did a phase 11 trial of bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor, in combination with irinotecan for patients with recurrent grade 3 malignant glioma. Experimental Design: Upon documentation of adequate safety among an initial cohort of nine patients treated with bevacizumab (10 mg/kg) and irinotecan every 14 days, a second cohort (n = 24) was treated with bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) every 3 weeks with irinotecan on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 of each 42-day cycle. For both cohorts, the dose of irinotecan was 340 mg/m(2) for patients on enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAED) and 125 mg/m(2) for patients not on EIAEDs. After each 6-week cycle, patients were evaluated with a physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging. Results: The 6-month progression-free survival was 55% (95% confidence interval, 36-70%). The 6-month overall survival was 79% (95% confidence interval, 61-89%). Twenty patients (61%) had at least a partial response. Outcome did not differ between the two treatment cohorts. Significant adverse events were infrequent and included a central nervous system hemorrhage in one patient, and one patient who developed thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura. Conclusion: Bevacizumab and irinotecan is an active regimen with acceptable toxicity for patients with recurrent WHO grade 3 malignant glioma.

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

4.7
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