Background

Clonal immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor rearrangements serve as tumor-specific markers that have become mainstays of the diagnosis and monitoring of lymphoid malignancy. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques targeting these loci have been successfully applied to lymphoblastic leukemia and multiple myeloma for minimal residual disease detection. However, adoption of NGS for primary diagnosis remains limited.

Methods

We addressed the bioinformatics challenges associated with immune cell sequencing and clone detection by designing a novel web tool, CloneRetriever (CR), which uses machine-learning principles to generate clone classification schemes that are customizable, and can be applied to large datasets. CR has 2 applications-a "validation" mode to derive a clonality classifier, and a "live" mode to screen for clones by applying a validated and/or customized classifier. In this study, CR-generated multiple classifiers using 2 datasets comprising 106 annotated patient samples. A custom classifier was then applied to 36 unannotated samples.

Results

The optimal classifier for clonality required clonal dominance ≥4.5× above background, read representation ≥8% of all reads, and technical replicate agreement. Depending on the dataset and analysis step, the optimal algorithm yielded sensitivities of 81%-90%, specificities of 97%-100%, areas under the curve of 91%-94%, positive predictive values of 92-100%, and negative predictive values of 88%-98%. Customization of the algorithms yielded 95%-100% concordance with gold-standard clonality determination, including rescue of indeterminate samples. Application to a set of unknowns showed concordance rates of 83%-96%.

Conclusions

CR is an out-of-the-box ready and user-friendly software designed to identify clonal rearrangements in large NGS datasets for the diagnosis of lymphoid malignancies.

Building on an initiative to enhance clinical trial participation involving the Society for Neuro-Oncology, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners, we evaluate the impact of eligibility criteria and trial conduct on neuro-oncology clinical trial participation. Clinical trials often carry forward eligibility criteria from prior studies that may be overly restrictive and unnecessary and needlessly limit patient accrual. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be evaluated based on the goals and design of the study and whether they impact patient safety and/or treatment efficacy. In addition, we evaluate clinical trial conduct as a barrier to accrual and discuss strategies to minimize such barriers for neuro-oncology trials.

Background

The Coronary Artery Calcium Data and Reporting System (CAC-DRS), which takes into account the Agatston score category (A) and the number of calcified vessels (N) has not yet been validated in terms of its prognostic significance.

Methods

We included 54,678 patients from the CAC Consortium, a large retrospective clinical cohort of asymptomatic individuals free of baseline cardiovascular disease (CVD). CAC-DRS groups were derived from routine, cardiac-gated CAC scans. Cox proportional hazards regression models, adjusted for traditional CVD risk factors, were used to assess the association between CAC-DRS groups and CHD, CVD, and all-cause mortality. CAC-DRS was then compared to CAC score groups and regional CAC distribution using area under the curve (AUC) analysis.

Results

The study population had a mean age of 54.2 ± 10.7, 34.4% female, and mean ASCVD score 7.3% ± 9.0. Over a mean follow-up of 12 ± 4 years, a total of 2,469 deaths (including 398 CHD deaths and 762 CVD deaths) were recorded. There was a graded risk for CHD, CVD and all-cause mortality with increasing CAC-DRS groups ranging from an all-cause mortality rate of 1.2 per 1,000 person-years for A0 to 15.4 per 1,000 person-years for A3/N4. In multivariable-adjusted models, those with CAC-DRS A3/N4 had significantly higher risk for CHD mortality (HR 5.9 (95% CI 3.6-9.9), CVD mortality (HR4.0 (95% CI 2.8-5.7), and all-cause mortality a (HR 2.5 (95% CI 2.1-3.0) compared to CAC-DRS A0. CAC-DRS had higher AUC than CAC score groups (0.762 vs 0.754, P < 0.001) and CAC distribution (0.762 vs 0.748, P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The CAC-DRS system, combining the Agatston score and the number of vessels with CAC provides better stratification of risk for CHD, CVD, and all-cause death than the Agatston score alone. These prognostic data strongly support new SCCT guidelines recommending the use CAC-DRS scoring.

Purpose

Diffuse gliomas are malignant brain tumors that include lower-grade gliomas (LGGs) and glioblastomas. Transformation of low-grade glioma into a higher tumor grade is typically associated with contrast enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging. Mutations in the isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) gene occur in most LGGs (> 70%). Ivosidenib is an inhibitor of mutant IDH1 (mIDH1) under evaluation in patients with solid tumors.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase I, dose escalation and expansion study of ivosidenib in patients with mIDH1 solid tumors. Ivosidenib was administered orally daily in 28-day cycles.

Results

In 66 patients with advanced gliomas, ivosidenib was well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities reported. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached; 500 mg once per day was selected for the expansion cohort. The grade ≥ 3 adverse event rate was 19.7%; 3% (n = 2) were considered treatment related. In patients with nonenhancing glioma (n = 35), the objective response rate was 2.9%, with 1 partial response. Thirty of 35 patients (85.7%) with nonenhancing glioma achieved stable disease compared with 14 of 31 (45.2%) with enhancing glioma. Median progression-free survival was 13.6 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 33.2 months) and 1.4 months (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.9 months) for the nonenhancing and enhancing glioma cohorts, respectively. In an exploratory analysis, ivosidenib reduced the volume and growth rates of nonenhancing tumors.

Conclusion

In patients with mIDH1 advanced glioma, ivosidenib 500 mg once per day was associated with a favorable safety profile, prolonged disease control, and reduced growth of nonenhancing tumors.

Primary and metastatic tumors of the central nervous system are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms with varied outcomes and management strategies. Recently, improved survival observed in 2 randomized clinical trials established combined chemotherapy and radiation as the new standard for treating patients with pure or mixed anaplastic oligodendroglioma harboring the 1p/19q codeletion. For metastatic disease, increasing evidence supports the efficacy of stereotactic radiosurgery in treating patients with multiple metastatic lesions but low overall tumor volume. These guidelines provide recommendations on the diagnosis and management of this group of diseases based on clinical evidence and panel consensus. This version includes expert advice on the management of low-grade infiltrative astrocytomas, oligodendrogliomas, anaplastic gliomas, glioblastomas, medulloblastomas, supratentorial primitive neuroectodermal tumors, and brain metastases. The full online version, available at NCCN. org, contains recommendations on additional subtypes.

The NCCN Guidelines for Central Nervous System Cancers provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with cancers of the central nervous system. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight recent updates regarding the management of metastatic brain tumors using radiation therapy. Use of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is no longer limited to patients with 3 or fewer lesions, because data suggest that total disease burden, rather than number of lesions, is predictive of survival benefits associated with the technique. SRS is increasingly becoming an integral part of management of patients with controlled, low-volume brain metastases.

Modern radiation therapy is delivered with great precision, in part by relying on high-resolution multidimensional anatomic imaging to define targets in space and time. The development of quantitative imaging (QI) modalities capable of monitoring biologic parameters could provide deeper insight into tumor biology and facilitate more personalized clinical decision-making. The Quantitative Imaging Network (QIN) was established by the National Cancer Institute to advance and validate these QI modalities in the context of oncology clinical trials. In particular, the QIN has significant interest in the application of QI to widen the therapeutic window of radiation therapy. QI modalities have great promise in radiation oncology and will help address significant clinical needs, including finer prognostication, more specific target delineation, reduction of normal tissue toxicity, identification of radioresistant disease, and clearer interpretation of treatment response. Patient-specific QI is being incorporated into radiation treatment design in ways such as dose escalation and adaptive replanning, with the intent of improving outcomes while lessening treatment morbidities. This review discusses the current vision of the QIN, current areas of investigation, and how the QIN hopes to enhance the integration of QI into the practice of radiation oncology.

Background

Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant grade 2 gliomas are malignant brain tumors that cause considerable disability and premature death. Vorasidenib, an oral brain-penetrant inhibitor of mutant IDH1 and IDH2 enzymes, showed preliminary activity in IDH-mutant gliomas.

Methods

In a double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with residual or recurrent grade 2 IDH-mutant glioma who had undergone no previous treatment other than surgery to receive either oral vorasidenib (40 mg once daily) or matched placebo in 28-day cycles. The primary end point was imaging-based progression-free survival according to blinded assessment by an independent review committee. The key secondary end point was the time to the next anticancer intervention. Crossover to vorasidenib from placebo was permitted on confirmation of imaging-based disease progression. Safety was also assessed.

Results

A total of 331 patients were assigned to receive vorasidenib (168 patients) or placebo (163 patients). At a median follow-up of 14.2 months, 226 patients (68.3%) were continuing to receive vorasidenib or placebo. Progression-free survival was significantly improved in the vorasidenib group as compared with the placebo group (median progression-free survival, 27.7 months vs. 11.1 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 to 0.56; P<0.001). The time to the next intervention was significantly improved in the vorasidenib group as compared with the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.43; P<0.001). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher occurred in 22.8% of the patients who received vorasidenib and in 13.5% of those who received placebo. An increased alanine aminotransferase level of grade 3 or higher occurred in 9.6% of the patients who received vorasidenib and in no patients who received placebo.

Conclusions

In patients with grade 2 IDH-mutant glioma, vorasidenib significantly improved progression-free survival and delayed the time to the next intervention. (Funded by Servier; INDIGO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04164901.).