Dataset Information

Association of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy with survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015 based on the randomized controlled EF-14 study. Subsequent approvals worldwide and increased adoption over time have raised the question of whether a consistent survival benefit has been observed in the real-world setting, and whether device usage has played a role.

Methods

We conducted a literature search to identify clinical studies evaluating overall survival (OS) in TTFields-treated patients. Comparative and single-cohort studies were analyzed. Survival curves were pooled using a distribution-free random-effects method.

Results

Among nine studies, seven (N = 1430 patients) compared the addition of TTFields therapy to standard of care (SOC) chemoradiotherapy versus SOC alone and were included in a pooled analysis for OS. Meta-analysis of comparative studies indicated a significant improvement in OS for patients receiving TTFields and SOC versus SOC alone (HR: 0.63; 95% CI 0.53-0.75; p < 0.001). Among real-world post-approval studies, the pooled median OS was 22.6 months (95% CI 17.6-41.2) for TTFields-treated patients, and 17.4 months (95% CI 14.4-21.6) for those not receiving TTFields. Rates of gross total resection were generally higher in the real-world setting, irrespective of TTFields use. Furthermore, for patients included in studies reporting data on device usage (N = 1015), an average usage rate of ≥ 75% was consistently associated with prolonged survival (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Meta-analysis of comparative TTFields studies suggests survival may be improved with the addition of TTFields to SOC for patients with newly diagnosed GBM.

SUBMITTER: Ballo MT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10462574 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy with survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ballo Matthew T MT Conlon Patrick P Lavy-Shahaf Gitit G Kinzel Adrian A Vymazal Josef J Rulseh Aaron M AM

Journal of neuro-oncology 20230726 1

<h4>Purpose</h4>Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy, an electric field-based cancer treatment, became FDA-approved for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) in 2015 based on the randomized controlled EF-14 study. Subsequent approvals worldwide and increased adoption over time have raised the question of whether a consistent survival benefit has been observed in the real-world setting, and whether device usage has played a role.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a literature search to i ...[more]

PMID: 37493865

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTumor-treating fields (TTFields) therapy and radiotherapy may have synergistic anti-glioma effect based on preclinical studies. The combination of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) with TTFields therapy has noticeably attracted clinicians' attention. This study aimed to provide insights into the clinical outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma who received either concurrent CRT and TTFields therapy or adjuvant TTFields therapy following CRT. The findings were based on a cohort of patients who were treated at Huashan Hospital (Shanghai, China).MethodsThis retrospective study analyzed ndGBM patients' clinical outcomes who were treated at Huashan Hospital and received TTFields therapy. Patients were categorized into two groups: one group received adjuvant TTFields therapy after completing CRT (referred to as the A-TTF group), while the other received TTFields therapy concurrently with CRT and continued TTFields after treatment (referred to as the CA-TTF group). The study evaluated treatment efficacy and toxicities, comparing outcomes between the two groups. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. To mitigate confounding factors, efficacy was assessed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model, propensity score matching, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score.ResultsA total of 72 patients with ndGBM were included in the study. Among them, 41 patients received concurrent and adjuvant TTFields therapy in combination with CRT (CA-TTF group), and 31 patients received adjuvant TTFields therapy with temozolomide (A-TTF group). The median follow-up time was 18.0 months. No significant differences were observed in median PFS (14.2 vs. 15.0 months, P = 0.92) or OS (20.8 vs. 20.0 months, P = 0.92) between the CA-TTF and A-TTF groups. Skin toxicity was common, while manageable, with no significant difference between the two groups. Following IPTW adjustment, the hazard ratios for PFS and OS indicated a potential advantage for the CA-TTF group, although this difference was not statistically significant.ConclusionConcurrent CRT and TTFields therapy emerged safe for newly diagnosed GBM patients. Although no significant survival differences were found between the CA-TTF and A-TTF groups, the potential benefit of concurrent TTFields warrants further investigation through large-scale clinical trials.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstudied elderly patients comprise a large segment of high-risk patients with glioblastoma (GBM) that are challenging to treat. Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) is a locoregional, noninvasive, antimitotic therapy delivering low-intensity, intermediate-frequency alternating electric fields to the tumor. In the phase 3 EF-14 clinical trial, TTFields (200 kHz) improved median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) in patients with newly diagnosed GBM (ndGBM) when added concomitantly to maintenance temozolomide (TMZ). This EF-14 subgroup analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of TTFields in elderly patients.MethodsAll 134 patients who are ≥65 years of age were included (TTFields/TMZ combination, n=89; TMZ monotherapy, n=45; 2:1 ratio of randomization). PFS and OS were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methodology (α=0.05). Health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality-of-life questionnaire QLQ-C30 supplemented with the brain tumor module (QLQ-BN20). Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated using Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (CTCAE) v4.0.ResultsThe PFS was 6.5 months in patients randomized to the treatment group with TTFields/TMZ combination versus 3.9 months in patients treated with TMZ monotherapy (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30-0.74; P=0.0236). The OS was 17.4 months in patients treated with TTFields/TMZ combination versus 13.7 months in patients treated with TMZ monotherapy (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.33-0.77; P=0.0204). Annual survival rates with TTFields/TMZ versus TMZ monotherapy were 39% (95% CI, 29-50%) versus 27% (95% CI, 15-41%; P=0.072) at 2 years, 19% (95% CI, 11-29%) versus 11% (95% CI, 4-23%; P=0.135) at 3 years, and 15% (95% CI, 7-25%) versus 0% at 5 years, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups in the preselected items of HRQoL assessment. Grade ≥3 systemic AEs were 46% in the TTFields/TMZ group versus 40% in the TMZ monotherapy group, without statistically significant difference between the two groups. The only TTFields-related AEs were reversible scalp skin reactions, with grades 1-2 and grade 3 skin reactions reported by 51% and 2% of patients, respectively.ConclusionsCombining TTFields with maintenance TMZ significantly improved PFS and OS in elderly patients with ndGBM in the phase 3 EF-14 clinical trial, without significant increases in systemic toxicity or negatively affecting patient HRQoL. TTFields-related skin AEs were low-grade and manageable.Clinical trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00916409, identifier: NCT00916409.

Project description:BackgroundTumour-treating fields therapy is a locoregional, anti-cancer treatment. Efficacy and safety of tumour-treating fields therapy in adults with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were demonstrated in the pivotal phase 3 EF-14 study (NCT00916409). Here, we report post-approval data of tumour-treating fields therapy in Japanese patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.MethodsUnsolicited post-marketing surveillance data from Japanese patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma treated with tumour-treating fields therapy (December 2016-June 2020) were retrospectively analysed. The primary endpoints were skin, neurological and psychiatric adverse events. The secondary endpoints were 1- and 2-year overall survival rates, and the 6-month progression-free survival. adverse events were analysed using MedDRA v24.0. The overall survival and progression-free survival were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis (log-rank testing). The Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were also performed.ResultsForty patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were enrolled (62.5% male; median age 59 years; median baseline Karnofsky Performance Scale score 90). The most common tumour-treating-fields-therapy-related adverse event was beneath-array local skin reaction (60% of patients). The adverse events were mostly mild to moderate in severity. Neurological disorders were observed in 2.5% patients (one patient reported dysesthesia). No psychiatric disorders were reported. The 1- and 2-year overall survival rates were 77.9% (95% CI 60.6-88.3) and 53.6% (35.5-68.7%), respectively. The 6-month progression-free survival was 77.5% (61.2-87.6%). These survival rates compare favourably with those in the EF-14 trial (1- and 2-year overall survival rates: 73% [69-77%] and 43% [39-48%], respectively; 6-month progression-free survival rate: 56% (51-61%).ConclusionThis post-approval, real-world evidence study revealed no new safety signals and suggests the safety and efficacy of tumour-treating fields therapy in Japanese patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Dataset Information

Association of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy with survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Association of Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) therapy with survival in newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets