NIMG-26. EVALUATING THE DAYS GAINED RESPONSE METRIC IN CLINICAL TRIALS USING BEVACIZUMAB PLUS ADDITIONAL AGENTS FOR RECURRENT GLIOBLASTOMA

Abstract

Abstract Determining effective therapies for patients with recurrent glioblastoma remains difficult especially in small early phase clinical trials. Currently utilized estimators of treatment response rely on two-dimensional measurements of tumor progression (e.g. RANO, RECIST, MacDonald) that have often fallen short in reliably connecting patients who respond with positive survival outcomes. This has prompted consideration of advanced imaging and volumetric measurements by the RANO working group and others. Our proposed approach, Days Gained (DG), uses volumetric measurements to calculate a personalized response metric based on change in tumor growth characteristics pre/post-treatment. DG has shown promise for connecting imageable treatment response with clinically meaningful (statistically significant) survival benefit when applied in upfront and recurrent therapy settings, even in the context of coincident bevacizumab treatment. In this study, we seek to consider a new cohort of patients receiving bevacizumab in combination with other novel therapies to distinguish any subpopulation of patients with meaningful response. In this work, we identified a subset of 16 patients from bevacizumab clinical trials with data available for DG analysis requiring serial imaging (T1Gd and FLAIR) prior to and after the first cycle of therapy. Each trial evaluated bevacizumab alone versus bevacizumab plus either dasatinib or TRC105 in recurrent disease. Discrimination of time to progression (TTP) was evaluated at DG thresholds identified from our prior analysis of patients treated with bevacizumab. Using previously identified DG thresholds for clinically significant treatment benefit, in our cohort, DG measured by serial FLAIR imaging was significant in predicting longer TTP (120 DG, p=0.014), but T1Gd DG scores did not attain significance (p=0.630). Given the limited insights in connecting response metrics to accurately predicted outcomes, these data further support the use of DG as a burgeoning marker of treatment response (or lack of response) that may be useful for more routine integration into clinical trials.