PURPOSE: The Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria for high-grade gliomas (RANO-HGG) and low-grade gliomas (RANO-LGG) were developed to improve reliability of response assessment in glioma trials. Over time, some limitations of these criteria were identified, and challenges emerged regarding integrating features of the modified RANO (mRANO) or the immunotherapy RANO (iRANO) criteria. METHODS: Informed by data from studies evaluating the different criteria, updates to the RANO criteria are proposed (RANO 2.0). RESULTS: We recommend a standard set of criteria for both high- and low-grade gliomas, to be used for all trials regardless of the treatment modalities being evaluated. In the newly diagnosed setting, the postradiotherapy magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), rather than the postsurgical MRI, will be used as the baseline for comparison with subsequent scans. Since the incidence of pseudoprogression is high in the 12 weeks after radiotherapy, continuation of treatment and confirmation of progression during this period with a repeat MRI, or histopathologic evidence of unequivocal recurrent tumor, are required to define tumor progression. However, confirmation scans are not mandatory after this period nor for the evaluation of treatment for recurrent tumors. For treatments with a high likelihood of pseudoprogression, mandatory confirmation of progression with a repeat MRI is highly recommended. The primary measurement remains the maximum cross-sectional area of tumor (two-dimensional) but volumetric measurements are an option. For IDH wild-type glioblastoma, the nonenhancing disease will no longer be evaluated except when assessing response to antiangiogenic agents. In IDH-mutated tumors with a significant nonenhancing component, clinical trials may require evaluating both the enhancing and nonenhancing tumor components for response assessment. CONCLUSION: The revised RANO 2.0 criteria refine response assessment in gliomas.

A recent joint meeting was held on January 30, 2014, with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Cancer Institute (NCI), clinical scientists, imaging experts, pharmaceutical and biotech companies, clinical trials cooperative groups, and patient advocate groups to discuss imaging endpoints for clinical trials in glioblastoma. This workshop developed a set of priorities and action items including the creation of a standardized MRI protocol for multicenter studies. The current document outlines consensus recommendations for a standardized Brain Tumor Imaging Protocol (BTIP), along with the scientific and practical justifications for these recommendations, resulting from a series of discussions between various experts involved in aspects of neuro-oncology neuroimaging for clinical trials. The minimum recommended sequences include: (i) parameter-matched precontrast and postcontrast inversion recovery-prepared, isotropic 3D T1-weighted gradient-recalled echo; (ii) axial 2D T2-weighted turbo spin-echo acquired after contrast injection and before postcontrast 3D T1-weighted images to control timing of images after contrast administration; (iii) precontrast, axial 2D T2-weighted fluid-attenuated inversion recovery; and (iv) precontrast, axial 2D, 3-directional diffusion-weighted images. Recommended ranges of sequence parameters are provided for both 1.5 T and 3 T MR systems.

Radiographic endpoints including response and progression are important for the evaluation of new glioblastoma therapies. The current RANO criteria was developed to overcome many of the challenges identified with previous guidelines for response assessment, however, significant challenges and limitations remain. The current recommendations build on the strengths of the current RANO criteria, while addressing many of these limitations. Modifications to the current RANO criteria include suggestions for volumetric response evaluation, use contrast enhanced T1 subtraction maps to increase lesion conspicuity, removal of qualitative non-enhancing tumor assessment requirements, use of the post-radiation time point as the baseline for newly diagnosed glioblastoma response assessment, and “treatment-agnostic” response assessment rubrics for identifying pseudoprogression, pseudoresponse, and a confirmed durable response in newly diagnosed and recurrent glioblastoma trials.

Purpose: Lower grade gliomas (LGGs) are malignant brain tumors. Current therapy is associated with short- and long-term toxicity. Progression to higher tumor grade is associated with contrast enhancement on MRI. The majority of LGGs harbor mutations in the genes encoding isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 or 2 (IDH1/IDH2). Vorasidenib (AG-881) is a first-in-class, brain-penetrant, dual inhibitor of the mutant IDH1 and mutant IDH2 enzymes. Patients and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase I, dose-escalation study of vorasidenib in 93 patients with mutant IDH1/2 (mIDH1/2) solid tumors, including 52 patients with glioma that had recurred or progressed following standard therapy. Vorasidenib was administered orally, once daily, in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Enrollment is complete; this trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02481154. Results: Vorasidenib showed a favorable safety profile in the glioma cohort. Dose-limiting toxicities of elevated transaminases occurred at doses ≥100 mg and were reversible. The protocol-defined objective response rate per Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria for LGG in patients with nonenhancing glioma was 18% (one partial response, three minor responses). The median progression-free survival was 36.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 11.2–40.8] for patients with nonenhancing glioma and 3.6 months (95% CI, 1.8–6.5) for patients with enhancing glioma. Exploratory evaluation of tumor volumes in patients with nonenhancing glioma showed sustained tumor shrinkage in multiple patients. Conclusions: Vorasidenib was well tolerated and showed preliminary antitumor activity in patients with recurrent or progressive nonenhancing mIDH LGG.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Tumor location is a significant prognostic factor in glioblastoma, which may reflect the genetic profile of tumor precursor cells. The purpose of the current study was to construct and analyze probabilistic radiographic atlases reflecting preoperative tumor locations and corresponding demographic, “-omic,” and interventional phenotypes to provide insight into potential niche locations of glioblastoma cells of origin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative anatomic MR images in 507 patients with de novo glioblastoma were analyzed. Images were registered to stereotactic space, tumors were segmented, and the stereospecific frequency of tumor occurrence was analyzed statistically by age, extent of resection, MGMT methylation, IDH1 mutation, gene expression subclassification, PTEN loss, PTEN deficiency, EGFR amplification, EGFR variant 3 expression, progression-free survival from the start of radiochemotherapy, and overall survival from initial diagnosis. RESULTS: Most glioblastomas grow into the periventricular white matter regions adjacent to the subventricular zone. MGMT promoter methylated tumors occur more frequently in the left temporal lobe, in young patients with glioblastoma, in IDH1 mutant tumors, in tumors having the proneural gene expression subtype, and in tumors lacking loss of PTEN occurring most frequently in the frontal lobe. MGMT methylated tumors with the IDH1 mutation tended to occur in the left frontal lobe. EGFR amplified and EGFR variant 3-expressing tumors occurred most frequently in the left temporal lobe. A similar region in the left temporal lobe was associated with favorable response to radiochemotherapy and increased survival. CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic atlases for specific phenotypes provide insight into overlap between prognostic variables and may help to identify niche locations for cancer cells of origin.