Purpose: FGFR genomic alterations (amplification, mutations, and/or fusions) occur in ∼8% of gliomas, particularly FGFR1 and FGFR3. We conducted a multicenter open-label, single-arm, phase II study of a selective FGFR1–3 inhibitor, infigratinib (BGJ398), in patients with FGFR-altered recurrent gliomas. Patients and Methods: Adults with recurrent/progressive gliomas harboring FGFR alterations received oral infigratinib 125 mg on days 1 to 21 of 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate by Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria. Comprehensive genomic profiling was performed on available pretreatment archival tissue to explore additional molecular correlations with efficacy. Results: Among 26 patients, the 6-month PFS rate was 16.0% [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.0–32.5], median PFS was 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.1–2.8), and objective response rate was 3.8%. However, 4 patients had durable disease control lasting longer than 1 year. Among these, 3 had tumors harboring activating point mutations at analogous positions of FGFR1 (K656E; n = 2) or FGFR3 (K650E; n = 1) in pretreatment tissue; an FGFR3-TACC3 fusion was detected in the other. Hyperphosphatemia was the most frequently reported treatment-related adverse event (all-grade, 76.9%; grade 3, 3.8%) and is a known on-target toxicity of FGFR inhibitors. Conclusions: FGFR inhibitor monotherapy with infigratinib had limited efficacy in a population of patients with recurrent gliomas and different FGFR genetic alterations, but durable disease control lasting more than 1 year was observed in patients with tumors harboring FGFR1 or FGFR3 point mutations or FGFR3-TACC3 fusions. A follow-up study with refined biomarker inclusion criteria and centralized FGFR testing is warranted.

Purpose: In a post hoc analysis of the CATNON trial (NCT00626990), we explored whether adding temozolomide to radiotherapy improves outcome in patients with IDH1/2 wildtype (wt) anaplastic astrocytomas with molecular features of glioblastoma [redesignated as glioblastoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase–wildtype (IDH-wt) in the 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) classification of central nervous system tumors]. Patients and Methods: From the randomized phase III CATNON study examining the addition of adjuvant and concurrent temozolomide to radiotherapy in anaplastic astrocytomas, we selected a subgroup of IDH1/2wt and H3F3Awt tumors with presence of TERT promoter mutations and/or EGFR amplifications and/or combined gain of chromosome 7 and loss of chromosome 10. Molecular abnormalities including MGMT promoter methylation status were determined by next-generation sequencing, DNA methylation profiling, and SNaPshot analysis. Results: Of the 751 patients entered in the CATNON study, 670 had fully molecularly characterized tumors. A total of 159 of these tumors met the WHO 2021 molecular criteria for glioblastoma, IDH-wt. Of these patients, 47 received radiotherapy only and 112 received a combination of radiotherapy and temozolomide. There was no added effect of temozolomide on either overall survival [HR, 1.19; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.82–1.71] or progression-free survival (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.61–1.24). MGMT promoter methylation was prognostic for overall survival, but was not predictive for outcome to temozolomide treatment either with respect to overall survival or progression-free survival. Conclusions: In this cohort of patients with glioblastoma, IDH-wt temozolomide treatment did not add benefit beyond that observed from radiotherapy, regardless of MGMT promoter status. These findings require a new well-powered prospective clinical study to explore the efficacy of temozolomide treatment in this patient population.

Peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) consists of the administration of a tumor-targeting radiopharmaceutical into the circulation of a patient. The radiopharmaceutical will bind to a specific peptide receptor leading to tumor-specific binding and retention. The only target that is currently used in clinical practice is the somatostatin receptor (SSTR), which is overexpressed on a range of tumor cells, including neuroendocrine tumors and neural-crest derived tumors. Academia played an important role in the development of PRRT, which has led to heterogeneous literature over the last two decades, as no standard radiopharmaceutical or regimen has been available for a long time. This review provides a summary of the treatment efficacy (e.g., response rates and symptom-relief), impact on patient outcome and toxicity profile of PRRT performed with different generations of SSTR-targeting radiopharmaceuticals, including the landmark randomized-controlled trial NETTER-1. In addition, multiple optimization strategies for PRRT are discussed, i.e., the dose–effect concept, dosimetry, combination therapies (i.e., tandem/duo PRRT, chemoPRRT, targeted molecular therapy, somatostatin analogues and radiosensitizers), new radiopharmaceuticals (i.e., SSTR-antagonists, Evans-blue containing vector molecules and alpha-emitters), administration route (intra-arterial versus intravenous) and response prediction via molecular testing or imaging. The evolution and continuous refinement of PRRT resulted in many lessons for the future development of radionuclide therapy aimed at other targets and tumor types.

In the phase III LUX-Head & Neck 1 (LHN1) trial, afatinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus methotrexate in recurrent and/or metastatic (R/M) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients progressing on/after platinum-based therapy. This report evaluates afatinib efficacy and safety in prespecified subgroups of patients aged ≥65 and <65 years. Patients were randomized (2:1) to 40 mg/day oral afatinib or 40 mg/m²/week intravenous methotrexate. PFS was the primary end point; overall survival (OS) was the key secondary end point. Other end points included: objective response rate (ORR), patient-reported outcomes, tumor shrinkage, and safety. Disease control rate (DCR) was also assessed. Of 483 randomized patients, 27% (83 afatinib; 45 methotrexate) were aged ≥65 years (older) and 73% (239 afatinib; 116 methotrexate) <65 years (younger) at study entry. Similar PFS benefit with afatinib versus methotrexate was observed in older {median 2.8 versus 2.3 months, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.68 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45–1.03], P = 0.061} and younger patients [2.6 versus 1.6 months, HR = 0.79 (0.62–1.01), P = 0.052]. In older and younger patients, the median OS with afatinib versus methotrexate was 7.3 versus 6.4 months [HR = 0.84 (0.54–1.31)] and 6.7 versus 6.2 months [HR = 0.98 (0.76–1.28)]. ORRs with afatinib versus methotrexate were 10.8% versus 6.7% and 10.0% versus 5.2%; DCRs were 53.0% versus 37.8% and 47.7% versus 38.8% in older and younger patients, respectively. In both subgroups, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were rash/acne (73%–77%) and diarrhea (70%–80%) with afatinib, and stomatitis (43%) and fatigue (31%–34%) with methotrexate. Fewer treatment-related discontinuations were observed with afatinib (each subgroup 7% versus 16%). A trend toward improved time to deterioration of global health status, pain, and swallowing with afatinib was observed in both subgroups. Advancing age (≥65 years) did not adversely affect clinical outcomes or safety with afatinib versus methotrexate in second-line R/M HNSCC patients. NCT01345682 (ClinicalTrials.gov).