Objective: Exercise interventions benefit cancer patients. However, only low numbers of patients adhere to these interventions. This review aimed to identify predictors of exercise intervention adherence in patients with cancer, during and after multimodality cancer treatment.Methods: A literature search was performed using electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane) to identify relevant papers published before February 1, 2017. Papers reporting randomized controlled trials, conducted in adult cancer patients who participated in an exercise intervention during and/or after multimodality cancer treatment, and providing outcome of factors predicting exercise adherence were included. Papers were assessed for methodological quality by using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale.Results: The search identified 720 potentially relevant papers, of which 15 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. In these 15 studies, 2279 patients were included and 1383 of these patients were randomized to an exercise intervention. During cancer treatment, the factors predicting exercise adherence were as follows: location of the rehabilitation center, extensive exercise history, high motivation for exercise, and fewer exercise limitations. After cancer treatment, factors that predicted adherence were as follows: less extensive surgery, low alcohol consumption, high previous exercise adherence, family support, feedback by trainers, and knowledge and skills of exercise. Methodological quality of the included papers was rated “high”.Conclusions: The most prominent predictors of adherence to exercise interventions were location of the rehabilitation center, extensive exercise history, high motivation for exercise, and fewer exercise limitations. To increase the number of cancer patients who will benefit, these results should be considered into the development and implementation of future exercise interventions.

Neoplasia publishes the results of novel investigations in all areas of oncology research.

The G protein–coupled protein receptor C-X-C chemokine receptor 4 (CXCR4) is an attractive target for cancer diagnosis and treatment, as it is overexpressed in many solid and hematologic cancers. Binding of its ligand, C-X-C chemokine ligand 12 (CXCL12), results in receptor internalization and activation of several signal transduction pathways, such as phosphoinositide 3-kinase/protein kinase B, which are critical in cell proliferation, angiogenesis, development of metastasis, and survival. Also, the CXCR4–CXCL12 axis is involved in the interaction between hematopoietic stem cells (as well as hematologic and solid tumor cells) and their protective microenvironment. This interaction can be disrupted by CXCR4 antagonists. This concept is being used clinically to harvest hematopoietic stem or progenitor cells from bone marrow and to sensitize cancer cells to conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and the potential to overcome tumor microenvironment–driven immunosuppression is being explored. This review focuses on new strategies for improvement of cancer treatment by targeting of the CXCR4–CXCL12 interaction. Because of its critical role in cancer, many peptidic and nonpeptidic ligands with different modes of antagonistic activity against the CXCR4–CXCL12 axis have been developed, with some of them reaching clinical trials. Molecular imaging with recently developed radiolabeled CXCR4 ligands could facilitate the selection of patients who might benefit from directed targeted therapy, including CXCR4-directed endoradiotherapy.

Transforming growth factor–β (TGF-β) signaling is involved in glioma development. The monoclonal antibody fresolimumab (GC1008) can neutralize all mammalian isoforms of TGF-β, and tumor uptake can be visualized and quantified with ⁸⁹Zr-fresolimumab PET in mice. The aim of this study was to investigate the fresolimumab uptake in recurrent high-grade gliomas using ⁸⁹Zr-fresolimumab PET and to assess treatment outcome in patients with recurrent high-grade glioma treated with fresolimumab. Methods: Patients with recurrent glioma were eligible. After intravenous administration of 37 MBq (5 mg) of ⁸⁹Zr-fresolimumab, PET scans were acquired on day 2 or day 4 after tracer injection. Thereafter, patients were treated with 5 mg of fresolimumab per kilogram intravenously every 3 wk. ⁸⁹Zr-fresolimumab tumor uptake was quantified as maximum standardized uptake value (SUV_max). MR imaging for response evaluation was performed after 3 infusions or as clinically indicated. Results: Twelve patients with recurrent high-grade glioma were included: 10 glioblastomas, 1 anaplastic oligodendroglioma, and 1 anaplastic astrocytoma. All patients underwent ⁸⁹Zr-fresolimumab PET 4 d after injection. In 4 patients, an additional PET scan was obtained on day 2 after injection. SUV_max on day 4 in tumor lesions was 4.6 (range, 1.5–13.9) versus a median SUV_mean of 0.3 (range, 0.2–0.5) in normal brain tissue. All patients showed clinical or radiologic progression after 1–3 infusions of fresolimumab. Median progression-free survival was 61 d (range, 25–80 d), and median overall survival was 106 d (range, 37–417 d). Conclusion: ⁸⁹Zr-fresolimumab penetrated recurrent high-grade gliomas very well but did not result in clinical benefit.

Purpose: Selinexor is an oral selective inhibitor of exportin-1 (XPO1) with efficacy in various solid and hematologic tumors. We assessed intratumoral penetration, safety, and efficacy of selinexor monotherapy for recurrent glioblastoma. Patients and Methods: Seventy-six adults with Karnofsky Performance Status ≥ 60 were enrolled. Patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery received up to three selinexor doses (twice weekly) preoperatively (Arm A; n = 8 patients). Patients not undergoing surgery received 50 mg/m2 (Arm B, n = 24), or 60 mg (Arm C, n = 14) twice weekly, or 80 mg once weekly (Arm D; n = 30). Primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6). Results: Median selinexor concentrations in resected tumors from patients receiving presurgical selinexor was 105.4 nmol/L (range 39.7–291 nmol/L). In Arms B, C, and D, respectively, the PFS6 was 10% [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.79–35.9], 7.7% (95% CI, 1.17–50.6), and 17% (95% CI, 7.78–38.3). Measurable reduction in tumor size was observed in 19 (28%) and RANO-response rate overall was 8.8% [Arm B, 8.3% (95% CI, 1.0–27.0); C: 7.7% (95% CI, 0.2–36.0); D: 10% (95% CI, 2.1–26.5)], with one complete and two durable partial responses in Arm D. Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 26 (34%) patients; 1 (1.3%) was fatal. The most common treatment-related AEs were fatigue (61%), nausea (59%), decreased appetite (43%), and thrombocytopenia (43%), and were manageable by supportive care and dose modification. Molecular studies identified a signature predictive of response (AUC = 0.88). Conclusions: At 80 mg weekly, single-agent selinexor induced responses and clinically relevant PFS6 with manageable side effects requiring dose reductions. Ongoing trials are evaluating safety and efficacy of selinexor in combination with other therapies for newly diagnosed or recurrent glioblastoma.

Tumor adaptation or selection is thought to underlie therapy resistance in glioma. To investigate longitudinal epigenetic evolution of gliomas in response to therapeutic pressure, we performed an epigenomic analysis of 132 matched initial and recurrent tumors from patients with IDH-wildtype (IDHwt) and IDH-mutant (IDHmut) glioma. IDHwt gliomas showed a stable epigenome over time with relatively low levels of global methylation. The epigenome of IDHmut gliomas showed initial high levels of genome-wide DNA methylation that was progressively reduced to levels similar to those of IDHwt tumors. Integration of epigenomics, gene expression, and functional genomics identified HOXD13 as a master regulator of IDHmut astrocytoma evolution. Furthermore, relapse of IDHmut tumors was accompanied by histologic progression that was associated with survival, as validated in an independent cohort. Finally, the initial cell composition of the tumor microenvironment varied between IDHwt and IDHmut tumors and changed differentially following treatment, suggesting increased neoangiogenesis and T-cell infiltration upon treatment of IDHmut gliomas. This study provides one of the largest cohorts of paired longitudinal glioma samples with epigenomic, transcriptomic, and genomic profiling and suggests that treatment of IDHmut glioma is associated with epigenomic evolution toward an IDHwt-like phenotype. Significance: Standard treatments are related to loss of DNA methylation in IDHmut glioma, resulting in epigenetic activation of genes associated with tumor progression and alterations in the microenvironment that resemble treatment-naïve IDHwt glioma.