Purpose: Rechallenge with temozolomide (TMZ) at first progression of glioblastoma after temozolomide chemoradiotherapy (TMZ/RT!TMZ) has been studied in retrospective and single-arm prospective studies, applying temozolomide continuously or using 7/14 or 21/28 days schedules. The DIRECTOR trial sought to show superiority of the 7/14 regimen.Experimental Design: Patients with glioblastoma at first progression after TMZ/RT!TMZ and at least two maintenance temozolomide cycles were randomized to Arm A [one week on (120 mg/m 2 per day)/one week off] or Arm B [3 weeks on (80 mg/m 2 per day)/one week off]. The primary endpoint was median timeto-treatment failure (TTF) defined as progression, premature temozolomide discontinuation for toxicity, or death from any cause. O 6 -methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation was prospectively assessed by methylationspecific PCR.Results: Because of withdrawal of support, the trial was prematurely closed to accrual after 105 patients. There was a similar outcome in both arms for median TTF [A: 1.8 months; 95% confidence intervals (CI), 1.8-3.2 vs. B: 2.0 months; 95% CI, 1.8-3.5] and overall survival [A: 9.8 months (95% CI, 6.7-13.0) vs. B: 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.1-11.6)]. Median TTF in patients with MGMT-methylated tumors was 3.2 months (95% CI, 1.8-7.4) versus 1.8 months (95% CI, 1.8-2) in MGMT-unmethylated glioblastoma. Progression-free survival rates at 6 months (PFS-6) were 39.7% with versus 6.9% without MGMT promoter methylation.Conclusions: Temozolomide rechallenge is a treatment option for MGMT promoter-methylated recurrent glioblastoma. Alternative strategies need to be considered for patients with progressive glioblastoma without MGMT promoter methylation. Clin Cancer Res; 21(9); 2057-64. Ó2015 AACR.

SummaryAfter root pretreatment with 2,6-dichloroisonicotinic acid (DCIA or INA), hypocotyls of etiolated cucumber seedlings acquired resistance to infection by Colletotrichum lagenarium caused by the failure of the fungus to penetrate epidermal cell walls. The hypocotyls contained only low levels of class III chitinase and its mRNA prior to infection. This pathogenesis-related (PR) gene was expressed strongly upon infection but only in resistant hypocotyls and soon after germination of the fungal spores. Chitinase was also induced early by an albino mutant strain of C. lagenarium that can barely penetrate the epidermis. Thus, early recognition of the fungus implies signal compounds able to pass, or being generated in, the hydrophobic epidermal surface. As the apoplastic chitinase accumulates timely at the site of a subsequent attack, it may contribute to disease resistance. The mechanism behind the enhanced responsiveness of epidermal cells was studied by gently abrading the cuticle of susceptible hypocotyls to allow permeation of a water-soluble polymeric fungal elicitor. Induction of chitinase occurred only when the elicitor was applied simultaneously with a resistance inducer such as DCIA, salicylic acid (SA) or a benzothiadiazole (BTH). In addition, long-term root pretreatment with DCIA conditioned the hypocotyls for enhanced elicitor responses. These results demonstrate that the above inducers of acquired resistance can affect expression of the cucumber chitinase gene not only as direct inducers. They can also act synergistically with fungal elicitors and, in addition, condition the hypocotyls in a developmental manner for potentiated elicitation.

BackgroundChildren and patients with cognitive deficits may find it difficult to understand the implication of research. In the European Union (EU), clinical studies outside the EU directives concerning medicinal products or medical devices, i.e., “miscellaneous clinical studies”, have no legally mandated timelines for institutional review boards’ (IRB) decisions.GoalTo evaluate the review process of IRBs for two different “miscellaneous” multicenter clinical research protocols involving vulnerable subjects (children and adult stroke patients).MethodsDescriptive and comparative statistics. Protocol 1 is a prospective, multicenter, cross-sectional screening study of a symptomatic pediatric population at risk for Fabry disease involving genetic testing (NCT02152189). Protocol 2 is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label, blinded endpoint post-market study to evaluate the effectiveness of stent retrievers (NCT02135926). After having obtained positive initial IRB votes at the main study site, both protocols were subsequently submitted to the remaining IRBs.ResultsProtocol 1 was submitted to 19 IRBs. No IRB objected to the study. Median time-to-final vote was 34 (IQR 10–65; range 0 to 130) days. Two IRBs accepted the coordinating center’s IRB votes without re-evaluation. Changes to the informed consent documents were asked by 7/19 IRBs, amendments to the protocol by 2. Protocol 2 was submitted to 16 IRBs. Fifteen decisions were made. No IRB objected to the study. Median time-to final vote was 59 (IQR 10 to 65; range 0 to 128) days, which was not statistically significantly different compared with protocol 1 (Wilcoxon test). Two IRBs accepted a previous IRB decision and did not conduct an independent review. Eight/16 IRBs required changes to the informed consent documents; two IRBs recommended an amendment of the protocol.ConclusionBoth clinical research protocols involving vulnerable populations were well accepted. IRB workflows and decision times varied substantially. Some IRBs accepted a previous IRB decision without the necessity of another reevaluation process. Requested changes were focused on the informed consent documents. A more standardized approach across jurisdictions is desirable.