Multicenter cohort study reveals acceptable tolerability and survival with lomustine-temozolomide in elderly glioblastoma patients, highlighting the need for prospective trials.
Background The CeTeG/NOA-09 trial showed improved survival with lomustine (CCNU) plus temozolomide (TMZ) over TMZ alone in O6-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter-methylated glioblastoma patients aged 18-70 years. Data on feasibility, tolerability and outcomes in patients over 70 receiving this regimen are lacking and were evaluated in this study. Methods We conducted a retrospective multicenter cohort study including patients aged >70 years with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed, MGMT promoter-methylated glioblastoma treated with first-line radiotherapy and CCNU/TMZ. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Toxicity was evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0. Results Eighteen patients (median age of 72 years, range 71-78) were included. Most patients had a good clinical status (median Karnofsky Performance Status of 90%, interquartile range [IQR] 80-90). Patients received a median of 5.5 (IQR 3.5–6) TMZ and 5 (IQR 3–6) CCNU cycles. Hematotoxicity occurred in 50% of patients, with grade ≥3 hematotoxicity in 33%. Hepatotoxicity was observed in two cases (11%), both grade 3. Toxicity-related treatment discontinuation occurred in 11%, with no treatment-related deaths. Median follow-up was 15.8 months (range: 4–82.5), median PFS was 11.5 months (95% CI: 8.9–21.1), and median OS was 19.1 months (95% CI: 13.3–46.4). Conclusions In this highly selected multicenter cohort of patients with MGMT promoter-methylated glioblastoma, first-line CCNU/TMZ combined with radiotherapy was feasible and tolerable. Survival outcomes were encouraging but descriptive, warranting prospective studies that include geriatric assessment before broader implementation in elderly patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Scheuble et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: