Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30522967›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2019

Regorafenib compared with lomustine in patients with relapsed glioblastoma (REGOMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

Giuseppe Lombardi, Gian Luca De Salvo, Alba Ariela Brandes, Marica Eoli, Roberta Rudà, Marina Faedi, Ivan Lolli, Andrea Pace, Bruno Daniele, Francesco Pasqualetti and 9 more

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 253 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
253citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
16.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

253 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 372 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

193 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Giuseppe LombardiDepartment of Oncology, Oncology 1, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Gian Luca De SalvoClinical Research Unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Alba Ariela BrandesMedical Oncology Department, AUSL-IRCCS Scienze Neurologiche, Bologna, Italy.
Marica EoliMolecolar Neuro-Oncology Unit, Besta Institute, Milan, Italy.
Roberta RudàDepartment of Neuro-Oncology, University of Turin and City of Health and Science Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Marina FaediMedical Oncology Unit, IRST-IRCCS, Meldola, Italy.
Ivan LolliMedical Oncology Unit-IRCCS Saverio de Bellis, Castellana Grotte, Bari, Italy.
Andrea PaceNeuroncology Unit, Regina Elena Cancer Institue-IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Bruno DanieleMedical Oncology Unit, A.O.G. Rummo, Benevento, Italy.
Francesco PasqualettiRadiotherapy Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Pisa, Italy.
Simona RizzatoDepartment of Oncology, Azienda Sanitaria-Universitaria Integrata, Udine, Italy.
Luisa BelluDepartment of Oncology, Oncology 1, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Ardi PambukuDepartment of Oncology, Oncology 1, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Miriam FarinaClinical Research Unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Giovanna MagniClinical Research Unit, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Stefano IndraccoloDepartment of Translational Oncology and Services, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy.
Marina Paola GardimanDepartment of Medicine and Surgical Pathology and Cytopathology Unit, University Hospital of Padua, Padua, Italy.
Riccardo SoffiettiDepartment of Neuro-Oncology, University of Turin and City of Health and Science Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Vittorina ZagonelDepartment of Oncology, Oncology 1, Veneto Institute of Oncology IOV-IRCCS, Padua, Italy. Electronic address: vittorina.zagonel@iov.veneto.it.
Istituto Oncologico Veneto · ITIstituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico · ITPiedmont Reference Center for Epidemiology and Cancer Prevention · ITAzienda Ospedaliera G.Rummo · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana · ITAzienda Sanitaria Universitaria Integrata di Trieste · ITGastroenterology Hospital "Saverio de Bellis" · ITUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlioblastoma is a highly vascularised tumour and there are few treatment options after disease recurrence. Regorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor of angiogenic, stromal, and oncogenic receptor tyrosine kinases. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma.

methodsREGOMA is a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial done in ten centres in Italy. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed glioblastoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, and documented disease progression after surgery followed by radiotherapy and temozolomide chemoradiotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based system, stratified by centre and surgery at recurrence (yes vs no), to receive regorafenib 160 mg once daily for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle or lomustine 110 mg/m

findingsBetween Nov 27, 2015, and Feb 23, 2017, 124 patients were screened and 119 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive regorafenib (n=59) or lomustine (n=60). Median follow-up was 15·4 months (IQR 13·8-18·1). At the analysis cutoff date, 99 (83%) of 119 patients had died: 42 (71%) of 59 in the regorafenib group and 57 (95%) of 60 in the lomustine group. Overall survival was significantly improved in the regorafenib group compared with the lomustine group, with a median overall survival of 7·4 months (95% CI 5·8-12·0) in the regorafenib group and 5·6 months (4·7-7·3) in the lomustine group (hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·33-0·75; log-rank p=0·0009). Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 33 (56%) of 59 patients treated with regorafenib and 24 (40%) of 60 with lomustine. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to regorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction, increased lipase, and blood bilirubin increased (in six [10%] of 59 patients each). In the lomustine group, the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were decreased platelet count (eight [13%] of 60 patients), decreased lymphocyte count (eight [13%]), and neutropenia (seven [12%]). No death was considered by the investigators to be drug related.

interpretationREGOMA showed an encouraging overall survival benefit of regorafenib in recurrent glioblastoma. This drug might be a new potential treatment for these patients and should be investigated in an adequately powered phase 3 study.

fundingVeneto Institute of Oncology and Bayer Italy.

Indexed as

AgedAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingFemaleGlioblastomaHumansLomustineMaleMiddle AgedPhenylurea CompoundsPyridinesRecurrenceSurvival AnalysisTreatment OutcomeAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic Agents, AlkylatingLomustinePhenylurea CompoundsPyridinesregorafenib

Identifiers

PMID30522967
OpenAlexW2903289999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.