» Articles » PMID: 34270348

Randomized Phase II Trial of MIBG Versus MIBG, Vincristine, and Irinotecan Versus MIBG and Vorinostat for Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Neuroblastoma: A Report From NANT Consortium

Abstract

Purpose: I-metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) is an active radiotherapeutic for neuroblastoma. The primary aim of this trial was to identify which of three MIBG regimens was likely associated with the highest true response rate.

Patients And Methods: Patients 1-30 years were eligible if they had relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma, at least one MIBG-avid site, and adequate autologous stem cells. Patients received MIBG 18 mCi/kg on day 1 and autologous stem cell on day 15. Patients randomly assigned to arm A received only MIBG; patients randomly assigned to arm B received intravenous vincristine on day 0 and irinotecan daily on days 0-4; patients randomly assigned to arm C received vorinostat (180 mg/m/dose) orally once daily on days 1 to 12. The primary end point was response after one course by New Approaches to Neuroblastoma Therapy criteria. The trial was designed with 105 patients to ensure an 80% chance that the arm with highest response rate was selected.

Results: One hundred fourteen patients were enrolled, with three ineligible and six unevaluable, leaving 105 eligible and evaluable patients (36 in arm A, 35 in arm B, and 34 in arm C; 55 boys; and median age 6.5 years). After one course, the response rates (partial response or better) on arms A, B, and C were 14% (95% CI, 5 to 30), 14% (5 to 31), and 32% (18 to 51). An additional five, five, and four patients met New Approaches to Neuroblastoma Therapy Minor Response criteria on arms A, B, and C, respectively. On arms A, B, and C, rates of any grade 3+ nonhematologic toxicity after first course were 19%, 49%, and 35%.

Conclusion: Vorinostat and MIBG is likely the arm with the highest true response rate, with manageable toxicity. Vincristine and irinotecan do not appear to improve the response rate to MIBG and are associated with increased toxicity.

Citing Articles

Patients, parents and professional perspectives on molecular radiotherapy for neuroblastoma and paediatric neuroendocrine cancers.

Whittaker L, Knox L, Aitchison Z, Peet C, ODonovan A, Gray J Nucl Med Commun. 2025; 46(4):373-377.

PMID: 39844505 PMC: 11878586. DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000001956.


Later lines of systemic therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: real-world data from a setting with barriers to access cancer therapies.

Jacome A, Mathias-Machado M, Gil M, Passarini T, Cristofaro S, Moraes E J Gastrointest Oncol. 2025; 15(6):2543-2551.

PMID: 39816030 PMC: 11732344. DOI: 10.21037/jgo-24-524.


Progress Toward Epigenetic Targeted Therapies for Childhood Cancer.

Liapodimitri A, Tetens A, Craig-Schwartz J, Lunsford K, Skalitzky K, Koldobskiy M Cancers (Basel). 2025; 16(24.

PMID: 39766049 PMC: 11674401. DOI: 10.3390/cancers16244149.


Evaluation of circulating tumor DNA as a prognostic and predictive biomarker in BRAF V600E mutated colorectal cancer-results from the FIRE-4.5 study.

Klein-Scory S, Baraniskin A, Schmiegel W, Mika T, Schroers R, Held S Mol Oncol. 2024; 19(2):344-356.

PMID: 39630848 PMC: 11793001. DOI: 10.1002/1878-0261.13778.


Progresses and Pitfalls of Epigenetics in Solid Tumors Clinical Trials.

Rossi A, Zacchi F, Reni A, Rota M, Palmerio S, Menis J Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(21).

PMID: 39519290 PMC: 11546921. DOI: 10.3390/ijms252111740.


References
1.
Shabason J, Tofilon P, Camphausen K . Grand rounds at the National Institutes of Health: HDAC inhibitors as radiation modifiers, from bench to clinic. J Cell Mol Med. 2011; 15(12):2735-44. PMC: 3112261. DOI: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2011.01296.x. View

2.
Fouladi M, Park J, Stewart C, Gilbertson R, Schaiquevich P, Sun J . Pediatric phase I trial and pharmacokinetic study of vorinostat: a Children's Oncology Group phase I consortium report. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(22):3623-9. PMC: 2917318. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.9119. View

3.
Mueller S, Yang X, Sottero T, Gragg A, Prasad G, Polley M . Cooperation of the HDAC inhibitor vorinostat and radiation in metastatic neuroblastoma: efficacy and underlying mechanisms. Cancer Lett. 2011; 306(2):223-9. PMC: 3244077. DOI: 10.1016/j.canlet.2011.03.010. View

4.
Chan E, Arlinghaus L, Cardin D, Goff L, Berlin J, Parikh A . Phase I trial of vorinostat added to chemoradiation with capecitabine in pancreatic cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2016; 119(2):312-8. PMC: 4961249. DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2016.04.013. View

5.
McCluskey A, Boyd M, Pimlott S, Babich J, Gaze M, Mairs R . Experimental treatment of neuroblastoma using [131I]meta-iodobenzylguanidine and topotecan in combination. Br J Radiol. 2008; 81 Spec No 1:S28-35. DOI: 10.1259/bjr/27723093. View