Ivosidenib in predominantly recurrent IDH1-mutant glioma: A single-institution experience

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Background Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant gliomas are infiltrative tumors with limited treatment options at recurrence. Early studies suggest IDH inhibition has therapeutic activity. We evaluated clinical outcomes associated with IDH-1 inhibitor ivosidenib in recurrent IDH-1-mutant gliomas and molecular predictors of response. Methods We retrospectively analyzed adults treated with ivosidenib from January 2021 to August 2025 with predominantly recurrent, pretreated CNS WHO grade 2-4 astrocytoma IDH-mutant or grade 2-3 oligodendroglioma, IDH-mutant and 1p/19q codeleted. Prior anticancer treatments, toxicities, enhancement status at ivosidenib initiation, and genomic alterations were collected. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary analyses evaluated associations between PFS, genomic complexity, and CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion. Results Ninety-two adults, median age 43, were included: 61 astrocytomas and 31 oligodendrogliomas, mostly grade 2. Before ivosidenib, 69 had surgery, 64 chemotherapy, and 64 radiation. Median time from diagnosis to ivosidenib was 4.8 years, with median of two prior progressions. Median treatment duration was 5.8 months. Median PFS was 15.2, 4.6, and 2.1 months for astrocytoma grades 2-4, 14.0 and 6.9 months for oligodendroglioma grades 2-3. Increasing genomic complexity was associated with shorter PFS in univariate analysis. Patients without CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion had median PFS of 19.2 months. Two patients with homozygous deletion had median PFS of 0.6 months. Conclusions In this retrospective analysis of predominantly recurrent IDH-1-mutant glioma, ivosidenib was associated with longer PFS in lower-grade, non-enhancing tumors that received little or no prior anticancer treatment and less complex genomic profiles. These findings support a context-dependent benefit of IDH inhibition in recurrent disease.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.