Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 21, 2026

Tumor Treating Field Therapy in Combination with Bevacizumab for the Treatment of Recurrent Glioblastoma
Published on: October 27, 2014
Continuing or ceasing bevacizumab beyond progression in recurrent glioblastoma: an exploratory randomized phase II
Elizabeth J Hovey1, Kathryn M Field1, Mark A Rosenthal1
1Prince of Wales Hospital, Barker Street, Randwick, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia (E.J.H.); University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia (E.J.H.); Royal Melbourne Hospital, Grattan Street, Parkville 3050, Melbourne Victoria, Australia (K.M.F., M.A.R., P.P., C.G.); Department of Medicine (Royal Melbourne Hospital), University of Melbourne, Grattan Street Parkville 3052, Victoria, Australia (K.M.F., M.A.R.); National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia (E.H.B., K.S., A.L., J.S.); Austin Hospital, 145 Studley Road, Heidelberg, Melbourne, Victoria 3084, Australia (L.C.); Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Perth 6009, Western Australia (A.K.N.); Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia (H.W.).
Background:
In patients with recurrent glioblastoma, the benefit of bevacizumab beyond progression remains uncertain. We prospectively evaluated continuing or ceasing bevacizumab in patients who progressed while on bevacizumab.
Methods:
CABARET, a phase II study, initially randomized patients to bevacizumab with or without carboplatin (Part 1). At progression, eligible patients underwent a second randomization to continue or cease bevacizumab (Part 2). They could also receive additional chemotherapy regimens (carboplatin, temozolomide, or etoposide) or supportive care.
Results:
Of 120 patients treated in Part 1, 48 (80% of the anticipated 60-patient sample size) continued to Part 2. Despite randomization, there were some imbalances in patient characteristics. The best response was stable disease in 7 (30%) patients who continued bevacizumab and 2 (8%) patients who stopped receiving bevacizumab. There were no radiological responses. Median progression-free survival was 1.8 vs 2.0 months (bevacizumab vs no bevacizumab; hazard ratio [HR], 1.08; 95% CI, .59-1.96; P = .81). Median overall survival was 3.4 vs 3.0 months (HR, .84; 95% CI, .47-1.50; P = .56 and HR .70; 95% CI .38-1.29; P = .25 after adjustment for baseline factors). Quality-of-life scores did not significantly differ between arms. While the maximum daily steroid dose was lower in the continuation arm, the difference was not statistically significant.
Conclusions:
Patients who continued bevacizumab beyond disease progression did not have clear survival improvements, although the study was not powered to detect other than very large differences. While these data provide the only randomized evidence related to continuing bevacizumab beyond progression in recurrent glioblastoma, the small sample size precludes definitive conclusions and suggests this remains an open question.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Random Error
Random Variables
Uppercase letters such as X or Y denote a random variable. Lowercase letters like x or y denote the value of a random variable. If X is a random variable, then X is written in words, and x is given as a number.
For example, let X = the...
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...

