Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment made over the past two decades, high-grade gliomas are still incurable neoplasms. Moreover, after failing adjuvant therapy, few active treatments are available. In this setting, novel agents, such as new chemotherapy compounds and anticancer agents against specific molecular targets, have therefore been investigated. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is an intriguing target in high-grade gliomas because it is frequently overexpressed due to amplification of the EGFR gene. Gefitinib and erlotinib act as ATP mimetic agents, binding to the cytoplasmic ATP pocket domain and blocking receptor phosphorylations and, thereby, EGFR-mediated activation of downstream pathways. These drugs have been evaluated in several clinical trials treating recurrent high-grade gliomas with contrasting results. Retrospective correlative analyses generated a plethora of putative predictive factors of activity of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The first generations of studies on EGFR inhibitors have not found significant activity of these agents in high-grade gliomas. Furthermore, no clear molecular or clinical predictors have been identified. As with other targeted agents, prospective trials using specific criteria and standardized methods to evaluate tissue biomarkers are required to find predictors of EGFR inhibitors activity in high-grade glioma patients.

High-grade gliomas are the most common primary intracranial malignancies and account for over half of all malignant brain tumors in adults. Glioblastoma is defined by WHO as grade a IV tumor, the highest grade and most lethal of all gliomas. Despite recent developments in the treatment of high-grade gliomas, only few patients are cured (1). The limited treatment options for patients with recurrent gliomas (24) underscore the need for clinical investigations into new agents with novel mechanisms of action.

Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) amplification and overexpression, present in ∼50% of glioblastomas, are associated with a poor prognosis, especially when occurring in younger patients (5, 6). Nevertheless, the prognostic value of the EGFR remains controversial (7). EGFR signaling promotes proliferation, migration, and invasion, and inhibits glioma cell apoptosis (8). Frequently, in the context of gene amplification, the EGFR gene presents structural rearrangements and some mutations, the most common being EGFRvIII (9, 10), characterized by the lack of a portion in the extracellular receptor domain. The resulting mutant protein is ligand independent and constitutively phosphorylated. EGFRvIII-positive tumors are also reported to be associated with a worse prognosis and shorter life expectancy (6), and have been targeted by antitumor vaccines in preclinical studies (11, 12) and in a few patients (13, 14). More recently novel missense mutations in the extracellular domain of the EGFR, again associated with increased EGFR gene dosage, have been reported from 14% (18 of 132) of glioblastoma with potentially activating properties (15). Taken together, EGFR and the truncated form, EGFRvIII, activate a signaling cascade and are playing a key role in the development of an aggressive phenotype with a dismal prognosis and resistance to therapy.

Monoclonal antibodies against EGFR were first introduced in the 1980s—first-generation murine monoclonal antibodies later generations using humanized antibodies. However, a prospective phase I/II trial on patients with recurrent malignant gliomas failed to show that these antibodies were of therapeutic efficacy (16); a trial using the intratumoral delivery of monoclonal antibodies was terminated early because they caused a severe intracranial inflammatory reaction (17). Ongoing studies test a vaccination approach targeting the tumor-specific EGFRvIII (13).

In recent years, small molecule inhibitors targeting tyrosine kinases, such as erlotinib (Tarceva) and gefitinib (Iressa), binding to the intracellular part of the receptor have been introduced in clinical practice. In non–small cell lung cancer, a particular sensitivity was observed in female patients with adenocarcinoma, never smokers and Japanese origin (18, 19). Sequencing of the EGFR receptor identified mutations in the tyrosine kinase pocket that were associated with both tyrosine kinase inhibitor response and prolonged survival (2022). Subsequent functional analysis suggested mutation-mediated enhanced binding of the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (23, 24). These mutations do not fully explain the whole spectrum of gefitinib activity: few cases of response, and some cases of disease stabilization, have been observed in patients with wild-type EGFR, and rarely have EGFR mutations been described in patients with treatment-induced disease stabilization, which probably contributes substantially to the survival benefit of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (25). However, in malignant glioma, such a relationship could not be shown (2630).

Mutations in the tyrosine kinase domain could not be shown in malignant glioma (29, 3133); however, some point mutations in the EGFR extracellular domain have been identified, and a potential effect on tyrosine kinase inhibitors response in glioblastoma has been hypothesized (15). Other determinants for EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor sensitivity, such as EGFR copy number, Akt activation (phosphorylation), and phosphatase and tensin homologue (PTEN) protein expression have therefore been investigated.

In non–small cell lung cancer, gefitinib seems to confer a clinical benefit in tumors with a high EGFR gene copy number, identified by fluorescent in situ hybridization (3437). Akt, a serine/threonine kinase that acts downstream of EGFR regulates cellular processes including cell survival, proliferation, and growth, is activated by phosphorylation. PTEN loss has been associated with Akt activation (38) and with an in vitro resistance to gefitinib (39, 40). However, in recent reports, no association has been found between PTEN expression and gefitinib sensitivity in non–small cell lung cancer cells (41, 42). K-ras mutation or p-Akt overexpression in non–small cell lung cancer is associated with a low response rate and a shorter time to disease-progression in the absence of EGFR mutations (43). In a phase II trial of gefitinib on a series of 53 patients with recurrent glioblastoma, none presented objective responses; however, only 21% of patients had measurable disease at treatment initiation (26). The progression-free survival at 6 months was only 13% not different from historical controls with other agents considered inactive. In this trial, EGFR protein expression and gene status, and EGFRvIII protein expression were not significantly correlated with progression-free survival at 6 months and survival, and gefitinib as a single agent is considered inactive in this setting.

Similarly, 28 patients with recurrent or progressive high-grade glioma were prospectively treated with gefitinib within the Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia network. No objective responses were observed, and a progression-free survival at 6 months of 14% was reported (27). On analyzing phospho-Akt, EGFR gene copy number, and protein expression, no significant correlations with survival and response variables were found.

However, in two retrospective series, correlations have been suggested between molecular biomarkers and responses or survival. Haas-Kogan et al. (30) observed that the response to erlotinib treatment was higher in glioblastoma with high EGFR expression and low phospho-Akt than those with low EGFR expression and high phospho-Akt levels. The authors found no correlation between EGFRvIII expression and response. In their study on 49 glioblastoma patients treated with erlotinib or gefitinib, Mellinghoff et al. (28) found that EGFRvIII and PTEN protein coexpression was correlated with response to treatment.

Most recently, a large, well-conducted, randomized phase II study by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC 26034 trial) compared first-line erlotinib with either temozolomide or 1,3-bis(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea as standard treatments (44). This study confirmed the disappointing results with the EGFR inhibitor as a single agent in recurrent disease. The a progression-free survival at 6 months in the erlotinib arm was 12% only compared with 24% in the control arm. No responses were observed with erlotinib, and no correlations could be shown for treatment effect and EGFR expression or amplification and EGFRvIII expression. Moreover, EGFRvIII expression correlated with a decreased overall survival and progression-free survival in all patients, all patients with EGFRvIII, and PTEN protein coexpression treated with erlotinib rapidly progressed. These findings are in clear contradiction of the previous retrospective analyses and underline the need for randomized controlled trials and prospective analyses of molecular markers.

The above studies differ greatly in frequencies of biomarkers analyzed and respective predictive values (Table 1). These discrepancies may originate in the different assays used to evaluate biomarkers, difference in stringency of response criteria, and very small numbers of samples analyzed.

Table 1.

Biomarkers and their predictive values in erlotinib/gefitinib studies in high-grade gliomas

Patients in studyRich (26)
Haas-Kogan (30)
Mellinghoff (28)
Franceschi (27)
van den Bent (44)
N = 53N = 52N = 49N = 28N = 110
EGFR expression 79% 27% NA 38% 58% 
Tumors analyzed, n 53 41  21 99 
    Predictive value No Yes  No No 
EGFR amplification 36% 26% 48% 47% 46% 
Tumors analyzed, n 42 41 25 19 91 
    Predictive value No Yes No No No 
EGFRvIII expression 49% 5% 46% NA 21% 
Tumors analyzed, n 53 41 25  99 
    Predictive value No No Yes  No 
P-Akt expression NA 55% NA 48% 19% 
Tumors analyzed, n  41  21 21 
    Predictive value  Yes  No No 
PTEN expression NA NA 50% NA NA 
Tumors analyzed, n   26   
    Predictive value   Yes   
Patients in studyRich (26)
Haas-Kogan (30)
Mellinghoff (28)
Franceschi (27)
van den Bent (44)
N = 53N = 52N = 49N = 28N = 110
EGFR expression 79% 27% NA 38% 58% 
Tumors analyzed, n 53 41  21 99 
    Predictive value No Yes  No No 
EGFR amplification 36% 26% 48% 47% 46% 
Tumors analyzed, n 42 41 25 19 91 
    Predictive value No Yes No No No 
EGFRvIII expression 49% 5% 46% NA 21% 
Tumors analyzed, n 53 41 25  99 
    Predictive value No No Yes  No 
P-Akt expression NA 55% NA 48% 19% 
Tumors analyzed, n  41  21 21 
    Predictive value  Yes  No No 
PTEN expression NA NA 50% NA NA 
Tumors analyzed, n   26   
    Predictive value   Yes   

Abbreviation: NA, not available.

Mellinghoff and coworkers (45) defined response as a decrease in the bidirectional diameters by 25%, whereas the established standard WHO or Macdonald criteria require a 50% decrease. The differences for the reported frequency for EGFRvIII (Table 1) may be partly due to different specificity and sensitivity of the antibodies against EGFRvIII for immunohistochemistry used (clone L8A4 and clone G100 in Mellinghoff and Haas-Kogan studies, respectively). Although in the report by Rich et al. (26), the same antibody for EGFRvIII (Clone L8A4) was used, and the authors came to different conclusions (28).

In summary, findings reported in studies evaluating EGFR inhibitors are surprisingly contradictory: three prospective trials with biomarker reported negative findings, whereas two other retrospective trials suggested that these inhibitors had some sort of activity in a subset of patients with particular molecular characteristics. However, the retrospective nature of the latter studies may have been affected by variations in patient selection.

Due to the lack of a sound demonstration of the efficacy of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors and the absence of validated predictive factors, these drugs should not be administered as single agents to patients with high-grade gliomas. The complexity of signaling pathways regulated by tyrosine kinases and the ignorance, until recently, of the relevance of negative feedback loops altered by targeted treatments, suggests requirement of a more in-depth molecular analysis (4648). Moreover, well-designed prospective trials using specific criteria to evaluate tyrosine kinase inhibitor activity and standardized methods to evaluate tissue biomarkers are required to confirm molecular predictors of the clinical activity of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors in patients with high-grade gliomas.

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

1
Levin VA. Chemotherapy for brain tumors of astrocytic and oligodendroglial lineage: the past decade and where we are heading.
Neuro-oncol
1999
;
1
:
69
–80.
2
Brandes AA, Tosoni A, Amista P, et al. How effective is BCNU in recurrent glioblastoma in the modern era? A phase II trial.
Neurology
2004
;
63
:
1281
–4.
3
Brandes AA, Basso U, Reni M, et al. First-line chemotherapy with cisplatin plus fractionated temozolomide in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: a phase II study of the Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
1598
–604.
4
Brandes AA, Tosoni A, Basso U, et al. Second-line chemotherapy with irinotecan plus carmustine in glioblastoma recurrent or progressive after first-line temozolomide chemotherapy: a phase II study of the Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia (GICNO).
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
4779
–86.
5
Watanabe K, Tachibana O, Sata K, Yonekawa Y, Kleihues P, Ohgaki H. Overexpression of the EGF receptor and p53 mutations are mutually exclusive in the evolution of primary and secondary glioblastomas.
Brain Pathol
1996
;
6
:
217
–23; discussion 23–4.
6
Shinojima N, Tada K, Shiraishi S, et al. Prognostic value of epidermal growth factor receptor in patients with glioblastoma multiforme.
Cancer Res
2003
;
63
:
6962
–70.
7
Quan AL, Barnett GH, Lee SY, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor amplification does not have prognostic significance in patients with glioblastoma multiforme.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
2005
;
63
:
695
–703.
8
Lund-Johansen M, Bjerkvig R, Humphrey PA, Bigner SH, Bigner DD, Laerum OD. Effect of epidermal growth factor on glioma cell growth, migration, and invasion in vitro.
Cancer Res
1990
;
50
:
6039
–44.
9
Wong AJ, Ruppert JM, Bigner SH, et al. Structural alterations of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene in human gliomas.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
1992
;
89
:
2965
–9.
10
Frederick L, Wang XY, Eley G, James CD. Diversity and frequency of epidermal growth factor receptor mutations in human glioblastomas.
Cancer Res
2000
;
60
:
1383
–7.
11
Moscatello DK, Ramirez G, Wong AJ. A naturally occurring mutant human epidermal growth factor receptor as a target for peptide vaccine immunotherapy of tumors.
Cancer Res
1997
;
57
:
1419
–24.
12
Heimberger AB, Crotty LE, Archer GE, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor VIII peptide vaccination is efficacious against established intracerebral tumors.
Clin Cancer Res
2003
;
9
:
4247
–54.
13
Heimberger A, Hussain S, Aldape K, et al. Tumor-specific peptide vaccination in newly-diagnosed patients with GBM. J Clin Oncol, 2006 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings Part I 2006;24: abstract #2529.
14
Sampson JH, Aldape KD, Gilbert MR, et al. Temozolomide as a vaccine adjuvant in GBM.
J Clin Oncol (Meeting Abstracts)
2007
;
25
:
2020
.
15
Lee JC, Vivanco I, Beroukhim R, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor activation in glioblastoma through novel missense mutations in the extracellular domain.
PLoS Med
2006
;
3
:
e485
.
16
Stragliotto G, Vega F, Stasiecki P, Gropp P, Poisson M, Delattre JY. Multiple infusions of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibody (EMD 55,900) in patients with recurrent malignant gliomas.
Eur J Cancer
1996
;
32A
:
636
–40.
17
Wersall P, Ohlsson I, Biberfeld P, et al. Intratumoral infusion of the monoclonal antibody, mAb 425, against the epidermal-growth-factor receptor in patients with advanced malignant glioma.
Cancer Immunol Immunother
1997
;
44
:
157
–64.
18
Ranson M, Hammond LA, Ferry D, et al. ZD1839, a selective oral epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is well tolerated and active in patients with solid, malignant tumors: results of a phase I trial.
J Clin Oncol
2002
;
20
:
2240
–50.
19
Herbst RS, Maddox AM, Rothenberg ML, et al. Selective oral epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor ZD1839 is generally well-tolerated and has activity in non-small-cell lung cancer and other solid tumors: results of a phase I trial.
J Clin Oncol
2002
;
20
:
3815
–25.
20
Janne PA, Gurubhagavatula S, Yeap BY, et al. Outcomes of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with gefitinib (ZD1839, “Iressa”) on an expanded access study.
Lung Cancer
2004
;
44
:
221
–30.
21
Lynch TJ, Bell DW, Sordella R, et al. Activating mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor underlying responsiveness of non-small-cell lung cancer to gefitinib.
N Engl J Med
2004
;
350
:
2129
–39.
22
Pao W, Miller V, Zakowski M, et al. EGF receptor gene mutations are common in lung cancers from “never smokers” and are associated with sensitivity of tumors to gefitinib and erlotinib.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2004
;
101
:
13306
–11.
23
Fukuoka M, Yano S, Giaccone G, et al. Multi-institutional randomized phase II trial of gefitinib for previously treated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (The IDEAL 1 Trial) [corrected].
J Clin Oncol
2003
;
21
:
2237
–46.
24
Kris MG, Natale RB, Herbst RS, et al. Efficacy of gefitinib, an inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase, in symptomatic patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a randomized trial.
JAMA
2003
;
290
:
2149
–58.
25
Shepherd FA, Rodrigues Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, et al. Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer.
N Engl J Med
2005
;
353
:
123
–32.
26
Rich JN, Reardon DA, Peery T, et al. Phase II trial of gefitinib in recurrent glioblastoma.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
133
–42.
27
Franceschi E, Cavallo G, Lonardi S, et al. Gefitinib in patients with progressive high-grade gliomas: a multicentre phase II study by Gruppo Italiano Cooperativo di Neuro-Oncologia (GICNO).
Br J Cancer
2007
;
96
:
1047
–51.
28
Mellinghoff IK, Wang MY, Vivanco I, et al. Molecular determinants of the response of glioblastomas to EGFR kinase inhibitors.
N Engl J Med
2005
;
353
:
2012
–24.
29
Lassman AB, Rossi MR, Raizer JJ, et al. Molecular study of malignant gliomas treated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors: tissue analysis from North American Brain Tumor Consortium Trials 01-03 and 00-01.
Clin Cancer Res
2005
;
11
:
7841
–50.
30
Haas-Kogan DA, Prados MD, Tihan T, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor, protein kinase B/Akt, and glioma response to erlotinib.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2005
;
97
:
880
–7.
31
Barber TD, Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, Velculescu VE. Somatic mutations of EGFR in colorectal cancers and glioblastomas.
N Engl J Med
2004
;
351
:
2883
.
32
Marie Y, Carpentier AF, Omuro AM, et al. EGFR tyrosine kinase domain mutations in human gliomas.
Neurology
2005
;
64
:
1444
–5.
33
Rich JN, Rasheed BK, Yan H. EGFR mutations and sensitivity to gefitinib.
N Engl J Med
2004
;
351
:
1260
–1; author reply -1.
34
Cappuzzo F, Hirsch FR, Rossi E, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor gene and protein and gefitinib sensitivity in non-small-cell lung cancer.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2005
;
97
:
643
–55.
35
Takano T, Ohe Y, Sakamoto H, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations and increased copy numbers predict gefitinib sensitivity in patients with recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
6829
–37.
36
Hirsch FR, Varella-Garcia M, McCoy J, et al. Increased epidermal growth factor receptor gene copy number detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization associates with increased sensitivity to gefitinib in patients with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma subtypes: a Southwest Oncology Group Study.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
6838
–45.
37
Bell DW, Lynch TJ, Haserlat SM, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor mutations and gene amplification in non-small-cell lung cancer: molecular analysis of the IDEAL/INTACT gefitinib trials.
J Clin Oncol
2005
;
23
:
8081
–92.
38
Sansal I, Sellers WR. The biology and clinical relevance of the PTEN tumor suppressor pathway.
J Clin Oncol
2004
;
22
:
2954
–63.
39
Bianco R, Shin I, Ritter CA, et al. Loss of PTEN/MMAC1/TEP in EGF receptor-expressing tumor cells counteracts the antitumor action of EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
Oncogene
2003
;
22
:
2812
–22.
40
She QB, Solit D, Basso A, Moasser MM. Resistance to gefitinib in PTEN-null HER-overexpressing tumor cells can be overcome through restoration of PTEN function or pharmacologic modulation of constitutive phosphatidylinositol 3′-kinase/Akt pathway signaling.
Clin Cancer Res
2003
;
9
:
4340
–6.
41
Panigrahi AR, Pinder SE, Chan SY, Paish EC, Robertson JF, Ellis IO. The role of PTEN and its signalling pathways, including AKT, in breast cancer; an assessment of relationships with other prognostic factors and with outcome.
J Pathol
2004
;
204
:
93
–100.
42
Janmaat ML, Rodriguez JA, Gallegos-Ruiz M, Kruyt FA, Giaccone G. Enhanced cytotoxicity induced by gefitinib and specific inhibitors of the Ras or phosphatidyl inositol-3 kinase pathways in non-small cell lung cancer cells.
Int J Cancer
2006
;
118
:
209
–14.
43
Han SW, Kim TY, Jeon YK, et al. Optimization of patient selection for gefitinib in non-small cell lung cancer by combined analysis of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation, K-ras mutation, and Akt phosphorylation.
Clin Cancer Res
2006
;
12
:
2538
–44.
44
Van Den Bent MJ, Brandes A, Rampling R, et al. Randomized phase II trial of erlotinib (E) versus temozolomide (TMZ) or BCNU in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (GBM): EORTC 26034.
J Clin Oncol (Meeting Abstracts)
2007
;
25
:
2005
.
45
Macdonald DR, Cascino TL, Schold SC, Jr., Cairncross JG. Response criteria for phase II studies of supratentorial malignant glioma.
J Clin Oncol
1990
;
8
:
1277
–80.
46
O'Reilly KE, Rojo F, She QB, et al. mTOR inhibition induces upstream receptor tyrosine kinase signaling and activates Akt.
Cancer Res
2006
;
66
:
1500
–8.
47
Amit I, Citri A, Shay T, et al. A module of negative feedback regulators defines growth factor signaling.
Nat Genet
2007
;
39
:
503
–12.
48
Lachat Y, Diserens AC, Nozaki M, et al. INK4a/Arf is required for suppression of EGFR/ΔEGFR(2–7)-dependent ERK activation in mouse astrocytes and glioma.
Oncogene
2004
;
23
:
6854
–63.