Table 5.

FT of the ESMO-MCBS for the treatment of glioblastoma at the Medical University of Vienna

Analysed treatment	Setting	Primary EP	PFS control	PFS gain	PFS HR	OS control	OS gain	OS HR	Adjustment/ remark	MCBS	MCBS- FT
Radiotherapy ± temozolomide Stupp et al, NEJM30	Untreated disease	OS				12.1 months	2.5 months	0.63 (0.52–0.75)		−	2
Radiotherapy, temozolomide± bevacizumab Gilbert et al, NEJM31	Untreated disease	OS, PFS	7.3 months	3.4 months	0.79 (0.66–0.94)	16 months	−	Non-significant	Deterioration in QOL	−	No clinical benefit
Radiotherapy, temozolomide ± bevacizumab Chinot et al, NEJM32	Untreated disease	OS, PFS	6.2 months	4.4 months	0.64 (0.55–0.74)	17 months	0.1 months	Non-significant	Improved QOL, upgrade 1 point; 39% versus 26% SAEs, downgrade 1 point	−	3
Lomustine versus bevacizumab versus bevacizumab + lomustine (BELOB) Taal et al, Lancet Oncol33; Dirven et al, EJC34	Recurrent disease	OS 9 months				43%	− 20%	Not applicable	Combination selected for phase III trial, QOL assessed		NA
Lomustine ± bevacizumab (EORTC 26101) Abstract only35	Recurrent disease	OS				8.6 months	0.5 months	Non-significant		−	NA

EP, endpoint; ESMO, European Society for Medical Oncology; FT, field testing; MCBS, Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Score; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival; QOL, quality of life.