Explore the vast range of titles available.

Neoantigens, which are derived from tumour-specific protein-coding mutations, are exempt from central tolerance, can generate robust immune responses 1 , 2 and can function as bona fide antigens that facilitate tumour rejection 3 . Here we demonstrate that a strategy that uses multi-epitope, personalized neoantigen vaccination, which has previously been tested in patients with high-risk melanoma 4 – 6 , is feasible for tumours such as glioblastoma, which typically have a relatively low mutation load 1 , 7 and an immunologically ‘cold’ tumour microenvironment 8 . We used personalized neoantigen-targeting vaccines to immunize patients newly diagnosed with glioblastoma following surgical resection and conventional radiotherapy in a phase I/Ib study. Patients who did not receive dexamethasone—a highly potent corticosteroid that is frequently prescribed to treat cerebral oedema in patients with glioblastoma—generated circulating polyfunctional neoantigen-specific CD4 + and CD8 + T cell responses that were enriched in a memory phenotype and showed an increase in the number of tumour-infiltrating T cells. Using single-cell T cell receptor analysis, we provide evidence that neoantigen-specific T cells from the peripheral blood can migrate into an intracranial glioblastoma tumour. Neoantigen-targeting vaccines thus have the potential to favourably alter the immune milieu of glioblastoma. Neoantigen-targeting vaccines are a feasible therapy for tumours with a low mutation burden and immunologically ‘cold’ tumour microenvironment, as neoantigen-specific T cells from the peripheral blood migrate into intracranial glioblastoma, thereby altering the immune milieu of the glioblastoma.

There is an urgent need for more effective therapies for glioblastoma. Data from a previous unrandomised phase 2 trial suggested that lomustine-temozolomide plus radiotherapy might be superior to temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylation of the MGMT promoter. In the CeTeG/NOA-09 trial, we aimed to further investigate the effect of lomustine-temozolomide therapy in the setting of a randomised phase 3 trial. In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, we enrolled patients from 17 German university hospitals who were aged 18–70 years, with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter, and a Karnofsky Performance Score of 70% and higher. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a predefined SAS-generated randomisation list to standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy (75 mg/m2 per day concomitant to radiotherapy [59–60 Gy] followed by six courses of temozolomide 150–200 mg/m2 per day on the first 5 days of the 4-week course) or to up to six courses of lomustine (100 mg/m2 on day 1) plus temozolomide (100–200 mg/m2 per day on days 2–6 of the 6-week course) in addition to radiotherapy (59–60 Gy). Because of the different schedules, patients and physicians were not masked to treatment groups. The primary endpoint was overall survival in the modified intention-to-treat population, comprising all randomly assigned patients who started their allocated chemotherapy. The prespecified test for overall survival differences was a log-rank test stratified for centre and recursive partitioning analysis class. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149109. Between June 17, 2011, and April 8, 2014, 141 patients were randomly assigned to the treatment groups; 129 patients (63 in the temozolomide and 66 in the lomustine-temozolomide group) constituted the modified intention-to-treat population. Median overall survival was improved from 31·4 months (95% CI 27·7–47·1) with temozolomide to 48·1 months (32·6 months–not assessable) with lomustine-temozolomide (hazard ratio [HR] 0·60, 95% CI 0·35–1·03; p=0·0492 for log-rank analysis). A significant overall survival difference between groups was also found in a secondary analysis of the intention-to-treat population (n=141, HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·35–1·03; p=0·0432 for log-rank analysis). Adverse events of grade 3 or higher were observed in 32 (51%) of 63 patients in the temozolomide group and 39 (59%) of 66 patients in the lomustine-temozolomide group. There were no treatment-related deaths. Our results suggest that lomustine-temozolomide chemotherapy might improve survival compared with temozolomide standard therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. The findings should be interpreted with caution, owing to the small size of the trial. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

Rindopepimut (also known as CDX-110), a vaccine targeting the EGFR deletion mutation EGFRvIII, consists of an EGFRvIII-specific peptide conjugated to keyhole limpet haemocyanin. In the ACT IV study, we aimed to assess whether or not the addition of rindopepimut to standard chemotherapy is able to improve survival in patients with EGFRvIII-positive glioblastoma. In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years and older with glioblastoma from 165 hospitals in 22 countries. Eligible patients had newly diagnosed glioblastoma confirmed to express EGFRvIII by central analysis, and had undergone maximal surgical resection and completion of standard chemoradiation without progression. Patients were stratified by European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer recursive partitioning analysis class, MGMT promoter methylation, and geographical region, and randomly assigned (1:1) with a prespecified randomisation sequence (block size of four) to receive rindopepimut (500 μg admixed with 150 μg GM-CSF) or control (100 μg keyhole limpet haemocyanin) via monthly intradermal injection until progression or intolerance, concurrent with standard oral temozolomide (150–200 mg/m2 for 5 of 28 days) for 6–12 cycles or longer. Patients, investigators, and the trial funder were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival in patients with minimal residual disease (MRD; enhancing tumour <2 cm2 post-chemoradiation by central review), analysed by modified intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01480479. Between April 12, 2012, and Dec 15, 2014, 745 patients were enrolled (405 with MRD, 338 with significant residual disease [SRD], and two unevaluable) and randomly assigned to rindopepimut and temozolomide (n=371) or control and temozolomide (n=374). The study was terminated for futility after a preplanned interim analysis. At final analysis, there was no significant difference in overall survival for patients with MRD: median overall survival was 20·1 months (95% CI 18·5–22·1) in the rindopepimut group versus 20·0 months (18·1–21·9) in the control group (HR 1·01, 95% CI 0·79–1·30; p=0·93). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events for all 369 treated patients in the rindopepimut group versus 372 treated patients in the control group were: thrombocytopenia (32 [9%] vs 23 [6%]), fatigue (six [2%] vs 19 [5%]), brain oedema (eight [2%] vs 11 [3%]), seizure (nine [2%] vs eight [2%]), and headache (six [2%] vs ten [3%]). Serious adverse events included seizure (18 [5%] vs 22 [6%]) and brain oedema (seven [2%] vs 12 [3%]). 16 deaths in the study were caused by adverse events (nine [4%] in the rindopepimut group and seven [3%] in the control group), of which one—a pulmonary embolism in a 64-year-old male patient after 11 months of treatment—was assessed as potentially related to rindopepimut. Rindopepimut did not increase survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Combination approaches potentially including rindopepimut might be required to show efficacy of immunotherapy in glioblastoma. Celldex Therapeutics, Inc.

Most patients with glioblastoma are older than 60 years, but treatment guidelines are based on trials in patients aged only up to 70 years. We did a randomised trial to assess the optimum palliative treatment in patients aged 60 years and older with glioblastoma. Patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were recruited from Austria, Denmark, France, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey. They were assigned by a computer-generated randomisation schedule, stratified by centre, to receive temozolomide (200 mg/m2 on days 1–5 of every 28 days for up to six cycles), hypofractionated radiotherapy (34·0 Gy administered in 3·4 Gy fractions over 2 weeks), or standard radiotherapy (60·0 Gy administered in 2·0 Gy fractions over 6 weeks). Patients and study staff were aware of treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN81470623. 342 patients were enrolled, of whom 291 were randomised across three treatment groups (temozolomide n=93, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=98, standard radiotherapy n=100) and 51 of whom were randomised across only two groups (temozolomide n=26, hypofractionated radiotherapy n=25). In the three-group randomisation, in comparison with standard radiotherapy, median overall survival was significantly longer with temozolomide (8·3 months [95% CI 7·1–9·5; n=93] vs 6·0 months [95% CI 5·1–6·8; n=100], hazard ratio [HR] 0·70; 95% CI 0·52–0·93, p=0·01), but not with hypofractionated radiotherapy (7·5 months [6·5–8·6; n=98], HR 0·85 [0·64–1·12], p=0·24). For all patients who received temozolomide or hypofractionated radiotherapy (n=242) overall survival was similar (8·4 months [7·3–9·4; n=119] vs 7·4 months [6·4–8·4; n=123]; HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·63–1·06; p=0·12). For age older than 70 years, survival was better with temozolomide and with hypofractionated radiotherapy than with standard radiotherapy (HR for temozolomide vs standard radiotherapy 0·35 [0·21–0·56], p<0·0001; HR for hypofractionated vs standard radiotherapy 0·59 [95% CI 0·37–0·93], p=0·02). Patients treated with temozolomide who had tumour MGMT promoter methylation had significantly longer survival than those without MGMT promoter methylation (9·7 months [95% CI 8·0–11·4] vs 6·8 months [5·9–7·7]; HR 0·56 [95% CI 0·34–0·93], p=0·02), but no difference was noted between those with methylated and unmethylated MGMT promoter treated with radiotherapy (HR 0·97 [95% CI 0·69–1·38]; p=0·81). As expected, the most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the temozolomide group were neutropenia (n=12) and thrombocytopenia (n=18). Grade 3–5 infections in all randomisation groups were reported in 18 patients. Two patients had fatal infections (one in the temozolomide group and one in the standard radiotherapy group) and one in the temozolomide group with grade 2 thrombocytopenia died from complications after surgery for a gastrointestinal bleed. Standard radiotherapy was associated with poor outcomes, especially in patients older than 70 years. Both temozolomide and hypofractionated radiotherapy should be considered as standard treatment options in elderly patients with glioblastoma. MGMT promoter methylation status might be a useful predictive marker for benefit from temozolomide. Merck, Lion's Cancer Research Foundation, University of Umeå, and the Swedish Cancer Society.

Patients with glioblastoma currently do not sufficiently benefit from recent breakthroughs in cancer treatment that use checkpoint inhibitors 1 , 2 . For treatments using checkpoint inhibitors to be successful, a high mutational load and responses to neoepitopes are thought to be essential 3 . There is limited intratumoural infiltration of immune cells 4 in glioblastoma and these tumours contain only 30–50 non-synonymous mutations 5 . Exploitation of the full repertoire of tumour antigens—that is, both unmutated antigens and neoepitopes—may offer more effective immunotherapies, especially for tumours with a low mutational load. Here, in the phase I trial GAPVAC-101 of the Glioma Actively Personalized Vaccine Consortium (GAPVAC), we integrated highly individualized vaccinations with both types of tumour antigens into standard care to optimally exploit the limited target space for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Fifteen patients with glioblastomas positive for human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-A*02:01 or HLA-A*24:02 were treated with a vaccine (APVAC1) derived from a premanufactured library of unmutated antigens followed by treatment with APVAC2, which preferentially targeted neoepitopes. Personalization was based on mutations and analyses of the transcriptomes and immunopeptidomes of the individual tumours. The GAPVAC approach was feasible and vaccines that had poly-ICLC (polyriboinosinic-polyribocytidylic acid-poly- l -lysine carboxymethylcellulose) and granulocyte–macrophage colony-stimulating factor as adjuvants displayed favourable safety and strong immunogenicity. Unmutated APVAC1 antigens elicited sustained responses of central memory CD8 + T cells. APVAC2 induced predominantly CD4 + T cell responses of T helper 1 type against predicted neoepitopes. In a phase I trial, highly individualized peptide vaccines against unmutated tumour antigens and neoepitopes elicited sustained responses in CD8 + and CD4 + T cells, respectively, in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma.

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most prevalent and aggressive primary brain tumor in adults, characterized by a poor prognosis and significant resistance to existing treatments. Despite progress in therapeutic strategies, the median overall survival remains approximately 15 months. A hallmark of GBM is its intricate molecular profile, driven by disruptions in multiple signaling pathways, including PI3K/AKT/mTOR, Wnt, NF-κB, and TGF-β, critical to tumor growth, invasion, and treatment resistance. This review examines the epidemiology, molecular mechanisms, and therapeutic prospects of targeting these pathways in GBM, highlighting recent insights into pathway interactions and discovering new therapeutic targets to improve patient outcomes.

Cilengitide is a selective αvβ3 and αvβ5 integrin inhibitor. Data from phase 2 trials suggest that it has antitumour activity as a single agent in recurrent glioblastoma and in combination with standard temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (particularly in tumours with methylated MGMT promoter). We aimed to assess cilengitide combined with temozolomide chemoradiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter. In this multicentre, open-label, phase 3 study, we investigated the efficacy of cilengitide in patients from 146 study sites in 25 countries. Eligible patients (newly diagnosed, histologically proven supratentorial glioblastoma, methylated MGMT promoter, and age ≥18 years) were stratified for prognostic Radiation Therapy Oncology Group recursive partitioning analysis class and geographic region and centrally randomised in a 1:1 ratio with interactive voice response system to receive temozolomide chemoradiotherapy with cilengitide 2000 mg intravenously twice weekly (cilengitide group) or temozolomide chemoradiotherapy alone (control group). Patients and investigators were unmasked to treatment allocation. Maintenance temozolomide was given for up to six cycles, and cilengitide was given for up to 18 months or until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The primary endpoint was overall survival. We analysed survival outcomes by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00689221. Overall, 3471 patients were screened. Of these patients, 3060 had tumour MGMT status tested; 926 patients had a methylated MGMT promoter, and 545 were randomly assigned to the cilengitide (n=272) or control groups (n=273) between Oct 31, 2008, and May 12, 2011. Median overall survival was 26·3 months (95% CI 23·8–28·8) in the cilengitide group and 26·3 months (23·9–34·7) in the control group (hazard ratio 1·02, 95% CI 0·81–1·29, p=0·86). None of the predefined clinical subgroups showed a benefit from cilengitide. We noted no overall additional toxic effects with cilengitide treatment. The most commonly reported adverse events of grade 3 or worse in the safety population were lymphopenia (31 [12%] in the cilengitide group vs 26 [10%] in the control group), thrombocytopenia (28 [11%] vs 46 [18%]), neutropenia (19 [7%] vs 24 [9%]), leucopenia (18 [7%] vs 20 [8%]), and convulsion (14 [5%] vs 15 [6%]). The addition of cilengitide to temozolomide chemoradiotherapy did not improve outcomes; cilengitide will not be further developed as an anticancer drug. Nevertheless, integrins remain a potential treatment target for glioblastoma. Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany.

Poor central nervous system penetration of cytotoxic drugs due to the blood brain barrier (BBB) is a major limiting factor in the treatment of brain tumors. Most recurrent glioblastomas (GBM) occur within the peritumoral region. In this study, we describe a hyperthemic method to induce temporary disruption of the peritumoral BBB that can potentially be used to enhance drug delivery. Twenty patients with probable recurrent GBM were enrolled in this study. Fourteen patients were evaluable. MRI-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy was applied to achieve both tumor cytoreduction and disruption of the peritumoral BBB. To determine the degree and timing of peritumoral BBB disruption, dynamic contrast-enhancement brain MRI was used to calculate the vascular transfer constant (Ktrans) in the peritumoral region as direct measures of BBB permeability before and after laser ablation. Serum levels of brain-specific enolase, also known as neuron-specific enolase, were also measured and used as an independent quantification of BBB disruption. In all 14 evaluable patients, Ktrans levels peaked immediately post laser ablation, followed by a gradual decline over the following 4 weeks. Serum BSE concentrations increased shortly after laser ablation and peaked in 1-3 weeks before decreasing to baseline by 6 weeks. The data from our pilot research support that disruption of the peritumoral BBB was induced by hyperthemia with the peak of high permeability occurring within 1-2 weeks after laser ablation and resolving by 4-6 weeks. This provides a therapeutic window of opportunity during which delivery of BBB-impermeant therapeutic agents may be enhanced. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01851733.

In 2004, a randomised phase III trial by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group (NCIC) reported improved median and 2-year survival for patients with glioblastoma treated with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide and radiotherapy. We report the final results with a median follow-up of more than 5 years. Adult patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were randomly assigned to receive either standard radiotherapy or identical radiotherapy with concomitant temozolomide followed by up to six cycles of adjuvant temozolomide. The methylation status of the methyl-guanine methyl transferase gene, MGMT, was determined retrospectively from the tumour tissue of 206 patients. The primary endpoint was overall survival. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00006353. Between Aug 17, 2000, and March 22, 2002, 573 patients were assigned to treatment. 278 (97%) of 286 patients in the radiotherapy alone group and 254 (89%) of 287 in the combined-treatment group died during 5 years of follow-up. Overall survival was 27·2% (95% CI 22·2–32·5) at 2 years, 16·0% (12·0–20·6) at 3 years, 12·1% (8·5–16·4) at 4 years, and 9·8% (6·4–14·0) at 5 years with temozolomide, versus 10·9% (7·6–14·8), 4·4% (2·4–7·2), 3·0% (1·4–5·7), and 1·9% (0·6–4·4) with radiotherapy alone (hazard ratio 0·6, 95% CI 0·5–0·7; p<0·0001). A benefit of combined therapy was recorded in all clinical prognostic subgroups, including patients aged 60–70 years. Methylation of the MGMT promoter was the strongest predictor for outcome and benefit from temozolomide chemotherapy. Benefits of adjuvant temozolomide with radiotherapy lasted throughout 5 years of follow-up. A few patients in favourable prognostic categories survive longer than 5 years. MGMT methylation status identifies patients most likely to benefit from the addition of temozolomide. EORTC, NCIC, Nélia and Amadeo Barletta Foundation, Schering-Plough.

Background Chemotherapy with lomustine is widely considered as standard treatment option for progressive glioblastoma. The value of adding radiotherapy to second-line chemotherapy is not known. Methods EORTC-2227-BTG (LEGATO, NCT05904119) is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic (PRECIS-2 score: 34 out of 45), randomized, multicenter phase III trial in patients with first progression of glioblastoma. A total of 411 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to lomustine (110 mg/m 2 every 6 weeks) or lomustine (110 mg/m 2 every 6weeks) plus radiotherapy (35 Gy in 10 fractions). Main eligibility criteria include histologic confirmation of glioblastoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase gene ( IDH ) wild-type per WHO 2021 classification, first progression at least 6 months after the end of prior radiotherapy, radiologically measurable disease according to RANO criteria with a maximum tumor diameter of 5 cm, and WHO performance status of 0–2. The primary efficacy endpoint is overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, response rate, neurocognitive function, health-related quality of life, and health economic parameters. LEGATO is funded by the European Union’s Horizon Europe Research program, was activated in March 2024 and will enroll patients in 43 sites in 11 countries across Europe with study completion projected in 2028. Discussion EORTC-2227-BTG (LEGATO) is a publicly funded pragmatic phase III trial designed to clarify the efficacy of adding reirradiation to chemotherapy with lomustine for the treatment of patients with first progression of glioblastoma. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05904119. Registered before start of inclusion, 23 May 2023