New Approaches to Glioblastoma

Literature Cited

1. 1. 

   Louis DN, Perry A, Wesseling P et al. 2021. The 2021 WHO classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Neuro-Oncol 23:81231–51
   [Google Scholar]
2. 2. 

   Ostrom QT, Patil N, Cioffi G et al. 2020. CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2013–2017. Neuro-Oncol 3022:12 Suppl. 2iv1–iv96
   [Google Scholar]
3. 3. 

   Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ et al. 2005. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 10352:10987–96
   [Google Scholar]
4. 4. 

   Louis DN, Wesseling P, Aldape K et al. 2020. cIMPACT-NOW update 6: new entity and diagnostic principle recommendations of the cIMPACT-Utrecht meeting on future CNS tumor classification and grading. Brain Pathol 30:4844–56
   [Google Scholar]
5. 5. 

   Weller M, van den Bent M, Preusser M et al. 2021. EANO guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diffuse gliomas of adulthood. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 18:170–86
   [Google Scholar]
6. 6. 

   Stupp R, Wong ET, Kanner AA et al. 2012. NovoTTF-100A versus physician's choice chemotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma: a randomised phase III trial of a novel treatment modality. Eur. J. Cancer 48:142192–202
   [Google Scholar]
7. 7. 

   Stupp R, Taillibert S, Kanner A et al. 2017. Effect of tumor-treating fields plus maintenance temozolomide versus maintenance temozolomide alone on survival in patients with glioblastoma: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318:232306–16
   [Google Scholar]
8. 8. 

   Qazi MA, Vora P, Venugopal C et al. 2017. Intratumoral heterogeneity: pathways to treatment resistance and relapse in human glioblastoma. Ann. Oncol. 28:71448–56
   [Google Scholar]
9. 9. 

   Sanai N, Berger MS. 2018. Surgical oncology for gliomas: the state of the art. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 15:2112–25
   [Google Scholar]
10. 10. 

    Terstappen GC, Meyer AH, Bell RD, Zhang W. 2021. Strategies for delivering therapeutics across the blood-brain barrier. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 20:5362–83
    [Google Scholar]
11. 11. 

    Bao S, Wu Q, McLendon RE et al. 2006. Glioma stem cells promote radioresistance by preferential activation of the DNA damage response. Nature 444:7120756–60
    [Google Scholar]
12. 12. 

    Chen J, Li Y, Yu TS et al. 2012. A restricted cell population propagates glioblastoma growth after chemotherapy. Nature 488:7412522–26
    [Google Scholar]
13. 13. 

    Khaddour K, Johanns TM, Ansstas G. 2020. The landscape of novel therapeutics and challenges in glioblastoma multiforme: contemporary state and future directions. Pharmaceuticals 13:11389
    [Google Scholar]
14. 14. 

    Lim M, Xia Y, Bettegowda C, Weller M. 2018. Current state of immunotherapy for glioblastoma. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 15:7422–42
    [Google Scholar]
15. 15. 

    Wick W, Gorlia T, Bendszus M et al. 2017. Lomustine and bevacizumab in progressive glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 377:201954–63
    [Google Scholar]
16. 16. 

    Lacroix M, Abi-Said D, Fourney DR et al. 2001. A multivariate analysis of 416 patients with glioblastoma multiforme: prognosis, extent of resection, and survival. J. Neurosurg. 95:2190–98
    [Google Scholar]
17. 17. 

    Beiko J, Suki D, Hess KR et al. 2014. IDH1 mutant malignant astrocytomas are more amenable to surgical resection and have a survival benefit associated with maximal surgical resection. Neuro-Oncol 16:181–91
    [Google Scholar]
18. 18. 

    Li YM, Suki D, Hess K, Sawaya R 2016. The influence of maximum safe resection of glioblastoma on survival in 1229 patients: Can we do better than gross-total resection?. J. Neurosurg. 124:4977–88
    [Google Scholar]
19. 19. 

    Pessina F, Navarria P, Cozzi L et al. 2017. Maximize surgical resection beyond contrast-enhancing boundaries in newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme: Is it useful and safe? A single institution retrospective experience. J. Neurooncol. 135:1129–39
    [Google Scholar]
20. 20. 

    Eyüpoglu IY, Hore N, Merkel A et al. 2016. Supra-complete surgery via dual intraoperative visualization approach (DiVA) prolongs patient survival in glioblastoma. Oncotarget 7:1825755–68
    [Google Scholar]
21. 21. 

    Sanai N, Polley M-Y, McDermott MW et al. 2011. An extent of resection threshold for newly diagnosed glioblastomas. J. Neurosurg. 115:13–8
    [Google Scholar]
22. 22. 

    Brown TJ, Brennan MC, Li M et al. 2016. Association of the extent of resection with survival in glioblastoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol 2:111460–69
    [Google Scholar]
23. 23. 

    Grabowski MM, Recinos PF, Nowacki AS et al. 2014. Residual tumor volume versus extent of resection: predictors of survival after surgery for glioblastoma. J. Neurosurg. 121:51115–23
    [Google Scholar]
24. 24. 

    De Leeuw BI, Van Baarsen KM, Snijders TJ, Robe P. 2019. Interrelationships between molecular subtype, anatomical location, and extent of resection in diffuse glioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuro-oncol. Adv. 1:1vdz032
    [Google Scholar]
25. 25. 

    Hegi ME, Diserens A-C, Gorlia T et al. 2005. MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 352:10997–1003
    [Google Scholar]
26. 26. 

    Stupp R, Hegi ME, Mason WP et al. 2009. Effects of radiotherapy with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide versus radiotherapy alone on survival in glioblastoma in a randomised phase III study: 5-year analysis of the EORTC-NCIC trial. Lancet Oncol 10:5459–66
    [Google Scholar]
27. 27. 

    Alexander BM, Ba S, Berger MS et al. 2018. Adaptive global innovative learning environment for glioblastoma: GBM AGILE. Clin. Cancer Res. 24:4737–43
    [Google Scholar]
28. 28. 

    Touat M, Li YY, Boynton AN et al. 2020. Mechanisms and therapeutic implications of hypermutation in gliomas. Nature 580:7804517–23
    [Google Scholar]
29. 29. 

    Herrlinger U, Tzaridis T, Mack F et al. 2019. Lomustine-temozolomide combination therapy versus standard temozolomide therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma with methylated MGMT promoter (CeTeG/NOA-09): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 393:10172678–88
    [Google Scholar]
30. 30. 

    Donawho CK, Luo Y, Luo Y et al. 2007. ABT-888, an orally active poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that potentiates DNA-damaging agents in preclinical tumor models. Clin. Cancer Res. 13:92728–37
    [Google Scholar]
31. 31. 

    Gupta SK, Kizilbash SH, Carlson BL et al. 2016. Delineation of MGMT hypermethylation as a biomarker for veliparib-mediated temozolomide-sensitizing therapy of glioblastoma. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 108:5djv369
    [Google Scholar]
32. 32. 

    Barazzuol L, Jena R, Burnet NG et al. 2013. Evaluation of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor ABT-888 combined with radiotherapy and temozolomide in glioblastoma. Radiat. Oncol. 8:65
    [Google Scholar]
33. 33. 

    Clarke MJ, Mulligan EA, Grogan PT et al. 2009. Effective sensitization of temozolomide by ABT-888 is lost with development of temozolomide resistance in glioblastoma xenograft lines. Mol. Cancer Ther. 8:2407–14
    [Google Scholar]
34. 34. 

    McDonald K, Nozue-Okada K, Khasraw M. 2014. Combining VELIPARIB (ABT-888) with temozolomide shows strong synergy when treating temozolomide-resistant and recurrent GBM cell lines. Cancer Res 74:19 Suppl3777 Abstr.)
    [Google Scholar]
35. 35. 

    Jue TR, Nozue K, Lester AJ et al. 2017. Veliparib in combination with radiotherapy for the treatment of MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma. J. Transl. Med. 15:61
    [Google Scholar]
36. 36. 

    McEllin B, Camacho CV, Mukherjee B et al. 2010. PTEN loss compromises homologous recombination repair in astrocytes: implications for glioblastoma therapy with temozolomide or poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. Cancer Res 70:135457–64
    [Google Scholar]
37. 37. 

    Lin F, de Gooijer MC, Roig EM et al. 2014. ABCB1, ABCG2, and PTEN determine the response of glioblastoma to temozolomide and ABT-888 therapy. Clin. Cancer Res. 20:102703–13
    [Google Scholar]
38. 38. 

    Gupta SK, Smith EJ, Mladek AC et al. 2018. PARP inhibitors for sensitization of alkylation chemotherapy in glioblastoma: impact of blood-brain barrier and molecular heterogeneity. Front. Oncol. 8:670
    [Google Scholar]
39. 39. 

    Kleinberg L, Supko JG, Mikkelsen T et al. 2013. Phase I adult brain tumor consortium (ABTC) trial of ABT-888 (veliparib), temozolomide (TMZ), and radiotherapy (RT) for newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) including pharmacokinetic (PK) data. J. Clin. Oncol. 31:15 Suppl2065
    [Google Scholar]
40. 40. 

    Sim HW, McDonald KL, Lwin Z et al. 2021. A randomized phase II trial of veliparib, radiotherapy and temozolomide in patients with unmethylated MGMT glioblastoma: the VERTU study. Neuro-Oncol 23:101736–49
    [Google Scholar]
41. 41. 

    Brennan CW, Verhaak RG, McKenna A et al. 2013. The somatic genomic landscape of glioblastoma. Cell 155:2462–77
    [Google Scholar]
42. 42. 

    Wang Q, Hu B, Hu X et al. 2017. Tumor evolution of glioma-intrinsic gene expression subtypes associates with immunological changes in the microenvironment. Cancer Cell 32:142–56.e6
    [Google Scholar]
43. 43. 

    Barthel FP, Johnson KC, Varn FS et al. 2019. Longitudinal molecular trajectories of diffuse glioma in adults. Nature 576:7785112–20
    [Google Scholar]
44. 44. 

    Yung WK, Vredenburgh JJ, Cloughesy TF et al. 2010. Safety and efficacy of erlotinib in first-relapse glioblastoma: a phase II open-label study. Neuro-Oncol 12:101061–70
    [Google Scholar]
45. 45. 

    Prados MD, Chang SM, Butowski N et al. 2009. Phase II study of erlotinib plus temozolomide during and after radiation therapy in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme or gliosarcoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 27:4579–84
    [Google Scholar]
46. 46. 

    Lassman A, Pugh S, Wang T et al. 2019. ACTR-21. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial of depatuxizumab mafodotin (ABT-414) in epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) amplified (AMP) newly diagnosed glioblastoma (nGBM). Neuro-Oncol 21:Suppl. 6vi17
    [Google Scholar]
47. 47. 

    Van Den Bent M, Eoli M, Sepulveda JM et al. 2020. INTELLANCE 2/EORTC 1410 randomized phase II study of Depatux-M alone and with temozolomide versus temozolomide or lomustine in recurrent EGFR amplified glioblastoma. Neuro-Oncol 22:5684–93
    [Google Scholar]
48. 48. 

    Sampson JH, Heimberger AB, Archer GE et al. 2010. Immunologic escape after prolonged progression-free survival with epidermal growth factor receptor variant III peptide vaccination in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 28:314722–29
    [Google Scholar]
49. 49. 

    Ameratunga M, Pavlakis N, Wheeler H et al. 2018. Anti-angiogenic therapy for high-grade glioma. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 11:11Cd008218
    [Google Scholar]
50. 50. 

    Khasraw M, Ameratunga M, Grommes C 2014. Bevacizumab for the treatment of high-grade glioma: an update after phase III trials. Expert Opin. Biol. Ther. 14:5729–40
    [Google Scholar]
51. 51. 

    Gustafson MP, Lin Y, New KC et al. 2010. Systemic immune suppression in glioblastoma: the interplay between CD14+HLA-DRlo/neg monocytes, tumor factors, and dexamethasone. Neuro-Oncol 12:7631–44
    [Google Scholar]
52. 52. 

    Filley AC, Henriquez M, Dey M. 2017. Recurrent glioma clinical trial, CheckMate-143: the game is not over yet. Oncotarget 8:5391779–94
    [Google Scholar]
53. 53. 

    Chinot OL, Wick W, Mason W et al. 2014. Bevacizumab plus radiotherapy–temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 370:8709–22
    [Google Scholar]
54. 54. 

    Batchelor TT, Mulholland P, Neyns B et al. 2013. Phase III randomized trial comparing the efficacy of cediranib as monotherapy, and in combination with lomustine, versus lomustine alone in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 31:263212
    [Google Scholar]
55. 55. 

    Kalpathy-Cramer J, Chandra V, Da X et al. 2017. Phase II study of tivozanib, an oral VEGFR inhibitor, in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J. Neuro-oncol. 131:3603–10
    [Google Scholar]
56. 56. 

    Iwamoto FM, Lamborn KR, Robins HI et al. 2010. Phase II trial of pazopanib (GW786034), an oral multi-targeted angiogenesis inhibitor, for adults with recurrent glioblastoma (North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study 06-02). Neuro-Oncol 12:8855–61
    [Google Scholar]
57. 57. 

    Hutterer M, Nowosielski M, Haybaeck J et al. 2014. A single-arm phase II Austrian/German multicenter trial on continuous daily sunitinib in primary glioblastoma at first recurrence (SURGE 01-07). Neuro-Oncol 16:192–102
    [Google Scholar]
58. 58. 

    Lombardi G, De Salvo GL, Brandes AA et al. 2019. Regorafenib compared with lomustine in patients with relapsed glioblastoma (REGOMA): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 20:1110–19
    [Google Scholar]
59. 59. 

    Jiménez-Alcázar M, Curiel-García Á, Nogales P et al. 2021. Dianhydrogalactitol overcomes multiple temozolomide resistance mechanisms in glioblastoma. Mol. Cancer Ther. 20:61029–38
    [Google Scholar]
60. 60. 

    Wen PY, Cloughesy TF, Olivero AG et al. 2020. First-in-human phase I study to evaluate the brain-penetrant PI3K/mTOR inhibitor GDC-0084 in patients with progressive or recurrent high-grade glioma. Clin. Cancer Res. 26:81820–28
    [Google Scholar]
61. 61. 

    Cancer Genome Atlas Res. Netw 2008. Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways. Nature 455:72161061–68
    [Google Scholar]
62. 62. 

    Wen PY, Touat M, Alexander BM et al. 2019. Buparlisib in patients with recurrent glioblastoma harboring phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase pathway activation: an open-label, multicenter, multi-arm, phase II trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 37:9741–50
    [Google Scholar]
63. 63. 

    Wick W, Gorlia T, Bady P et al. 2016. Phase II study of radiotherapy and temsirolimus versus radiochemotherapy with temozolomide in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma without MGMT promoter hypermethylation (EORTC 26082). Clin. Cancer Res. 22:194797–806
    [Google Scholar]
64. 64. 

    Dahiya S, Emnett RJ, Haydon DH et al. 2014. BRAF-V600E mutation in pediatric and adult glioblastoma. Neuro-Oncol 16:2318–19
    [Google Scholar]
65. 65. 

    Kaley T, Touat M, Subbiah V et al. 2018. BRAF inhibition in BRAF^V600-mutant gliomas: results from the VE-BASKET study. J. Clin. Oncol. 36:353477–84
    [Google Scholar]
66. 66. 

    Wen P, Stein A, van den Bent M et al. 2019. ACTR-30. Updated efficacy and safety of dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with recurrent/refractory BRAF V600E–mutated high-grade glioma (HGG) and low-grade glioma (LGG). Neuro-Oncol 21:Suppl. 6vi19–vi20
    [Google Scholar]
67. 67. 

    Drilon A, Laetsch TW, Kummar S et al. 2018. Efficacy of larotrectinib in TRK fusion–positive cancers in adults and children. N. Engl. J. Med. 378:8731–39
    [Google Scholar]
68. 68. 

    Demetri GD, Paz-Ares L, Farago AF et al. 2018. Efficacy and safety of entrectinib in patients with NTRK fusion-positive tumours: pooled analysis of STARTRK-2, STARTRK-1, and ALKA-372-001. Ann. Oncol. 29:Suppl. 9ix175
    [Google Scholar]
69. 69. 

    Whittaker S, Madani D, Joshi S et al. 2017. Combination of palbociclib and radiotherapy for glioblastoma. Cell Death Discov 3:117033
    [Google Scholar]
70. 70. 

    Verhaak RG, Hoadley KA, Purdom E et al. 2010. Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. Cancer Cell 17:198–110
    [Google Scholar]
71. 71. 

    Wen P, Trippa L, Lee E et al. 2020. CTNI-12. Preliminary results of the abemaciclib arm in the individualized screening trial of innovative glioblastoma therapy (INSIGHT): a phase II platform trial using Bayesian adaptive randomization. Neuro-Oncol 22:Suppl. 2ii44
    [Google Scholar]
72. 72. 

    Alexander BM, Trippa L, Gaffey S et al. 2019. Individualized Screening Trial of Innovative Glioblastoma Therapy (INSIGhT): a Bayesian adaptive platform trial to develop precision medicines for patients with glioblastoma. JCO Precis Oncol 3:1–13
    [Google Scholar]
73. 73. 

    Wick W, Dettmer S, Berberich A et al. 2018. N2M2 (NOA-20) phase I/II trial of molecularly matched targeted therapies plus radiotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed non-MGMT hypermethylated glioblastoma. Neuro-Oncol 21:195–105
    [Google Scholar]
74. 74. 

    Pfaff E, Kessler T, Balasubramanian GP et al. 2018. Feasibility of real-time molecular profiling for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma without MGMT promoter hypermethylation—the NCT Neuro Master Match (N2M2) pilot study. Neuro-Oncol 20:6826–37
    [Google Scholar]
75. 75. 

    Prowell TM, Theoret MR, Pazdur R. 2016. Seamless oncology-drug development. N. Engl. J. Med. 374:212001–3
    [Google Scholar]
76. 76. 

    Louveau A, Smirnov I, Keyes TJ et al. 2015. Structural and functional features of central nervous system lymphatic vessels. Nature 523:7560337–41
    [Google Scholar]
77. 77. 

    Aspelund A, Antila S, Proulx ST et al. 2015. A dural lymphatic vascular system that drains brain interstitial fluid and macromolecules. J. Exp. Med. 212:7991–99
    [Google Scholar]
78. 78. 

    Goldberg SB, Schalper KA, Gettinger SN et al. 2020. Pembrolizumab for management of patients with NSCLC and brain metastases: long-term results and biomarker analysis from a non-randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol 21:5655–63
    [Google Scholar]
79. 79. 

    Tawbi HA, Forsyth PA, Algazi A et al. 2018. Combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in melanoma metastatic to the brain. N. Engl. J. Med. 379:8722–30
    [Google Scholar]
80. 80. 

    Reardon DA, Omuro A, Brandes AA et al. 2017. OS10.3 Randomized phase 3 study evaluating the efficacy and safety of nivolumab versus bevacizumab in patients with recurrent glioblastoma: CheckMate 143. Neuro-Oncol 19:Suppl. 3iii21
    [Google Scholar]
81. 81. 

    Garber ST, Hashimoto Y, Weathers SP et al. 2016. Immune checkpoint blockade as a potential therapeutic target: surveying CNS malignancies. Neuro-Oncol 18:101357–66
    [Google Scholar]
82. 82. 

    Nduom EK, Wei J, Yaghi NK et al. 2016. PD-L1 expression and prognostic impact in glioblastoma. Neuro-Oncol 18:2195–205
    [Google Scholar]
83. 83. 

    Hodges TR, Ott M, Xiu J et al. 2017. Mutational burden, immune checkpoint expression, and mismatch repair in glioma: implications for immune checkpoint immunotherapy. Neuro-Oncol 19:81047–57
    [Google Scholar]
84. 84. 

    Kipnis J. 2016. Multifaceted interactions between adaptive immunity and the central nervous system. Science 353:6301766–71
    [Google Scholar]
85. 85. 

    Fecci PE, Heimberger AB, Sampson JH. 2014. Immunotherapy for primary brain tumors: no longer a matter of privilege. Clin Cancer Res 20:225620–29
    [Google Scholar]
86. 86. 

    Nduom EK, Weller M, Heimberger AB. 2015. Immunosuppressive mechanisms in glioblastoma. Neuro-Oncol 17:Suppl. 7vii9–14
    [Google Scholar]
87. 87. 

    Wei J, Chen P, Gupta P et al. 2020. Immune biology of glioma-associated macrophages and microglia: functional and therapeutic implications. Neuro Oncol 22:2180–94
    [Google Scholar]
88. 88. 

    Goswami S, Walle T, Cornish AE et al. 2020. Immune profiling of human tumors identifies CD73 as a combinatorial target in glioblastoma. Nat. Med. 26:139–46
    [Google Scholar]
89. 89. 

    Woroniecka KI, Rhodin KE, Chongsathidkiet P et al. 2018. T-cell dysfunction in glioblastoma: applying a new framework. Clin. Cancer Res. 24:163792–802
    [Google Scholar]
90. 90. 

    Schartner JM, Hagar AR, Van Handel M et al. 2005. Impaired capacity for upregulation of MHC class II in tumor-associated microglia. Glia 51:4279–85
    [Google Scholar]
91. 91. 

    Ou A, Ott M, Fang D, Heimberger AB. 2021. The role and therapeutic targeting of JAK/STAT signaling in glioblastoma. Cancers 13:3437
    [Google Scholar]
92. 92. 

    Wainwright DA, Chang AL, Dey M et al. 2014. Durable therapeutic efficacy utilizing combinatorial blockade against IDO, CTLA-4, and PD-L1 in mice with brain tumors. Clin. Cancer Res. 20:205290–301
    [Google Scholar]
93. 93. 

    Chongsathidkiet P, Jackson C, Koyama S et al. 2018. Sequestration of T cells in bone marrow in the setting of glioblastoma and other intracranial tumors. Nat. Med. 24:91459–68
    [Google Scholar]
94. 94. 

    Woroniecka K, Chongsathidkiet P, Rhodin K et al. 2018. T-cell exhaustion signatures vary with tumor type and are severe in glioblastoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 24:174175–86
    [Google Scholar]
95. 95. 

    Ott M, Tomaszowski KH, Marisetty A et al. 2020. Profiling of patients with glioma reveals the dominant immunosuppressive axis is refractory to immune function restoration. JCI Insight 5:17e134386
    [Google Scholar]
96. 96. 

    Chiocca EA, Rabkin SD. 2014. Oncolytic viruses and their application to cancer immunotherapy. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2:4295–300
    [Google Scholar]
97. 97. 

    Bommareddy PK, Shettigar M, Kaufman HL. 2018. Integrating oncolytic viruses in combination cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 18:8498–513
    [Google Scholar]
98. 98. 

    Andtbacka RH, Kaufman HL, Collichio F et al. 2015. Talimogene laherparepvec improves durable response rate in patients with advanced melanoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:252780–88
    [Google Scholar]
99. 99. 

    Lang FF, Conrad C, Gomez-Manzano C et al. 2018. Phase I study of DNX-2401 (Delta-24-RGD) oncolytic adenovirus: replication and immunotherapeutic effects in recurrent malignant glioma. J. Clin. Oncol. 36:141419–27
    [Google Scholar]
100. 100. 

     Cloughesy TF, Landolfi J, Vogelbaum MA et al. 2018. Durable complete responses in some recurrent high-grade glioma patients treated with Toca 511 + Toca FC. Neuro-Oncol 20:101383–92
     [Google Scholar]
101. 101. 

     Gujar S, Pol JG, Kroemer G. 2018. Heating it up: oncolytic viruses make tumors ‘hot’ and suitable for checkpoint blockade immunotherapies. Oncoimmunology 7:8e1442169
     [Google Scholar]
102. 102. 

     Samson A, Scott KJ, Taggart D et al. 2018. Intravenous delivery of oncolytic reovirus to brain tumor patients immunologically primes for subsequent checkpoint blockade. Sci. Transl. Med. 10:422aam7577
     [Google Scholar]
103. 103. 

     Desjardins A, Gromeier M, Herndon JE et al. 2018. Recurrent glioblastoma treated with recombinant poliovirus. N. Engl. J. Med. 379:2150–61
     [Google Scholar]
104. 104. 

     Harrington K, Freeman DJ, Kelly B, Harper J, Soria JC. 2019. Optimizing oncolytic virotherapy in cancer treatment. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 18:9689–706
     [Google Scholar]
105. 105. 

     Corrales L, Glickman LH, McWhirter SM et al. 2015. Direct activation of STING in the tumor microenvironment leads to potent and systemic tumor regression and immunity. Cell Rep 11:71018–30
     [Google Scholar]
106. 106. 

     Ohkuri T, Ghosh A, Kosaka A et al. 2014. STING contributes to antiglioma immunity via triggering type I IFN signals in the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2:121199–208
     [Google Scholar]
107. 107. 

     Le Naour J, Zitvogel L, Galluzzi L et al. 2020. Trial watch: STING agonists in cancer therapy. Oncoimmunology 9:11777624
     [Google Scholar]
108. 108. 

     Boudreau CE, Najem H, Ott M et al. 2021. Intratumoral delivery of STING agonist results in clinical responses in canine glioblastoma. Clin. Cancer Res 27:5528–35
     [Google Scholar]
109. 109. 

     Gedeon PC, Schaller TH, Chitneni SK et al. 2018. A rationally designed fully human EGFRvIII:CD3-targeted bispecific antibody redirects human T cells to treat patient-derived intracerebral malignant glioma. Clin. Cancer Res. 24:153611–31
     [Google Scholar]
110. 110. 

     Pituch KC, Zannikou M, Ilut Let al 2021. Neural stem cells secreting bispecific T cell engager to induce selective antiglioma activity. PNAS 118:9e2015800118
     [Google Scholar]
111. 111. 

     Nair SK, De Leon G, Boczkowski D et al. 2014. Recognition and killing of autologous, primary glioblastoma tumor cells by human cytomegalovirus pp65-specific cytotoxic T cells. Clin. Cancer Res. 20:102684–94
     [Google Scholar]
112. 112. 

     Reap EA, Suryadevara CM, Batich KA et al. 2018. Dendritic cells enhance polyfunctionality of adoptively transferred T cells that target cytomegalovirus in glioblastoma. Cancer Res 78:1256–64
     [Google Scholar]
113. 113. 

     Batich KA, Reap EA, Archer GE et al. 2017. Long-term survival in glioblastoma with cytomegalovirus pp65-targeted vaccination. Clin. Cancer Res. 23:81898–909
     [Google Scholar]
114. 114. 

     Mitchell DA, Batich KA, Gunn MD et al. 2015. Tetanus toxoid and CCL3 improve dendritic cell vaccines in mice and glioblastoma patients. Nature 519:7543366–69
     [Google Scholar]
115. 115. 

     Weathers SP, Penas-Prado M, Pei BL et al. 2020. Glioblastoma-mediated immune dysfunction limits CMV-specific T cells and therapeutic responses: results from a phase I/II trial. Clin. Cancer Res. 26:143565–77
     [Google Scholar]
116. 116. 

     Sabbagh A, Beccaria K, Ling X et al. 2021. Opening of the blood-brain barrier using low-intensity pulsed ultrasound enhances responses to immunotherapy in preclinical glioma models. Clin. Cancer Res. 27:154325–37
     [Google Scholar]
117. 117. 

     Hilf N, Kuttruff-Coqui S, Frenzel K et al. 2019. Actively personalized vaccination trial for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Nature 565:7738240–45
     [Google Scholar]
118. 118. 

     Wick W, Dietrich P-Y, Kuttruff S et al. 2018. GAPVAC-101: first-in-human trial of a highly personalized peptide vaccination approach for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. J. Clin.Oncol. 36:15 Suppl2000
     [Google Scholar]
119. 119. 

     Keskin DB, Anandappa AJ, Sun J et al. 2019. Neoantigen vaccine generates intratumoral T cell responses in phase Ib glioblastoma trial. Nature 565:7738234–39
     [Google Scholar]
120. 120. 

     Liu CJ, Schaettler M, Blaha DT et al. 2020. Treatment of an aggressive orthotopic murine glioblastoma model with combination checkpoint blockade and a multivalent neoantigen vaccine. Neuro-Oncol 22:91276–88
     [Google Scholar]
121. 121. 

     Antonios JP, Soto H, Everson RG et al. 2016. PD-1 blockade enhances the vaccination-induced immune response in glioma. JCI Insight 1:10e87059
     [Google Scholar]
122. 122. 

     Lee-Chang C, Miska J, Hou D et al. 2020. Activation of 4-1BBL+ B cells with CD40 agonism and IFNγ elicits potent immunity against glioblastoma. J. Exp. Med. 218:1e20200913
     [Google Scholar]
123. 123. 

     Lee-Chang C, Rashidi A, Miska J et al. 2019. Myeloid-derived suppressive cells promote B cell-mediated immunosuppression via transfer of PD-L1 in glioblastoma. Cancer Immunol. Res. 7:121928–43
     [Google Scholar]
124. 124. 

     O'Rourke DM, Nasrallah MP, Desai A et al. 2017. A single dose of peripherally infused EGFRvIII-directed CAR T cells mediates antigen loss and induces adaptive resistance in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Sci. Transl. Med. 9:399eaaa0984
     [Google Scholar]
125. 125. 

     Brown CE, Alizadeh D, Starr R et al. 2016. Regression of glioblastoma after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 375:262561–69
     [Google Scholar]
126. 126. 

     Hyrenius-Wittsten A, Su Y, Park M et al. 2021. SynNotch CAR circuits enhance solid tumor recognition and promote persistent antitumor activity in mouse models. Sci. Transl. Med. 13:591eabd8836
     [Google Scholar]
127. 127. 

     Hegde M, Mukherjee M, Grada Z et al. 2016. Tandem CAR T cells targeting HER2 and IL13Rα2 mitigate tumor antigen escape. J. Clin. Investig. 126:83036–52
     [Google Scholar]
128. 128. 

     Wang D, Starr R, Chang WC et al. 2020. Chlorotoxin-directed CAR T cells for specific and effective targeting of glioblastoma. Sci. Transl. Med. 12:533eaaw2672
     [Google Scholar]
129. 129. 

     Shaim H, Sanabria MH, Basar R et al. 2021. Targeting the αv integrin-TGF-β axis improves natural killer cell function against glioblastoma stem cells. J. Clin. Investig 131:14e142116
     [Google Scholar]