Review ArticleReview

Expert opinion on translational research for advanced glioblastoma treatment

Xiaoteng Cui, Yunfei Wang, Junhu Zhou, Qixue Wang and Chunsheng Kang
Cancer Biology & Medicine April 2023, 20230012; DOI: https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2023.0012

Abstract

Malignant gliomas are known to be one of the most difficult diseases to diagnose and treat because of the infiltrative growth pattern, rapid progression, and poor prognosis. Many antitumor drugs are not ideal for the treatment of gliomas due to the blood-brain barrier. Temozolomide (TMZ) is a DNA alkylating agent that can cross the blood-brain barrier. As the only first-line chemotherapeutic drug for malignant gliomas at present, TMZ is widely utilized to provide a survival benefit; however, some patients are inherently insensitive to TMZ. In addition, patients could develop acquired resistance during TMZ treatment, which limits antitumor efficacy. To clarify the mechanism underlying TMZ resistance, numerous studies have provided multilevel solutions, such as improving the effective concentration of TMZ in tumors and developing novel small molecule drugs. This review discusses the in-depth mechanisms underlying TMZ drug resistance, thus aiming to provide possibilities for the establishment of personalized therapeutic strategies against malignant gliomas and the accelerated development and transformation of new targeted drugs.

keywords

Introduction

A malignant glioma is the most common primary tumor originating in the central nervous system (CNS)1,2. According to the 5th edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of CNS tumors, gliomas are categorized as grades 1–43. WHO grade 4 isocitrate dehydrogenase-wild type (IDH-WT) gliomas are also known as glioblastomas (GBMs) and generally have a median survival time of 12–15 months after diagnosis4. Because GBMs present with malignant behavior (i.e., invasive growth) into normal brain tissue, complete resection is nearly impossible2. The vast majority of GBMs recur within a few months after surgery, even if the residual tumor is not detected on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after extensive resection5. Recurrent GBMs progress rapidly without appropriate treatment and causes significant pain; however, use of alkylating agents as chemotherapy drugs in patients with GBMs has significantly improved survival6. Indeed, maximal surgical resection, followed by radiotherapy and alkylating agent chemotherapy, has become the conventional therapeutic strategy for patients with GBM7,8.

Temozolomide (TMZ), an oral alkylating agent, was first discovered to have antitumor effects in 19879 and was approved as a conventional frontline chemotherapeutic agent for GBM treatment by the FDA in 200510. TMZ has the following advantages: high efficiency in crossing the blood-brain barrier (BBB); maintaining a high drug concentration within the GBMs; and exerting antitumor effects11,12. Although TMZ treatment has improved the survival time and quality of life of GBM patients, TMZ is still considered to be palliative treatment13,14. With the widespread use of TMZ, the emerging problem of drug resistance has led to GBM treatment failure11. In recent years, physical15, chemical16,17, and biological18 treatment strategies have been applied in clinical trials or clinical therapies involving GBMs, but the clinical efficacies have not proven satisfactory. Thus, there is an urgent need to establish a reasonable GBM treatment strategy to effectively prolong patient survival and quality of life.

TMZ is currently the optimal and only available chemotherapeutic drug for GBM treatment

Cytotoxic mechanism of TMZ action

TMZ is the first-line drug for clinical GBM therapy. TMZ is a lipophilic molecule with oral administration and is well-tolerated. Pharmacokinetic studies have shown that TMZ is rapidly hydrolyzed to the 5-(3-methyltriazen-1-yl) imidazole-4-carboxamide (MTIC) metabolite within 1.5 h after entering the cell. MTIC is further metabolized to produce the active ingredient, diazomethane. The MTIC half-life is 8 min, which causes methylation of the guanine residues, O6 and N7, and the adenine residue, N3, during DNA replication, thus forming O6-MG, N7-MG, and N3-MA, respectively19,20. These abnormal modifications cause DNA strand breaks and replication fork collapse, which leads to cell cycle arrest in the G2/M phase and ultimately contributes to apoptosis21–23 (Figure 1).

Figure 1
Figure 1

Intracellular metabolism and drug resistance mechanisms of Temozolomide (TMZ). TMZ, an alkylating agent that can cross the BBB, is hydrolyzed and metabolized into the active ingredient, diazomethane. Diazomethane has a very short half-life in cells and methylates guanine and adenine of DNA to form N7-MG, O6-MG, and N3-MA. A considerable portion of TMZ, however, is secreted from the cell in the form of the original drug after entering cells. In addition, the activation of the base excision repair (BER) mechanism and the high level of O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) rapidly erases cytotoxic methylated modifications, resulting in cell survival. MTIC: 5-(3-methyltriazen-1-yl) imidazole-4-carboxamide; AIC: 4-amino-5-imidazole-carboxamide.

Mechanism underlying TMZ resistance

Deficiency of the effective TMZ intracellular concentration

The effective concentration of a chemotherapeutic drug at the tumor site is a crucial factor in determining efficacy. TMZ is highly enriched in gliomas due to the efficient ability to cross the BBB, which is an important feature that distinguishes TMZ from other alkylating agents. Tumor cells actively secrete intracellular chemotherapy drugs, which leads to insufficient concentrations of drugs, and thus the cytotoxic effects of drugs are diminished. For example, P-glycoprotein (P-gp), which is encoded by the multidrug resistance protein 1 (MDR1) gene, is a drug efflux pump involved in chemotherapy resistance that is overexpressed on the surface of tumor cells24,25. P-gp has been reported to be expressed in most brain tumors, including GBM, and P-gp may be involved in TMZ resistance26,27. In addition, our study demonstrated that the exocrine function of GBM is a vital mechanism underlying primary resistance against TMZ. After entering the cells, nearly one-half of TMZ is secreted through the vesicle system in the form of the original drug28. All of the above-cited reports suggest that the reduction in the effective concentration of TMZ in tumors caused by various mechanisms is the first step leading to chemotherapy resistance.

Abnormal DNA damage repair (DDR) function

DDR is a fundamental cellular function to compensate for DNA lesions. The O6-MG caused by TMZ changes the normal hydrogen bond between guanine and cytosine, which leads to mismatches with thymine during DNA replication, then triggers cellular repair via the mismatch repair (MMR) mechanism. MMR recognizes and excises mispairing in the new strand but leaves O6-MG in the parent strand, which results in futile cycle repeats and eventually leads to cell death29. MutS homolog 6 (MSH6), which is a member of the MutS family of proteins involved in MMR, is commonly mutated in patients with recurrent GBM after receiving TMZ chemotherapy when compared to patients with primary GBM30,31. This finding indicates that key gene mutations lead to abnormal MMR function, thus causing TMZ resistance32.

Base excision repair (BER) is another essential DNA repair mechanism. After exposure to chemical drugs or ionizing radiation, damaged DNA can rapidly activate damage recognition proteins and repair damaged DNA fragments through a series of cutting, joining, and other processes with a series of enzymatic reactions33. N7-MG and N3-MA activate poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP-1), promote X-ray repair cross complementing 1 (XRCC1), repair enzyme recruitment at DNA damage sites, and activate the BER repair process, resulting in cell survival34. Furthermore, PARP inhibitors sensitize glioma cells to TMZ35.

O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT)-mediated specific repair

Given that N3-MA and N7-MG are rapidly removed by BER before DNA replication, O6-MG is the dominant position at which TMZ causes DNA damage. MGMT is a DNA repair enzyme that removes methylation of the O6 site on DNA, thus repairing the cytotoxic damage caused by TMZ11,36. This effect is rapid and specific, so the level of MGMT expression is thought to reflect the clinical efficacy of TMZ in patients with gliomas.

Numerous studies have shown that MGMT expression is mainly regulated by the promoter region methylation level37,38. Epigenetic silencing of MGMT by promoter hypermethylation is significantly associated with longer survival in glioma patients who receive TMZ chemotherapy39. Intense MGMT histochemical staining in glioma samples is associated with TMZ resistance40. It has been reported that long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), such as lnc-TALC and HOTAIR, regulate MGMT expression via epigenetic modification alterations41,42. These findings have helped neurosurgeons judge the effectiveness of TMZ treatment and the survival time of GBM patients by evaluating the MGMT gene promoter methylation level in tumor tissues. Moreover, clinical data have suggested that TMZ treatment also helps prolong the survival time of GBM patients with an unmethylated MGMT promoter39,43. Therefore, regardless of the MGMT promoter status, TMZ is currently the only chemotherapeutic drug used for glioma patients after surgery.

Strategies for better therapy against GBM

Currently, potential strategies for TMZ resistance are shown in Table 1. To solve the problem of GBM treatment efficacy, it is important to fully explore the pathogenesis and chemoresistance mechanisms underlying GBM, establish novel diagnosis and treatment strategies, and develop new therapeutic approaches.

View this table:
Table 1

Mechanisms of TMZ resistance and potential therapeutic strategies

Novel diagnostic and therapeutic schemes based on deep sequencing technology

Gene mutations cause tumor occurrences and are key factors affecting the clinical therapeutic effect. In recent years studies have shown that GBMs have a variety of somatic mutations with subtype specificities46. The molecular subtypes of GBMs can be determined by genome and transcriptome sequencing47. The typical features of the GBM-classical subtype are chromosome 7 amplifications accompanied by chromosome 10 deletions. These mutations are characterized by the high expression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and deletion of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A), but the TP53 gene is generally not mutated in this subtype. The neuronal precursor cell and stem cell marker gene, Nestin, as well as Notch and Hedgehog pathway-related genes, are highly expressed in this subtype. The most common genomic alterations of the mesenchymal subtype of GBM are deletions of neurofibromin 1 (NF1) and phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN), which lead to the continuous activation of the protein kinase B (PKB, also known as AKT) pathway. The characteristic highly-expressed genes of this subtype are mesenchymal-related genes, such as chitinase 3-like 1 (CHI3L1), MET, CD44, and MERTK, and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) and nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) pathway-related genes. The GBM-proneural subtype is characterized by somatic mutations of IDH1 and platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA), which are often accompanied by TP53 deletions. The oligodendrocyte development-related gene oligodendrocyte transcription factor 2 (OLIG2), NK2 homeobox 2 (NKX2-2), and the SOX protein family are highly expressed in this subtype. The significant features of the neural subtype of GBM are the high levels of neuron marker gene expression, such as neurofilament light chain (NEFL), gamma-aminobutyric acid type A receptor subunit alpha 1 (GABRA1), synaptotagmin 1 (SYT1), and solute carrier family 12 member 5 (SLC12A5).

Understanding the characteristics of gene mutations in tumors can be helpful to evaluate the therapeutic strategies and prognostic conditions for tumor patients. IDH1/2 mutations are mostly found in low-grade gliomas and secondary GBMs that have a good prognosis for radiotherapy and alkylating agent chemotherapy48. Genetic mutations of the telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) promoter region do not co-exist with IDH1 mutations in primary GBMs; however, co-mutations in TERT promoter and IDH1/2 are often detected in oligodendrogliomas, which indicates a good prognosis49. For GBM patients with the V600E mutation in the B-Raf proto-oncogene, serine/threonine kinase (BRAF) gene, the BRAF inhibitor, vemurafenib is recommended for adjuvant treatment50. Hypermethylation of the MGMT promoter region indicates that TMZ chemotherapy would be more beneficial for GBM patients51.

With the rapid development of sequencing technology, more GBM-specific mutations and low-frequency loci will be gradually revealed and studied. Omics studies have shown that adult diffuse gliomas in East Asians have unique genomic characteristics52. By further promoting the genomic diagnosis of GBM in the clinical setting, researchers can make personalized diagnoses at the molecular level and guide the establishment of individual therapeutic strategies. Deep sequencing analysis of large samples allows for the thorough analysis of the effects of different genetic mutations on the progression and prognosis of GBMs. Moreover, under the orchestration of deep sequencing and multiomics analysis, novel marker diagnostic kits can be developed for the better diagnosis of GBMs and the implication of precise treatments against malignant GBMs. Based on the above findings, the possibilities of gene mutations as new therapeutic targets are worth evaluating for the development of targeted small molecule drugs. Additionally, these mutations actively promote clinical transformation, provide a molecular theoretical basis for effective treatment approaches for personalized diagnosis and treatment, and eventually improve the prognosis of GBM patients.

New drugs and new technologic breakthroughs

Because of the special origination site and unique microenvironment characteristics of brain tumors, the majority of drugs are difficult to pass through the BBB, which greatly limits the therapeutic effect. With inherent high heterogeneity, gliomas often recur and develop treatment resistance. In recent years, cancer immunotherapies using chimeric antigen receptor T (CAR-T) cells have been adopted in clinical treatments. CAR-T cells show strong antitumor effects in hematologic malignancies, but challenges remain in the treatment of solid tumors, including malignant gliomas53. Immune checkpoint inhibitors significantly benefit patients with solid tumors, such as lung cancers or melanomas, but are not ideal for GBM patients54–56. With ongoing research, novel drugs targeting new targets have shown satisfactory effects against malignant gliomas, and some drugs have been approved for clinical trials. Such drugs include AG-120 and AG-881, which target IDH1 mutations57,58, bozitinib, which targets the PTPRZ1-MET fusion gene16, and ACT001, a Chinese medicinal extract from the root bark of magnolia that blocks the activity of the phosphatidylinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway59. The clustered regularly spaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)/Cas13a system has also shown promising preclinical results in the treatment of GBM by virtue of its unique gene editing ability to target RNA60. With respect to new uses for old drugs, the widely used antidiabetic drug, metformin, inhibits GBM growth by altering the metabolic state and inducing apoptosis of tumor cells61. Sequential therapy of chloroquine and TMZ has shown good effects against GBMs, as the concentration of TMZ increased in tumor cells by the chloroquine-induced inhibition of exocrine function28. Numerous studies demonstrated that TMZ-resistant GBM cells transmit resistance via exosomes62–65. Targeting exosomes has great potential to reverse TMZ resistance. In addition, Lin and colleagues66 reported a novel analog of TMZ that induced MMR-independent cell killing selectively in TMZ-resistant tumors with MGMT silence.

At present, the clinical treatment of GBMs is still facing limitations. Novel therapeutic drugs and treatment approaches need to be developed. Advanced drug delivery systems would help to solve the crucial problems of cross-BBB delivery. The in-depth mechanisms of old drugs for GBMs and appropriate drug combinations are worth exploring. Moreover, accelerating the developments and clinical transformations of new small-molecule drugs provide a promising future.

Deeper research focusing on the GBM microenvironment will help to develop novel therapeutic targets

GBMs are a kind of well-known “cold tumor” because of insensitivity to most current immunotherapies67. In recent years, the wide application of single-cell RNA sequencing technology in tumors has greatly improved the understanding of the complex tumor microenvironment and cell-cell interactions in GBMs. By analyzing the single-cell transcriptome data of clinical samples, the high inter- and intra-heterogeneity of GBMs were further revealed68, and malignant cells in GBM samples were sorted into four subtypes by means of the expression of signature genes69. Furthermore, it was found that a large number of macrophages/microglia infiltrated GBM tissues, whereas the proportion of T lymphocytes was very small70. An in-depth study showed that many bone marrow-derived macrophages exist in tumor tissues, while brain-resident microglia mostly appear around GBM tissues71. Moreover, single-cell sequencing analysis of immune cells sorted from GBM samples via CD45 or CD11b antibodies revealed the cell types, distribution, and transcriptomic features of immune cells in GBMs70,71. The above findings not only reveal the unique landscape of the immune microenvironment in GBMs but will also benefit the development of therapeutic targets based on cell-cell interactions. For example, colony stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R), also known as M-CSF, is mainly expressed on the cell surface and is critical for macrophage differentiation and survival72. CSF1 is a secretory ligand of CSF1R that is secreted by tumor cells. CSF1 can bind and activate the tyrosine kinase activity of CSF1R to promote macrophage M2 polarization. Inhibitors blocking the interaction between CSF1/CSF1R reverses the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. For example, BLZ945, PLX3397, and other drugs targeting the CSF1/CSF1R interaction have displayed promising antitumor effects and have been used in clinical trials to treat tumors73,74. The results of preclinical experiments showed that PLX3397 has a good inhibitory effect against GBMs driven by platelet-derived growth factor subunit B (PDGFB); however, PLX3397 promotes RAS-driven GBM growth and has no effect on other mesenchymal or pre-neural subtypes75.

Cancer stem cells are a type of cell with self-renewal and multidirectional differentiation potential in tumor tissues. Cancer stem cells have a key role in maintaining tumor heterogeneity, promoting tumor progression, and driving tumor recurrence76,77. Studies have demonstrated that there are cells expressing CD133, SOX2, and other stem genes in GBM tissues, and these cells are defined as glioma stem cells (GSCs)78. It has been reported that GSCs not only have the abilities of self-renewal and multilineage differentiation but are also related to chemo- and radio-therapy resistance79. The hypoxic and ischemic microenvironment in GBMs promotes angiogenesis mediated by GSCs80 and accelerates the invasion and metastasis of GBMs81. Targeting GSCs would be expected to prolong the tumor-free survival time of GBM patients.

Overall, the unique immune microenvironment of GBMs requires more specific immune targets and immunotherapy strategies. The investigation of the in-depth mechanisms of tumorigenesis and the development of novel targeted drugs are worth pursuing to reverse the current status of GBMs as a “cold tumor”.

Applications of new tumor animal models and novel experimental technologies that mimic clinical tumors for promoting preclinical mechanistic research on GBM

Appropriate experimental models can promote the rapid development of mechanistic explorations and drug discoveries. Based on the gene mutation characteristics of distinct GBM subtypes, scientists have established several subtype-specific GBM primary models82. In 2000, Holland and colleagues83 transfected the K-Ras (G12D) and AKT (Δ11–60) mutants into immortalized chicken fibroblasts and injected these cells into mouse brain. The treated cells showed glioma-like growth, forming infiltrating diffuse tumor tissue. Thus, activated Ras and AKT pathways induce diffuse glioma. In addition, a recombinant lentivirus with PDGFB overexpression and CDKN2A knockdown injected into the hippocampus of mice induced the occurrence of proneural subtype GBMs84.

The increasing development of 3D cell culture technology enables the realization of tumor organoids. The 3D system showed the complex spatial morphology of tumor tissues and the cell-cell and cell-matrix interactions and has unique applications in preclinical drug screening and evaluations. At present, many studies on glioma-like organoids have been carried out85,86.

3D printing has become a novel technology in recent years. Some studies have applied 3D biological printing technology to construct ex vivo models of GBM via the mixed bioprinting of various cells and matrices in petri dishes for culture and observation to obtain GBM models close to real tumors and explore the interactions between tumor and immune cells in the microenvironment87.

Natural and reasonable GBM models are very important for basic research and preclinical tests of novel drugs. Accelerating the development of animal models based on the genetic characteristics of diseases, establishing animal models that better represent clinical GBMs, and focusing on promoting organoid culture and 3D culture technology help to facilitate the rapid advancement of basic research and drug screening of GBMs.

Conclusions

Gliomas have always been one of the most malignant diseases hindering human health. Researchers have made continuous efforts to explore the pathogenesis, microenvironment characteristics, and drug resistance mechanisms of this disease, revealing an increasing number of potential drug targets. Although TMZ is still the only drug available, we have reason to believe that the development of personalized diagnoses will provide more individualized treatment strategies for GBM patients.

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflicts of interest are disclosed.

Author contributions

Conceived and designed the analysis: Xiaoteng Cui, Chunsheng Kang.

Collected the data: Xiaoteng Cui, Yunfei Wang.

Contributed data or analysis tools: Junhu Zhou, Qixue Wang.

Performed the analysis: Xiaoteng Cui, Yunfei Wang.

Wrote the paper: Xiaoteng Cui, Chunsheng Kang.

  • Received January 13, 2023.
  • Accepted March 22, 2023.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

References

  1. 1.↵
    2. Ostrom QT,
    3. Price M,
    4. Neff C,
    5. Cioffi G,
    6. Waite KA,
    7. Kruchko C, et al.
    CBTRUS statistical report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the united states in 2015-2019. Neuro Oncol. 2022; 24(Suppl 5): v1–95.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. 2.↵
    2. Wen PY,
    3. Kesari S.
    Malignant gliomas in adults. N Engl J Med. 2008; 359: 492–507.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    2. Louis DN,
    3. Perry A,
    4. Wesseling P,
    5. Brat DJ,
    6. Cree IA,
    7. Figarella-Branger D, et al.
    The 2021 WHO classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Neuro Oncol. 2021; 23: 1231–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    2. Stylli SS.
    Novel treatment strategies for glioblastoma. Cancers (Basel). 2020; 12: 2883.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    2. Chen C,
    3. Xu T,
    4. Lu Y,
    5. Chen J,
    6. Wu S.
    The efficacy of temozolomide for recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. Eur J Neurol. 2013; 20: 223–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    2. Sarkaria JN,
    3. Kitange GJ,
    4. James CD,
    5. Plummer R,
    6. Calvert H,
    7. Weller M, et al.
    Mechanisms of chemoresistance to alkylating agents in malignant glioma. Clin Cancer Res. 2008; 14: 2900–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    2. Stupp R,
    3. Hegi ME,
    4. Mason WP,
    5. van den Bent MJ,
    6. Taphoorn MJ,
    7. Janzer RC, et al.
    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. 2009; 10: 459–66.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    2. Perry JR,
    3. Laperriere N,
    4. O’Callaghan CJ,
    5. Brandes AA,
    6. Menten J,
    7. Phillips C, et al.
    Short-course radiation plus temozolomide in elderly patients with glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2017; 376: 1027–37.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    2. Stevens MF,
    3. Hickman JA,
    4. Langdon SP,
    5. Chubb D,
    6. Vickers L,
    7. Stone R, et al.
    Antitumor activity and pharmacokinetics in mice of 8-carbamoyl-3-methyl-imidazo[5,1-d]-1,2,3,5-tetrazin-4(3H)-one (CCRG 81045; M & B 39831), a novel drug with potential as an alternative to dacarbazine. Cancer Res. 1987; 47: 5846–52.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    2. Cohen MH,
    3. Johnson JR,
    4. Pazdur R.
    Food and drug administration drug approval summary: temozolomide plus radiation therapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme. Clin Cancer Res. 2005; 11(19 Pt 1): 6767–71.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    2. Lee SY.
    Temozolomide resistance in glioblastoma multiforme. Genes Dis. 2016; 3: 198–210.
    OpenUrl
  12. 12.↵
    2. Serwer LP,
    3. James CD.
    Challenges in drug delivery to tumors of the central nervous system: an overview of pharmacological and surgical considerations. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2012; 64: 590–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    2. Knisely JP,
    3. Baehring JM.
    A silver lining on the horizon for glioblastoma. Lancet Oncol. 2009; 10: 434–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    2. Huse JT,
    3. Holland EC.
    Targeting brain cancer: advances in the molecular pathology of malignant glioma and medulloblastoma. Nat Rev Cancer. 2010; 10: 319–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    2. Fabian D,
    3. Guillermo Prieto Eibl MDP,
    4. Alnahhas I,
    5. Sebastian N,
    6. Giglio P,
    7. Puduvalli V, et al.
    Treatment of glioblastoma (GBM) with the addition of tumor-treating fields (TTF): a review. Cancers (Basel). 2019; 11: 174.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    2. Hu H,
    3. Mu Q,
    4. Bao Z,
    5. Chen Y,
    6. Liu Y,
    7. Chen J, et al.
    Mutational landscape of secondary glioblastoma guides met-targeted trial in brain tumor. Cell. 2018; 175: 1665–78.e18.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    2. Diaz RJ,
    3. Ali S,
    4. Qadir MG,
    5. De La Fuente MI,
    6. Ivan ME,
    7. Komotar RJ.
    The role of bevacizumab in the treatment of glioblastoma. J Neurooncol. 2017; 133: 455–67.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    2. O’Rourke DM,
    3. Nasrallah MP,
    4. Desai A,
    5. Melenhorst JJ,
    6. Mansfield K,
    7. Morrissette JJD, et al.
    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. 2017; 9: eaaa0984.
  19. 19.↵
    2. Britten CD,
    3. Rowinsky EK,
    4. Baker SD,
    5. Agarwala SS,
    6. Eckardt JR,
    7. Barrington R, et al.
    A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of temozolomide and cisplatin in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Clin Cancer Res. 1999; 5: 1629–37.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    2. Fuchs RP,
    3. Isogawa A,
    4. Paulo JA,
    5. Onizuka K,
    6. Takahashi T,
    7. Amunugama R, et al.
    Crosstalk between repair pathways elicits double-strand breaks in alkylated DNA and implications for the action of temozolomide. Elife. 2021; 10: e69544.
  21. 21.↵
    2. Hirose Y,
    3. Berger MS,
    4. Pieper RO.
    p53 effects both the duration of G2/M arrest and the fate of temozolomide-treated human glioblastoma cells. Cancer Res. 2001; 61: 1957–63.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.
    2. Shen HY,
    3. Tang HL,
    4. Zheng YH,
    5. Feng J,
    6. Dong BX,
    7. Chen XQ.
    The PARP1 inhibitor niraparib represses DNA damage repair and synergizes with temozolomide for antimyeloma effects. J Oncol. 2022; 2022: 2800488.
  23. 23.↵
    2. Alonso MM,
    3. Gomez-Manzano C,
    4. Bekele BN,
    5. Yung WKA,
    6. Fueyo J.
    Adenovirus-based strategies overcome temozolomide resistance by silencing the O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter. Cancer Res. 2007; 67: 11499–504.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    2. Robey RW,
    3. Pluchino KM,
    4. Hall MD,
    5. Fojo AT,
    6. Bates SE,
    7. Gottesman MM.
    Revisiting the role of ABC transporters in multidrug-resistant cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2018; 18: 452–64.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    2. Ambudkar SV,
    3. Dey S,
    4. Hrycyna CA,
    5. Ramachandra M,
    6. Pastan I,
    7. Gottesman MM.
    Biochemical, cellular, and pharmacological aspects of the multidrug transporter. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1999; 39: 361–98.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    2. Munoz JL,
    3. Walker ND,
    4. Scotto KW,
    5. Rameshwar P.
    Temozolomide competes for P-glycoprotein and contributes to chemoresistance in glioblastoma cells. Cancer Lett. 2015; 367: 69–75.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    2. Demeule M,
    3. Shedid D,
    4. Beaulieu E,
    5. Del Maestro RF,
    6. Moghrabi A,
    7. Ghosn PB, et al.
    Expression of multidrug-resistance P-glycoprotein (MDR1) in human brain tumors. Int J Cancer. 2001; 93: 62–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    2. Yang E,
    3. Wang L,
    4. Jin W,
    5. Liu X,
    6. Wang Q,
    7. Wu Y, et al.
    PTRF/Cavin-1 enhances chemo-resistance and promotes temozolomide efflux through extracellular vesicles in glioblastoma. Theranostics. 2022; 12: 4330–47.
    OpenUrl
  29. 29.↵
    2. Roos WP,
    3. Batista LF,
    4. Naumann SC,
    5. Wick W,
    6. Weller M,
    7. Menck CFM, et al.
    Apoptosis in malignant glioma cells triggered by the temozolomide-induced DNA lesion O6-methylguanine. Oncogene. 2007; 26: 186–97.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    2. Atkins RJ,
    3. Ng W,
    4. Stylli SS,
    5. Hovens CM,
    6. Kaye AH.
    Repair mechanisms help glioblastoma resist treatment. J Clin Neurosci. 2015; 22: 14–20.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    2. Yip S,
    3. Miao J,
    4. Cahill DP,
    5. Iafrate AJ,
    6. Aldape K,
    7. Nutt CL, et al.
    MSH6 mutations arise in glioblastomas during temozolomide therapy and mediate temozolomide resistance. Clin Cancer Res. 2009; 15: 4622–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    2. Erasimus H,
    3. Gobin M,
    4. Niclou S,
    5. Van Dyck E.
    DNA repair mechanisms and their clinical impact in glioblastoma. Mutat Res Rev Mutat Res. 2016; 769: 19–35.
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    2. Zharkov DO.
    Base excision DNA repair. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2008; 65: 1544–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    2. Wu S,
    3. Li X,
    4. Gao F,
    5. de Groot JF,
    6. Koul D,
    7. Yung WKA.
    PARP-mediated PARylation of MGMT is critical to promote repair of temozolomide-induced O6-methylguanine DNA damage in glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol. 2021; 23: 920–31.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    2. Sim HW,
    3. Galanis E,
    4. Khasraw M.
    PARP inhibitors in glioma: a review of therapeutic opportunities. Cancers (Basel). 2022; 14: 1003.
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.↵
    2. Choi S,
    3. Yu Y,
    4. Grimmer MR,
    5. Wahl M,
    6. Chang SM,
    7. Costello JF.
    Temozolomide-associated hypermutation in gliomas. Neuro Oncol. 2018; 20: 1300–9.
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    2. Esteller M,
    3. Garcia-Foncillas J,
    4. Andion E,
    5. Goodman SN,
    6. Hidalgo OF,
    7. Vanaclocha V, et al.
    Inactivation of the DNA-repair gene MGMT and the clinical response of gliomas to alkylating agents. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343: 1350–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    2. Butler M,
    3. Pongor L,
    4. Su YT,
    5. Xi L,
    6. Raffeld M,
    7. Quezado M, et al.
    MGMT status as a clinical biomarker in glioblastoma. Trends Cancer. 2020; 6: 380–91.
    OpenUrl
  39. 39.↵
    2. Hegi ME,
    3. Diserens AC,
    4. Gorlia T,
    5. Hamou MF,
    6. de Tribolet N,
    7. Weller M, et al.
    MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352: 997–1003.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    2. Friedman HS,
    3. McLendon RE,
    4. Kerby T,
    5. Dugan M,
    6. Bigner SH,
    7. Henry AJ, et al.
    DNA mismatch repair and O6-alkylguanine-DNA alkyltransferase analysis and response to Temodal in newly diagnosed malignant glioma. J Clin Oncol. 1998; 16: 3851–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    2. Wu P,
    3. Cai J,
    4. Chen Q,
    5. Han B,
    6. Meng X,
    7. Li Y, et al.
    Lnc-TALC promotes O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase expression via regulating the c-Met pathway by competitively binding with miR-20b-3p. Nat Commun. 2019; 10: 2045.
    OpenUrl
  42. 42.↵
    2. Zhao J,
    3. Yang S,
    4. Cui X,
    5. Wang Q,
    6. Yang E,
    7. Tong F, et al.
    A novel compound EPIC-0412 reverses temozolomide resistance via inhibiting DNA repair/MGMT in glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol. 2022; noac242.
  43. 43.↵
    2. Chai R,
    3. Li G,
    4. Liu Y,
    5. Zhang K,
    6. Zhao Z,
    7. Wu F, et al.
    Predictive value of MGMT promoter methylation on the survival of TMZ treated IDH-mutant glioblastoma. Cancer Biol Med. 2021; 18: 272–82.
    OpenUrl
  44. 44.
    2. Rosch L,
    3. Herter S,
    4. Najafi S,
    5. Ridinger J,
    6. Peterziel H,
    7. Cinatl J, et al.
    ERBB and P-glycoprotein inhibitors break resistance in relapsed neuroblastoma models through P-glycoprotein. Mol Oncol. 2023; 17: 37–58.
    OpenUrl
  45. 45.
    2. Hanna C,
    3. Kurian KM,
    4. Williams K,
    5. Watts C,
    6. Jackson A,
    7. Carruthers R, et al.
    Pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of olaparib and temozolomide for recurrent glioblastoma: results of the phase I OPARATIC trial. Neuro Oncol. 2020; 22: 1840–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    2. Brennan CW,
    3. Verhaak RG,
    4. McKenna A,
    5. Campos B,
    6. Noushmehr H,
    7. Salama SR, et al.
    The somatic genomic landscape of glioblastoma. Cell. 2013; 155: 462–77.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. 47.↵
    2. Verhaak RG,
    3. Hoadley KA,
    4. Purdom E,
    5. Wang V,
    6. Qi Y,
    7. Wilkerson MD, et al.
    Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. Cancer Cell. 2010; 17: 98–110.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    2. Wang Z,
    3. Bao Z,
    4. Yan W,
    5. You G,
    6. Wang Y,
    7. Li X, et al.
    Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutation-specific microRNA signature predicts favorable prognosis in glioblastoma patients with IDH1 wild type. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2013; 32: 59.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    2. Eckel-Passow JE,
    3. Lachance DH,
    4. Molinaro AM,
    5. Walsh KM,
    6. Decker PA,
    7. Sicotte H, et al.
    Glioma groups based on 1p/19q, IDH, and TERT promoter mutations in tumors. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372: 2499–508.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. 50.↵
    2. Subbiah V,
    3. Puzanov I,
    4. Blay JY,
    5. Chau I,
    6. Lockhart AC,
    7. Raje NS, et al.
    Pan-cancer efficacy of vemurafenib in BRAFv600-mutant non-melanoma cancers. Cancer Discov. 2020; 10: 657–63.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  51. 51.↵
    2. Reifenberger G,
    3. Hentschel B,
    4. Felsberg J,
    5. Schackert G,
    6. Simon M,
    7. Schnell O, et al.
    Predictive impact of MGMT promoter methylation in glioblastoma of the elderly. Int J Cancer. 2012; 131: 1342–50.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. 52.↵
    2. Mo Z,
    3. Xin J,
    4. Chai R,
    5. Woo PYM,
    6. Chan DTM,
    7. Wang J.
    Epidemiological characteristics and genetic alterations in adult diffuse glioma in East Asian populations. Cancer Biol Med. 2022; 19: 1440–59.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  53. 53.↵
    2. Newick K,
    3. O’Brien S,
    4. Moon E,
    5. Albelda SM.
    CAR T cell therapy for solid tumors. Annu Rev Med. 2017; 68: 139–52.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    2. Reck M,
    3. Remon J,
    4. Hellmann MD.
    First-line immunotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2022; 40: 586–97.
    OpenUrl
  55. 55.
    2. Carlino MS,
    3. Larkin J,
    4. Long GV.
    Immune checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma. Lancet. 2021; 398: 1002–14.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. 56.↵
    2. Lee EQ.
    Immune checkpoint inhibitors in GBM. J Neurooncol. 2021; 155: 1–11.
    OpenUrl
  57. 57.↵
    2. Popovici-Muller J,
    3. Lemieux RM,
    4. Artin E,
    5. Saunders JO,
    6. Salituro FG,
    7. Travins J, et al.
    Discovery of AG-120 (ivosidenib): a first-in-class mutant IDH1 inhibitor for the treatment of IDH1 mutant cancers. ACS Med Chem Lett. 2018; 9: 300–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  58. 58.↵
    2. Konteatis Z,
    3. Artin E,
    4. Nicolay B,
    5. Straley K,
    6. Padyana AK,
    7. Jin L, et al.
    Vorasidenib (AG-881): a first-in-class, brain-penetrant dual inhibitor of mutant IDH1 and 2 for treatment of glioma. ACS Med Chem Lett. 2020; 11: 101–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  59. 59.↵
    2. Tong L,
    3. Li J,
    4. Li Q,
    5. Wang X,
    6. Medikonda R,
    7. Zhao T, et al.
    ACT001 reduces the expression of PD-L1 by inhibiting the phosphorylation of STAT3 in glioblastoma. Theranostics. 2020; 10: 5943–56.
    OpenUrl
  60. 60.↵
    2. Wang Q,
    3. Liu X,
    4. Zhou J,
    5. Yang C,
    6. Wang G,
    7. Tan Y, et al.
    The CRISPR-Cas13a gene-editing system induces collateral cleavage of RNA in glioma cells. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2019; 6: 1901299.
  61. 61.↵
    2. Seliger C,
    3. Luber C,
    4. Gerken M,
    5. Schaertl J,
    6. Proescholdt M,
    7. Riemenschneider MJ, et al.
    Use of metformin and survival of patients with high-grade glioma. Int J Cancer. 2019; 144: 273–80.
    OpenUrl
  62. 62.↵
    2. Ding C,
    3. Yi X,
    4. Wu X,
    5. Bu X,
    6. Wang D,
    7. Wu Z, et al.
    Exosome-mediated transfer of circRNA CircNFIX enhances temozolomide resistance in glioma. Cancer Lett. 2020; 479: 1–12.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  63. 63.
    2. Li Z,
    3. Meng X,
    4. Wu P,
    5. Zha C,
    6. Han B,
    7. Li L, et al.
    Glioblastoma cell-derived lncRNA-containing exosomes induce microglia to produce complement C5, promoting chemotherapy resistance. Cancer Immunol Res. 2021; 9: 1383–99.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  64. 64.
    2. Wei QT,
    3. Liu BY,
    4. Ji HY,
    5. Lan YF,
    6. Tang WH,
    7. Zhou J, et al.
    Exosome-mediated transfer of MIF confers temozolomide resistance by regulating TIMP3/PI3k/AKT axis in gliomas. Mol Ther Oncolytics. 2021; 22: 114–28.
    OpenUrl
  65. 65.↵
    2. Zhang Z,
    3. Yin J,
    4. Lu C,
    5. Wei Y,
    6. Zeng A,
    7. You Y.
    Exosomal transfer of long non-coding RNA SBF2-AS1 enhances chemoresistance to temozolomide in glioblastoma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2019; 38: 166.
    OpenUrl
  66. 66.↵
    2. Lin K,
    3. Gueble SE,
    4. Sundaram RK,
    5. Huseman ED,
    6. Bindra RS,
    7. Herzon SB.
    Mechanism-based design of agents that selectively target drug-resistant glioma. Science. 2022; 377: 502–11.
    OpenUrl
  67. 67.↵
    2. Tomaszewski W,
    3. Sanchez-Perez L,
    4. Gajewski TF,
    5. Sampson JH.
    Brain tumor microenvironment and host state: implications for immunotherapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2019; 25: 4202–10.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. 68.↵
    2. Patel AP,
    3. Tirosh I,
    4. Trombetta JJ,
    5. Shalek AK,
    6. Gillespie SM,
    7. Wakimoto H, et al.
    Single-cell RNA-seq highlights intratumoral heterogeneity in primary glioblastoma. Science. 2014; 344: 1396–401.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  69. 69.↵
    2. Neftel C,
    3. Laffy J,
    4. Filbin MG,
    5. Hara T,
    6. Shore ME,
    7. Rahme GJ, et al.
    An integrative model of cellular states, plasticity, and genetics for glioblastoma. Cell. 2019; 178: 835–49.e21.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  70. 70.↵
    2. Muller S,
    3. Kohanbash G,
    4. Liu SJ,
    5. Alvarado B,
    6. Carrera D,
    7. Bhaduri A, et al.
    Single-cell profiling of human gliomas reveals macrophage ontogeny as a basis for regional differences in macrophage activation in the tumor microenvironment. Genome Biol. 2017; 18: 234.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  71. 71.↵
    2. Chen Z,
    3. Feng X,
    4. Herting CJ,
    5. Garcia VA,
    6. Nie K,
    7. Pong WW, et al.
    Cellular and molecular identity of tumor-associated macrophages in glioblastoma. Cancer Res. 2017; 77: 2266–78.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  72. 72.↵
    2. Stanley ER,
    3. Chitu V.
    CSF-1 receptor signaling in myeloid cells. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2014; 6: a021857.
  73. 73.↵
    2. Peranzoni E,
    3. Lemoine J,
    4. Vimeux L,
    5. Feuillet V,
    6. Barrin S,
    7. Kantari-Mimoun C, et al.
    Macrophages impede CD8 T cells from reaching tumor cells and limit the efficacy of anti-PD-1 treatment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018; 115: E4041–50.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  74. 74.↵
    2. Fang Y,
    3. He Y,
    4. Wu C,
    5. Zhang M,
    6. Gu Z,
    7. Zhang J, et al.
    Magnetism-mediated targeting hyperthermia-immunotherapy in “cold” tumor with CSF1R inhibitor. Theranostics. 2021; 11: 6860–72.
    OpenUrl
  75. 75.↵
    2. Rao R,
    3. Han R,
    4. Ogurek S,
    5. Xue C,
    6. Wu LM,
    7. Zhang L, et al.
    Glioblastoma genetic drivers dictate the function of tumor-associated macrophages/microglia and responses to CSF1R inhibition. Neuro Oncol. 2022; 24: 584–97.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  76. 76.↵
    2. Plaks V,
    3. Kong N,
    4. Werb Z.
    The cancer stem cell niche: how essential is the niche in regulating stemness of tumor cells? Cell Stem Cell. 2015; 16: 225–38.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  77. 77.↵
    2. Vlashi E,
    3. Pajonk F.
    Cancer stem cells, cancer cell plasticity and radiation therapy. Semin Cancer Biol. 2015; 31: 28–35.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. 78.↵
    2. Lathia JD,
    3. Mack SC,
    4. Mulkearns-Hubert EE,
    5. Valentim CL,
    6. Rich JN.
    Cancer stem cells in glioblastoma. Genes Dev. 2015; 29: 1203–17.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  79. 79.↵
    2. Boyd NH,
    3. Tran AN,
    4. Bernstock JD,
    5. Etminan T,
    6. Jones AB,
    7. Gillespie GY, et al.
    Glioma stem cells and their roles within the hypoxic tumor microenvironment. Theranostics. 2021; 11: 665–83.
    OpenUrl
  80. 80.↵
    2. Li Z,
    3. Bao S,
    4. Wu Q,
    5. Wang H,
    6. Eyler C,
    7. Sathornsumetee S, et al.
    Hypoxia-inducible factors regulate tumorigenic capacity of glioma stem cells. Cancer Cell. 2009; 15: 501–13.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.↵
    2. Torres A,
    3. Erices JI,
    4. Sanchez F,
    5. Ehrenfeld P,
    6. Turchi L,
    7. Virolle T, et al.
    Extracellular adenosine promotes cell migration/invasion of glioblastoma stem-like cells through A3 adenosine receptor activation under hypoxia. Cancer Lett. 2019; 446: 112–22.
    OpenUrl
  82. 82.↵
    2. Gargiulo G.
    Next-generation in vivo modeling of human cancers. Front Oncol. 2018; 8: 429.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  83. 83.↵
    2. Holland EC,
    3. Celestino J,
    4. Dai C,
    5. Schaefer L,
    6. Sawaya RE,
    7. Fuller GN.
    Combined activation of Ras and Akt in neural progenitors induces glioblastoma formation in mice. Nat Genet. 2000; 25: 55–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  84. 84.↵
    2. Rahme GJ,
    3. Luikart BW,
    4. Cheng C,
    5. Israel MA.
    A recombinant lentiviral PDGF-driven mouse model of proneural glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol. 2018; 20: 332–42.
    OpenUrl
  85. 85.↵
    2. Golebiewska A,
    3. Hau AC,
    4. Oudin A,
    5. Stieber D,
    6. Yabo YA,
    7. Baus V, et al.
    Patient-derived organoids and orthotopic xenografts of primary and recurrent gliomas represent relevant patient avatars for precision oncology. Acta Neuropathol. 2020; 140: 919–49.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  86. 86.↵
    2. Goranci-Buzhala G,
    3. Mariappan A,
    4. Gabriel E,
    5. Ramani A,
    6. Ricci-Vitiani L,
    7. Buccarelli M, et al.
    Rapid and efficient invasion assay of glioblastoma in human brain organoids. Cell Rep. 2020; 31: 107738.
  87. 87.↵
    2. Tang M,
    3. Xie Q,
    4. Gimple RC,
    5. Zhong Z,
    6. Tam T,
    7. Tian J, et al.
    Three-dimensional bioprinted glioblastoma microenvironments model cellular dependencies and immune interactions. Cell Res. 2020; 30: 833–53.
    OpenUrl
Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Citation Tools

Jump to section

Keywords