Campian, Jian

Abstract Background High-grade gliomas (HGG) have a poor prognosis despite aggressive treatment. Severe, persistent lymphopenia occurring in HGG patients after concurrent chemoradiation is associated with worse survival. NT-I7, a long-acting interleukin-7 analog, has been shown to increase CD4 and CD8 counts in healthy, septic, and HIV-positive adults. This multi-institutional, NCI-funded dose-escalation trial is the first to evaluate NT-I7 safety and activity in HGG patients with severe treatment-related lymphopenia (TRL) and the effect of co-administered glucocorticoids. Methods Eligible HGG patients had CD4 counts <300 cells/mm3 after 5 weeks of standard chemoradiation and were receiving either ≤0.75 or ≥4 mg/day of dexamethasone. Patients received a single intramuscular dose of NT-I7 (60 or 360 µg/kg) post-chemoradiation, followed by safety evaluation and multi-parameter, longitudinal monitoring of lymphocyte populations and immunologic function. Results NT-I7 was well tolerated in all 12 patients (median age 64; median CD4 count 161 cells/mm³) before the study closed prematurely. Absolute lymphocyte counts doubled in 83% (10/12; 95% CI: 51.6%-97.9%) of patients, and CD4 counts doubled in 42% (5/12; 95% CI: 15.2%-72.3%) of patients. Glucocorticoid use did not significantly affect CD4 or lymphocyte increases. Correlative immune profiling revealed increased Ki67 expression in CD4 (P < .005) and CD8 (P < .05) after one week, along with the expansion of CD4 and CD8 T-cell subsets and CD56 + natural killer cells. Conclusions NT-I7 is well tolerated and effectively increases lymphocyte and CD4 counts in severe TRL patients, regardless of glucocorticoid use, suggesting its potential to mitigate TRL and improve outcomes in HGG.

Background: High-grade gliomas (HGGs), particularly glioblastoma (GBM), are associated with exceptionally high mortality and inevitable recurrence. In considering novel treatment options for these devastating diseases, immunotherapies represent promising candidates. Immunotherapies have demonstrated efficacy for several advanced tumors outside the central nervous system, highlighting a potential role for these agents in treating HGGs. However, multiple challenges to immunotherapy efficacy have tempered therapeutic benefit in practice, including local and systemic immunosuppression, intratumoral heterogeneity, and various mechanisms of intrinsic and acquired resistance. In the past 30 years, diverse immunotherapeutic subclasses have been assessed for benefit against HGGs. Methods: We performed a PubMed search for randomized clinical trials performed within the last 30 years evaluating the following immunotherapy agents for high-grade gliomas: immune checkpoint inhibitors, vaccines, oncologic viruses, cytokines, and CAR T-cells. The present review offers a critical analysis of key pre-clinical and clinical trials that have shaped the immunotherapy landscape for high-grade gliomas over the past two decades. Results/Conclusions: Across the different immunotherapeutic methods and modalities explored thus far, a recurring theme emerges: while therapeutic strategies with a compelling conceptual basis are continually under development and even demonstrate a benefit in preclinical and early-phase trials, larger and later-phase trials consistently fail to produce concordantly significant outcomes. To date, no large-scale clinical trial has demonstrated a benefit of sufficient consequence to change practice. Continued critical appraisal of the strengths and pitfalls of prior investigative work, optimization of treatment development and delivery, and innovative approaches to combination therapy design will collectively be integral to future therapeutic advancement.

e13893 Background: For individuals with CNS tumors who have experience difficulties with in-person (IP) evaluations due to disease-related neurologic disability or the costs associated with travel, telehealth (TH) offers a convenient and timely alternative for accessing specialized neuro-oncology care. We report our institution’s experience with telehealth utilization in neuro-oncology. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who had at least one neuro-oncology telehealth visit between August 2021 and May 2024 at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. Reasons for visits, outcomes of appointments, acute care utilization following visits was reviewed. Results: A total of 660 patients who had at least one TH visit between August 2021 and May 2024 were included in the analysis. Median age was 56 (range 20-98), 49% were female, and 92% were white. Most patients resided in the US Midwest (84%), followed by the South (8%), West (5%), Northeast (1%), and US Territories (< 1%). Less than two percent were international patients. The most common primary visit diagnosis was glioblastoma (GBM, 26%), followed by astrocytoma, IDH-mutant (17%), meningioma (17%), oligodendroglioma, IDH-mutant, 1p/19q codeleted (7%). Of 6657 visits reviewed, 2745 (41%) were conducted via TH. Telehealth visits served various purposes, including consultation for newly diagnosed tumors or abnormal MRIs (n = 26), second opinion for an established tumor diagnosis (n = 119), discussion about clinical trial participation (n = 108), tumor-related treatment discussions (n = 719), chemotherapy education (n = 161), new symptom assessment (n = 117), symptom management (n = 366), and tumor surveillance (n = 1694). Outcomes from telehealth visits included enrollment in clinical trials (n = 28), proceeding with tumor-directed surgery (n = 46), initiation of radiation therapy (n = 88), starting or changing systemic therapy (n = 377), continuing existing systemic therapy (n = 932), transition to supportive care (n = 45), tumor diagnostic workup (n = 28), continuation of tumor surveillance (n = 1254). Acute care utilization, defined as an emergency department visit or hospitalization within one month of an appointment, was the same following telehealth visits compared to in-person visits (6.9% for IP vs 5% for TH, p = 0.507). Conclusions: Our findings demonstrate that telehealth can effectively support all aspects of neuro-oncology care, ranging from initial diagnosis discussions to systemic therapy management and transitions to supportive care. Telehealth offers a convenient and accessible method of care delivery option for patients faced with neurologic illness. Additionally, THs do not lead to increased acute care utilization compared to IP evaluations.

e13891 Background: Most patients with central nervous system (CNS) malignancy develop cognitive impairment, fatigue, and mood-related symptoms that are impacted by cancer and treatment, including radiation therapy. We currently have limited therapies to mitigate neurocognitive toxicity. It is important to accurately assess neurocognitive function and symptom burden when working to establish therapeutics. The objective of this trial is to assess the effectiveness of therapies aimed at improving neurocognitive function and quality of life by leveraging a decentralized approach incorporating an established digital neurocognitive assessment tool and development of a remote symptom collection/medication log to improve capture of longitudinal neurocognitive data. Methods: This is an open-label decentralized clinical trial (NCT06377696) that randomizes patients who have received intracranial radiation for primary and secondary brain tumors in a 1:1 allocation to health promotion with a wearable device +/- metformin (targeting radiation-related toxicity). Remote symptom collection is reported through digital patient surveys. Medication adherence is being monitored through a digital medication log developed for the study. Remote neurologic examination is performed by clinical neuro-oncologists at telehealth visits. Participants perform serial remote cognitive assessments with an established digital neurocognitive testing platform – Mayo Test Drive (MTD). Cognitive assessments and symptom surveys were designed to be completed on a smartphone, tablet, or computer device. Results: The study started enrollment on May 31, 2024. As of January 27, 2025, 54 of 100 planned participants have enrolled (27 on each arm). 51 participants remain active on trial; 3 withdrew from trial participation (2 prior to treatment, 1 after treatment). The overall completion rate for a quality-of-life questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) is 85.0%, and each dose of metformin logged is 78.5%. The overall completion rate for virtual neurologic examination and short test of mental status is 94.7%. For MTD, the overall completion rate is 97.9%. The average MTD session duration was 16 minutes. Most participants completed MTD testing using a smartphone (90.5%) at home (89.1%). Conclusions: These results provide preliminary support that a decentralized trial assessing neurocognitive outcomes is feasible in patients with CNS malignancy. The completion rates of questionnaires and objective cognitive evaluation are comparable or higher than expected with historic norms. Final study results will provide real-world cognitive and quality-of-life data for patients with CNS tumors while providing preliminary data on the effectiveness of device-based health promotion +/- metformin for treatment related cognitive decline. Clinical trial information: NCT06377696 .

2053 Background: Recurrent gliomas are highly aggressive brain tumors, often resistant to conventional treatments. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have emerged as promising therapeutic agents by targeting tumor cells through immune modulation. However, clinical trials have demonstrated limited efficacy in recurrent gliomas. This study aimed to identify potential factors influencing treatment efficacy of ICIs in recurrent gliomas. Methods: This retrospective study, conducted across the Mayo Clinic following IRB approval, included patients ≥ 18 years diagnosed with adult-type diffuse gliomas. Eligible patients received treatment with at least 2 cycles of ICI for recurrent glioma between 2014 – 2024. Patients treated with ICIs as initial therapy were excluded. Clinical, radiographic, histological, and molecular data were analyzed, with missing information excluded. Responders to ICI were defined as patients who did not meet iRANO criteria for progressive disease based on first radiographic response assessment (and confirmatory follow up imaging as needed for possible pseudo-progression). Survival outcomes [Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS)] and potential predictive variables were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox-Regression Analyses. Results: 67 patients met eligibility criteria (mean age: 45.1 ± 15.0 years; 64.2% male; 94% white). 64 (95.5%) patients received Pembrolizumab, 2 (3%) Nivolumab, and 1(1.5%) combined Ipilimumab/Nivolumab, with a median treatment duration of 2.77 (1.39 – 19.4) months. All had prior alkylating chemotherapy. The OS (from diagnosis) for IDH wildtype (IDH-WT, n = 36), IDH mutant, 1p/19q non-co-deleted (IDH-MUT, n = 17) and IDH mutant, 1p/19q co-deleted (OLIGO, n = 14) gliomas were 3.1, 9.2, and 18.6 years, respectively. The median PFS from time of ICI was 2.23 (0.69 – 27.3) months. 24 (36.9%) patients were identified as Responders. PFS was not significantly different between patients with IDH-MUT and IDH-WT gliomas (2.30 vs 2.07 months, p = 0.593). However, patients with OLIGO gliomas had a significantly higher PFS compared to IDH-WT gliomas (5.16 vs 2.07 months, p = 0.021). The proportion of responders was greatest in OLIGO gliomas, however, did not reach statistical significance (IDH-WT, 31.4%; IDH-MUT, 29.4%; OLIGO, 61.5%, p = 0.120). Overall PFS was not impacted by patient age, sex, and extent of initial resection. When analyses were limited to Responders, the PFS for IDH-WT, IDH-MUT and OLIGO gliomas were 5.75, 7.01 and 10.8 months, respectively ( p = 0.434). Conclusions: Patients with recurrent OLIGO gliomas may have a longer PFS with ICI therapy compared with recurrent IDH-WT and IDH-MUT gliomas. However, there is significant variability in ICI treatment efficacy between patients. Further molecular profiling is in progress to evaluate additional predictive biomarkers of response.

TPS2099 Background: Gliomas are the most common primary central nervous system (CNS) malignancy in adults, accounting for 26.3% of all brain tumors. Care at high volume centers is associated with an overall survival benefit, but access to in-person evaluations can be challenging due to disease-related neurological disability and loss of income. Telehealth represents a convenient and efficient alternative to in-person evaluations, but acceptability and comparative safety of this care delivery modality has not been prospectively evaluated among glioma patients undergoing chemotherapy. Methods: This single-arm non-randomized pragmatic clinical trial evaluates patient satisfaction with, and safety of video-enabled telehealth assessments compared to in-person evaluations for patients with glioma undergoing temozolomide chemotherapy. The study includes adult patients with a diagnosis of glioma requiring adjuvant temozolomide chemotherapy. Participants act as their own controls, alternating between in-person and telehealth assessments while undergoing chemotherapy dosed per standard of care. Monitoring labs are completed locally and transmitted electronically. For participants without access to Wi-Fi or a device (e.g. mobile phone or computer), cellular-enabled tablet devices are provided to facilitate appointments and completion of electronic study components. All participants who travel to in-person appointments are reimbursed for travel expenses. The primary outcome measure is patient satisfaction with care delivered, as measured by institutional Press-Ganey survey scores obtained following telehealth and in-person assessments. A key secondary outcome measure is completion rate of planned oral chemotherapy, tracked using a digital pill diary incorporated into our institutional electronic health record. The digital diary allows real-time tracking of chemotherapy adherence and adverse events experienced by participants. Other secondary outcomes include acute care utilization days following telehealth and in-person visits (defined as emergency department evaluations and days of inpatient stay), neurologic disability as measured by the Neurologic Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (NANO) scale, and disease related quality of life measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30. All participant surveys are self-reported and completed electronically. This decentralized pragmatic clinical trial provides unprecedented, prospective real-world data on utilization of telehealth services compared to in-person visits for patients undergoing chemotherapy for glioma. We expect the data generated to inform the design and conduct of future decentralized interventional neuro-oncology trials. NCT06625047 opened for enrollment in October 2024, 16 of 30 intended participants were accrued as of January 2025. Clinical trial information: NCT06625047 .

TPS2092 Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary brain malignancy in adults. GBM is universally recurrent and associated with dismal outcomes. Re-irradiation (reRT) is ideal for evaluating combination therapy for recurrent GBM (rGBM) due to its multifactorial mechanism of action, including downstream immunomodulatory activity. RT (especially multi-fraction) increases immunogenicity in preclinical models by promoting immune activation, immune migration, and antigen uptake. Additionally, a recent study demonstrated enhanced PD-L1 expression in the glioma tumor microenvironment (TME) following RT, and combining stereotactic RT with a PD-1 inhibitor improved survival in murine models. Retifanlimab is a humanized monoclonal anti-PD1 IgG4 antibody that received FDA approval for adults with metastatic or recurrent locally advanced Merkel cell carcinoma. Bevacizumab, an anti-VEGF antibody, is a treatment for radiation necrosis/cerebral edema with less immune suppression than corticosteroids. In a previous Phase 2 study, hypofractionated RT (HFRT), retifanlimab, and bevacizumab was associated with a 9-month overall survival (OS) rate of 71.4%. To demonstrate the efficacy of this regimen compared to HFRT and bevacizumab, we have designed a new randomized controlled Phase 2 trial. We hypothesize that combination reRT with retifanlimab will produce a more robust anti-tumor immune response and improve OS compared to reRT without retifanlimab. Methods: This is a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled Phase 2 study of retifanlimab, bevacizumab, and HFRT for adult patients with rGBM. Patients are randomized 1:1 to the experimental (bevacizumab + retifanlimab + HFRT) or control cohort (bevacizumab + HFRT). Key eligibility criteria include age ≥ 18 years, Karnofsky performance status ≥ 60, ≥ 4 months since administration of any prior bevacizumab, and dexamethasone dose ≤ 4 mg at the time of randomization. The primary endpoint is 9-month OS. Secondary endpoints include OS, progression-free survival, objective response rate, neurologic assessment by NANO criteria, and adverse events profile. Protocol treatment will continue up to two years, or until progression or intolerable toxicity. Survival follow up will continue every two months, up to four years. Seven of the planned 94 patients have been enrolled as of submission on 1/28/25. Clinical trial #: NCT06160206. Funding provided by Incyte. Clinical trial information: NCT06160206 .

High-grade gliomas, like glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), are the most common malignant brain tumors in adults and are treated with the chemotherapy drug temozolomide (TMZ). In humans, a retrospective analysis of patients’ overall survival suggests that morning dosing may confer a benefit over evening dosing. Circadian variation in O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) gene expression and promoter methylation has been implicated in increased tumor cell sensitivity to TMZ in the morning. Although patient compliance with timed oral administration of TMZ was high in a prospective trial, it is not known whether differences in daily sleep patterns of patients impact the biological time of drug administration or overall survival. Using wrist actigraphy collected from 10 high-grade glioma patients, we quantified the moment of oral TMZ delivery in terms of wall clock time and internal biological time during the months after surgical tumor resection. We found that variation of daily rhythms within and between individuals caused dosing times to vary more in their internal biological time than wall clock time so that, for example, some doses taken by patients assigned for the evening (2000 h) were closer to the patient’s internal biological morning. We conclude that wrist actigraphy provides a reliable and non-invasive estimate of personal circadian time that could improve efficacy and precision of TMZ delivery. These findings may inform personalized circadian medicine and optimized times for TMZ delivery in the clinic.

Over the past several decades, viral vector-based vaccines have emerged as some of the most versatile and potent platforms in modern vaccinology. Their capacity to deliver genetic material encoding target antigens directly into host cells enables strong cellular and humoral immune responses, often superior to what traditional inactivated or subunit vaccines can achieve. This has accelerated their application to a wide array of pathogens and disease targets, from well-established threats like HIV and malaria to emerging infections such as Ebola, Zika, and SARS-CoV-2. The COVID-19 pandemic further highlighted the agility of viral vector platforms, with several adenovirus-based vaccines quickly authorized and deployed on a global scale. Despite these advances, significant challenges remain. One major hurdle is pre-existing immunity against commonly used vector backbones, which can blunt vaccine immunogenicity. Rare but serious adverse events, including vector-associated inflammatory responses and conditions like vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT), have raised important safety considerations. Additionally, scaling up manufacturing, ensuring consistency in large-scale production, meeting rigorous regulatory standards, and maintaining equitable global access to these vaccines present profound logistical and ethical dilemmas. In response to these challenges, the field is evolving rapidly. Sophisticated engineering strategies, such as integrase-defective lentiviral vectors, insect-specific flaviviruses, chimeric capsids to evade neutralizing antibodies, and plug-and-play self-amplifying RNA approaches, seek to bolster safety, enhance immunogenicity, circumvent pre-existing immunity, and streamline production. Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and prior outbreaks are guiding the development of platform-based approaches designed for rapid deployment during future public health emergencies. This review provides an exhaustive, in-depth examination of the historical evolution, immunobiological principles, current platforms, manufacturing complexities, regulatory frameworks, known safety issues, and future directions for viral vector-based vaccines.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive primary brain tumor in adults, characterized by rapid growth, invasive infiltration into surrounding brain tissue, and resistance to conventional therapies. Despite advancements in surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, median survival remains approximately 15 months, underscoring the urgent need for innovative treatments. Key considerations informing treatment development include oncogenic genetic and epigenetic alterations that may dually serve as therapeutic targets and facilitate treatment resistance. Various immunotherapeutic strategies have been explored and continue to be refined for their anti-tumor potential. Technical aspects of drug delivery and blood–brain barrier (BBB) penetration have been addressed through novel vehicles and techniques including the incorporation of nanotechnology. Molecular profiling has emerged as an important tool to individualize treatment where applicable, and to identify patient populations with the most drug sensitivity. The goal of this review is to describe the spectrum of potential GBM therapeutic targets, and to provide an overview of key trial outcomes. Altogether, the progress of clinical and preclinical work must be critically evaluated in order to develop therapies for GBM with the strongest therapeutic efficacy.