Back to Authors

Schreck, Karisa C.

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7181-3269

Mayo Clinic

Johns Hopkins University

Citations 3

BRAF-altered glioma in adults and children: A Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) and European Society for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) consensus review on clinical management and future directions
Schreck, Karisa C, Fuente, Macarena I de la, Fat, Mary Jane Lim, Maas, S L, Levy, Jean M Mulcahy, Lombardi, G , Perrault, Sébastien, Petritsch, Claudia , Aldape, Kenneth, Chang, Susan M, Holdhoff, Matthias, Kazda, Tomas, Rhun, Emilie Le, Minniti, Giuseppe, Mueller, Sabine, Preusser, M, Smits, Marion, Weller, Michael, Wen, Patrick Y, Bent, Martin van den, Geurts, Marjolein, Lombardi, Giuseppe , Maas, Sybren L. N. , Schreck, Karisa C. , Levy, Jean M. Mulcahy , Chang, Susan M. , Duerinck, Johnny , Holdhoff, Matthias , Kazda, Tomáš , Rhun, Émilie Le , Minniti, Giuseppe , Mishra, Mark V. , Mueller, Sabine , Padovan, Marta , Preusser, Matthias , Smits, Marion , Weller, Michael , Bent, Martin J. van den , Geurts, Marjolein

Neuro-Oncology | June 5, 2026 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1093/neuonc/noag135 Get It

Abstract Oncogenic BRAF alterations occur in a subset of diffuse gliomas across WHO grades and are increasingly identified through modern molecular diagnostics. In addition to standard glioma therapies, targeted treatments are available for patients with BRAF-altered glioma supported by variable evidence spanning randomized trials, single-arm studies, and real-world evidence. This joint consensus review from the Society for Neuro-Oncology (SNO) and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) synthesizes current knowledge on the diagnosis and management of BRAF-altered gliomas across age groups, tumor grades, and lines of therapy. Particular emphasis is placed on expert consensus in clinical scenarios where high-quality trial evidence remains limited. The review addresses rationale testing for BRAF alterations, selection, and monitoring of targeted therapies, management of treatment-related toxicities, approaches to resistance, and priorities for future research. It aims to provide practical, evidence-based guidance for clinicians while highlighting gaps to inform prospective studies.
Evaluating “brain permeability”: A critical issue for the development of therapeutic agents for primary and metastatic brain tumors
Grossman, Stuart A. , Barone, Amy , Strowd, Roy E, Rais, Rana , Duke, Elizabeth , Wearne, Emily , Price, Lauren , Hendrix, C. W., Schreck, Karisa C. , Lesser, Glenn J. , Sanai, Nader , Blakeley, Jaishri O, Nabors, Burt L., Sarkaria, Jann N, Peereboom, David, Schiff, D., Prowell, Tatiana M. , Elmquist, William F. , Hendrix, Craig W. , Strowd, Roy E. , Strowd, Roy E , Price, Lauren S L , Hendrix, Craig , Lesser, Glenn , Romo, Carlos , Portnow, Jana , Blakeley, Jaishri O , Kamson, David O , Nabors, Louis Burt , Searson, Peter C , Sarkaria, Jann N , Peereboom, David M , Schiff, David , Prowell, Tatiana M , Grossman, Stuart A , Romo, Carlos G. , Blakeley, Jaishri O. , Kamson, David , Nabors, Burt , Sarkaria, Jann N. , Peereboom, David M.

Neuro-Oncology | March 7, 2026 | Volume: 28 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 1599-1611

10.1093/neuonc/noag051 Get It

Abstract Current assessments of brain permeability rely predominantly on drug delivery to contrast-enhancing tumor regions. However, substantial portions of central nervous system (CNS) tumors reside within non-enhancing brain (NEB), where drug concentrations frequently remain subtherapeutic. This collaborative Adult Brain Tumor Consortium and Food and Drug Administration workshop aimed to identify criteria for defining NEB permeability to accomplish 2 critical objectives: (1) allocate clinical trial resources toward agents achieving therapeutic NEB concentrations and (2) minimize systemic toxicity when CNS benefit is improbable. The workshop systematically evaluated permeability assessment modalities, including drug physicochemical properties, in vitro blood-brain barrier models, and penetration into cerebrospinal fluid and normal rodent brain. Methodological approaches to determine requisite NEB drug concentrations and approaches to measuring NEB pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were examined. This culminated in developing the Non-Enhancing Brain Permeability Index (NEBPI), which assigns therapeutic agents to 3 categories: sufficiently permeable, insufficiently permeable, or impermeable. The NEBPI provides a standardized framework to assist investigators and regulatory agencies to evaluate NEB penetration before human efficacy studies are initiated for agents that require direct tumor contact. Assessing NEB drug penetration is critical to improving outcomes in CNS tumors and reducing the incidence of brain metastases in systemic malignancies.
Optimizing eligibility criteria and clinical trial conduct to enhance clinical trial participation for primary brain tumor patients
Lee, Eudocia Q. , Weller, Michael , Sul, Joohee, Bagley, Stephen , Sahebjam, Solmaz , Bent, Martin J. van den , Ahluwalia, Manmeet S. , Campian, Jian , Holdhoff, Matthias , Lesser, Glenn J. , Lieberman, Frank S. , Peñas-Prado, Marta , Schreck, Karisa C. , Vogelbaum, Michael A. , Walbert, Tobias , Chang, Susan M. , Reardon, David A. , Wen, Patrick Y. , Weller, Michael , van den Bent, Martin J , Ahluwalia, Manmeet S , Galanis, Evanthia , Gilbert, Mark R. , Mehta, Minesh P. , Strowd, Roy E. , Chang, Susan Marina , Nabors, Burt , Grossman, Stuart A. , Wen, Patrick Yung

Neuro-Oncology | January 23, 2020 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1093/neuonc/noaa015 Get It

AbstractBuilding on an initiative to enhance clinical trial participation involving the Society for Neuro-Oncology, the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Working Group, patient advocacy groups, clinical trial cooperative groups, and other partners, we evaluate the impact of eligibility criteria and trial conduct on neuro-oncology clinical trial participation. Clinical trials often carry forward eligibility criteria from prior studies that may be overly restrictive and unnecessary and needlessly limit patient accrual. Inclusion and exclusion criteria should be evaluated based on the goals and design of the study and whether they impact patient safety and/or treatment efficacy. In addition, we evaluate clinical trial conduct as a barrier to accrual and discuss strategies to minimize such barriers for neuro-oncology trials.