Karbhari, Nishika

Abstract Circumscribed meningeal melanocytic neoplasms (CMMNs) represent a spectrum of rare central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Knowledge of their clinical behavior and molecular correlates remains limited. In this single‐institution retrospective study, we analyzed 31 patients (14 male, 17 female; median age, 59 years) diagnosed with CMMN between 2004 and 2025. In this patient cohort, based on the current World Health Organization Central Nervous System Tumor Classification (WHO CNS5) criteria, the majority of cases (18, 58.1%) fell into the intermediate‐grade melanocytic tumor (IMT) category based on histology, with either increased mitotic activity, CNS invasion, or both; 7 (22.6%) were melanocytomas, 5 (16.1%) melanomas, and 1 (3.2%) indeterminate case because of limited tissue. By next‐generation sequencing, mutations were identified in GNAQ/GNA11 in 21/24 cases, BAP1 in 5/23 (2 IMT, 3 melanoma), EIF1AX in 9/21 (1 melanocytoma, 8 IMT), and SF3B1 in 3/23 (2 IMT, 1 melanoma). Primary sites were spinal (20), posterior fossa (6), and supratentorial (5). During follow‐up, progression was observed in 5/6 melanocytomas, 9/13 IMTs, and 4/5 melanomas, suggesting a high frequency of progression across all groups. Two‐year progression‐free survival was 83.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 53.5%–100.0%) for melanocytoma, 55.9% (95% CI, 26.7%–85.2%) for IMT, and 25.0% (95% CI, 0.0%–67.4%) for melanoma. Five‐year overall survival (OS) was 80.0% (95% CI, 44.9%–100.0%) for melanocytoma, 65.3% (95% CI, 37.0%–93.6%) for IMT, and 0.0% for melanoma. OS was significantly worse in melanoma compared with melanocytoma ( p = 0.002). BAP1 mutation correlated with worse OS (hazard ratio 8.73, p = 0.006). Upfront maximal safe resection appeared to be associated with improved outcomes in selected patients, whereas radiotherapy and systemic therapy did not demonstrate clear additional benefit in this cohort. In summary, our study shows that all CMMNs, irrespective of grade, have a high propensity to recur and melanoma histology and BAP1 mutation are associated with significantly worse OS.

Abstract BACKGROUND Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi), initially developed for BRCA-mutant tumors, are now being explored in gliomas to target DNA repair defects. In this retrospective analysis, we report our institutional experience using PARPi with temozolomide for glioma treatment. METHODS The medical record was retrospectively reviewed at our institution for neuro-oncology patients treated with off-label PARPi combined with temozolomide for > 1 month between 1/1/2010 and 5/1/2025. RESULTS Nineteen patients (median age 45, 47% female) were included. PARPi included olaparib (n = 18) and niraparib (n = 1). Tumor types were glioblastoma (GBM, n = 7), Grade 4 IDH-mutant astrocytoma (G4A, n = 4), Grade 3 astrocytoma (G3A, n = 2), Grade 3 oligodendroglioma (G3O, n = 3), Grade 2 oligodendroglioma (G2O, n = 2), and IDH1-mutant brainstem glioma (BG, n = 1; IDH status determined per CSF 2-hydroxyglutarate without surgically confirmed histologic subtyping). Patients were heavily pre-treated. One patient lost to follow-up was censored at last contact. Patients had KPS ≥ 70 in all but one case (KPS 60) and multiple prior progressions (treatment was initiated at 4th recurrence or higher in 16/19 patients). Median time from drug initiation to progression, drug initiation to death, and overall survival were as follows (months): GBM (3.0, 6.5, 34.9), G4A (1.4, 3.9, 80.3), G3A (3.4, 4.2, 83.3), G3O (3.8, 17.2, 121.2), G2O (3.0, 3.5, 159.9), BG (4, 5.5, 164.8). CONCLUSIONS This retrospective analysis supports the tolerability of combining PARPi with temozolomide in a real-world, heavily pretreated glioma population. Despite limited evidence of durable tumor control, the regimen provided transient disease stability in patients with few remaining options. These findings may inform treatment in compassionate or salvage settings particularly when alkylator treatment is considered, and highlight the need for prospective trials to identify response biomarkers and assess clinical utility.

Abstract BACKGROUND The IDH inhibitor vorasidenib was FDA-approved for treatment of IDH-mutant grade 2 gliomas in August 2024. We evaluated vorasidenib in patients with grade 3 and 4 IDH-mutant gliomas who would not have been eligible for the INDIGO trial. METHODS Retrospective review of patients with grade 3 or 4 IDH-mutant gliomas treated with vorasidenib between 9/1/24 and 5/31/25. Prior treatments, radiographic response, adverse events and seizure control were collected for each patient. RESULTS Thirty-two patients (median age 39.5, 46.9% female) met inclusion criteria. Tumor types included grade 3 oligodendroglioma (11, 34.4%), grade 3 astrocytoma (13, 40.6%) and grade 4 astrocytoma (8, 25%). Thirty patients had contrast-enhancement; 2 patients had non-enhancing tumor. Prior treatments included surgical resection (30, 93.8%), radiation (27, 84.4%), cytotoxic chemotherapy (25, 78.1%), bevacizumab (5, 15.6%), pembrolizumab (3, 9.4%), and ivosidenib (8, 25%). Four patients (12.5%) were naïve to systemic treatment at the time of vorasidenib initiation. Median duration of vorasidenib was 101.5 days (range 18-255) with 19 patients still on vorasidenib at the time of last follow-up. Seventeen patients (53.1%) had stable disease, 11 (34.4%) had progressive disease, 2 (6.3%) did not yet have response assessment, and 2 (6.3%) died. Grade 1 transaminitis occurred in 12 patients with no high grade transaminitis. Two patients developed lymphopenia; both were heavily pre-treated with multiple alkylating agents; no other hematologic toxicity was noted. One patient developed myalgias leading to vorasidenib discontinuation. Nine patients had fatigue, 4 headaches, 2 nausea, 2 decreased appetite. In patients with a history of epilepsy, there were no reported seizures. CONCLUSIONS Vorasidenib was well-tolerated in this heavily pre-treated cohort of grade 3–4 IDH-mutant gliomas, with low-grade transaminitis and fatigue being the most common toxicities. Preliminary results show disease stability in 53.1% of patients after a median of 3.5 months. Conclusions are limited by short-interval follow-up.

Abstract Despite intensive research over the past two decades, all glioblastoma (GBM) Phase 3 drug trials have been negative. The utility of the preclinical studies used to inform development for 10 Phase 3 trials was evaluated by four criteria: 1) drug distribution to the brain, 2) tumor location (flank vs. intracranial), 3) GBM xenograft source (patient-derived (PD) vs. cell line-derived (CD)), and 4) magnitude of survival extension. For the trials evaluated, no preclinical brain:plasma (B/P) data were reported for enzastaurin, cilengitide, nimotuzumab, Depatux-M, or bevacizumab, although IgG typically has a B/P ≈1%. B/P for imatinib was 1-3% and the other four drugs ranged from 25% to 51%. Except for enzastaurin, all drugs were studied in orthotopic tumor survival studies. The best response for each drug compared to relevant control (relative increase in median survival) was 22% (nimotuzumab), 31% (marizomib), 36% (sunitinib CD) / 5% (sunitinib PD), 63% (bevacizumab/temozolomide), 140% (imatinib), 157% (Depatux-M), 220% (veliparib/temozolomide), 300% (cediranib); median survival was not reached for cilengitide. However, only veliparib and sunitinib were studied in orthotopic PD models, and a single CD model (U87 or D54) was used exclusively for four drugs (enzastaurin, nimotuzumab, sunitinib, marizomib). In summary, 6 of 10 drugs had unknown or very poor brain distribution, 8 of 10 drugs were tested exclusively in CD models, which have questionable translational value, and 3 of 10 drugs had nominal activity (<50% survival prolongation) in preclinical survival studies. The stunning lack of clinical progress in GBM is deeply discouraging, but is consistent with underwhelming preclinical testing and the contextual interpretation of those results. Acknowledging multifaceted reasons for failed clinical trials, a more rigorous and critical approach should be used in preclinical studies, coupled with follow-up surgical window of opportunity studies, to identify and promote only the most promising therapies into advanced clinical testing.

Abstract BACKGROUND Access to in-person evaluations is challenging for patients with glioma due to disease-related disability and distance from specialized neuro-oncology centers. Telehealth is an alternative to in-person evaluations, but acceptability of and therapy compliance with this model has not been prospectively evaluated. METHODS In this single-arm non-randomized pragmatic clinical trial, we compared patient satisfaction with telehealth and in-person assessments among patients with glioma undergoing chemotherapy with temozolomide. Participants acted as their own controls, alternating between telehealth and in-person visits. Patient satisfaction with care delivered was evaluated by Press-Ganey surveys with Likert response scales (1-5, 1=very poor, 5=very good). A digital pill diary (DPD) was implemented to track chemotherapy compliance. RESULTS We accrued 30 patients (median age 59, 38% female) between October 2024 and May 2025. Half of the patients (n=15) reported a primary residence greater than 150 miles from our institution. Surveys from 25 participants were reviewed, with 17/25 completing one or more surveys following an in-person visit, and 21/25 completing one or more surveys following a telehealth visit. Overall average Press-Ganey scores were similar between the two visit modalities with high scores (telehealth=4.8; in-person=4.7). Median scores for specific modalities were similarly highly rated: likelihood of recommending practice to others (telehealth=5.0; in-person=5.0), concern the care provider showed (telehealth=5.0, in-person=4.7), provider’s discussion of treatment options (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0), provider effort to include patients in decision-making (telehealth=5.0, in-person=5.0). DPDs used to monitor treatment compliance indicated adherence to all prescribed doses of temozolomide in 75/79 cycles; the other 4 (of 79) treatment cycles were halted per provider instructions. CONCLUSION This interim assessment demonstrates feasibility of treating patients with similar patient satisfaction of care delivered between telehealth and in-person visits. The DPD was effective in tracking chemotherapy administration. Additional results including visit type preference and acute care utilization data are maturing.

Abstract BACKGROUND Pembrolizumab elicits durable responses in many solid tumors, yet activity in gliomas has been limited. Lymphopenia has been reported in association with reduced survival and a shorter time to progression on checkpoint inhibition in other solid tumors. We evaluated whether low absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) is related to worse outcomes in pembrolizumab-treated patients with gliomas. METHODS In this single-center retrospective study, we identified adults with gliomas who received ≥1 dose of pembrolizumab and had available lymphocyte counts at our center between 05/01/2018 and 1/31/2025. Patients’ demographics, dexamethasone use, baseline ALC (before initiation of pembrolizumab), and clinical outcomes were collected. Overall Survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan–Meier analysis from the date of starting pembrolizumab to the date of death. RESULTS Ninety patients met eligibility criteria (glioblastoma [GBM] n = 44, astrocytoma n = 20, oligodendroglioma n = 13, meningioma n = 8, other n = 5); 62% were male and 31% (n = 28) harbored IDH-mutant tumors. Across all histological subtypes, baseline ALC<750 cells/mm³ was associated with significantly shorter OS compared to baseline ALC≥750 cells/mm³ (3.7 vs 7.7 months, P = 0.0063) with similar dexamethasone exposure (63% vs 52%). In the recurrent GBM subgroup (n = 43; MGMT-methylated 26%), ALC≥750 cells/mm³ correlated with longer OS (8.5 vs 3.4 months, P = 0.0065) with a slightly lower proportion of patients on dexamethasone in high ALC group (52% vs 75%). Conversely, among patients with IDH-mutant gliomas (n = 28), no significant difference in OS was observed based on ALC levels (7.8 vs. 7.3 months, P = 0.58) with similar dexamethasone use (57% and 43% in high and low ALC groups, respectively). CONCLUSION Baseline lymphopenia preceding pembrolizumab treatment is associated with shorter OS in patients with GBM, but not in IDH-mutant gliomas. These associations require further validation in additional patient cohorts.

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.

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 .

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.

Introduction: Glioblastoma is a fatal intracranial neoplasm that is refractory to treatment, with inevitable disease recurrence and progression to death. Marine-derived compounds, including those found in nutraceutical products, may provide therapeutic benefit in the setting of glioblastoma. We present two patient cases whose courses demonstrate a compelling role for marine-derived products in the management of glioblastoma. Cases: Case 1 describes a patient with MGMT promoter unmethylated glioblastoma who went on to complete standard of care chemoradiation along with concurrent use of a majority sea cucumber (MSC) blend known as SeaCare® (SeaCare, Torrington, CT, USA). Her survival of over 2 years significantly exceeds the recognized median survival time of glioblastoma. Case 2 describes a patient with a complicated course who experienced dramatic improvement after the initiation of the MSC blend, with an exceptional survival time of over 4 years post-diagnosis. Discussion: The mechanisms of marine-derived products that underlie these dramatic clinical effects are likely multifaceted but may hinge on the modification of the tumor immune microenvironment and suppression of tumorigenic effects. Specifically, the change in tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) within the tumor microenvironment is central to this complex interplay. Conclusions: Ultimately, the use of marine products in the treatment of glioblastoma may present a novel and promising therapeutic strategy that warrants further investigation.