A Systematic Review of Glioblastoma-Targeted Therapies in Phases II, III, IV Clinical Trials.

1. Introduction

Since 1926, different classifications of brain tumors have been proposed, based mainly on histological and malignancy criteria [ 1 ]. Increasing knowledge on glioma molecular characteristics enabled the proposition of a new classification in 2016. Figure 1 recapitulates the main steps of the modern classification of gliomas. Glioblastoma (GBM) is a high-grade glioma (grade IV), the most aggressive and the most frequent glioma. In the 2016 classification, GBMs are divided into three groups according to the status of the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) gene: (i) GBMs IDHwt [this group represents 90% of GBMs and corresponds to primary GBMs], (ii) mutated IDH GBMs [this group represents 10% of GBMs, corresponds to secondary GBMs, occurs in young patients and has a better prognostic], (iii) Not otherwise specified (NOS) GBMs [status could not be evaluated]. When histological data suggest GBM and immunohistochemical analysis of IDHmut is negative, sequencing is recommended. Sequencing is no longer recommended after the age of 55 [ 2 ]. Inhibitors of the mutated IDH proteins are currently evaluated in GBM in Phase I clinical trials ( NCT02073994 , NCT02273739 ). They will thus not be further described in this review.

The standard treatment of GBMs is based on surgical resection followed by radiotherapy (RT) and concomitant chemotherapy for 6 weeks. The area around the tumor is irradiated with 2 Gy per day, five days per week for a total dose of 60 Gy. The chemotherapy used is Temozolomide (TMZ) at 75 mg/m 2 per day. After this radiochemotherapy, TMZ treatment is pursued alone every four weeks at 150–200 mg/m 2 per day for 5 consecutive days [ 3 ]. TMZ is an alkylating agent that causes DNA damage, cell cycle arrest and cell apoptosis. After oral administration, it is spontaneously hydrolyzed into an highly instable metabolite: 3-methyl-(triazen-1-yl)imidazole-4-carboxamide (MTIC) which reacts with water and releases highly reactive 5-aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide and methyldiazonium. The latter induces methylation at the O6 and N7 positions of a guanine and N3 position of an adenine [ 4 ]. These mutations cause aberrant repairs.

Despite these aggressive treatments, recurrence generally appears within 6–9 months of diagnosis [ 5 ]. In 90% of cases, recurrence is at the edge of the surgical resection. At the appearance of recurrence, patients’ survival is low: 3–6 months [ 6 , 7 ]. No protocol has yet been validated in the management of recurrent GBM. An increase in RT doses does not lead to gain in survival but induces more toxicity, including necrosis of healthy tissue [ 8 ]. Long-term side effects of radiation exposure (among which neurocognitive, psychosocial, endocrine …) are present months or years after treatment and cause problems in rare people who survive as the effect of side-effects increases with time [ 9 ]. Increasing the doses of TMZ is also not more efficient [ 10 ]. In most cases, patients with recurrent GBM are included in clinical trials [ 11 ]. If not, several therapeutic molecules are proposed in the second line, mainly alkylating agents (lomustine, carmustine, fotemustine, carboplatin or procarbazine), microtubule destabilizing agent (vincristine) or antiangiogenic drug (bevacizumab). In absence of standard protocols, the therapeutic strategy is discussed for individual patients. In addition, corticosteroids, anticonvulsants (lacosamide, levetiracetam) and anticoagulants are used in the progression of tumors in the event of intracranial pressure, stroke and deep venous thrombosis epilepsy which occurs in 30% of patients with primary brain tumors [ 12 ].

Different improvements of the current protocol (surgery, radio and chemo therapies) or new strategies based on the particular microenvironment of GBM are increasingly proposed for the effective care of GBM [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. They are briefly mentioned below, but are not the focus of this review. But regardless of strategies, if new treatments allowed for significantly longer survival, they would require more than improving patients’ survival and would minimize long-term side effects to preserve or even improve patients’ quality of life. Late adverse events induced by administered treatments should be addressed [ 18 ].

New strategies are proposed to improve the drug passage through the blood brain barrier (BBB) to achieve a higher therapeutic concentration at the tumor site. Delivering chemotherapy directly into the surgical resection cavity has been proposed. Convection-enhanced delivery (CED) allows chemotherapy to be delivered directly via a catheter in the tissue surrounding the GBM resection cavity. This method increases the volume of distribution but results in unpredictable brain diffusion [ 19 ]. It requires the use of several surgical procedures, leading to a high risk of infection or bleeding. Another strategy consists of administrating the therapy directly at the tumor resection bed [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ]. The use of small lipophilic molecules, able to passively cross the endothelial cells of the BBB, has been tested in combination with standard therapies [ 26 ]. Encapsulating therapies in nanoparticles (10–200 nm) not only increases their solubility but also their release time and stability, while reducing side effects [ 27 , 28 ].

GBM has long been considered as a non-immunogenic tumor due to immunosuppressive adaptation mechanisms, low levels of T cells, dendritic cells and monocytes, decreased IgG and IgA and increased regulatory T cells [ 29 ]. Many different recent reviews focus on novel therapies that harness the immune system, including vaccination, T-cell therapies, immune check-point modulators or adaptive immunotherapy [ 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ].

Targeting tumor cell metabolism is another option. GBM is a hypoxic tumor. Hypoxia plays a role via different hypoxia inducing factors, HIF-1α and HIF-2α [ 34 ]. HIF1-α or factors implicated in the HIFs pathways have been proposed as potential therapeutic targets (as for examples profilin-1 or FIH1) [ 35 , 36 , 37 ]. To date, one Phase II clinical trial has been performed via the inhibitor of HIF2α, PT2385 [ 38 ] ( NCT03216499 ).

Approaches aiming to exploit the metabolic deregulation of tumor cells compared to healthy cells are also increasing and characterization of specific metabolic pathways and metabolites are under intense investigations. Tumor cells have an increased need for glucose compared to healthy cells [ 39 ]. Thus, unlike healthy cells that use mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation to generate ATP, tumor cells use aerobic glycolysis (the “Warburg effect”) [ 40 ]. Based on this concept, reduction of glucose delivery to tumor cells, for example, might influence their growth without influencing normal cells [ 41 ].

Delivery of low-intensity, intermediate-frequency (100–300 kHz) alternating electric fields through the TTFields, Optune ® , Novocure Inc., Portsmouth, NH USA (tumor treatment fields) device has given an alternative strategy to treat GBM. It was approved by the FDA since 2011 for recurrent GBM. Beside antiproliferative and anti-mitotic effects, this device efficacy might also be related to inhibition of migration, invasion, angiogenesis and DNA repair as well as induction of apoptosis and immune effects [ 42 ].

GBMs are characterized by a high molecular and transcriptional inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity [ 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 ]. Developments in multi-omic analysis have led to identification of specific molecular signatures [ 47 , 48 , 49 ] discriminating at least 3 different subclasses (mesenchymal, proneural and classical) but also emphasized a high degree of plasticity between cellular states [ 50 ]. Nevertheless, proposition of targeted therapies has increased these last years based on promising preclinical data which supported the initiation of clinical trials. The aim of this paper is to make an exhaustive review of the different clinical trials (completed or under way) focusing on drugs considered as targeted therapeutics. We have divided the topic in 4 different sections considering drugs inhibiting (1) stem cells and stem cell pathways ( Section 3.1 ), (2) the growth autonomy and migration ( Section 3.2 ), (3) the cell cycle and escape to cell death ( Section 3.3 ) and (4) angiogenesis ( Section 3.4 ). Clinical trials of phases I/II, II, III or IV have been considered but not those of Phase I.

2. Methods

1 April 2020 has been set as the end date for data collection for this study. The flowchart ( Figure 2 ) lists the clinical trials included and excluded from this manuscript. Briefly, 1519 clinical trials were listed on www.clinicaltrials.com (accessed on 1 April 2021) for GBM. Restrictions were applied to keep only clinical trials on adults and phases I/II to IV. 788 clinical trials remained (212 Phase I/II, 488 Phase II, 14 Phase II/III, 70 Phase III & 4 Phase IV). They have then been sub-classified: 257 clinical trials concerning targeted therapies are described in this review, and 531 clinical trials were excluded from this analysis as they are related to (i) RT, irradiation, imaging, classic cytotoxic chemotherapy, surgery, (ii) immunotherapy and vaccine therapy, (iii) other tumors than adult brain tumors, and (iv) other studies, such as withdrawal trials, trials which did not retain enough patients or did not pass phase II, studies on hypoxia, metabolism, anti-depressants, vitamins, hormones, molecules for sleep disorders, or cognitive decline, or drugs for which molecular targets are not clearly identified.

To recapitulate, the 257 clinical trials described in this review cover 20-years of targeted therapies in clinical phases I/II and over, for adult GBM. In addition to GBM, clinical trials including gliomas, high grade gliomas, gliosarcomas, anaplastic astrocytomas, or other brain tumors were retained. Children and young patient brain tumors were excluded.

Twelve tables detail the different clinical trials underway or completed in phases I/II, II, III or IV. The dates mentioned correspond to the start of the clinical trial and the last date of data update on Clinicaltrials.com . In tables, comparative trials with a significant difference between two treatments are highlighted in green and those with a non-significant difference are highlighted in red.

3. Results-Glioblastoma Targeted Therapies

The different GBM biomarkers targeted in phases I/II, II, III and IV and described in the following paragraphs are presented in Figure 3 .

3.1. Targeting Stem Cells and Stem Cell Pathways

The discovery of tumor stem-like cells in solid tumors including glioma [ 59 , 60 ] has changed the landscape of the origin of tumors and their recurrence. These cells also named “GBM initiating cells” (GICs) or “GBM stem cells” (GSC) [ 61 , 62 ] exhibit self-renewal capacity and differentiating ability to form the tumoral mass [ 63 ]. The presence of GICs can be explained by the malignant transformation of neural (non-tumor) stem cells [ 64 ] and/or by the de-differentiation of tumor cells into tumor stem cells following radiotherapy or chemotherapy [ 65 ].

GICs are reported to be more resistant to current treatments than differentiated tumor cells explaining their role in GBM recurrence. This increased resistance can be explained by (1) a quiescent condition, resulting in the ineffectiveness of currently used chemotherapies targeting the cell cycle [ 66 ], (2) High expression of efflux transporters, including MRP1 (Multidrug resistance-associated protein 1) and P-gP (Permeability-GlycoProtein), evicting therapeutic molecules and (3) a defective regulation of apoptosis, with higher expression of survival factors and an ability to adapt to a stressful environment [ 67 ].

The discovery of GICs has generated hope for new therapeutic targets. Eradicating GICs would prevent the initiation of GBM on the periphery of surgical resection and reduce drug resistance and recurrence [ 68 ]. Three strategies are currently being studied to induce apoptosis of GICs: (i) directly targeting the signaling pathways involved in the self-renewal of GICs ( Table 1 ), (ii) inducing their differentiation to sensitize them to therapies, and (iii) inhibiting the pathways that control their resistance.

3.1.1. Targeting the Self-Renewal of GICs

Wnt pathway

The Wnt signaling pathway is involved in the development of neural stem cells [ 72 ]. Aberrant activation of this pathway is involved in their malignant transformation and the development of brain tumors [ 73 ]. The Wnt pathway is also involved in the invasion of GBMs and in the epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Inhibiting the Wnt pathway in GICs leads to the sensitization to TMZ by decreasing the transcription of the transport proteins ABCC2 (MRP2) and ABCC4 (MRP4) [ 74 ]. Two proteins are being investigated in the inhibition of the Wnt pathway: β-catenin and GSK3-β. Diclofenac and Celecoxib, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, respectively, have been shown to inhibit β-catenin and to induce a decrease in the proliferation and migration of GBMs cells [ 75 ]. Tested in Phase II in newly diagnosed GBMs, combined with TMZ, Celecoxib had no survival benefit ( NCT00112502 ) [ 69 ]. Two GSK3-β inhibitors were assayed in preclinical assays on GBMs cells: AR-A01441 and LiCl. These two agents increase the apoptosis of GBMs cells, decrease neurosphere formation and clonogenicity [ 76 ]. Two new selective inhibitors of the Wnt pathway have been synthesized: SEN461 and XAV939 [ 77 ]. In vitro, SEN461 is known to be responsible for the inhibition of GBM cell growth. However no clinical trials have analyzed the efficacy of GSK3-β inhibition [ 78 ] in vivo.

Notch pathway

The Notch pathway is involved in invasion, resistance to anti-VEGF (Vascular endothelial growth factor) therapies and recurrences of GBMs [ 79 , 80 , 81 ]. Activation of this pathway induced by one of its ligands (Delta and Jagged) results in the cleavage of the Notch receptor, allowing the release of the receptor’s intracellular domain and its translocation to the nucleus. Notch’s cleavage is mediated by α and γ-secretase [ 82 ]. It has been suggested that targeting the Notch pathway via inhibition of γ-secretase [ 83 , 84 ] may be useful. Several inhibitors have been tested in vitro, such as MRK003 [ 85 ], GSI (RO4929097) [ 86 ], and dnMAML [ 87 ]. Only the GSI compound (R04929097) is currently being tested in clinics ( Table 1 ). A Phase I study, investigating the toxicity of GSI combined with Bevacizumab, showed encouraging results ( NCT01189240 ). The study is being pursued in a Phase II study [ 88 ].

Hedgehog (SHH) pathway

The SHH signaling pathway is associated with resistance to radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Two main effectors of this pathway exist: SMO (smoothened) and Gli1 (glioma-associated oncogene homolog 1) [ 89 , 90 , 91 ]. SMO inhibition is achievable via two inhibitors, LDE225/Sonidegib and GDC-0449/Vismodegib [ 92 ]. The latter is currently in clinical trials (Phase II) in recurrent GBMs ( NCT00980343 ) and (Phase I/II) in patients with newly diagnosed GBM without O6 methylguanine methyl transferase (MGMT) promoter methylation ( NCT03158389 , referred below as N 2 M 2 (NOA-20), NCT Neuro Master Match the umbrella protocol for Phase I/IIa trials of molecularly matched targeted therapies combined with RT) [ 71 ].

Glasdegib (PF-04449913), another SMO inhibitor that has demonstrated potent and selective inhibition of Hedgehog signaling in vitro, and significant antitumor efficacy in vivo in various solid and hematologic malignancies [ 93 ], is a rational therapeutic agent currently in phase I/II for patients with newly diagnosed GBM, since it inhibits SHH pathway interfering with cancer stem cells and endothelial migration.

Gli1 can be inhibited by the cyclopamine. This steroidal alkaloid induces a decrease in the number of GICs and leads to RT sensitization [ 94 ]. The optimization of cyclopamine, by addition of a glucuronide group, showed a decrease in the tumor mass without having the toxic effects of Gli1 inhibition in astrocytes. This formulation specifically targets tumor cells expressing the beta-glucuronidase enzyme [ 95 ]. Similarly, the formulation of cyclopamine in micelles leads to inhibition of the proliferation and invasion of GBMs cells. This formulation also enhances the cytotoxic effect of TMZ in vivo [ 96 ]. No clinical studies have tested Gli1 inhibition.

STAT3 pathway

The transcription factor STAT3 has an established function in neural stem cell and astrocyte development. It has been found to play dual tumor suppressive and oncogenic roles in glial malignancy depending on the mutational profile of the tumor [ 97 ]. Napabucasin (BBI608), a small molecule that blocks stem cell activity in cancer cells by targeting the STAT3 pathway, is currently in clinical Phase I/II in combination with TMZ in adult patients with recurrent or progressed GBM ( NCT02315534 , Table 1 ).

3.1.2. Inducing the Differentiation of GICs or Inhibiting Pathways That Control Resistance

Very few clinical trials addressing these points are currently developed although new targets are suggested through preclinical explorations.

As previously mentioned, inducing differentiation of GICs would sensitize them to current therapies. Simulating the BMP (Bone Morphogenetic Proteins) pathway is possible by different mechanisms: - Activation of an effector of the BMP pathway, such as BMP-7, blocks the tumor progression in vitro [ 98 ]. - Using mimic effectors of the BMP pathway: the BMP-2 protein mimicking peptide, GBMP1, has been developed to activate this pathway and is currently being studied [ 99 ]. Activation of the BMP pathway is currently tested in clinical trials. A Phase I study is testing the recombinant protein hrBMP4 in recurrent GBMs ( NCT02869243 ).

A new strategy aims to target adenosine, which is involved in GIC chemoresistance [ 100 , 101 ]. Physiologically, adenosine is produced by the degradation of AMP by the factors CD39 and CD73. In GBMs cells, CD73 expression is increased and leads to an increase in adenosine levels [ 102 ]. An increase in the A3AR adenosine receptor has also been observed in GBMs cells. Inhibition of A3AR receptor expression induces a decrease in MRP1 activity and increased sensitivity to chemotherapy [ 102 , 103 ]. CD73/A3AR/MRP1 is a potential therapeutic target, not yet tested in a clinical setting.

Two other adenosine receptors, A1B and A2B, are involved in apoptosis and GIC differentiation. The stimulation of these receptors by agonists helps to sensitize GICs to chemotherapy [ 104 ].

3.2. Targeting Growth Autonomy and Migration

Mutations in RAS/MAPK and PI3K/AKT pathways are reported in 88% of GBMs [ 105 ]. Their hyperactivation plays a central role in cell survival, growth, angiogenesis and cellular metabolism. It is mainly caused by ligand-induced stimulation of tyrosine kinase receptors (RTKs), such as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and platelet-derived growth factor receptors (PDGFR). The different RTKs are activated by the autophosphorylation of their tyrosine kinase domain, which results in the binding and activation of PI3K. The activated PI3K transforms PIP2 into PIP3. The latter binds to AKT and transports it to the plasma membrane where residues are phosphorylated by PDk-1 (on Thr308) and mTORC2 (on Ser473). The activation of AKT leads to a phosphorylation cascade and to the activation of several proteins involved in cell growth, angiogenesis and apoptosis, including mTOR and its partner mTORC1. One of the main inhibitors of this pathway is PTEN, which prevents the transformation of PIP2 into PIP3 [ 106 ].

The RAS/MAPK pathway activation results in the transformation of GDP to GTP, recruitment of RAF to the membrane and its activation, and ERK phosphorylation.

Targeting the different effectors of these pathways would reduce growth autonomy and migration of the GBM.

3.2.1. Inhibition of EGFR and HER2

The ErbB family of proteins contains four receptor tyrosine kinases, structurally related to the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR or HER1). EGFR and HER2 are promising anti-tumor targets for the therapy of GBM ( Table 2 ).

i. Inhibition of EGFR

The EGFR signaling drives cancer development. EGFR aberrant expression and signaling promotes cell growth, survival, invasion and angiogenesis, and regulates tumor metabolism and cell stemness [ 107 ]. EGFR is a clinical target in solid tumors. In GBM, EGFR is amplified and/or mutated in more than 50% of cases [ 108 ]. EGFR and its mutant EGFRvIII are the subjects of extensive research. Several strategies are proposed to inhibit these receptors, including monoclonal antibodies, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and anti-tumor vaccines. The first two classes are described in this review ( Table 2 ).

Monoclonal Antibodies

Cetuximab was the first chimeric antibody proposed to target EGFR. Two Phase II studies did not show any therapeutic benefit in patients with recurrent GBM, either as monotherapy [ 128 ] or in combination with Bevacizumab and Irinotecan [ 110 ].

Panitumumab, the first fully human monoclonal anti-EGFR antibody to enter clinical trials for the treatment of solid tumors, did not prove to be beneficial for GBM patients in a phase II with irinotecan ( NCT01017653 ).

Nimotuzumab, a humanized anti-EGFR antibody, also did not show a gain in overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in patients newly diagnosed and treated with the Stupp protocol (phase III) ( NCT00753246 ) [ 111 ]. These results were disappointing compared to an earlier study that showed that the combination of nimotuzumab with RT resulted in prolonged survival [ 129 ]. Nimotuzumab remains a potential interesting therapy. Indeed, an enhancement of the cytotoxic activity of TMZ in vivo has recently been observed [ 130 ].

GC1118, an anti-EGFR antibody which seems more potent to inhibit EGF binding to EGFR than cetuximab or panitumumab [ 131 ] is currently being tested as monotherapy ( NCT03618667 ).

Sym004 is a synergistic antibody combination containing two recombinant mAbs (futuximab and modotuximab) which binds to different non-overlapping epitopes of EGFR and promotes a rapid EGFR internalization and degradation. Sym004 overcame cetuximab resistance in pre-clinical lung cancer cells [ 132 ]. However, it did not improve OS in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer [ 133 ]. In GBM, it is evaluated as monotherapy ( NCT02540161 ).

Depatuxizumab-mafodotin (ABT-414) is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) composed by an anti-EGFR IgG conjugated to the tubulin inhibitor monomethyl auristatin F [ 134 ]. Depatuximab-mafodotin failed to show survival benefit in newly diagnosed GBM but used in combination with TMZ in EGFR amplified recurrent GBM presented a possible efficiency [ 135 ].

Tyrosine Kinase Activity Inhibitors

Erlotinib is a reversible inhibitor of EGFR tyrosine kinase activity. Two Phase II studies did not show any improvement in OS when combining erlotinib and bevacizumab with TMZ as adjuvant therapy to the Stupp protocol in newly diagnosed patients [ 114 , 136 ]. Similar results were observed in a Phase II study analyzing the efficacy of Erlotinib in combination with sorafenib [ 113 ].

Gefitinib is a reversible and specific inhibitor of EGFR tyrosine kinase activity. Combined with RT in newly diagnosed patients, OS is not improved compared to RT alone [ 124 ], nor is it improved as adjuvant after RT [ 137 ].

Afatinib, an irreversible pan-inhibitor of the ErbB family (including EGFR and EGFRvIII) did not show better results than TMZ in a Phase II study ( NCT00727506 ). Nevertheless, an increase in PFS has been observed in patients with tumors expressing EGFRvIII or with EGFR amplification [ 125 ].

Dacomitinib is a pan-HER family inhibitor (EGFR, HER2, and HER4), approved as first-line treatment of EGFR mutant NSCLC. In GBM, dacomitinib was tested as monotherapy in tumors with EGFR amplification or with the presence of the most common EGFR mutation in GBM EGFRvIII, but it provided minimal benefits [ 126 ].

ii. Inhibition of HER2

HER2 tends to be activated by forming heterodimers with other members of the family or other receptors, since no activating-ligand is known [ 138 ]. HER2 overexpression in breast cancer cells promotes tumor aggressiveness and thus became a therapeutic target combined with a companion test [ 139 ]. HER2-targeted antibody trastuzumab in breast cancer is a successful example of a targeted therapy.

Even though HER2 expression is low in GBM cells, multitargeted TKI of HER2, EGFR and VEGFR family are being tested in clinical trials.

Lapatinib and neratinib are two treatments used in HER2-positive breast cancer. In GBM, Lapatinib, a dual EGFR and HER2 kinase inhibitor, did not provide therapeutic gain in patients with recurrent GBMs in a Phase II study [ 140 ]. This compound together with TMZ and RT in newly diagnosed patients is in clinical trials ( NCT01591577 ) [ 141 ].

3.2.2. Multikinase Inhibitors

Series of multikinase inhibitors have been tested in GBM ( Table 3 and Table 4 ). Usually developed initially against one specific target, they proved able to inhibit different RTKs or non-receptor kinases as their ATP/ADP binding pocket revealed similarities. This characteristic may have advantages as simultaneously inhibiting several kinases may limit drug resistance and compensatory pathways [ 142 ]. Most of them are able to target EGFR, PDGFR, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR) known targets of GBM or even HER2, a target in breast cancers.

Anlotinib inhibits VEGFR, FGFR, PDGFR and c-kit [ 143 ]. Anlotinib is tested in GBM clinical trials as monotherapy or combined with Stupp protocol.

TG02 is an inhibitor of CDKs, JAK2 and FLT3 able to penetrate the blood-brain barrier and is therefore an interesting therapeutic for brain tumors [ 144 ]. TG02 is assayed in GBM in combination with TMZ ( NCT02942264 ).

Tesevatinib is an inhibitor of EGFR, HER2, VEGFR and ephrin B4 [ 145 ], used in polycystic kidney disease and tested as monotherapy in GBM ( NCT02844439 ).

Vandetanib, an inhibitor of EGFR, VEGFR2 and RET, has shown encouraging preclinical results. A 94% decrease in xenograft tumor size was observed when combined with TMZ and compared to TMZ alone [ 146 ]. However, the addition of vandetanib to the Stupp protocol does not prolong the survival of newly diagnosed patients ( NCT00441142 ) [ 147 ].

Other multi-kinase inhibitors, such as cabozantinib, TG02, bosutinib are tested in GBM. All clinical trials, ongoing or completed, are listed in Table 3 .

Inhibition of PDGFR

Similar to EGFR, the PDGF receptor is involved in the activation of the PI3K pathway. It is overexpressed or amplified in 75% of GBMs and thus appears as an interesting therapeutic target [ 150 ]. PDGFR inhibition has been largely explored in GBM. However, no specific PDGFR inhibitor exists and inhibitors are multikinase inhibitors ( Table 4 ).

Imatinib was the first inhibitor targeting PDGFRα/β, BCR-Abl, c-kit. Although Imatinib has not shown clinical benefit in combination with hydroxyurea [ 151 ], it is currently in clinical trials.

Dasatinib, an inhibitor of PDGFRβ, EPHA2, BCR-Abl, c-kit and SRC, was ineffective in a Phase II study in patients with recurrent GBMs [ 152 ].

Tandutinib, an inhibitor of PDGFRβ, FLT3, c-Kit, was tested in a Phase II study with Bevacizumab in patients with recurrent GBMs. The results indicated that this combination does not improve patient survival compared to standard therapy ( NCT00667394 ) [ 153 ]. Another Phase II study showed similar results and was stopped [ 154 ].

Sunitinib, an inhibitor of PDGFRα/β, c-kit, VEGFR1/2/3, FLT3 and RET, also provided disappointing results. A Phase II study did not show any clinical benefit of sunitinib in patients with recurrent GBMs compared to bevacizumab or conventional chemotherapies [ 166 ]. Similar results were observed in newly diagnosed non-operable patients [ 160 ].

Regorafenib inhibits a mutant isoform of BRAF (BRAFV600E), KIT, RET, angiopoietin 1 receptor, PDGFRα, VEGFR1/2/3 and FGFR1/2 [ 167 ]. In GBM, it is evaluated as monotherapy or together with the Stupp protocol.

Crenolanib, an inhibitor PDGFR and FLT3 is evaluated as monotherapy in recurrent GBM with PDGFRα gene amplification ( NCT02626364 ).

Ponatinib (AP24534), a multi-targeted kinase inhibitor of BCR-Abl, PDGFRα, VEGFR2, FGFR1, and Src [ 168 ] but also RET, KIT, and FLT1, is assayed as a monotherapy in recurrent GBM refractory to bevacizumab ( NCT02478164 ).

Leflunomide, an antimetabolite and inhibitor of PDGFR, EGFR and FGFR, is used for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis. In preclinical trials, the active compound inhibited glioma cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo. Now it is evaluated as monotherapy in GBM ( NCT00003293 ).

Besides these multi-target drugs, specific anti PDGFR antibodies have been designed and tested in GBM. A fully human anti-PDGFR antibody (IMC-3G3) blocks ligand binding and receptor activation and is being tested in different solid tumors [ 169 ]. A comparative clinical trial between IMC-3G3 monotherapy and ramucirumab (targeting VEGFR2) monotherapy did not show improved survival ( NCT00895180 ).

Another monoclonal anti-PDGFRα antibody, MEDI-575, was well tolerated but showed limited clinical activity in GBM [ 163 ].

Inhibition of IGFR1 and FGFR

Insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF1R) activation by its ligand IGF1 promotes GBM cells survival through PI3K/AKT pathway activation. Thus, inhibition of IGF1R may be an interesting strategy to suppress GBM progression [ 170 ]. Moreover, IGF1R overexpression in GBM is correlated with a shorter survival and lack of response to TMZ [ 171 ]. A phase I/II clinical trial ( NCT01721577 , Table 4 ), used AXL1717, an antagonist of IGF1R, as a single agent in the treatment of recurrent malignant astrocytomas. Monotherapy was well tolerated. Further optimizations in dose need to be performed [ 165 ].

Mutations of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) are rare in GBM but signalling through FGFRs impacts GBM progression and patient survival [ 172 ]. For example, fusion between FGFR and TACC (transforming acidic coiled-coil containing proteins) enhances tumor-growth and aneuploidy events [ 173 ]. FGFR1,2,3 mutations and fusion are targeted by BGJ398 ( Table 4 ) as monotherapy in a phase-II clinical trial in GBM. However, BGJ398 was out licensed and no more studies were performed.

Inhibition ALK

Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK), a transmembrane receptor tyrosine kinase that belongs to the insulin receptor superfamily, is expressed in about 60% of GBMs and conveys tumorigenic functions. Second-generation ALK inhibitors, such as alectinib, might be novel therapeutic agents against GBMs, as they induced cell death in various human GBM cell lines with lower concentrations than other ALK inhibitors. The specific anti-tumor mechanism of alectinib is not yet described [ 174 ]. Alectinib is currently tested in the N 2 M 2 Phase I/IIa clinical trial ( NCT 03158389 , Table 4 ) [ 71 ].

3.2.3. Inhibition of the PI3K/AKT Pathway

Table 5 describes the clinical trials concerning the inhibition of the PI3K/AKT pathway.

Inhibition of mTOR.

Another target in the PI3K/AKT pathway is mTOR. Several mTOR inhibitors are available and tested in clinical trials.

Among them, temsirolimus, which has recently been shown to target GICs [ 187 ], is the subject of many clinical trials. Two Phase II studies did not show clinical benefits when combined with bevacizumab [ 175 ] or sorafenib ( NCT00800917 ) [ 188 ]. More recently, a Phase II study comparing the combination of temsirolimus with RT in newly diagnosed patients did not show any difference in survival compared to the Stupp protocol ( NCT01019434 ) [ 178 ]. It is actually tested in the N 2 M 2 (NOA-20) clinical trial ( NCT03158389 ) [ 71 ].

Sirolimus (rapamycin) showed promising preclinical results by decreasing 95% tumor mass in vivo [ 189 ]. In addition, it also decreased the proliferation of GICs [ 190 ] and their differentiation [ 191 ]. Despite these results, sirolimus combined with erlotinib is not effective in GBM recurrence ( NCT00672243 , Table 2 ) [ 116 ].

Similar results were observed with everolimus. A Phase II study showed that the administration of everolimus before the Stupp protocol in newly diagnosed patients does not provide any clinical benefit compared to the standard protocol [ 181 ].

ABI-009 is a novel albumin-bound mTOR inhibitor (albumin-bound rapamycin nanoparticles, nab-rapamycin), currently tested as single agent or in combination with standard therapies ( NCT03463265 ) in a Phase II study.

AZD2014, an inhibitor of both mTORC1 and mTORC2, causes radiosensitization of GICs in vitro and in vivo [ 192 ]. This compound is currently in a Phase I clinical trial ( NCT02619864 ).

Inhibition of PI3K

Several PI3K pan-inhibitors have shown promising in vitro and in vivo results, some of which are being tested in clinical trials.

Pictilisib is an isoform inhibitor of PI3K α/δ. Combined with RT and TMZ, it has a pro-apoptotic action, increases autophagy and decreases the migration capacities of GBMs cell lines. In vivo, it increases sensitivity to RT and TMZ [ 193 ]. Pictilisib was compared with pembrolizumab in a phase I/II study but data are not published ( NCT02430363 ).

Buparlisib (BKM120) inhibits cell invasive capacities in vitro and reduces tumor invasion in vivo [ 194 , 195 ]. It is currently being tested in two phase I/II and II studies ( NCT01349660 NCT01339052 ). In the Phase II study ( NCT01339052 ), buparlisib achieved significant brain penetration, but had low efficacy in patients with PI3K-activated recurrent GBM, which was explained by incomplete blockade of PI3K pathway in tumor tissue [ 196 ].

Sonolisib (PX-866), an isoform inhibitor of PI3K α, δ and γ reduces the invasive and angiogenic capacities of GBM cells in vitro. In vivo, decreased tumor growth and increased survival of xenografted mice [ 197 ] were observed. A Phase II study did not show clinical benefit in the case of recurrent GBMs ( NCT01259869 ) [ 183 ].

Paxalisib (GDC-0084) is a brain-penetrant small molecule inhibitor of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. An interim analysis from Kazia Therapeutics reviewed OS of 17.7 months (nine patients) compared to the median OS for patients treated with TMZ (12.7 months). Final data of the phase II trial ( NCT03522298 ) are expected to be presented in the first half of 2021, but FDA has already granted fast track designation to paxalisib.

Inhibition of AKT

Enzastaurin is an inhibitor of AKT and protein kinase C. This molecule was the first to provide clinical benefit in a subgroup of patients with recurrent GBMs according to their MGMT status [ 185 ]. Enzastaurin has been compared to lomustine in a Phase III clinical trial ( NCT00295815 ). Median PFS, 6-month PFS rate and OS did not differ significantly between enzastaurin and lomustine. Enzastaurin was well tolerated, had a better hematologic toxicity profile but did not have superior efficacy compared with lomustine in patients with recurrent GBM [ 184 ].

Other AKT inhibitors with promising results are being tested in preclinics or Phase I, such as perifosine [ 198 ], nelfinavir [ 199 ], MK2206 [ 200 ].

3.2.4. Inhibition of RAS/MAPK Pathway

RAS/MAPK pathway is activated by many receptors including tyrosine kinase receptors and involved in cell survival and proliferation. RAS/MAPK has been targeted in GBM ( Table 6 ).

One inhibitor of this pathway, TLN-4601, did not demonstrate therapeutic efficacy in monotherapy in a Phase II study in the event of recurrence [ 201 ].

Sorafenib is a Raf-1 and p38 inhibitor, involved in the RAS-MAPK, VEGFR, c-kit and PDGFR pathways [ 206 ]. Although sorafenib has been shown to potentiate the pro-apoptotic effect in GBMs cells [ 207 ], it does not appear to improve sensitivity to radiotherapy and chemotherapy in vivo [ 208 ]. For clinical trials, the combination of sorafenib and TMZ in recurrent GBMs provides a PFS of 3.2 months and an OS of 7.4 months [ 209 ]. Combined with bevacizumab [ 204 ], erlotinib [ 114 ] and temsirolimus [ 188 ], it does not provide clinical benefit. Disappointing results were also observed in newly diagnosed patients treated with sorafenib and combined to the Stupp protocol in adjuvant therapy [ 202 ].

Two Ras-MAPK inhibitors are in Phase II clinical trials: LY2228820 and atorvastatin. The latter molecule could potentiate the effects of TMZ in vitro and in vivo [ 210 ]. In a Phase II study ( NCT02029573 ) in combination with standard therapy (RT/TMZ) in newly diagnosed GBM patients, preliminary results are encouraging and met criteria for continued accrual [ 205 ].

Dabrafenib is a BRAF inhibitor that binds and inhibits the active conformation of the receptor. Dabrafenib is evaluated in combination with the MEK inhibitor trametinib in newly GBM ( NCT03919071 ).

A very recent study includes binimetinib (a MEK inhibitor) with encorafenib (a BRAF inhibitor) in adults with recurrent BRAF V600-Mutated HGG ( NCT03973918 ).

The lipid proliferation switch led to the discovery of a novel anticancer drug target, the tumor repressor protein sphingomyelin synthase 1 (SGMS1). The activation of SGMS1 by 2OHOA, a synthetic hydroxylated fatty acid, modulates the lipid content of cancer cell membranes, regulates the localization of key signalling proteins, including Ras and PKC at the plasma membrane, leading to inactivation of Ras/MAPK, PI3K/Akt and PKC/cyclin/CDK signalling pathways [ 211 ]. The clinical trial in Phase I/IIa NCT01792310 demonstrated its safety and efficacy in humans. 2OHOA was designed as orphan drug by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the treatment of glioma and is now tested in a Phase IIb study ( NCT04250922 ).

3.3. Targeting the Cell Cycle and Escape to Cell Death

A major reason for the failure of chemotherapy is the resistance of GBM cells to cell death by apoptosis, necrosis or autophagy [ 212 , 213 ].

3.3.1. Therapies Targeting Apoptosis

Apoptosis can be mediated by the extrinsic and the intrinsic pathways. The extrinsic pathway results from the activation of the TNF-R1, FAS and DR4/DR5 death receptors through their respective ligands TNFα, CD95 and TRAIL [ 214 ]. The intrinsic pathway is regulated by proteins of the BCL-2 family and of the inhibitor of aptotosis (IAP) family. Pro and anti-apoptotic members of the BCL2 family regulate mitochondria-dependent cell effects. When apoptosis is triggered mitochondria become permeable and release cytochrome C. The two pathways converge on a series of catalytic cascades involving caspases [ 105 ]. The tumor suppressor p53 is implicated in several pro-apoptotic pathways and appears mutated in about 30% of GBM. Restoring apoptosis may be obtained by targeting different apoptosis players ( Table 7 ).

Activating proteins involved in the extrinsic pathway of apoptosis

The CD95 death receptor is overexpressed in GBMs and mesenchymal GICs. It is also associated with epithelial-mesenchymal transition [ 219 ]. APO010 and APG101 are two CD95 agonists. APO010 has significant anti-tumor activity in GICs, increasing their sensitivity to TMZ in vitro. Administered locoregionally, APO010 increases mice survival [ 220 ]. A phase II study showed that the combination of the agonist APG101 with re-irradiation in recurrent GBM improves PFS but not OS compared to re-irradiation alone. This therapeutic benefit is more pronounced in mutated IDH tumors [ 215 ].

TRAIL/DR5 dependent cell death can be induced by ONC201. ONC201 binds and antagonizes dopamine receptors DRD2 and DRD3 causing p53-independent apoptosis in tumor cells. ONC201 inhibits the phosphorylation of AKT and ERK pathways, leading to the dephosphorylation of transcription factor FOXO3A, and thus transcription of pro-apoptotic death receptor ligand TRAIL. Through a stress response activation ONC201 is involved in EIF2α phosphorylation and increases DR5 expression [ 221 , 222 ] Based on the the first results using ONC201 in monotherapy which showed that the treatment was well tolerated and that ONC201 may have single agent activity in GBM [ 223 ], a phase II clinical trial was started on GBM with H3 K27M mutation ( NCT02525692 ). It showed that ONC201 can be used regardless of age or location [ 216 ].

Activating proteins involved in the intrinsic pathway of apoptosis

The TSPO protein is involved in the permeabilization of the mitochondrial membrane. Its level of expression being correlated with a poor prognosis, it is considered a potential target for apoptosis restoration [ 224 ]. Several ligands of TSPO (Translocator protein), derived from pyrazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidine acetamides, are able to specifically reduce the proliferation of GBMs cells [ 225 ]. No clinical trials are underway with these new molecules.

Targeting proteins involved in the regulation of apoptosis

Due to its role in regulating both pathways of apoptosis, targeting the p53 protein has also been suggested to reactivate its pro-apoptotic functions, by gene therapy or by inhibiting its interaction with MDM2 [ 226 , 227 ].

In a recent study, a tumor-targeting p53 nanodelivery system (SGT53) showed sensitization of resistant GBM cells to TMZ in vitro and increase in the survival of xenografted mice [ 228 ]. Gene therapy is currently in a Phase II clinical study ( NCT02340156 ).

Inhibition of MDM2-p53 interaction to trigger apoptosis is an approach that showed encouraging preclinical results. Among these, ISA27 inhibits cell growth in vitro and in vivo [ 229 ] while nutlin-3a induces apoptosis and senescence of glioma cells [ 230 ]. α5β1 integrin-specific inhibition in association with nutlin-3a also triggered a strong apoptosis in glioma cells expressing a functional p53 [ 231 ]. Idasanutlin (RG7388) with more potency, selectivity, and better pharmacokinetic profile than other MDM2 inhibitors appears interesting in preclinical assays, is tested in clinical trials for acute myeloid leukemia and recently in the N 2 M 2 (NOA-20) clinical trials in GBM (NCT01358389) [ 71 ]. Finally, the AMG-232 inhibitor has shown encouraging results including inhibition of tumor growth in several xenografts (lung, osteosarcoma, etc.) and tumor regression in mouse models [ 232 ]. This agent is currently in Phase I clinical trials ( NCT03107780 , NCT01723020 ).

Farnesyltransferase inhibitors (FTI) can induce apoptosis, as they revert cells to a state in which cell-substratum attachment is necessary for viability [ 233 ]. Inhibition of farnesyltransferase (FT) by tipifarnib blocks the prenylation of the farnesyltransferase tail CAAX motif, thereby preventing Ras binding to the membrane and its activation. Tipifarnib is tested in four clinical studies in monotherapy or combined with RT or TMZ or other targeted therapies ( NCT00050986 , NCT00058097 , NCT00005859 and NCT00335764 ). Lonafarnib ( SCH66336 ) is a FTI that blocks farnesylation of cell proliferation proteins, such as RhoB, RAS, laminins and CCAX phosphatase [ 234 , 235 ]. It inhibits in vitro [ 236 ] and in vivo [ 237 ] cell growth in combination with chemo and/or radiotherapy. A phase II was performed in combination with TMZ ( NCT00038493 ).

Simultaneous reactivation of p53 and TSPO proteins appears to be more effective in promoting apoptosis in GBMs cells but also in reducing the risk of resistance [ 238 ]. Reactivating these proteins using molecules with irreversible action has been suggested in order to reduce the risk of recurrence [ 239 ].

Another potential approach is to target anti-apoptotic proteins from the BCL-2 family. The compound gossypol binds to the common part of proteins Bcl-2, Bcl-XL and Mcl-1 [ 240 ]. Its combination with TMZ was shown to inhibit the invasive and proliferative abilities of GBMs cells and angiogenesis in vitro, and to cause apoptosis in vivo [ 241 ]. Gossypol was tested as monotherapy in a phase II ( NCT00540722 ).

Finally, a new therapy targeting the Bcl-2 protein consists of the administration of spherical nucleic acid (SNA). SNA-NU-0129, a formulation containing gold nanoparticles and a siRNA targeting BCL2L12, is involved in the inhibition of this protein and in the induction of cellular apoptosis in vitro [ 242 ]. A Phase I study is ongoing in recurrent GBMs and gliosarcomas ( NCT03020017 ).

3.3.2. Therapies Targeting Autophagy

Autophagy is a degradation mechanism that can also induce cell death independently of caspases. It is based on the encapsulation of proteins, cytoplasm and organelles in vesicles that will be degraded in lysosomes. The pro- or anti-tumor function of autophagy in the GBM is still uncertain [ 243 ]. Molecules inducing autophagy, such as curcubitacin [ 244 ], itraconazole [ 245 ], rutin [ 246 ], givinostat [ 247 ] can have different consequences, but none of them are yet tested in Phase I/II or more.

In addition, chloroquine, inhibiting autophagy via lysosomal protease blockade and fusion between lysosomes and autophagosome [ 248 ], provoked a decrease in cell proliferation and migration, and an induction of apoptosis in vivo and in vitro [ 249 ]. Chloroquine is in Phase I and II clinical trials in combination with TMZ and/or RT ( NCT02378532 , NCT02432417 , NCT00224978 & NCT00486603 ) ( Table 8 ).

3.3.3. Targeting Multifaceted Pathways and DNA Modifications

Table 9 details all the clinical trials of this section.

CDK4/6 inhibitors

Cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) signalling regulates cell cycle, cell differentiation, metabolism and apoptosis. In glioma cells, CDK4 is overexpressed which led to glioma cell proliferation and TMZ resistance [ 260 ]. CDK4/6 inhibitors (palbociclib/PD 0332991, abemaciclib) specifically blocked the cell cycle at the G1-to-S transition phase, leading to cell cycle arrest and stopped cell proliferation [ 261 ]. These inhibitors are approved in combination with anti-oestrogen therapies for the treatment of hormonal breast cancer, and are being studied in GBM upon surgical resection. Palbociclib is one of the drug tested in the GBM phase I/IIa trial NCT03158389 [ 71 ].

Proteasome inhibitors

The proteasome is a central cellular protein-degradation machinery. It regulates cell homeostasis in normal and cancer cells. Bortezomib, the first-generation proteasome inhibitor, was approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma and mantle cell lymphoma [ 262 ]. This therapy is able to increase apoptosis levels in preclinical brain tumor assays. Moreover, clinical trials using proteasome inhibitors in combination strategies are being tested to maximize therapeutic efficacy and limit toxicity [ 263 ]. Bortezomib is studied in combination with TMZ and/or radiation, or with an inhibitor of histone deacetylase.

Marizomib, is a second-generation, irreversible proteasome inhibitor with a more lipophilic structure, having the ability to cross the blood-brain barrier [ 264 ]. It has been tested in patients with newly diagnosed and recurrent GBM in phase I and phase II studies. In patients with recurrent GBM, marizomib was administered in a Phase I/II study as a single agent or in combination with bevacizumab ( NCT02330562 ) and in a Phase II study as a single agent or in combination with bevacizumab or RT/TMZ or ABI-009, or lomustine ( NCT03463265 ). Based on encouraging observations [ 265 ], marizomib combined with RT/TMZ is actually in a Phase III study (NCT0334509).

Histone deacetylase inhibitors

Epigenetic alterations in histones control chromatin structure and transcriptional activation. Besides their potential role in onset and progression of cancer, they are generally reversible and thus interesting therapeutic targets. Histone acetylation relaxes chromatin and allows access to DNA and transcription activation. On the other hand, histone deacetylases (HDAC) compacts chromatin and represses transcription [ 266 ]. HDACs can be essential for cancer cell survival and growth, showing an epigenetic vulnerability of tumor cells. HDAC inhibition can induce tumour cell cycle arrest, apoptosis, reduction of angiogenesis and enhancement of tumor-mediated immunity [ 266 , 267 ]. HDAC inhibitors [ 268 ] in GBM tends to re-establish the balance of histone acetylation and sensitizes tumor-mediated immunity. It can also sensitize tumor cells when used in combination, for example, with radiation therapy [ 267 ]. Several clinical trials are testing HDAC inhibitors as monotherapy or in combination in GBM. Vorinostat as a monotherapy had modest activity in patients and did not improve PFS or median OS in association with bevacuzimab ( NCT01738646 ) or bortezomib ( NCT00641706 ). Another HDAC inhibitor, FR901228 (Romidepsin), was ineffective for patients with recurrent GBM ( NCT00085540 ).

TGF-β inhibitors

Transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) is a cytokine secreted by immune cells, tumor cells, and stromal cells. TGF-β is overexpressed GBM tissues but inexistent in normal brain. TGF-β signalling regulates GBM proliferation, invasion, angiogenesis, immunosuppression, and GSCs stemness [ 269 ]. Targeting TGF-β signaling mechanisms is a promising therapeutic strategy [ 270 ]. In GBM clinical trials, TGF-β pathway are targeted by antisens oligonucleotide (trabedersen, NCT004331561) and by small molecules, OKN-007 ( NCT03649464 ) [ 271 ], and galunisertib ( NCT01582269 , NCT01220271 ). Results are available for galunisertib and trabedersen.

Targeting of TGF-β2 signaling through inhibition of TGF-β mRNA translation by using the antisense oligonucleotides trabedersen, injected in the resection cavity, was tested in GBM in a Phase IIb ( NCT00431561 ) but the first results did not show statistically significant differences among the three arms: trabedersen at doses of 10 or 80 mM or standard chemotherapy (TMZ or procarbazine/lomustine/vincristine) [ 256 ].

Galunisertib targets the TGF-β1 receptor and selectively inhibits the serine/threonine activity of the receptor, thereby preventing the phosphorylation of downstream proteins, SMAD2 and SMAD3. It demonstrated antitumor effects in preclinical and radiographic responses [ 272 ]. But no differences in efficacy, safety or pharmacokinetic variables were observed in a Phase Ib/IIa clinical trial ( NCT01220271 ) between the two treatment arms (TMZ/RT with and without galunisertib) [ 257 ].

PARP inhibitors

Defects in DNA repair pathways are a characteristic feature of cancer cells. They participate in tumour development by promoting genomic instability. For more than 50 years, this characteristic has been exploited as a therapeutic opportunity for the treatment of cancer, with the use of conventional cytotoxic chemotherapies. More recently, the discovery of a synthetic lethality interaction between DNA damage induced by PARP (poly[ADP-ribose] polymerase) inhibitors led to the development of new therapeutic approaches. The PARP proteins use NAD + as their substrate to modify acceptor proteins with ADP-ribose modifications. Most PARP inhibitors target the NAD + binding site.

A high expression of PARP-1 mRNA is associated with low survival, particularly in classical GBMs [ 273 ]. A few molecules inhibiting PARP-1 are in clinical trials. Among them, iniparib (BSI-201) taken concomitantly with RT and TMZ has shown encouraging results, in human glioma xenografts, resulting in complete tumor regression in 70% of animals [ 274 ]. This PARP1 inhibitor plus TMZ was evaluated in a phase I/II in newly-diagnosed GBM ( NCT00687765 ). Other NAD + mimetics, olaparib (AZD2281), veliparib (ABT-888) and pamiparib (BGB-290) inhibit the catalytic activity of PARP-1 and PARP-2 and are currently being studied in phase I or I/II clinical trials. Only results for veliparib combined with TMZ ( NCT01026493 ) are available [ 259 ]. The concept of this study was to exploit methylation at positions N3-adenine and N7-guanine, supposedly independent of the MGMT effect and related more to base excision repair with PARP. But the study did not demonstrate any clinical activity.

3.4. Targeting Angiogenesis

Angiogenesis is a complex process regulated by multiple signaling pathways. Due to a high tumor proliferation, access to oxygen and nutrients decreases in some areas of a tumor, leading to hypoxia and necrosis. GBM are highly angiogenic tumors and blocking neo-angiogenesis has represented an interesting therapeutic way for twenty years.

3.4.1. Targeting VEGF/VEGFR Pathway

Clinical trials for VEGF and VEGFR targeting are described in Table 10 .

Bevacizumab

VEGF is overexpressed in GBMs and plays a major role in angiogenesis by activating its receptor VEGFR [ 275 ]. Since 2009, the food and drug administration (FDA) has approved bevacizumab, an anti-VEGF antibody, as a treatment in recurrent GBMs. Indeed, non placebo-controlled Phase II clinical trials highlighted the bevacizumab anti-tumor activity and this molecule is considered effective alone or in combination with Irinotecan, a topoisomerase I DNA inhibitor [ 276 , 277 ]. Based on encouraging results, few clinical trials were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of bevacizumab in comparative studies. However, results of these trials have been estimated insufficient by EMA to approve bevacizumab use in GBM in Europe. This discrepancy between drug authorities lead to huge off-label use of bevacizumab for GBM, mostly at recurrence, since this antibody is also marketed for the treatment of ovarian, lung, breast and colorectal cancer.

For other studies presented in Table 10 , bevacizumab is usually the reference treatment of the control arm to be compared to combinations of bevacizumab plus other experimental molecules targeting different pathways.

Clinical Trials in Recurrent GBMs

In a Phase II study, the combination of bevacizumab and TMZ did not show a survival benefit compared to bevacizumab alone [ 294 ]. Similar results were observed in several other Phase II studies with bevacizumab in combination with temsirolimus [ 175 ], Carboplatin and irinotecan [ 306 ]. Only the combination of bevacizumab and lomustine appears to provide encouraging results in terms of survival and quality of life in a Phase II study [ 307 , 308 ]. However, these promising results were not demonstrated in a Phase III study, in which the combination therapy resulted in a PFS benefit but no OS improvement ( NCT01290939 ) [ 292 ].

The efficacy of bevacizumab was also studied retrospectively in patients exposed to a second irradiation [ 309 ]. This study shows that bevacizumab might be a protective agent against a second irradiation. The improvement in irradiation with an anti-angiogenic agent was explained by the normality of vascularization during VEGFR blockade. Indeed, this “normalization window” allows a temporary increase in tumor oxygenation, which improves the damage induced by irradiation [ 310 ].

Clinical Trials in Newly Diagnosed GBMs

No benefit for bevacizumab with or without conventional treatment was obtained in different clinical trials [ 284 , 287 , 297 , 311 , 312 ]. Only one Phase II study, analyzing the combination of RT and bevacizumab followed by an adjuvant therapy combining bevacizumab and irinotecan, showed an improvement in PFS compared to the Stupp protocol in patients with non-methylated MGMT status [ 291 ]. A (non-significant) tendency towards an OS gain was also shown when TMZ was combined with bevacizumab in neo-adjuvant Stupp protocol therapy compared to the same protocol without Bevacizumab in non-operable patients [ 285 ]. Finally, it was retrospectively shown that proneural GBMs could benefit on the addition of bevacizumab compared to placebo (OS = 17.1 vs. 12.8 months HR = 0.43; p = 0.002) [ 313 ].

Molecules targeting VEGFR

Pazopanib, a VEGFR1/2/3, PDGFR-α/β, and c-Kit inhibitor, administered as monotherapy, did not show therapeutic benefit in recurrent GBMs [ 298 ].

Cediranib is an oral, highly potent VEGFR inhibitor with similar activity against all three VEGF receptors and c-Kit and partial activity against PDGF receptors [ 314 ]. Cediranib, as monotherapy, has provided encouraging results in recurrent GBMs [ 302 ]. However, in combination with lomustine, cediranib did not show any therapeutic benefit, due to an increase in EGFR levels. Recently, a survival benefit has been reported with the combination of cediranib and gefitinib in recurrent GBMs [ 299 ].

Nintedanib, alone, did not show any survival benefit in recurrent GBMs [ 302 ]. Note that nintedanib is an inhibitor of VEGFR1/2/3, FGFR1/2/3 and PDGFRα/β.

Dovitinib, an FGFR, PDGFRβ, VEGFR and c-kit inhibitor, currently in clinical trials, sensitizes GBMs cells to TMZ in vitro [ 315 , 316 ].

Vatalanib is a VEGFR1/2/3, PDGFRβ and c-kit inhibitor. Its tolerance and safety were evaluated in a Phase I/II study ( NCT00128700 ) in newly diagnosed patients [ 304 ] and in combination with imatinib and hyroxyurea in patients with glioma [ 317 ].

Most of these molecules have multiple targets. A few other molecules for which only a few clinical trials are ongoing and for which few results have been published, are listed in Table 10 , such as tivozanib, axitinib, semaxanib, CT-322 (a molecule based on an engineered variant of the tenth type III domain of human fibronectin), and the monoclonal antibody tanibirumab (a specific binder to VEGFR2, thereby preventing the binding of its ligand VEGF).

3.4.2. The secondary Pathways of Angiogenesis

Table 11 shows the clinical trials concerning the secondary pathways of angiogenesis.

The failure of anti-VEGF therapies might be explained by compensatory mechanisms, through activation of other factors involved in angiogenesis in response to VEGF inhibition.

c-MET pathway

The c-MET pathway is deregulated because of an overexpression of (i) the c-MET receptor via mutation or amplification, or (ii) its HGF ligand [ 322 , 323 ]. Activation of this pathway is particularly important in the transformation of endothelial cells into mesenchymal cells, in the induction of aberrant vascularization and in tumor progression [ 324 ]. In addition, its activation is associated with a decrease in VEGFR2 expression, which leads to resistance to anti-VEGF therapies [ 325 , 326 ].

Onartuzumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting c-MET, induced a decrease in the growth of GBMs cells. Combined with bevacizumab in recurrent GBMs, ornatuzumab provides a PFS similar to bevacizumab alone. Nevertheless, this study showed a survival benefit in patients with high HGF expression or non-methylated MGMT status [ 318 ].

Other c-MET inhibitors have been developed and are currently being investigated. Among these, crizotinib (a c-MET and ALK inhibitor) causes GBMs cells to become sensitive to TMZ [ 327 ]. Crizotinib is currently being tested in combination with TMZ in a Phase I study ( NCT02270034 ). Cabozantinib, a c-MET and VEGFR2 inhibitor, was tested in a Phase I study, combined with TMZ during the Stupp protocol [ 328 ] and in two Phase II studies as monotherapy in recurrent GBM ( NCT01068782 and NCT00704288 ).

Targeting the c-MET ligand, HGF, is also being investigated. The anti-HGF antibody, rilotumumumab (AMG 102), did not show therapeutic benefit in monotherapy in a Phase II study in patients with recurrent GBMs [ 320 ].

PIGF pathway

Another factor involved in angiogenesis is PIGF, a member of the VEGF family, binding to VEGFR1 (FLT1) and its neuropilin-1/2 co-receptors (NRP1/2). It is expressed in GBMs and tumor endothelial cells [ 329 ]. Aflibercept, also called VEGF-trap, is a recombinant fusion protein mimicking binding domain of VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 and blocking different ligands (VEGF-A, VEGF-B and PlGF). In monotherapy or in combination with bevacizumab in recurrent GBMs, no survival benefit was observed [ 321 , 330 ]. These disappointing results might be explained by a decrease in PIGF expression during tumor progression, in particular after treatment with TMZ. This new therapeutic option seems more relevant in newly diagnosed patients [ 331 ].

Endoglin

Endoglin (CD105) is strongly expressed in endothelial cells with high proliferation rates [ 332 ]. TCR105 is a chimeric antibody targeting endoglin, which enhances the effects of bevacizumab in vivo, tested in two clinical trials ( NCT01648348 , NCT01564914 ). The combination of TRC105 and bevacizumab was well tolerated [ 333 ], but TRC105 with bevacizumab did not prolong median PFS versus bevacizumab alone in recurrent GBM patients [ 334 ].

Endoglin is also studied as a diagnostic marker and to estimate the degree of angiogenesis. The endoglin labelling is more typical of neoplastic endothelial cells and is correlated to Ki67, thus making it specific and sensitive to the evolution of angiogenesis in GBM [ 335 ].

3.4.3. Other Pathways of Angiogenesis

Other pathways of angiogenesis are described in Table 12 .

Thalidomide is a long-established anti-angiogenic agent that inhibits the angiogenic activity of β-FGF and TNF-α [ 345 ]. However, when combined with RT in GBM, no benefit was observed in newly diagnosed GBMs [ 346 ]. It has shown limited gastrointestinal toxicity and anti-tumor activity in combination with irinotecan [ 337 ], and is currently in clinical trials in combination with the Stupp protocol in newly diagnosed GBMs ( NCT00047294 ).

Integrins αvβ3 and αvβ5 have been proposed as targets of new anti-angiogenic therapies. Promising results have been observed when combining an inhibitor of these integrins, cilengitide, with the Stupp protocol in newly diagnosed patients [ 342 , 347 ]. Nevertheless, in two clinical studies (one phase II and one phase III), this combination did not show survival gains in patients with methylated [ 340 ] and non-methylated [ 341 ] MGMT status. ATN161 (Ac-PHSCN-NH 2 ) is a selective antagonist for α5β1 integrin. It is a capped five amino-acid peptide derived from the synergy site of fibronectin, a region which enhances the fibronectin’s RGD-mediated binding to the α5β1 integrin. ATN 161 is antiangiogenic and antimetastatic [ 348 ] and was evaluated in a phase I/II trial for recurrent malignant glioma ( NCT00352313 ).

Trebananib (AMG-386) is an angiopoietin neutralizing peptibody comprising a peptide with angiopoietin-binding properties that is fused to the Fc region of an antibody with an antiangiogenic effect in solid tumor. It inhibits the interaction between the ligands angiopoietin-1 and angiopoietin-2 with the Tie-2 receptor [ 349 ]. Angiopoietins (Ang1 and Ang2) and their RTK (TIE1 and TIE2) are key mediators of tumor angiogenesis. Angiopoietins are overexpressed in GBM and are involved in GBM tumor growth. Moreover, angiopoietin-2 increased in bevacizumab-treated GBM and thus VEGF and angiopoietin-2 combined therapy may overcome bevacizumab resistance. A phase II study used trebananib as monotherapy on patients with recurrent GBM ( NCT01290263 ). Trebananib was also tested in combination with bevacizumab ( NCT01609790 ). However, combination did not significantly improve outcome over bevacizumab alone. Moreover, angiopoietin recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody, PF-04856884, was enrolled on a phase II as monotherapy in patients with recurrent GBM ( NCT01225510 ). This study, which was withdrawn, was not listed in Tables. Until now no further trials were performed in GBM.

Endostatin is a fragment of type XVIII collagen, and one inhibitor of angiogenesis. Endostatin competitively binds to VEGFR-2 and inhibits MAPK signaling pathway and angiogenesis [ 350 ]. Recombinant human endostatin improved chemotherapy efficiency in NSCLC, breast cancer and melanoma [ 351 , 352 , 353 ]. Endostatin is actually tested in GBM in a phase II study with TMZ and irinotecan ( NCT04267978 ).

Prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) expression has been demonstrated in the tumor neovasculature of GBM, by immunohistochemical staining [ 354 ]. Although its significance has not been fully determined, PSMA may play a functional role in angiogenesis [ 355 ]. It is anchored to the cell membrane, which makes it an ideal promising therapeutic target, and can be internalized making it an appropriate candidate for pro-drug activity. Strong reactivity to the antibody component of PSMA antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), BrUOG 263, was observed in the endothelial cells of new tumor blood vessels in GBM. Following binding and internalization of PSMA ADC, the cytotoxic component of PSMA ADC will be released and destroy the neovasculature that supports tumor growth.

Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), especially MMP2 & 9, are thought to play a central role in invasion, owing to their ability to degrade the majority of brain ECM components [ 356 ]. Prinomastat and COL-3 are two drugs targeting MMPs that may stop the growth of GBM by stopping blood flow to the tumor. They have been tested in two clinical trials. Prinomastat/TMZ compared to TMZ alone did neither improve the one-year survival rate nor PFS ( NCT00004200 ). The clinical trial ( NCT00004147 ) with COL-3 in progressive and recurrent high-grade gliomas did not warrant further studies and did not reach phase II [ 357 ].

4. Discussion-Guidance towards Future GBM Targeted Therapies

Out of 257 Phase I/II to III clinical trials on targeted therapies listed in the tables of this manuscript, almost 70% are phase II studies (62 Phase I/II, 177 Phase II, 4 Phase II/III, 14 Phase III). Of the studies for which results are available, only 37 are comparative studies with statistical data. Comparative trials with a significant difference between two treatments are highlighted in color in the tables, in green and red for those showing a significant and non-significant difference between two treatments, respectively. It is clear that the red color dominates over the green one. Only 12 studies showed improvements mainly of PFS. Most of them (11 out of 12) involve therapies targeting VEGF and VEGFR. Although some specific explanations may be proposed for the high degree of these clinical trial failures (see below), improved clinical trial design is also needed. For exemple, Phase II trials may contain a control arm to assess the efficacy of new therapies and to reduce false positive results which remains difficult to establish in the case of recurrent disease in absence of standard treatment; historical control data became obsolete due to the improvement of patient standard of care in the clinic [ 358 , 359 ]. GBM is a rare disease and enrollment of patients in trials remains too low, promotion of participation must be planned to increase the number of high-quality trials [ 360 ]. In addition, the need for stratification of patients at least based on prognostic and predictive biomarkers such as the level of the predictive target is critical. Biomarkers might also help to reduce the development costs through better patient selection. A recent study on the impact of biomarker use in clinical trials shows an overall 5-fold benefit over non-biomarker use by analyzing a collection of 10,000 clinical trials for 745 drugs in four major cancer types (colorectal, lung, melanoma and breast cancer) [ 361 ]. The neuro-oncology community must work together to be able to change favorably the guidelines on the treatment of GBM [ 362 ].

Many different targeted therapeutic options are investigated. For more recent trials, we identified two main tendencies. First, is underway a clear upward trend towards approaches with multi-kinase inhibitors (i.e., when a kinase inhibitor interacts with multiple members of the protein kinase family). The second trend is towards a multi-targeted therapeutic approach. Drugs able to target multiple critical nodes for GBM development and progression might help to counteract the lack of efficiency and the rapid acquisition of resistance observed with monotherapies [ 363 ].

Several factors can explain the therapeutic failure of GBM targeted treatments: (i) Performing a full surgical resection is impossible. Eliminating tumor cells that have migrated into the healthy parenchyma without causing neurological or cognitive disorders is not feasible. 35% of newly diagnosed patients are estimated to be non-operable due to the location or size of the tumor. In these cases, a biopsy is recommended in order to establish a diagnosis [ 364 ]. When surgery is possible, macroscopic resection is described as a good prognostic factor [ 365 ]. A recent meta-analysis showed that out of 27,865 patients diagnosed with GBM between 2004 and 2013, a biopsy (non-operable case), partial resection and massive resection accounted for 28.5%, 34.8% and 36.8% of cases [ 366 ]. (ii) Crossing the BBB is not a turnkey operation, despite its potential destruction by tumor invasion or RT. New approaches proposed, such as nanoparticles or convection-enhanced delivery (CED), [ 367 , 368 ], show encouraging pre-clinical and clinical results. (iii) New molecular and genomic data has highlighted the inter- but also intra-tumoral heterogeneity of GBM, with tumors and tumor areas differing in target expression. Intratumoral heterogeneity is described as the root cause of therapy resistance and might explain the failure of targeted therapies specifically targeting tumor biomarkers, including anti-EGFR (cetuximab, gefitinib, erlotinib …), anti-VEGF (bevacizumab) and anti-integrin (cilengitide) therapies. Below, we tried to explain the failure of the therapies targeting these three proteins. These data highlight the need to combine different targeted therapies.

4.1. The Failure of Anti-EGFR Therapies

Besides favourable pre-clinical studies, anti-EGFR therapies barely present any clinical benefit for patients with GBM. Several clinical studies are being carried out in newly diagnosed GBM and recurrent GBM with anti-EGFR therapies as monotherapy or in combination with radiochemotherapy or other targeted agents ( Table 2 ).

Besides the tissue differences between colorectal, head and neck, lung cancers and GBM, EGFR is also molecularly heterogeneous among these cancers. First, EGFR mutations in GBMs (as EGFRvIII) occur within receptor extracellular domain while in lung cancers (as L858R) occur in the kinase domain. Interestingly, EGFRvIII mutation seems to appear at later stages of tumor development. This subclonal EGFR mutation is lost in certain recurrent tumors [ 369 ]. However, mutational switch can happen where the initial EGFR mutation is replaced by another in recurrent tumor [ 370 ]. EGFRvIII heterogeneity adds another layer of complexity by its location in extrachromosomal double minute structures. Extrachromosomal EGFRvIII loss upon treatment promotes therapy resistance. However, the mutant tends to reappear after TKI withdrawal and resensitizes the tumor [ 371 ]. The secondary mutation (T790M) upon TKI treatment provides tumor resistance to therapy, in lung cancer [ 372 ]. While, in GBM no EGFR secondary mutation is described as cause of therapy resistance [ 373 ].

Tumor heterogeneity can be a reasonable case for GBM resistance to EGFR-targeted therapies. Upregulation of redundant receptor tyrosine kinases and deregulation of EGFR downstream molecules can trigger EGFR therapy resistance.

In GBM, PDGFR and c-MET are also upregulated and contribute to tumor progression. In the same or in other subclones than EGFR, these receptors can mediate an EGFR-inhibition bypass. In vivo, inhibition of EGFR (erlotinib) and c-MET (crizotinib) resulted in decreased tumor growth [ 374 ]. Also, in a subcutaneous GBM xenografts, combined inhibition of EGFR and PDGFRβ signaling suppresses tumor growth [ 375 ]. Further clinical multi-targeting is needed to test this hypothesis and try to overcome EGFR-therapy resistance in GBM.

In GBM, an EGFR downstream molecule, PTEN, is often loss. PTEN is a suppressor of PI3K/AKT pathway. Simultaneous expression of EGFRvIII and PTEN was associated with patient response to TKI [ 376 ]. However, another study showed that even though PTEN is frequently deleted in GBM, it cannot predict therapeutic efficiency of TKI [ 140 ].

Moreover, EGFR therapeutic targeting promotes a switch to an angiogenic and mesenchymal tumor phenotype. Mesenchymal switch is associated with GBM therapy resistance [ 377 , 378 ]. GBM resistance to EGFR therapy is still unclear and further studies are needed to improve EGFR-targeting in clinical trials. Although multi-targeted RTK and combinatory therapies have been newly proposed ( Table 2 , Table 3 and Table 4 ) [ 379 ], there is an urgent need to develop genetic and cellular representative GBM models [ 380 ].

4.2. The Failure of Bevacizumab

The lack of efficacy of bevacizumab, a large-size molecule, can be explained by its intravenous route of administration and poor intracerebral bioavailability. Intra-arterial brain administration, after temporary destruction of the BBB by mannitol and followed by intravenous administration, has shown encouraging results in terms of PFS in patients with recurrent GBMs (PFS = 10 months) [ 381 ]. Indeed, this route of administration has the advantage of potentiating the cerebral delivery of chemotherapy (local concentration of more than 48.9-fold compared to intravenous administration) [ 382 ]. Recent results have confirmed the benefit of this delivery method and are being studied [ 383 , 384 ].

The standard dose of bevacizumab is 10 mg/kg IV, injected every two weeks. Although this dose is clinically well tolerated, it can have adverse biological effects, particularly via the formation of hypoxic areas [ 321 ]. The study by Heiland et al., 2016 [ 385 ] suggested that a low dose of bevacizumab may decrease the size of cerebral edema and may result in better vascular permeability. This study showed an improvement in PFS when bevacizumab is injected at 5 mg/kg every two weeks and is combined with lomustine, compared to bevacizumab alone at 10 mg/kg every two weeks (PFS = 5 months vs. 3.2 months). This therapeutic benefit was not observed in first-time recurrent patients. Finally, at a dose of 5 mg/kg/week, no gain in PFS or survival was observed [ 288 ].

4.3. The Failure of Cilengitide

Although preclinical studies nicely demonstrated that cilengitide may affect both tumoral cells and endothelial cells, failure to improve GBM patient survival of the first antagonist of integrins reaching the clinic was really disappointing. The reasons of this failure can only be guessed, but different factors may be included [ 386 , 387 , 388 ].

First, the short half-life (a few hours) and pharmacokinetics of cilengitide restricts its properties in patients. Second, the use of cilengitide at low dose has been shown to stimulate angiogenesis in preclinical models [ 389 ]. This point has been addressed in patients [ 390 ] where no cilengitide-specific pattern of progression has been detected. Third, no reliable biomarker of cilengitide activity has been identified for stratification of patients. For the CENTRIC assay (the phase III clinical trial), patients were stratified according to the MGMT promoter methylation status, i.e., inclusion concerned only patients with a methylated promoter [ 340 ]. A phase II clinical trial (CORE) was conducted concomitantly with patients exhibiting a non-methylated MGMT promoter. Interestingly, a retrospective analysis of both cohorts regarding the expression of the cilengitide targets (αvβ3/β5 integrins) expression, concluded that cilengitide was the most effective in the CORE patients with high level of αvβ3 expression in the tumoral cells and not in the endothelial cells [ 391 ]. These results highlight the need for stratification of patients at least based on the level of the predictive target. In line with this, it was recently shown in an elegant work from the Cheresh group, that GBM sensitivity to αvβ3 integrin blockade is not simply related to the overexpression of the integrin but rather to an addiction to glucose uptake by the glucose transporteur Glut3 [ 392 , 393 ]. A fourth point could be added concerning the redundancy of integrin targets; in fact, other integrins (such as α5β1 integrin) may remain active after cilengitide relaying pro-tumoral effects. The story of cilengitide highlights some pitfalls in the transfer of preclinical results towards the clinic but also the need to stratify patients according to pertinent biomarkers.

The plasticity of GBM cells complicates heterogeneity. It has been shown a bidirectional plasticity between glioma stem cell and their more differentiated counterparts either to form the tumor mass or in answer to therapies. These two types of cells will have different sensitivity to radio/chemotherapies but also to targeted therapies. Recent data emphasized that differentiated tumoral cells may contribute to GIC-dependent tumor progression [ 394 , 395 ]. These results indicate that targeting both cell populations will be needed to eradicate GBM. In a given tumor, glioma stem cells may vary from a proneuronal to a mesenchymal phenotype with intermediary states and thus acquiring new targets. Plasticity occurs also at the metabolic level when GBM cells adapt to the microenvironment to survive (for example from hypoxic to normoxic area) leading to new resistances. Treatments by themselves induce phenotypic and genomic modifications of tumor areas provoking secondary resistance. For example, bevacizumab has been shown to become ineffective due to the activation of secondary pathways involved in angiogenesis (c-MET, PIGF …).

It is increasingly recognized that preclinical models have to be improved to reflect the clinical reality. In vitro, from 2D long term established cell lines grown on flat surface, 3D spheroids or cells embedded in several matrices, we now go through investigations on patient-derived primary cell lines either as glioma stem cell culture or as organoids. This last model certainly will recapitulate at best the tumoral and environmental heterogeneity of GBM. The deal for the following years will be to test therapies on such personalized models in a time framework which will allow to return towards the patient as rapidly as possible. Majority of in vivo models still are based on nude mice where immunological networks are absent. Even if syngeneic mice models of glioma can be useful, they lack the human specificities and complexities. Success of targeted therapies may be in part dependent on the development of reliable modeling of GBM.

Although targeting the immune system is not the subject of this review, this strategy is also part of many ongoing clinical investigations. Moreover, targeted therapy also mediates immunostimulatory and immunosuppressive effects [ 396 ]. While early results of checkpoint inhibitors or others immune-targeting drugs have been disappointing when used as monotherapy, likely because of the overwhelming immunosuppressive contribution of the immune tumor microenvironment (iTME), new combinatorial approach might overcome this issue. Interestingly, targeting microglia which is believed to be a major regulator of this iTME, has been suggested in combination with targeted or antiangiogenic therapies responsible of iTME modulation [ 397 ]. Indeed, VEGF and TGF-β signaling and abnormal vasculature, all belonging to the selected targets presented in this review has been implicated in fostering immunosuppression [ 398 ]. Their inhibition have been already shown to improved immunotherapies clinical outcomes in various cancer [ 399 ]. Although the impact of targeted therapies on iTME is still unclear, ongoing clinical trials combining bevacizumab or others targeted therapies to check-point inhibitors (for instance: NCT03743662 , NCT03661723 , NCT04704154 ) open new perspectives for GBM treatment.

5. Conclusions

Within molecular targeted therapies, the most frequently reported are those targeting (i) EGFR, which gene is amplified or over-expressed in more than 50% of GBMs (40 clinical trials), and more generally tyrosine kinase receptors (85 clinical trials) and (ii) VEGF/VEGFR (75 clinical trials of which 53 involving bevacizumab). Besides diagnostic and prognostic relevance, some markers can be of predictive interest (therapeutic decision making) or even constitute a molecular target that can be activated by a specific therapy (theranostic marker). It seems that new approaches aim to counter heterogeneity by targeting, not specifically certain tumor markers expressed irregularly, but the potential cause of the heterogeneity. New and combined approaches (targeted-, chemo-, immuno-, radiotherapies) may result in reduced secondary resistance because they target the whole tumor. Indeed, the discovery of GBM stem cells gave new hope for the treatment of GBM. Their likely significance in tumor initiation, and therefore in the heterogeneity of the GBM, makes them relevant targets but their differentiated counterparts need to be considered as well as their crosstalk only begin to be understood.

The 257 clinical trials described in tables of this manuscript reveal that many different options are explored and raised questions still unanswered about targeted therapies. However, they led to the accumulation of new fundamental knowledge, which will definitely help to understand the mechanisms of resistance and advance research. The results obtained in recent years highlight the need to better stratify patients, by providing more personalized treatment corresponding to the genetic composition and evolution of GBMs. In that way, initiatives such as N 2 M 2 (NOA-20) phase I/II trial ( NCT03158389 ) of molecularly matched targeted therapies plus radiotherapy in GBM patients, with an unmethylated MGMT promoter, appears of great interest [ 71 ]. In this trial, molecular profile characterization of tumors allows allocation of patients to first line targeted therapies according to their mode of action. Indeed, complex molecular diagnostics will translate in clinical decision and may be the future for GBM treatment.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.-C.M. and L.C.; formal analysis, M.-C.M., E.C.D.S. and L.C.; data curation, resources and original data preparation, E.C.D.S. and L.C.; supervision and project administration: L.C.; All authors have contributed to writing and reviewing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by ITI InnoVec (IdEx-ANR-10-IDEX-0002, SFRI-ANR-20-SFRI-0012).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

References

1. Stoyanov G.S. Dzhenkov D.L. On the Concepts and History of Glioblastoma Multiforme—Morphology, Genetics and Epigenetics Folia Med. 2018 60 48 66 10.1515/folmed-2017-0069 29668458

2. Lee S.C. Diffuse Gliomas for Nonneuropathologists: The New Integrated Molecular Diagnostics Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2018 142 804 814 10.5858/arpa.2017-0449-RA 29775073

3. Stupp R. Hegi M.E. Mason W.P. van den Bent M.J. Taphoorn M.J.B. Janzer R.C. Ludwin S.K. Allgeier A. Fisher B. Belanger K. Effects of Radiotherapy with Concomitant and Adjuvant Temozolomide versus Radiotherapy Alone on Survival in Glioblastoma in a Randomised Phase III Stud y: 5-Year Analysis of the EORTC-NCIC Trial Lancet Oncol. 2009 10 459 466 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70025-7 19269895

4. Zhang J. Stevens M.F.G. Bradshaw T.D. Temozolomide: Mechanisms of Action, Repair and Resistance Curr. Mol. Pharmacol. 2012 5 102 114 10.2174/1874467211205010102 22122467

5. Prados M.D. Byron S.A. Tran N.L. Phillips J.J. Molinaro A.M. Ligon K.L. Wen P.Y. Kuhn J.G. Mellinghoff I.K. de Groot J.F. Toward Precision Medicine in Glioblastoma: The Promise and the Challenges Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 1051 1063 10.1093/neuonc/nov031 25934816 PMC4490873

6. Franceschi E. Tosoni A. Bartolini S. Mazzocchi V. Fioravanti A. Brandes A.A. Treatment Options for Recurrent Glioblastoma: Pitfalls and Future Trends Expert Rev. Anticancer Ther. 2009 9 613 619 10.1586/era.09.23 19445578

7. Gallego O. Nonsurgical Treatment of Recurrent Glioblastoma Curr. Oncol. 2015 22 e273 e281 10.3747/co.22.2436 26300678 PMC4530825

8. Barani I.J. Larson D.A. Radiation Therapy of Glioblastoma Cancer Treat. Res. 2015 163 49 73 10.1007/978-3-319-12048-5_4 25468225

9. Lawrie T.A. Evans J. Gillespie D. Erridge S. Vale L. Kernohan A. Grant R. Long-term Side Effects of Radiotherapy, with or without Chemotherapy, for Glioma Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2019 8 CD013047 10.1002/14651858.CD013047 31425631 PMC6699681

10. Sun H. Du S. Liao G. Xie X. Ren C. Yuan Y.W. Do Glioma Patients Derive Any Therapeutic Benefit from Taking a Higher Cumulative Dose of Temozolomide Regimens?: A Meta-Analysis Medicine 2015 94 e827 10.1097/MD.0000000000000827 25997057 PMC4602866

11. Stupp R. Brada M. van den Bent M.J. Tonn J.-C. Pentheroudakis G. High-Grade Glioma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-Up Ann. Oncol. Off. J. Eur. Soc. Med. Oncol. 2014 25 Suppl. 3 iii93 iii101 10.1093/annonc/mdu050 24782454

12. Maschio M. Brain Tumor-Related Epilepsy Curr. Neuropharmacol. 2012 10 124 133 10.2174/157015912800604470 23204982 PMC3386502

13. Geraldo L.H.M. Garcia C. da Fonseca A.C.C. Dubois L.G.F. de Sampaio e Spohr T.C.L. Matias D. de Camargo Magalhães E.S. do Amaral R.F. da Rosa B.G. Grimaldi I. Glioblastoma Therapy in the Age of Molecular Medicine Trends Cancer 2019 5 46 65 10.1016/j.trecan.2018.11.002 30616755

14. Jain K.K. A Critical Overview of Targeted Therapies for Glioblastoma Front. Oncol. 2018 8 419 10.3389/fonc.2018.00419 30374421 PMC6196260

15. Mooney J. Bernstock J.D. Ilyas A. Ibrahim A. Yamashita D. Markert J.M. Nakano I. Current Approaches and Challenges in the Molecular Therapeutic Targeting of Glioblastoma World Neurosurg. 2019 129 90 100 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.05.205 31152883

16. Rajaratnam V. Islam M.M. Yang M. Slaby R. Ramirez H.M. Mirza S.P. Glioblastoma: Pathogenesis and Current Status of Chemotherapy and Other Novel Treatments Cancers 2020 12 937 10.3390/cancers12040937 32290213 PMC7226351

17. Zanders E.D. Svensson F. Bailey D.S. Therapy for Glioblastoma: Is It Working? Drug Discov. Today 2019 24 1193 1201 10.1016/j.drudis.2019.03.008 30878561

18. Alemany M. Velasco R. Simó M. Bruna J. Late Effects of Cancer Treatment: Consequences for Long-Term Brain Cancer Survivors Neuro-Oncol. Pract. 2020 8 18 30 10.1093/nop/npaa039 PMC7906268 33664966

19. Bobo R.H. Laske D.W. Akbasak A. Morrison P.F. Dedrick R.L. Oldfield E.H. Convection-Enhanced Delivery of Macromolecules in the Brain Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1994 91 2076 2080 10.1073/pnas.91.6.2076 8134351 PMC43312

20. Akiyama Y. Kimura Y. Enatsu R. Mikami T. Wanibuchi M. Mikuni N. Advantages and Disadvantages of Combined Chemotherapy with Carmustine Wafer and Bevacizumab in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: A Single-Institutional Experience World Neurosurg. 2018 113 e508 e514 10.1016/j.wneu.2018.02.070 29476996

21. Vellimana A.K. Recinos V.R. Hwang L. Fowers K.D. Li K.W. Zhang Y. Okonma S. Eberhart C.G. Brem H. Tyler B.M. Combination of Paclitaxel Thermal Gel Depot with Temozolomide and Radiotherapy Significantly Prolongs Survival in an Experimental Rodent Glioma Model J. Neurooncol. 2013 111 229 236 10.1007/s11060-012-1014-1 23224713 PMC4029109

22. Westphal M. Hilt D.C. Bortey E. Delavault P. Olivares R. Warnke P.C. Whittle I.R. Jääskeläinen J. Ram Z. A Phase 3 Trial of Local Chemotherapy with Biodegradable Carmustine (BCNU) Wafers (Gliadel Wafers) in Patients with Primary Malignant Glioma Neuro-Oncology 2003 5 79 88 10.1093/neuonc/5.2.79 12672279 PMC1920672

23. Wolinsky J.B. Colson Y.L. Grinstaff M.W. Local Drug Delivery Strategies for Cancer Treatment: Gels, Nanoparticles, Polymeric Films, Rods, and Wafers J. Control. Release Off. J. Control. Release Soc. 2012 159 14 26 10.1016/j.jconrel.2011.11.031 PMC3878823 22154931

24. Xing W. Shao C. Qi Z. Yang C. Wang Z. The Role of Gliadel Wafers in the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed GBM: A Meta-Analysis Drug Des. Devel. Ther. 2015 9 3341 3348 10.2147/DDDT.S85943 PMC4492653 26170620

25. Zhang Y.-D. Dai R.-Y. Chen Z. Zhang Y.-H. He X.-Z. Zhou J. Efficacy and Safety of Carmustine Wafers in the Treatment of Glioblastoma Multiforme: A Systematic Review Turk. Neurosurg. 2014 24 639 645 10.5137/1019-5149.JTN.8878-13.1 25269031

26. Karim R. Palazzo C. Evrard B. Piel G. Nanocarriers for the Treatment of Glioblastoma Multiforme: Current State-of-the-Art J. Control. Release Off. J. Control. Release Soc. 2016 227 23 37 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.02.026 26892752

27. Gutkin A. Cohen Z.R. Peer D. Harnessing Nanomedicine for Therapeutic Intervention in Glioblastoma Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2016 13 1573 1582 10.1080/17425247.2016.1200557 27292970

28. Kim S.-S. Harford J.B. Pirollo K.F. Chang E.H. Effective Treatment of Glioblastoma Requires Crossing the Blood-Brain Barrier and Targeting Tumors Including Cancer Stem Cells: The Promise of Nanomedicine Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2015 468 485 489 10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.06.137 26116770 PMC4690805

29. Avril T. Vauleon E. Tanguy-Royer S. Mosser J. Quillien V. Mechanisms of Immunomodulation in Human Glioblastoma Immunotherapy 2011 3 42 44 10.2217/imt.11.39 21524170

30. Brown N.F. Carter T.J. Ottaviani D. Mulholland P. Harnessing the Immune System in Glioblastoma Br. J. Cancer 2018 119 1171 1181 10.1038/s41416-018-0258-8 30393372 PMC6251037

31. McGranahan T. Therkelsen K.E. Ahmad S. Nagpal S. Current State of Immunotherapy for Treatment of Glioblastoma Curr. Treat. Options Oncol. 2019 20 24 10.1007/s11864-019-0619-4 30790064 PMC6394457

32. Miyazaki T. Ishikawa E. Sugii N. Matsuda M. Therapeutic Strategies for Overcoming Immunotherapy Resistance Mediated by Immunosuppressive Factors of the Glioblastoma Microenvironment Cancers 2020 12 1960 10.3390/cancers12071960 PMC7409093 32707672

33. Romani M. Pistillo M.P. Carosio R. Morabito A. Banelli B. Immune Checkpoints and Innovative Therapies in Glioblastoma Front. Oncol. 2018 8 464 10.3389/fonc.2018.00464 30406030 PMC6206227

34. Fuchs Q. Pierrevelcin M. Messe M. Lhermitte B. Blandin A.-F. Papin C. Coca A. Dontenwill M. Entz-Werlé N. Hypoxia Inducible Factors’ Signaling in Pediatric High-Grade Gliomas: Role, Modelization and Innovative Targeted Approaches Cancers 2020 12 979 10.3390/cancers12040979 PMC7226233 32326644

35. Fan Y. Potdar A.A. Gong Y. Eswarappa S.M. Donnola S. Lathia J.D. Hambardzumyan D. Rich J.N. Fox P.L. Profilin-1 Phosphorylation Directs Angiocrine Expression and Glioblastoma Progression through HIF-1α Accumulation Nat. Cell Biol. 2014 16 445 456 10.1038/ncb2954 24747440 PMC4036069

36. Wang E. Zhang C. Polavaram N. Liu F. Wu G. Schroeder M.A. Lau J.S. Mukhopadhyay D. Jiang S.-W. O’Neill B.P. The Role of Factor Inhibiting HIF (FIH-1) in Inhibiting HIF-1 Transcriptional Activity in Glioblastoma Multiforme PLoS ONE 2014 9 e86102 10.1371/journal.pone.0086102 24465898 PMC3900478

37. Covello K.L. Kehler J. Yu H. Gordan J.D. Arsham A.M. Hu C.-J. Labosky P.A. Simon M.C. Keith B. HIF-2alpha Regulates Oct-4: Effects of Hypoxia on Stem Cell Function, Embryonic Development, and Tumor Growth Genes Dev. 2006 20 557 570 10.1101/gad.1399906 16510872 PMC1410808

38. Strowd R.E. Ellingson B.M. Wen P.Y. Ahluwalia M.S. Piotrowski A.F. Desai A.S. Clarke J.L. Lieberman F.S. Desideri S. Nabors L.B. Safety and Activity of a First-in-Class Oral HIF2-Alpha Inhibitor, PT2385, in Patients with First Recurrent Glioblastoma (GBM) J. Clin. Oncol. 2019 37 2027 10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.2027 PMC10863646 37864646

39. Clark P.M. Mai W.X. Cloughesy T.F. Nathanson D.A. Emerging Approaches for Targeting Metabolic Vulnerabilities in Malignant Glioma Curr. Neurol. Neurosci. Rep. 2016 16 17 10.1007/s11910-015-0613-6 26759318

40. Woolf E.C. Scheck A.C. The Ketogenic Diet for the Treatment of Malignant Glioma J. Lipid Res. 2015 56 5 10 10.1194/jlr.R046797 24503133 PMC4274070

41. Hay N. Reprogramming Glucose Metabolism in Cancer: Can It Be Exploited for Cancer Therapy? Nat. Rev. Cancer 2016 16 635 649 10.1038/nrc.2016.77 27634447 PMC5516800

42. Ghiaseddin A.P. Shin D. Melnick K. Tran D.D. Tumor Treating Fields in the Management of Patients with Malignant Gliomas Curr. Treat. Options Oncol. 2020 21 76 10.1007/s11864-020-00773-5 32734509 PMC7391234

43. Ceccarelli M. Barthel F.P. Malta T.M. Sabedot T.S. Salama S.R. Murray B.A. Morozova O. Newton Y. Radenbaugh A. Pagnotta S.M. Molecular Profiling Reveals Biologically Discrete Subsets and Pathways of Progression in Diffuse Glioma Cell 2016 164 550 563 10.1016/j.cell.2015.12.028 26824661 PMC4754110

44. Perrin S.L. Samuel M.S. Koszyca B. Brown M.P. Ebert L.M. Oksdath M. Gomez G.A. Glioblastoma Heterogeneity and the Tumour Microenvironment: Implications for Preclinical Research and Development of New Treatments Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2019 47 625 638 10.1042/BST20180444 30902924

45. Verhaak R.G.W. Hoadley K.A. Purdom E. Wang V. Qi Y. Wilkerson M.D. Miller C.R. Ding L. Golub T. Mesirov J.P. Integrated Genomic Analysis Identifies Clinically Relevant Subtypes of Glioblastoma Characterized by Abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1 Cancer Cell 2010 17 98 110 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.12.020 20129251 PMC2818769

46. White K. Connor K. Clerkin J. Murphy B.M. Salvucci M. O’Farrell A.C. Rehm M. O’Brien D. Prehn J.H.M. Niclou S.P. New Hints towards a Precision Medicine Strategy for IDH Wild-Type Glioblastoma Ann. Oncol. 2020 31 1679 1692 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.08.2336 32918998

47. Aldape K. Zadeh G. Mansouri S. Reifenberger G. von Deimling A. Glioblastoma: Pathology, Molecular Mechanisms and Markers Acta Neuropathol. 2015 129 829 848 10.1007/s00401-015-1432-1 25943888

48. Behnan J. Finocchiaro G. Hanna G. The Landscape of the Mesenchymal Signature in Brain Tumours Brain J. Neurol. 2019 142 847 866 10.1093/brain/awz044 PMC6485274 30946477

49. Tirosh I. Suvà M.L. Tackling the Many Facets of Glioblastoma Heterogeneity Cell Stem Cell 2020 26 303 304 10.1016/j.stem.2020.02.005 32142659

50. Neftel C. Laffy J. Filbin M.G. Hara T. Shore M.E. Rahme G.J. Richman A.R. Silverbush D. Shaw M.L. Hebert C.M. An Integrative Model of Cellular States, Plasticity and Genetics for Glioblastoma Cell 2019 178 835 849.e21 10.1016/j.cell.2019.06.024 31327527 PMC6703186

51. Bailey P. Cushing H. A Classification of Tumors of the Glioma Groupo on a Histogenetic Basis with a Correlation Study of Prognosis Philadelphia, J.B Lippincott Co. Philadelphia, PA, USA 1926

52. Kernohan J.W. Mabon R.F. A Simplified Classification of the Gliomas Proc. Staff Meet. Mayo Clin. 1949 24 71 75 18111063

53. Zülch K.J. Types Histologiques des Tumeurs du Système Nerveux Central Organisation mondiale de la santé Genève, Switzerland 1979 978-92-4-276021-7

54. Kleihues P. Burger P.C. Scheithauer B.W. The New WHO Classification of Brain Tumours Brain Pathol. 1993 3 255 268 10.1111/j.1750-3639.1993.tb00752.x 8293185

55. Louis D.N. Perry A. Reifenberger G. von Deimling A. Figarella-Branger D. Cavenee W.K. Ohgaki H. Wiestler O.D. Kleihues P. Ellison D.W. The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System: A Summary Acta Neuropathol. 2016 131 803 820 10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1 27157931

56. Louis D.N. Ohgaki H. Wiestler O.D. Cavenee W.K. Burger P.C. Jouvet A. Scheithauer B.W. Kleihues P. The 2007 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System Acta Neuropathol. 2007 114 97 109 10.1007/s00401-007-0243-4 17618441 PMC1929165

57. Louis D.N. Holland E.C. Cairncross J.G. Glioma Classification: A Molecular Reappraisal Am. J. Pathol. 2001 159 779 786 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)61750-6 11549567 PMC1850454

58. Louis D.N. Perry A. Burger P. Ellison D.W. Reifenberger G. von Deimling A. Aldape K. Brat D. Collins V.P. Eberhart C. International Society of Neuropathology—Haarlem Consensus Guidelines for Nervous System Tumor Classification and Grading Brain Pathol. 2014 24 429 435 10.1111/bpa.12171 24990071 PMC8029490

59. Singh S.K. Clarke I.D. Terasaki M. Bonn V.E. Hawkins C. Squire J. Dirks P.B. Identification of a Cancer Stem Cell in Human Brain Tumors Cancer Res. 2003 63 5821 5828 14522905

60. Singh S.K. Clarke I.D. Hide T. Dirks P.B. Cancer Stem Cells in Nervous System Tumors Oncogene 2004 23 7267 7273 10.1038/sj.onc.1207946 15378086

61. Cruceru M.L. Neagu M. Demoulin J.-B. Constantinescu S.N. Therapy Targets in Glioblastoma and Cancer Stem Cells: Lessons from Haematopoietic Neoplasms J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2013 17 1218 1235 10.1111/jcmm.12122 23998913 PMC4159024

62. Ignatova T.N. Kukekov V.G. Laywell E.D. Suslov O.N. Vrionis F.D. Steindler D.A. Human Cortical Glial Tumors Contain Neural Stem-like Cells Expressing Astroglial and Neuronal Markers in Vitro Glia 2002 39 193 206 10.1002/glia.10094 12203386

63. Yi Y. Hsieh I.-Y. Huang X. Li J. Zhao W. Glioblastoma Stem-Like Cells: Characteristics, Microenvironment, and Therapy Front. Pharmacol. 2016 7 477 10.3389/fphar.2016.00477 28003805 PMC5141588

64. Koso H. Takeda H. Yew C.C.K. Ward J.M. Nariai N. Ueno K. Nagasaki M. Watanabe S. Rust A.G. Adams D.J. Transposon Mutagenesis Identifies Genes That Transform Neural Stem Cells into Glioma-Initiating Cells Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012 109 E2998 E3007 10.1073/pnas.1215899109 23045694 PMC3497753

65. Iwadate Y. Plasticity in Glioma Stem Cell Phenotype and Its Therapeutic Implication Neurol. Med. Chir. 2018 58 61 70 10.2176/nmc.ra.2017-0089 29129882 PMC5830525

66. Chen W. Dong J. Haiech J. Kilhoffer M.-C. Zeniou M. Cancer Stem Cell Quiescence and Plasticity as Major Challenges in Cancer Therapy Stem Cells Int. 2016 2016 1 16 10.1155/2016/1740936 27418931 PMC4932171

67. Jackson M. Hassiotou F. Nowak A. Glioblastoma Stem-like Cells: At the Root of Tumor Recurrence and a Therapeutic Target Carcinogenesis 2015 36 177 185 10.1093/carcin/bgu243 25504149

68. Sørensen M.D. Fosmark S. Hellwege S. Beier D. Kristensen B.W. Beier C.P. Chemoresistance and Chemotherapy Targeting Stem-like Cells in Malignant Glioma Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 2015 853 111 138 10.1007/978-3-319-16537-0_7 25895710

69. Penas-Prado M. Hess K.R. Fisch M.J. Lagrone L.W. Groves M.D. Levin V.A. De Groot J.F. Puduvalli V.K. Colman H. Volas-Redd G. Randomized Phase II Adjuvant Factorial Study of Dose-Dense Temozolomide Alone and in Combination with Isotretinoin, Celecoxib, and/or Thalidomide for Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 266 273 10.1093/neuonc/nou155 25239666 PMC4288521

70. Grossman S.A. Olson J. Batchelor T. Peereboom D. Lesser G. Desideri S. Ye X. Hammour T. Supko J.G. New Approaches to Brain Tumor Therapy CNS Consortium Effect of Phenytoin on Celecoxib Pharmacokinetics in Patients with Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2008 10 190 198 10.1215/15228517-2007-055 18287342 PMC2613821

71. Wick W. Dettmer S. Berberich A. Kessler T. Karapanagiotou-Schenkel I. Wick A. Winkler F. Pfaff E. Brors B. Debus J. N2M2 (NOA-20) Phase I/II Trial of Molecularly Matched Targeted Therapies plus Radiotherapy in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Non-MGMT Hypermethylated Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2019 21 95 105 10.1093/neuonc/noy161 30277538 PMC6303534

72. Nusse R. Wnt Signaling and Stem Cell Control Cell Res. 2008 18 523 527 10.1038/cr.2008.47 18392048

73. Yu C.-Y. Liang G.-B. Du P. Liu Y.-H. Lgr4 Promotes Glioma Cell Proliferation through Activation of Wnt Signaling Asian Pac. J. Cancer Prev. APJCP 2013 14 4907 4911 10.7314/APJCP.2013.14.8.4907 24083766

74. Bhuvanalakshmi G. Arfuso F. Millward M. Dharmarajan A. Warrier S. Secreted Frizzled-Related Protein 4 Inhibits Glioma Stem-like Cells by Reversing Epithelial to Mesenchymal Transition, Inducing Apoptosis and Decreasing Cancer Stem Cell Properties PLoS ONE 2015 10 e0127517 10.1371/journal.pone.0127517 26030909 PMC4452329

75. Sareddy G.R. Kesanakurti D. Kirti P.B. Babu P.P. Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Diclofenac and Celecoxib Attenuates Wnt/β-Catenin/Tcf Signaling Pathway in Human Glioblastoma Cells Neurochem. Res. 2013 38 2313 2322 10.1007/s11064-013-1142-9 24013885

76. Korur S. Huber R.M. Sivasankaran B. Petrich M. Morin P. Hemmings B.A. Merlo A. Lino M.M. GSK3beta Regulates Differentiation and Growth Arrest in Glioblastoma PLoS ONE 2009 4 e7443 10.1371/journal.pone.0007443 19823589 PMC2757722

77. Lee Y. Lee J.-K. Ahn S.H. Lee J. Nam D.-H. WNT Signaling in Glioblastoma and Therapeutic Opportunities Lab. Investig. J. Tech. Methods Pathol. 2016 96 137 150 10.1038/labinvest.2015.140 26641068

78. Ramachandran I. Ganapathy V. Gillies E. Fonseca I. Sureban S.M. Houchen C.W. Reis A. Queimado L. Wnt Inhibitory Factor 1 Suppresses Cancer Stemness and Induces Cellular Senescence Cell Death Dis. 2014 5 e1246 10.1038/cddis.2014.219 24853424 PMC4047921

79. Kanabur P. Guo S. Simonds G.R. Kelly D.F. Gourdie R.G. Verbridge S.S. Sheng Z. Patient-Derived Glioblastoma Stem Cells Respond Differentially to Targeted Therapies Oncotarget 2016 7 86406 86419 10.18632/oncotarget.13415 27863440 PMC5349922

80. Li J.-L. Sainson R.C.A. Oon C.E. Turley H. Leek R. Sheldon H. Bridges E. Shi W. Snell C. Bowden E.T. DLL4-Notch Signaling Mediates Tumor Resistance to Anti-VEGF Therapy in Vivo Cancer Res. 2011 71 6073 6083 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1704 21803743

81. Yu J.-B. Jiang H. Zhan R.-Y. Aberrant Notch Signaling in Glioblastoma Stem Cells Contributes to Tumor Recurrence and Invasion Mol. Med. Rep. 2016 14 1263 1268 10.3892/mmr.2016.5391 27315154

82. Shih I.-M. Wang T.-L. Notch Signaling, Gamma-Secretase Inhibitors, and Cancer Therapy Cancer Res. 2007 67 1879 1882 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-3958 17332312

83. Hovinga K.E. Shimizu F. Wang R. Panagiotakos G. Van Der Heijden M. Moayedpardazi H. Correia A.S. Soulet D. Major T. Menon J. Inhibition of Notch Signaling in Glioblastoma Targets Cancer Stem Cells via an Endothelial Cell Intermediate Stem Cells Dayt. Ohio 2010 28 1019 1029 10.1002/stem.429 PMC5532884 20506127

84. Saito N. Fu J. Zheng S. Yao J. Wang S. Liu D.D. Yuan Y. Sulman E.P. Lang F.F. Colman H. A High Notch Pathway Activation Predicts Response to γ Secretase Inhibitors in Proneural Subtype of Glioma Tumor-Initiating Cells: Targeting Proneural GBM with Notch Inhibition Stem Cells 2014 32 301 312 10.1002/stem.1528 24038660 PMC3947402

85. Tanaka S. Nakada M. Yamada D. Nakano I. Todo T. Ino Y. Hoshii T. Tadokoro Y. Ohta K. Ali M.A.E. Strong Therapeutic Potential of γ-Secretase Inhibitor MRK003 for CD44-High and CD133-Low Glioblastoma Initiating Cells J. Neurooncol. 2015 121 239 250 10.1007/s11060-014-1630-z 25293440

86. Yahyanejad S. King H. Iglesias V.S. Granton P.V. Barbeau L.M.O. van Hoof S.J. Groot A.J. Habets R. Prickaerts J. Chalmers A.J. NOTCH Blockade Combined with Radiation Therapy and Temozolomide Prolongs Survival of Orthotopic Glioblastoma Oncotarget 2016 7 41251 41264 10.18632/oncotarget.9275 27183910 PMC5173056

87. Opačak-Bernardi T. Ryu J.S. Raucher D. Effects of Cell Penetrating Notch Inhibitory Peptide Conjugated to Elastin-like Polypeptide on Glioblastoma Cells J. Drug Target. 2017 25 523 531 10.1080/1061186X.2017.1289537 28140690

88. Pan E. Supko J.G. Kaley T.J. Butowski N.A. Cloughesy T. Jung J. Desideri S. Grossman S. Ye X. Park D.M. Phase I Study of RO4929097 with Bevacizumab in Patients with Recurrent Malignant Glioma J. Neurooncol. 2016 130 571 579 10.1007/s11060-016-2263-1 27826680 PMC5571739

89. Auffinger B. Spencer D. Pytel P. Ahmed A.U. Lesniak M.S. The Role of Glioma Stem Cells in Chemotherapy Resistance and Glioblastoma Multiforme Recurrence Expert Rev. Neurother. 2015 15 741 752 10.1586/14737175.2015.1051968 26027432 PMC4830899

90. Lee Y. Kim K.H. Kim D.G. Cho H.J. Kim Y. Rheey J. Shin K. Seo Y.J. Choi Y.-S. Lee J.-I. FoxM1 Promotes Stemness and Radio-Resistance of Glioblastoma by Regulating the Master Stem Cell Regulator Sox2 PLoS ONE 2015 10 e0137703 10.1371/journal.pone.0137703 26444992 PMC4596841

91. Tu Y. Niu M. Xie P. Yue C. Liu N. Qi Z. Gao S. Liu H. Shi Q. Yu R. Smoothened Is a Poor Prognosis Factor and a Potential Therapeutic Target in Glioma Sci. Rep. 2017 7 42630 10.1038/srep42630 28195165 PMC5307388

92. Rimkus T.K. Carpenter R.L. Qasem S. Chan M. Lo H.-W. Targeting the Sonic Hedgehog Signaling Pathway: Review of Smoothened and GLI Inhibitors Cancers 2016 8 22 10.3390/cancers8020022 PMC4773745 26891329

93. Lin T.L. Matsui W. Hedgehog Pathway as a Drug Target: Smoothened Inhibitors in Development OncoTargets Ther. 2012 5 47 58 10.2147/OTT.S21957 22500124 PMC3325001

94. Bar E.E. Chaudhry A. Lin A. Fan X. Schreck K. Matsui W. Piccirillo S. Vescovi A.L. DiMeco F. Olivi A. Cyclopamine-Mediated Hedgehog Pathway Inhibition Depletes Stem-like Cancer Cells in Glioblastoma Stem Cells Dayt. Ohio 2007 25 2524 2533 10.1634/stemcells.2007-0166 17628016 PMC2610257

95. Bensalma S. Chadeneau C. Legigan T. Renoux B. Gaillard A. de Boisvilliers M. Pinet-Charvet C. Papot S. Muller J.M. Evaluation of Cytotoxic Properties of a Cyclopamine Glucuronide Prodrug in Rat Glioblastoma Cells and Tumors J. Mol. Neurosci. 2015 55 51 61 10.1007/s12031-014-0395-3 25280457

96. Liu Y.-J. Ma Y.-C. Zhang W.-J. Yang Z.-Z. Liang D.-S. Wu Z.-F. Qi X.-R. Combination Therapy with Micellarized Cyclopamine and Temozolomide Attenuate Glioblastoma Growth through Gli1 Down-Regulation Oncotarget 2017 8 42495 42509 10.18632/oncotarget.17205 28477008 PMC5522083

97. de la Iglesia N. Puram S.V. Bonni A. STAT3 Regulation of Glioblastoma Pathogenesis Curr. Mol. Med. 2009 9 580 590 10.2174/156652409788488739 19601808 PMC2712135

98. Reguera-Nuñez E. Roca C. Hardy E. de la Fuente M. Csaba N. Garcia-Fuentes M. Implantable Controlled Release Devices for BMP-7 Delivery and Suppression of Glioblastoma Initiating Cells Biomaterials 2014 35 2859 2867 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.12.001 24406213

99. Rampazzo E. Dettin M. Maule F. Scabello A. Calvanese L. D’Auria G. Falcigno L. Porcù E. Zamuner A. Della Puppa A. A Synthetic BMP-2 Mimicking Peptide Induces Glioblastoma Stem Cell Differentiation Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2017 1861 2282 2292 10.1016/j.bbagen.2017.07.001 28687190

100. Garrido W. Rocha J.D. Jaramillo C. Fernandez K. Oyarzun C. San Martin R. Quezada C. Chemoresistance in High-Grade Gliomas: Relevance of Adenosine Signalling in Stem-like Cells of Glioblastoma Multiforme Curr. Drug Targets 2014 15 931 942 10.2174/1389450115666140826122315 25174341

101. Uribe D. Torres Á. Rocha J.D. Niechi I. Oyarzún C. Sobrevia L. San Martín R. Quezada C. Multidrug Resistance in Glioblastoma Stem-like Cells: Role of the Hypoxic Microenvironment and Adenosine Signaling Mol. Asp. Med. 2017 55 140 151 10.1016/j.mam.2017.01.009 28223127

102. Quezada C. Garrido W. Oyarzún C. Fernández K. Segura R. Melo R. Casanello P. Sobrevia L. San Martín R. 5′-Ectonucleotidase Mediates Multiple-Drug Resistance in Glioblastoma Multiforme Cells J. Cell. Physiol. 2013 228 602 608 10.1002/jcp.24168 22833450

103. Torres A. Vargas Y. Uribe D. Jaramillo C. Gleisner A. Salazar-Onfray F. López M.N. Melo R. Oyarzún C. San Martín R. Adenosine A3 Receptor Elicits Chemoresistance Mediated by Multiple Resistance-Associated Protein-1 in Human Glioblastoma Stem-like Cells Oncotarget 2016 7 67373 67386 10.18632/oncotarget.12033 27634913 PMC5341882

104. Daniele S. Zappelli E. Natali L. Martini C. Trincavelli M.L. Modulation of A1 and A2B Adenosine Receptor Activity: A New Strategy to Sensitise Glioblastoma Stem Cells to Chemotherapy Cell Death Dis. 2014 5 e1539 10.1038/cddis.2014.487 25429616 PMC4260745

105. Nørøxe D.S. Poulsen H.S. Lassen U. Hallmarks of Glioblastoma: A Systematic Review ESMO Open 2016 1 e000144 10.1136/esmoopen-2016-000144 28912963 PMC5419216

106. Majewska E. Szeliga M. AKT/GSK3β Signaling in Glioblastoma Neurochem. Res. 2017 42 918 924 10.1007/s11064-016-2044-4 27568206 PMC5357492

107. Normanno N. De Luca A. Bianco C. Strizzi L. Mancino M. Maiello M.R. Carotenuto A. De Feo G. Caponigro F. Salomon D.S. Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Signaling in Cancer Gene 2006 366 2 16 10.1016/j.gene.2005.10.018 16377102

108. Frederick L. Wang X.Y. Eley G. James C.D. Diversity and Frequency of Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations in Human Glioblastomas Cancer Res. 2000 60 1383 1387 10728703

109. Combs S.E. Schulz-Ertner D. Hartmann C. Welzel T. Timke C. Herfarth K. von Deimling A. Edler L. Platten M. Wick W. Phase I/II Study of Cetuximab plus Temozolomide as Radiochemotherapy for Primary Glioblastoma (GERT)—Eudract Number 2005–003911–63; NCT00311857 J. Clin. Oncol. 2008 26 2077 10.1200/jco.2008.26.15_suppl.2077

110. Hasselbalch B. Lassen U. Hansen S. Holmberg M. Sørensen M. Kosteljanetz M. Broholm H. Stockhausen M.-T. Poulsen H.S. Cetuximab, Bevacizumab, and Irinotecan for Patients with Primary Glioblastoma and Progression after Radiation Therapy and Temozolomide: A Phase II Trial Neuro-Oncology 2010 12 508 516 10.1093/neuonc/nop063 20406901 PMC2940618

111. Westphal M. Heese O. Steinbach J.P. Schnell O. Schackert G. Mehdorn M. Schulz D. Simon M. Schlegel U. Senft C. A Randomised, Open Label Phase III Trial with Nimotuzumab, an Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibody in the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Adult Glioblastoma Eur. J. Cancer 2015 51 522 532 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.12.019 25616647

112. Brown P.D. Krishnan S. Sarkaria J.N. Wu W. Jaeckle K.A. Uhm J.H. Geoffroy F.J. Arusell R. Kitange G. Jenkins R.B. Phase I/II Trial of Erlotinib and Temozolomide with Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study N0177 J. Clin. Oncol. 2008 26 5603 5609 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.0612 18955445 PMC2651097

113. Peereboom D.M. Ahluwalia M.S. Ye X. Supko J.G. Hilderbrand S.L. Phuphanich S. Nabors L.B. Rosenfeld M.R. Mikkelsen T. Grossman S.A. NABTT 0502: A Phase II and Pharmacokinetic Study of Erlotinib and Sorafenib for Patients with Progressive or Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme Neuro-Oncology 2013 15 490 496 10.1093/neuonc/nos322 23328813 PMC3607264

114. Raizer J.J. Giglio P. Hu J. Groves M. Merrell R. Conrad C. Phuphanich S. Puduvalli V.K. Loghin M. Paleologos N. A Phase II Study of Bevacizumab and Erlotinib after Radiation and Temozolomide in MGMT Unmethylated GBM Patients J. Neurooncol. 2016 126 185 192 10.1007/s11060-015-1958-z 26476729 PMC4826294

115. Peereboom D.M. Shepard D.R. Ahluwalia M.S. Brewer C.J. Agarwal N. Stevens G.H.J. Suh J.H. Toms S.A. Vogelbaum M.A. Weil R.J. Phase II Trial of Erlotinib with Temozolomide and Radiation in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Neurooncol. 2010 98 93 99 10.1007/s11060-009-0067-2 19960228

116. Reardon D.A. Desjardins A. Vredenburgh J.J. Gururangan S. Friedman A.H. Herndon J.E. Marcello J. Norfleet J.A. McLendon R.E. Sampson J.H. Phase 2 Trial of Erlotinib plus Sirolimus in Adults with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2010 96 219 230 10.1007/s11060-009-9950-0 19562254 PMC2844073

117. Sathornsumetee S. Desjardins A. Vredenburgh J.J. McLendon R.E. Marcello J. Herndon J.E. Mathe A. Hamilton M. Rich J.N. Norfleet J.A. Phase II Trial of Bevacizumab and Erlotinib in Patients with Recurrent Malignant Glioma Neuro-Oncology 2010 12 1300 1310 10.1093/neuonc/noq099 20716591 PMC3018944

118. van den Bent M.J. Brandes A.A. Rampling R. Kouwenhoven M.C.M. Kros J.M. Carpentier A.F. Clement P.M. Frenay M. Campone M. Baurain J.-F. Randomized Phase II Trial of Erlotinib versus Temozolomide or Carmustine in Recurrent Glioblastoma: EORTC Brain Tumor Group Study 26034 J. Clin. Oncol. 2009 27 1268 1274 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.5984 19204207 PMC2667826

119. Kesavabhotla K. Schlaff C.D. Shin B. Mubita L. Kaplan R. Tsiouris A.J. Pannullo S.C. Christos P. Lavi E. Scheff R. Phase I/II Study of Oral Erlotinib for Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Glioblastoma Multiforme and Anaplastic Astrocytoma J. Exp. Ther. Oncol. 2012 10 71 81 22946346

120. Wen P.Y. Chang S.M. Lamborn K.R. Kuhn J.G. Norden A.D. Cloughesy T.F. Robins H.I. Lieberman F.S. Gilbert M.R. Mehta M.P. Phase I/II Study of Erlotinib and Temsirolimus for Patients with Recurrent Malignant Gliomas: North American Brain Tumor Consortium Trial 04-02 Neuro-Oncology 2014 16 567 578 10.1093/neuonc/not247 24470557 PMC3956354

121. Raizer J.J. Abrey L.E. Lassman A.B. Chang S.M. Lamborn K.R. Kuhn J.G. Yung W.K.A. Gilbert M.R. Aldape K.A. Wen P.Y. A Phase II Trial of Erlotinib in Patients with Recurrent Malignant Gliomas and Nonprogressive Glioblastoma Multiforme Postradiation Therapy Neuro-Oncology 2010 12 95 103 10.1093/neuonc/nop015 20150372 PMC2940554

122. Hegi M.E. Diserens A.-C. Bady P. Kamoshima Y. Kouwenhoven M.C.M. Delorenzi M. Lambiv W.L. Hamou M.-F. Matter M.S. Koch A. Pathway Analysis of Glioblastoma Tissue after Preoperative Treatment with the EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Gefitinib--a Phase II Trial Mol. Cancer Ther. 2011 10 1102 1112 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-11-0048 21471286

123. Rich J.N. Reardon D.A. Peery T. Dowell J.M. Quinn J.A. Penne K.L. Wikstrand C.J. Van Duyn L.B. Dancey J.E. McLendon R.E. Phase II Trial of Gefitinib in Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2004 22 133 142 10.1200/JCO.2004.08.110 14638850

124. Chakravarti A. Wang M. Robins H.I. Lautenschlaeger T. Curran W.J. Brachman D.G. Schultz C.J. Choucair A. Dolled-Filhart M. Christiansen J. RTOG 0211: A Phase 1/2 Study of Radiation Therapy with Concurrent Gefitinib for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Patients Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2013 85 1206 1211 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.10.008 23182702 PMC4199329

125. Reardon D.A. Nabors L.B. Mason W.P. Perry J.R. Shapiro W. Kavan P. Mathieu D. Phuphanich S. Cseh A. Fu Y. Phase I/Randomized Phase II Study of Afatinib, an Irreversible ErbB Family Blocker, with or without Protracted Temozolomide in Adults with Recurrent Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 430 439 10.1093/neuonc/nou160 25140039 PMC4483093

126. Sepúlveda-Sánchez J.M. Vaz M.Á. Balañá C. Gil-Gil M. Reynés G. Gallego Ó. Martínez-García M. Vicente E. Quindós M. Luque R. Phase II Trial of Dacomitinib, a Pan–Human EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, in Recurrent Glioblastoma Patients with EGFR Amplification Neuro-Oncology 2017 19 1522 1531 10.1093/neuonc/nox105 28575464 PMC5737732

127. Reardon D.A. Groves M.D. Wen P.Y. Nabors L. Mikkelsen T. Rosenfeld S. Raizer J. Barriuso J. McLendon R.E. Suttle A.B. A Phase I/II Trial of Pazopanib in Combination with Lapatinib in Adult Patients with Relapsed Malignant Glioma Clin. Cancer Res. 2013 19 900 908 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-1707 23363814

128. Neyns B. Sadones J. Joosens E. Bouttens F. Verbeke L. Baurain J.-F. D’Hondt L. Strauven T. Chaskis C. In’t Veld P. Stratified Phase II Trial of Cetuximab in Patients with Recurrent High-Grade Glioma Ann. Oncol. 2009 20 1596 1603 10.1093/annonc/mdp032 19491283

129. Solomon M.T. Miranda N. Jorrín E. Chon I. Marinello J.J. Alert J. Lorenzo-Luaces P. Crombet T. Nimotuzumab in Combination with Radiotherapy in High Grade Glioma Patients: A Single Institution Experience Cancer Biol. Ther. 2014 15 504 509 10.4161/cbt.28021 24521695 PMC4026072

130. Nitta Y. Shimizu S. Shishido-Hara Y. Suzuki K. Shiokawa Y. Nagane M. Nimotuzumab Enhances Temozolomide-Induced Growth Suppression of Glioma Cells Expressing Mutant EGFR in Vivo Cancer Med. 2016 5 486 499 10.1002/cam4.614 26778701 PMC4799951

131. Lim Y. Yoo J. Kim M.-S. Hur M. Lee E.H. Hur H.-S. Lee J.-C. Lee S.-N. Park T.W. Lee K. GC1118, an Anti-EGFR Antibody with a Distinct Binding Epitope and Superior Inhibitory Activity against High-Affinity EGFR Ligands Mol. Cancer Ther. 2016 15 251 263 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0679 26586721

132. Iida M. Brand T.M. Starr M.M. Li C. Huppert E.J. Luthar N. Pedersen M.W. Horak I.D. Kragh M. Wheeler D.L. Sym004, a Novel EGFR Antibody Mixture, Can Overcome Acquired Resistance to Cetuximab Neoplasia 2013 15 1196 1206 10.1593/neo.131584 24204198 PMC3819635

133. Montagut C. Argilés G. Ciardiello F. Poulsen T.T. Dienstmann R. Kragh M. Kopetz S. Lindsted T. Ding C. Vidal J. Efficacy of Sym004 in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer with Acquired Resistance to Anti-EGFR Therapy and Molecularly Selected by Circulating Tumor DNA Analyses: A Phase 2 Randomized Clinical Trial JAMA Oncol. 2018 4 e175245 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.5245 29423521 PMC5885274

134. Phillips A.C. Boghaert E.R. Vaidya K.S. Mitten M.J. Norvell S. Falls H.D. DeVries P.J. Cheng D. Meulbroek J.A. Buchanan F.G. ABT-414, an Antibody-Drug Conjugate Targeting a Tumor-Selective EGFR Epitope Mol. Cancer Ther. 2016 15 661 669 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0901 26846818

135. Van Den Bent M. Eoli M. Sepulveda J.M. Smits M. Walenkamp A. Frenel J.-S. Franceschi E. Clement P.M. Chinot O. De Vos F. INTELLANCE 2/EORTC 1410 Randomized Phase II Study of Depatux-M Alone and with Temozolomide vs Temozolomide or Lomustine in Recurrent EGFR Amplified Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2020 22 684 693 10.1093/neuonc/noz222 31747009 PMC7229258

136. Clarke J.L. Molinaro A.M. Phillips J.J. Butowski N.A. Chang S.M. Perry A. Costello J.F. DeSilva A.A. Rabbitt J.E. Prados M.D. A Single-Institution Phase II Trial of Radiation, Temozolomide, Erlotinib, and Bevacizumab for Initial Treatment of Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2014 16 984 990 10.1093/neuonc/nou029 24637230 PMC4057142

137. Uhm J.H. Ballman K.V. Wu W. Giannini C. Krauss J.C. Buckner J.C. James C.D. Scheithauer B.W. Behrens R.J. Flynn P.J. Phase II Evaluation of Gefitinib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Grade 4 Astrocytoma: Mayo/North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study N0074 Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2011 80 347 353 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.01.070 20510539 PMC5753591

138. Arkhipov A. Shan Y. Kim E.T. Dror R.O. Shaw D.E. Her2 Activation Mechanism Reflects Evolutionary Preservation of Asymmetric Ectodomain Dimers in the Human EGFR Family eLife 2013 2 e00708 10.7554/eLife.00708 23878723 PMC3713454

139. Iqbal N. Iqbal N. Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 (HER2) in Cancers: Overexpression and Therapeutic Implications Mol. Biol. Int. 2014 2014 10.1155/2014/852748 PMC4170925 25276427

140. Thiessen B. Stewart C. Tsao M. Kamel-Reid S. Schaiquevich P. Mason W. Easaw J. Belanger K. Forsyth P. McIntosh L. A Phase I/II Trial of GW572016 (Lapatinib) in Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme: Clinical Outcomes, Pharmacokinetics and Molecular Correlation Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2010 65 353 361 10.1007/s00280-009-1041-6 19499221

141. Yu A. Faiq N. Green S. Lai A. Green R. Hu J. Cloughesy T.F. Mellinghoff I. Nghiemphu P.L. Report of Safety of Pulse Dosing of Lapatinib with Temozolomide and Radiation Therapy for Newly-Diagnosed Glioblastoma in a Pilot Phase II Study J. Neurooncol. 2017 134 357 362 10.1007/s11060-017-2533-6 28669012 PMC6135089

142. Cicenas J. Cicenas E. Multi-Kinase Inhibitors, AURKs and Cancer Med. Oncol. 2016 33 43 10.1007/s12032-016-0758-4 27038473

143. Shen G. Zheng F. Ren D. Du F. Dong Q. Wang Z. Zhao F. Ahmad R. Zhao J. Anlotinib: A Novel Multi-Targeting Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor in Clinical Development J. Hematol. Oncol. 2018 11 120 10.1186/s13045-018-0664-7 30231931 PMC6146601

144. Goh K.C. Novotny-Diermayr V. Hart S. Ong L.C. Loh Y.K. Cheong A. Tan Y.C. Hu C. Jayaraman R. William A.D. TG02, a Novel Oral Multi-Kinase Inhibitor of CDKs, JAK2 and FLT3 with Potent Anti-Leukemic Properties Leukemia 2012 26 236 243 10.1038/leu.2011.218 21860433

145. Du E. Li X. He S. Li X. He S. The Critical Role of the Interplays of EphrinB2/EphB4 and VEGF in the Induction of Angiogenesis Mol. Biol. Rep. 2020 47 4681 4690 10.1007/s11033-020-05470-y 32488576

146. Jo M.-Y. Kim Y.G. Kim Y. Lee S.J. Kim M.H. Joo K.M. Kim H.H. Nam D.-H. Combined Therapy of Temozolomide and ZD6474 (Vandetanib) Effectively Reduces Glioblastoma Tumor Volume through Anti-Angiogenic and Anti-Proliferative Mechanisms Mol. Med. Rep. 2012 6 88 92 10.3892/mmr.2012.868 22505191

147. Lee E.Q. Kaley T.J. Duda D.G. Schiff D. Lassman A.B. Wong E.T. Mikkelsen T. Purow B.W. Muzikansky A. Ancukiewicz M. A Multicenter, Phase II, Randomized, Noncomparative Clinical Trial of Radiation and Temozolomide with or without Vandetanib in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Patients Clin. Cancer Res. 2015 21 3610 3618 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-3220 25910950 PMC4790106

148. McNeill K. Iwamoto F. Kreisl T. Sul J. Shih J. Fine H. AT-39A randomized phase II trial of vandetanib (ZD6474) in combination with carboplatin versus carboplatin alone in adults with recurrent glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2014 16 v17 10.1093/neuonc/nou237.38

149. Taylor J.W. Dietrich J. Gerstner E.R. Norden A.D. Rinne M.L. Cahill D.P. Stemmer-Rachamimov A. Wen P.Y. Betensky R.A. Giorgio D.H. Phase 2 Study of Bosutinib, a Src Inhibitor, in Adults with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2015 121 557 563 10.1007/s11060-014-1667-z 25411098 PMC4323868

150. Joensuu H. Puputti M. Sihto H. Tynninen O. Nupponen N.N. Amplification of Genes Encoding KIT, PDGFRalpha and VEGFR2 Receptor Tyrosine Kinases Is Frequent in Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Pathol. 2005 207 224 231 10.1002/path.1823 16021678

151. Reardon D.A. Dresemann G. Taillibert S. Campone M. van den Bent M. Clement P. Blomquist E. Gordower L. Schultz H. Raizer J. Multicentre Phase II Studies Evaluating Imatinib plus Hydroxyurea in Patients with Progressive Glioblastoma Br. J. Cancer 2009 101 1995 2004 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605411 19904263 PMC2795431

152. Lassman A.B. Pugh S.L. Gilbert M.R. Aldape K.D. Geinoz S. Beumer J.H. Christner S.M. Komaki R. DeAngelis L.M. Gaur R. Phase 2 Trial of Dasatinib in Target-Selected Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma (RTOG 0627) Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 992 998 10.1093/neuonc/nov011 25758746 PMC5762006

153. Odia Y. Sul J. Shih J.H. Kreisl T.N. Butman J.A. Iwamoto F.M. Fine H.A. A Phase II Trial of Tandutinib (MLN 518) in Combination with Bevacizumab for Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma CNS Oncol. 2016 5 59 67 10.2217/cns-2015-0010 26860632 PMC5514626

154. Batchelor T.T. Gerstner E.R. Ye X. Desideri S. Duda D.G. Peereboom D. Lesser G.J. Chowdhary S. Wen P.Y. Grossman S. Feasibility, Phase I, and Phase II Studies of Tandutinib, an Oral Platelet-Derived Growth Factor Receptor-β Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2017 19 567 575 10.1093/neuonc/now185 27663390 PMC5464374

155. Dresemann G. Weller M. Rosenthal M.A. Wedding U. Wagner W. Engel E. Heinrich B. Mayer-Steinacker R. Karup-Hansen A. Fluge O. Imatinib in Combination with Hydroxyurea versus Hydroxyurea Alone as Oral Therapy in Patients with Progressive Pretreated Glioblastoma Resistant to Standard Dose Temozolomide J. Neurooncol. 2010 96 393 402 10.1007/s11060-009-9976-3 19688297

156. Wen P.Y. Yung W.K.A. Lamborn K.R. Dahia P.L. Wang Y. Peng B. Abrey L.E. Raizer J. Cloughesy T.F. Fink K. Phase I/II Study of Imatinib Mesylate for Recurrent Malignant Gliomas: North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study 99-08 Clin. Cancer Res. 2006 12 4899 4907 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0773 16914578

157. Raymond E. Brandes A.A. Dittrich C. Fumoleau P. Coudert B. Clement P.M.J. Frenay M. Rampling R. Stupp R. Kros J.M. Phase II Study of Imatinib in Patients with Recurrent Gliomas of Various Histologies: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor Group Study J. Clin. Oncol. 2008 26 4659 4665 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.9235 18824712 PMC2653126

158. Galanis E. Anderson S.K. Twohy E.L. Carrero X.W. Dixon J.G. Tran D.D. Jeyapalan S.A. Anderson D.M. Kaufmann T.J. Feathers R.W. A Phase 1 and Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase 2 Trial of Bevacizumab plus Dasatinib in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma: Alliance/North Central Cancer Treatment Group N0872 Cancer 2019 125 3790 3800 10.1002/cncr.32340 31290996 PMC6788934

159. Franceschi E. Stupp R. van den Bent M.J. van Herpen C. Laigle Donadey F. Gorlia T. Hegi M. Lhermitte B. Strauss L.C. Allgeier A. EORTC 26083 Phase I/II Trial of Dasatinib in Combination with CCNU in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2012 14 1503 1510 10.1093/neuonc/nos256 23090987 PMC3499012

160. Balaña C. Gil M.J. Perez P. Reynes G. Gallego O. Ribalta T. Capellades J. Gonzalez S. Verger E. Sunitinib Administered Prior to Radiotherapy in Patients with Non-Resectable Glioblastoma: Results of a Phase II Study Target. Oncol. 2014 9 321 329 10.1007/s11523-014-0305-1 24424564

161. Hutterer M. Nowosielski M. Haybaeck J. Embacher S. Stockhammer F. Gotwald T. Holzner B. Capper D. Preusser M. Marosi C. A Single-Arm Phase II Austrian/German Multicenter Trial on Continuous Daily Sunitinib in Primary Glioblastoma at First Recurrence (SURGE 01-07) Neuro-Oncology 2014 16 92 102 10.1093/neuonc/not161 24311637 PMC3870838

162. Pan E. Yu D. Yue B. Potthast L. Chowdhary S. Smith P. Chamberlain M. A Prospective Phase II Single-Institution Trial of Sunitinib for Recurrent Malignant Glioma J. Neurooncol. 2012 110 111 118 10.1007/s11060-012-0943-z 22832897 PMC5735835

163. Phuphanich S. Raizer J. Chamberlain M. Canelos P. Narwal R. Hong S. Miday R. Nade M. Laubscher K. Phase II Study of MEDI-575, an Anti-Platelet-Derived Growth Factor-α Antibody, in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2017 131 185 191 10.1007/s11060-016-2287-6 27844311

164. Lee E.Q. Muzikansky A. Reardon D.A. Dietrich J. Nayak L. Duda D.G. Chukwueke U.N. Beroukhim R. Doherty L.M. Kane C. Phase II Trial of Ponatinib in Patients with Bevacizumab-Refractory Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2018 36 2032 10.1200/JCO.2018.36.15_suppl.2032 PMC6792497 31444999

165. Aiken R. Axelson M. Harmenberg J. Klockare M. Larsson O. Wassberg C. Phase I Clinical Trial of AXL1717 for Treatment of Relapsed Malignant Astrocytomas: Analysis of Dose and Response Oncotarget 2017 8 81501 81510 10.18632/oncotarget.20662 29113409 PMC5655304

166. Grisanti S. Ferrari V.D. Buglione M. Agazzi G.M. Liserre R. Poliani L. Buttolo L. Gipponi S. Pedersini R. Consoli F. Second Line Treatment of Recurrent Glioblastoma with Sunitinib: Results of a Phase II Study and Systematic Review of Literature J. Neurosurg. Sci. 2016 63 458 467 10.23736/S0390-5616.16.03874-1 27680966

167. Fondevila F. Méndez-Blanco C. Fernández-Palanca P. González-Gallego J. Mauriz J.L. Anti-Tumoral Activity of Single and Combined Regorafenib Treatments in Preclinical Models of Liver and Gastrointestinal Cancers Exp. Mol. Med. 2019 51 1 15 10.1038/s12276-019-0308-1 31551425 PMC6802659

168. O’Hare T. Shakespeare W.C. Zhu X. Eide C.A. Rivera V.M. Wang F. Adrian L.T. Zhou T. Huang W.-S. Xu Q. AP24534, a Pan-BCR-ABL Inhibitor for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia, Potently Inhibits the T315I Mutant and Overcomes Mutation-Based Resistance Cancer Cell 2009 16 401 412 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.09.028 19878872 PMC2804470

169. Shah G.D. Loizos N. Youssoufian H. Schwartz J.D. Rowinsky E.K. Rationale for the Development of IMC-3G3, a Fully Human Immunoglobulin G Subclass 1 Monoclonal Antibody Targeting the Platelet-Derived Growth Factor Receptor Alpha Cancer 2010 116 1018 1026 10.1002/cncr.24788 20127943

170. Zhang M. Liu J. Li M. Zhang S. Lu Y. Liang Y. Zhao K. Li Y. Insulin-like Growth Factor 1/Insulin-like Growth Factor 1 Receptor Signaling Protects against Cell Apoptosis through the PI3K/AKT Pathway in Glioblastoma Cells Exp. Ther. Med. 2018 16 1477 1482 10.3892/etm.2018.6336 30116397 PMC6090237

171. Maris C. D’Haene N. Trépant A.-L. Le Mercier M. Sauvage S. Allard J. Rorive S. Demetter P. Decaestecker C. Salmon I. IGF-IR: A New Prognostic Biomarker for Human Glioblastoma Br. J. Cancer 2015 113 729 737 10.1038/bjc.2015.242 26291053 PMC4559821

172. Jimenez-Pascual A. Siebzehnrubl F.A. Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor Functions in Glioblastoma Cells 2019 8 715 10.3390/cells8070715 PMC6678715 31337028

173. Lasorella A. Sanson M. Iavarone A. FGFR-TACC Gene Fusions in Human Glioma Neuro-Oncology 2017 19 475 483 10.1093/neuonc/now240 27852792 PMC5464372

174. Kawauchi D. Takahashi M. Yamamuro S. Kobayashi T. Uchida E. Iwadate Y. Ichimura K. Tomiyama A. ET-05 Alectinib and Ceritinib, the Second-Generation ALK Inhibitors, Effectively Induce Glioblastoma Cell Death Neuro-Oncol. Adv. 2020 2 ii6 10.1093/noajnl/vdaa143.025

175. Lassen U. Sorensen M. Gaziel T.B. Hasselbalch B. Poulsen H.S. Phase II Study of Bevacizumab and Temsirolimus Combination Therapy for Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme Anticancer Res. 2013 33 1657 1660 23564811

176. Galanis E. Buckner J.C. Maurer M.J. Kreisberg J.I. Ballman K. Boni J. Peralba J.M. Jenkins R.B. Dakhil S.R. Morton R.F. Phase II Trial of Temsirolimus (CCI-779) in Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study J. Clin. Oncol. 2005 23 5294 5304 10.1200/JCO.2005.23.622 15998902

177. Schiff D. Jaeckle K.A. Anderson S.K. Galanis E. Giannini C. Buckner J.C. Stella P. Flynn P.J. Erickson B.J. Schwerkoske J.F. Phase I/II Trial of Temsirolimus and Sorafenib in Treatment of Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma: North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study/Alliance N0572 Cancer 2018 124 1455 1463 10.1002/cncr.31219 29313954 PMC5867230

178. Wick W. Gorlia T. Bady P. Platten M. van den Bent M.J. Taphoorn M.J.B. Steuve J. Brandes A.A. Hamou M.-F. Wick A. Phase II Study of Radiotherapy and Temsirolimus versus Radiochemotherapy with Temozolomide in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma without MGMT Promoter Hypermethylation (EORTC 26082) Clin. Cancer Res. 2016 22 4797 4806 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-3153 27143690

179. Chang S.M. Wen P. Cloughesy T. Greenberg H. Schiff D. Conrad C. Fink K. Robins H.I. De Angelis L. Raizer J. Phase II Study of CCI-779 in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme Investig. New Drugs 2005 23 357 361 10.1007/s10637-005-1444-0 16012795

180. Hainsworth J.D. Shih K.C. Shepard G.C. Tillinghast G.W. Brinker B.T. Spigel D.R. Phase II Study of Concurrent Radiation Therapy, Temozolomide, and Bevacizumab Followed by Bevacizumab/Everolimus as First-Line Treatment for Patients with Glioblastoma Clin. Adv. Hematol. Oncol. 2012 10 240 246 22706484

181. Ma D.J. Galanis E. Anderson S.K. Schiff D. Kaufmann T.J. Peller P.J. Giannini C. Brown P.D. Uhm J.H. McGraw S. A Phase II Trial of Everolimus, Temozolomide, and Radiotherapy in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: NCCTG N057K Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 1261 1269 10.1093/neuonc/nou328 25526733 PMC4588750

182. Chinnaiyan P. Won M. Wen P.Y. Rojiani A.M. Werner-Wasik M. Shih H.A. Ashby L.S. Michael Yu H.-H. Stieber V.W. Malone S.C. A Randomized Phase II Study of Everolimus in Combination with Chemoradiation in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: Results of NRG Oncology RTOG 0913 Neuro-Oncology 2018 20 666 673 10.1093/neuonc/nox209 29126203 PMC5892159

183. Pitz M.W. Eisenhauer E.A. MacNeil M.V. Thiessen B. Easaw J.C. Macdonald D.R. Eisenstat D.D. Kakumanu A.S. Salim M. Chalchal H. Phase II Study of PX-866 in Recurrent Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 1270 1274 10.1093/neuonc/nou365 25605819 PMC4588751

184. Wick W. Puduvalli V.K. Chamberlain M.C. van den Bent M.J. Carpentier A.F. Cher L.M. Mason W. Weller M. Hong S. Musib L. Phase III Study of Enzastaurin Compared with Lomustine in the Treatment of Recurrent Intracranial Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2010 28 1168 1174 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.2595 20124186 PMC2834468

185. Wick W. Steinbach J.P. Platten M. Hartmann C. Wenz F. von Deimling A. Shei P. Moreau-Donnet V. Stoffregen C. Combs S.E. Enzastaurin before and Concomitant with Radiation Therapy, Followed by Enzastaurin Maintenance Therapy, in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma without MGMT Promoter Hypermethylation Neuro-Oncology 2013 15 1405 1412 10.1093/neuonc/not100 23911595 PMC3779043

186. Odia Y. Iwamoto F.M. Moustakas A. Fraum T.J. Salgado C.A. Li A. Kreisl T.N. Sul J. Butman J.A. Fine H.A. A Phase II Trial of Enzastaurin (LY317615) in Combination with Bevacizumab in Adults with Recurrent Malignant Gliomas J. Neurooncol. 2016 127 127 135 10.1007/s11060-015-2020-x 26643807

187. Chandrika G. Natesh K. Ranade D. Chugh A. Shastry P. Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Inhibitors, Temsirolimus and Torin 1, Attenuate Stemness-Associated Properties and Expression of Mesenchymal Markers Promoted by Phorbol-Myristate-Acetate and Oncostatin-M in Glioblastoma Cells Tumour Biol. J. Int. Soc. Oncodev. Biol. Med. 2017 39 10.1177/1010428317695921 28351321

188. Lee E.Q. Kuhn J. Lamborn K.R. Abrey L. DeAngelis L.M. Lieberman F. Robins H.I. Chang S.M. Yung W.K.A. Drappatz J. Phase I/II Study of Sorafenib in Combination with Temsirolimus for Recurrent Glioblastoma or Gliosarcoma: North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study 05-02 Neuro-Oncology 2012 14 1511 1518 10.1093/neuonc/nos264 23099651 PMC3499017

189. Arcella A. Biagioni F. Antonietta Oliva M. Bucci D. Frati A. Esposito V. Cantore G. Giangaspero F. Fornai F. Rapamycin Inhibits the Growth of Glioblastoma Brain Res. 2013 1495 37 51 10.1016/j.brainres.2012.11.044 23261661

190. Mendiburu-Eliçabe M. Gil-Ranedo J. Izquierdo M. Efficacy of Rapamycin against Glioblastoma Cancer Stem Cells Clin. Transl. Oncol. 2014 16 495 502 10.1007/s12094-013-1109-y 24043497

191. Ferrucci M. Biagioni F. Lenzi P. Gambardella S. Ferese R. Calierno M.T. Falleni A. Grimaldi A. Frati A. Esposito V. Rapamycin Promotes Differentiation Increasing βIII-Tubulin, NeuN, and NeuroD While Suppressing Nestin Expression in Glioblastoma Cells Oncotarget 2017 8 29574 29599 10.18632/oncotarget.15906 28418837 PMC5444688

192. Kahn J. Hayman T.J. Jamal M. Rath B.H. Kramp T. Camphausen K. Tofilon P.J. The MTORC1/MTORC2 Inhibitor AZD2014 Enhances the Radiosensitivity of Glioblastoma Stem-like Cells Neuro-Oncology 2014 16 29 37 10.1093/neuonc/not139 24311635 PMC3870843

193. Shi F. Guo H. Zhang R. Liu H. Wu L. Wu Q. Liu J. Liu T. Zhang Q. The PI3K Inhibitor GDC-0941 Enhances Radiosensitization and Reduces Chemoresistance to Temozolomide in GBM Cell Lines Neuroscience 2017 346 298 308 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2017.01.032 28147244

194. Netland I.A. Førde H.E. Sleire L. Leiss L. Rahman M.A. Skeie B.S. Miletic H. Enger P.Ø. Goplen D. Treatment with the PI3K Inhibitor Buparlisib (NVP-BKM120) Suppresses the Growth of Established Patient-Derived GBM Xenografts and Prolongs Survival in Nude Rats J. Neurooncol. 2016 129 57 66 10.1007/s11060-016-2158-1 27283525 PMC4972854

195. Speranza M.-C. Nowicki M.O. Behera P. Cho C.-F. Chiocca E.A. Lawler S.E. BKM-120 (Buparlisib): A Phosphatidyl-Inositol-3 Kinase Inhibitor with Anti-Invasive Properties in Glioblastoma Sci. Rep. 2016 6 20189 10.1038/srep20189 26846842 PMC4742861

196. Wen P.Y. Touat M. Alexander B.M. Mellinghoff I.K. Ramkissoon S. McCluskey C.S. Pelton K. Haidar S. Basu S.S. Gaffey S.C. Buparlisib in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Harboring Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase Pathway Activation: An Open-Label, Multicenter, Multi-Arm, Phase II Trial J. Clin. Oncol. 2019 37 741 750 10.1200/JCO.18.01207 30715997 PMC6553812

197. Koul D. Shen R. Kim Y.-W. Kondo Y. Lu Y. Bankson J. Ronen S.M. Kirkpatrick D.L. Powis G. Yung W.K.A. Cellular and in Vivo Activity of a Novel PI3K Inhibitor, PX-866, against Human Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2010 12 559 569 10.1093/neuonc/nop058 20156803 PMC2940638

198. Ramezani S. Vousooghi N. Ramezani Kapourchali F. Joghataei M.T. Perifosine Enhances Bevacizumab-Induced Apoptosis and Therapeutic Efficacy by Targeting PI3K/AKT Pathway in a Glioblastoma Heterotopic Model Apoptosis Int. J. Program. Cell Death 2017 22 1025 1034 10.1007/s10495-017-1382-2 28616662

199. Alonso-Basanta M. Fang P. Maity A. Hahn S.M. Lustig R.A. Dorsey J.F. A Phase I Study of Nelfinavir Concurrent with Temozolomide and Radiotherapy in Patients with Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Neurooncol. 2014 116 365 372 10.1007/s11060-013-1303-3 24194293 PMC4116080

200. Narayan R.S. Fedrigo C.A. Brands E. Dik R. Stalpers L.J.A. Baumert B.G. Slotman B.J. Westerman B.A. Peters G.J. Sminia P. The Allosteric AKT Inhibitor MK2206 Shows a Synergistic Interaction with Chemotherapy and Radiotherapy in Glioblastoma Spheroid Cultures BMC Cancer 2017 17 204 10.1186/s12885-017-3193-9 28320338 PMC5359921

201. Mason W.P. Belanger K. Nicholas G. Vallières I. Mathieu D. Kavan P. Desjardins A. Omuro A. Reymond D. A Phase II Study of the Ras-MAPK Signaling Pathway Inhibitor TLN-4601 in Patients with Glioblastoma at First Progression J. Neurooncol. 2012 107 343 349 10.1007/s11060-011-0747-6 22048878

202. Hainsworth J.D. Ervin T. Friedman E. Priego V. Murphy P.B. Clark B.L. Lamar R.E. Concurrent Radiotherapy and Temozolomide Followed by Temozolomide and Sorafenib in the First-Line Treatment of Patients with Glioblastoma Multiforme Cancer 2010 116 3663 3669 10.1002/cncr.25275 20564147

203. Reardon D.A. Vredenburgh J.J. Desjardins A. Peters K. Gururangan S. Sampson J.H. Marcello J. Herndon J.E. McLendon R.E. Janney D. Effect of CYP3A-Inducing Anti-Epileptics on Sorafenib Exposure: Results of a Phase II Study of Sorafenib plus Daily Temozolomide in Adults with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2011 101 57 66 10.1007/s11060-010-0217-6 20443129 PMC3102498

204. Galanis E. Anderson S.K. Lafky J.M. Uhm J.H. Giannini C. Kumar S.K. Kimlinger T.K. Northfelt D.W. Flynn P.J. Jaeckle K.A. Phase II Study of Bevacizumab in Combination with Sorafenib in Recurrent Glioblastoma (N0776): A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Trial Clin. Cancer Res. 2013 19 4816 4823 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0708 23833308 PMC3869574

205. Altwairgi A.K. Alghareeb W. Alnajjar F. Alsaeed E. Balbaid A. Alhussain H. Aldanan S. Orz Y. Lari A. Alsharm A. Phase II Study of Atorvastatin in Combination with Radiotherapy and Temozolomide In Patients with Glioblastoma (ART): Interim Analysis Report Ann. Oncol. 2016 27 vi103 vi113 10.1093/annonc/mdw367.32

206. Wilhelm S. Carter C. Lynch M. Lowinger T. Dumas J. Smith R.A. Schwartz B. Simantov R. Kelley S. Discovery and Development of Sorafenib: A Multikinase Inhibitor for Treating Cancer Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2006 5 835 844 10.1038/nrd2130 17016424

207. Jakubowicz-Gil J. Bądziul D. Langner E. Wertel I. Zając A. Rzeski W. Temozolomide and Sorafenib as Programmed Cell Death Inducers of Human Glioma Cells Pharmacol. Rep. PR 2017 69 779 787 10.1016/j.pharep.2017.03.008 28587939

208. Riedel M. Struve N. Müller-Goebel J. Köcher S. Petersen C. Dikomey E. Rothkamm K. Kriegs M. Sorafenib Inhibits Cell Growth but Fails to Enhance Radio- and Chemosensitivity of Glioblastoma Cell Lines Oncotarget 2016 7 61988 61995 10.18632/oncotarget.11328 27542273 PMC5308705

209. Zustovich F. Landi L. Lombardi G. Porta C. Galli L. Fontana A. Amoroso D. Galli C. Andreuccetti M. Falcone A. Sorafenib plus Daily Low-Dose Temozolomide for Relapsed Glioblastoma: A Phase II Study Anticancer Res. 2013 33 3487 3494 10.1200/jco.2011.29.15_suppl.2080 23898124

210. Peng P. Wei W. Long C. Li J. Atorvastatin Augments Temozolomide’s Efficacy in Glioblastoma via Prenylation-Dependent Inhibition of Ras Signaling Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2017 489 293 298 10.1016/j.bbrc.2017.05.147 28554840

211. Azaro A. Plummer E.R. Urruticoechea A. Rodon J. Haris N.R.M. Veal G. Perier A. Tur V. Escriba P.V. Busquets X. Final Report of a Phase I Study of 2-Hydroxyoleic Acid (2OHOA) a Novel Sphingomyelin Synthase Activator in Patients (Pt) with Advanced Solid Tumors (AST) Including Recurrent High Grade Gliomas (RHGG) J. Clin. Oncol. 2017 35 2554 10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.2554

212. Escamilla-Ramírez A. Castillo-Rodríguez R.A. Zavala-Vega S. Jimenez-Farfan D. Anaya-Rubio I. Briseño E. Palencia G. Guevara P. Cruz-Salgado A. Sotelo J. Autophagy as a Potential Therapy for Malignant Glioma Pharmaceuticals 2020 13 156 10.3390/ph13070156 PMC7407942 32707662

213. Kroemer G. Galluzzi L. Vandenabeele P. Abrams J. Alnemri E.S. Baehrecke E.H. Blagosklonny M.V. El-Deiry W.S. Golstein P. Green D.R. Classification of Cell Death: Recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2009 Cell Death Differ. 2009 16 3 11 10.1038/cdd.2008.150 18846107 PMC2744427

214. Peter M.E. Krammer P.H. The CD95(APO-1/Fas) DISC and Beyond Cell Death Differ. 2003 10 26 35 10.1038/sj.cdd.4401186 12655293

215. Wick W. Fricke H. Junge K. Kobyakov G. Martens T. Heese O. Wiestler B. Schliesser M.G. von Deimling A. Pichler J. A Phase II, Randomized, Study of Weekly APG101+reirradiation versus Reirradiation in Progressive Glioblastoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2014 20 6304 6313 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0951-T 25338498

216. Chi A.S. Tarapore R.S. Hall M.D. Shonka N. Gardner S. Umemura Y. Sumrall A. Khatib Z. Mueller S. Kline C. Pediatric and Adult H3 K27M-Mutant Diffuse Midline Glioma Treated with the Selective DRD2 Antagonist ONC201 J. Neurooncol. 2019 145 97 105 10.1007/s11060-019-03271-3 31456142 PMC7241441

217. Lustig R. Mikkelsen T. Lesser G. Grossman S. Ye X. Desideri S. Fisher J. Wright J. Phase II Preradiation R115777 (Tipifarnib) in Newly Diagnosed GBM with Residual Enhancing Disease Neuro-Oncology 2008 10 1004 1009 10.1215/15228517-2008-070 18725460 PMC2718997

218. Cloughesy T.F. Wen P.Y. Robins H.I. Chang S.M. Groves M.D. Fink K.L. Junck L. Schiff D. Abrey L. Gilbert M.R. Phase II Trial of Tipifarnib in Patients with Recurrent Malignant Glioma Either Receiving or Not Receiving Enzyme-Inducing Antiepileptic Drugs: A North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study J. Clin. Oncol. 2006 24 3651 3656 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.2323 16877733

219. Drachsler M. Kleber S. Mateos A. Volk K. Mohr N. Chen S. Cirovic B. Tüttenberg J. Gieffers C. Sykora J. CD95 Maintains Stem Cell-like and Non-Classical EMT Programs in Primary Human Glioblastoma Cells Cell Death Dis. 2016 7 e2209 10.1038/cddis.2016.102 27124583 PMC4855647

220. Eisele G. Roth P. Hasenbach K. Aulwurm S. Wolpert F. Tabatabai G. Wick W. Weller M. APO010, a Synthetic Hexameric CD95 Ligand, Induces Human Glioma Cell Death in Vitro and in Vivo Neuro-Oncology 2011 13 155 164 10.1093/neuonc/noq176 21183510 PMC3064626

221. Ralff M.D. Lulla A.R. Wagner J. El-Deiry W.S. ONC201: A New Treatment Option Being Tested Clinically for Recurrent Glioblastoma Transl. Cancer Res. 2017 6 S1239 S1243 10.21037/tcr.2017.10.03 30175049 PMC6117120

222. Kline C.L.B. Van den Heuvel A.P.J. Allen J.E. Prabhu V.V. Dicker D.T. El-Deiry W.S. ONC201 Kills Solid Tumor Cells by Triggering an Integrated Stress Response Dependent on ATF4 Activation by Specific EIF2α Kinases Sci. Signal. 2016 9 ra18 10.1126/scisignal.aac4374 26884600 PMC4968406

223. Arrillaga-Romany I. Chi A.S. Allen J.E. Oster W. Wen P.Y. Batchelor T.T. A Phase 2 Study of the First Imipridone ONC201, a Selective DRD2 Antagonist for Oncology, Administered Every Three Weeks in Recurrent Glioblastoma Oncotarget 2017 8 79298 79304 10.18632/oncotarget.17837 29108308 PMC5668041

224. Werry E.L. Barron M.L. Kassiou M. TSPO as a Target for Glioblastoma Therapeutics Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2015 43 531 536 10.1042/BST20150015 26551689

225. Werry E.L. King V.A. Barron M.L. Banister S.D. Sokias R. Kassiou M. Derivatives of the Pyrazolo[1,5-a]Pyrimidine Acetamide DPA-713 as Translocator Protein (TSPO) Ligands and pro-Apoptotic Agents in Human Glioblastoma Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2017 96 186 192 10.1016/j.ejps.2016.09.026 27658888

226. England B. Huang T. Karsy M. Current Understanding of the Role and Targeting of Tumor Suppressor P53 in Glioblastoma Multiforme Tumour Biol. J. Int. Soc. Oncodev. Biol. Med. 2013 34 2063 2074 10.1007/s13277-013-0871-3 23737287

227. Hong B. van den Heuvel A.P.J. Prabhu V.V. Zhang S. El-Deiry W.S. Targeting Tumor Suppressor P53 for Cancer Therapy: Strategies, Challenges and Opportunities Curr. Drug Targets 2014 15 80 89 10.2174/1389450114666140106101412 24387333

228. Kim S.-S. Rait A. Kim E. Pirollo K.F. Chang E.H. A Tumor-Targeting P53 Nanodelivery System Limits Chemoresistance to Temozolomide Prolonging Survival in a Mouse Model of Glioblastoma Multiforme Nanomed. Nanotechnol. Biol. Med. 2015 11 301 311 10.1016/j.nano.2014.09.005 PMC4330129 25240597

229. Costa B. Bendinelli S. Gabelloni P. Da Pozzo E. Daniele S. Scatena F. Vanacore R. Campiglia P. Bertamino A. Gomez-Monterrey I. Human Glioblastoma Multiforme: P53 Reactivation by a Novel MDM2 Inhibitor PLoS ONE 2013 8 e72281 10.1371/journal.pone.0072281 23977270 PMC3747081

230. Villalonga-Planells R. Coll-Mulet L. Martínez-Soler F. Castaño E. Acebes J.-J. Giménez-Bonafé P. Gil J. Tortosa A. Activation of P53 by Nutlin-3a Induces Apoptosis and Cellular Senescence in Human Glioblastoma Multiforme PLoS ONE 2011 6 e18588 10.1371/journal.pone.0018588 21483692 PMC3071734

231. Renner G. Janouskova H. Noulet F. Koenig V. Guerin E. Bär S. Nuesch J. Rechenmacher F. Neubauer S. Kessler H. Integrin A5β1 and P53 Convergent Pathways in the Control of Anti-Apoptotic Proteins PEA-15 and Survivin in High-Grade Glioma Cell Death Differ. 2016 23 640 653 10.1038/cdd.2015.131 26470725 PMC4986636

232. Canon J. Osgood T. Olson S.H. Saiki A.Y. Robertson R. Yu D. Eksterowicz J. Ye Q. Jin L. Chen A. The MDM2 Inhibitor AMG 232 Demonstrates Robust Antitumor Efficacy and Potentiates the Activity of P53-Inducing Cytotoxic Agents Mol. Cancer Ther. 2015 14 649 658 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-14-0710 25567130

233. Lebowitz P.F. Sakamuro D. Prendergast G.C. Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitors Induce Apoptosis of Ras-Transformed Cells Denied Substratum Attachment Cancer Res. 1997 57 708 713 9044849

234. Basso A.D. Kirschmeier P. Bishop W.R. Lipid Posttranslational Modifications. Farnesyl Transferase Inhibitors J. Lipid Res. 2006 47 15 31 10.1194/jlr.R500012-JLR200 16278491

235. Sebti S.M. Hamilton A.D. Farnesyltransferase Inhibitors in Cancer Therapy Available online: https://www.buecher.de/shop/mund/farnesyltransferase-inhibitors-in-cancer-therapy/sebti-sad-m-hamilton-andrew-d-eds-/products_products/detail/prod_id/20963971/ (accessed on 22 September 2020)

236. Glass T.L. Liu T.J. Yung W.K. Inhibition of Cell Growth in Human Glioblastoma Cell Lines by Farnesyltransferase Inhibitor SCH66336 Neuro-Oncology 2000 2 151 158 10.1093/neuonc/2.3.151 11302335 PMC1920495

237. Chaponis D. Barnes J.W. Dellagatta J.L. Kesari S. Fast E. Sauvageot C. Panagrahy D. Greene E.R. Ramakrishna N. Wen P.Y. Lonafarnib (SCH66336) Improves the Activity of Temozolomide and Radiation for Orthotopic Malignant Gliomas J. Neurooncol. 2011 104 179 189 10.1007/s11060-010-0502-4 21246394 PMC4898271

238. Daniele S. Taliani S. Da Pozzo E. Giacomelli C. Costa B. Trincavelli M.L. Rossi L. La Pietra V. Barresi E. Carotenuto A. Apoptosis Therapy in Cancer: The First Single-Molecule Co-Activating P53 and the Translocator Protein in Glioblastoma Sci. Rep. 2014 4 4749 10.1038/srep04749 24756113 PMC3996484

239. Daniele S. Barresi E. Zappelli E. Marinelli L. Novellino E. Da Settimo F. Taliani S. Trincavelli M.L. Martini C. Long Lasting MDM2/Translocator Protein Modulator: A New Strategy for Irreversible Apoptosis of Human Glioblastoma Cells Oncotarget 2016 7 7866 7884 10.18632/oncotarget.6872 26761214 PMC4884960

240. Qiu J. Levin L.R. Buck J. Reidenberg M.M. Different Pathways of Cell Killing by Gossypol Enantiomers Exp. Biol. Med. 2002 227 398 401 10.1177/153537020222700605 12037129

241. Jarzabek M.A. Amberger-Murphy V. Callanan J.J. Gao C. Zagozdzon A.M. Shiels L. Wang J. Ligon K.L. Rich B.E. Dicker P. Interrogation of Gossypol Therapy in Glioblastoma Implementing Cell Line and Patient-Derived Tumour Models Br. J. Cancer 2014 111 2275 2286 10.1038/bjc.2014.529 25375271 PMC4264441

242. Jensen S.A. Day E.S. Ko C.H. Hurley L.A. Luciano J.P. Kouri F.M. Merkel T.J. Luthi A.J. Patel P.C. Cutler J.I. Spherical Nucleic Acid Nanoparticle Conjugates as an RNAi-Based Therapy for Glioblastoma Sci. Transl. Med. 2013 5 209ra152 10.1126/scitranslmed.3006839 PMC4017940 24174328

243. Würstle S. Schneider F. Ringel F. Gempt J. Lämmer F. Delbridge C. Wu W. Schlegel J. Temozolomide Induces Autophagy in Primary and Established Glioblastoma Cells in an EGFR Independent Manner Oncol. Lett. 2017 14 322 328 10.3892/ol.2017.6107 28693171 PMC5494811

244. Yuan G. Yan S.-F. Xue H. Zhang P. Sun J.-T. Li G. Cucurbitacin I Induces Protective Autophagy in Glioblastoma in Vitro and in Vivo J. Biol. Chem. 2014 289 10607 10619 10.1074/jbc.M113.528760 24599950 PMC4036180

245. Liu R. Li J. Zhang T. Zou L. Chen Y. Wang K. Lei Y. Yuan K. Li Y. Lan J. Itraconazole Suppresses the Growth of Glioblastoma through Induction of Autophagy: Involvement of Abnormal Cholesterol Trafficking Autophagy 2014 10 1241 1255 10.4161/auto.28912 24905460 PMC4203550

246. Zhang P. Sun S. Li N. Ho A.S.W. Kiang K.M.Y. Zhang X. Cheng Y.S. Poon M.W. Lee D. Pu J.K.S. Rutin Increases the Cytotoxicity of Temozolomide in Glioblastoma via Autophagy Inhibition J. Neurooncol. 2017 132 393 400 10.1007/s11060-017-2387-y 28293765

247. Angeletti F. Fossati G. Pattarozzi A. Würth R. Solari A. Daga A. Masiello I. Barbieri F. Florio T. Comincini S. Inhibition of the Autophagy Pathway Synergistically Potentiates the Cytotoxic Activity of Givinostat (ITF2357) on Human Glioblastoma Cancer Stem Cells Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2016 9 107 10.3389/fnmol.2016.00107 27833530 PMC5081386

248. Maycotte P. Aryal S. Cummings C.T. Thorburn J. Morgan M.J. Thorburn A. Chloroquine Sensitizes Breast Cancer Cells to Chemotherapy Independent of Autophagy Autophagy 2012 8 200 212 10.4161/auto.8.2.18554 22252008 PMC3336076

249. Liu X. Sun K. Wang H. Dai Y. Inhibition of Autophagy by Chloroquine Enhances the Antitumor Efficacy of Sorafenib in Glioblastoma Cell. Mol. Neurobiol. 2016 36 1197 1208 10.1007/s10571-015-0318-z 26971793 PMC11482299

250. Sotelo J. Briceño E. López-González M.A. Adding Chloroquine to Conventional Treatment for Glioblastoma Multiforme: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial Ann. Intern. Med. 2006 144 337 343 10.7326/0003-4819-144-5-200603070-00008 16520474

251. Rosenfeld M.R. Ye X. Supko J.G. Desideri S. Grossman S.A. Brem S. Mikkelson T. Wang D. Chang Y.C. Hu J. A Phase I/II Trial of Hydroxychloroquine in Conjunction with Radiation Therapy and Concurrent and Adjuvant Temozolomide in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme Autophagy 2014 10 1359 1368 10.4161/auto.28984 24991840 PMC4203513

252. Taylor J.W. Parikh M. Phillips J.J. James C.D. Molinaro A.M. Butowski N.A. Clarke J.L. Oberheim-Bush N.A. Chang S.M. Berger M.S. Phase-2 Trial of Palbociclib in Adult Patients with Recurrent RB1-Positive Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2018 140 477 483 10.1007/s11060-018-2977-3 30151703 PMC6239922

253. Friday B.B. Anderson S.K. Buckner J. Yu C. Giannini C. Geoffroy F. Schwerkoske J. Mazurczak M. Gross H. Pajon E. Phase II Trial of Vorinostat in Combination with Bortezomib in Recurrent Glioblastoma: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study Neuro-Oncology 2012 14 215 221 10.1093/neuonc/nor198 22090453 PMC3266383

254. Galanis E. Jaeckle K.A. Maurer M.J. Reid J.M. Ames M.M. Hardwick J.S. Reilly J.F. Loboda A. Nebozhyn M. Fantin V.R. Phase II Trial of Vorinostat in Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study J. Clin. Oncol. 2009 27 2052 2058 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.0694 19307505 PMC2669764

255. Iwamoto F.M. Lamborn K.R. Kuhn J.G. Wen P.Y. Yung W.K.A. Gilbert M.R. Chang S.M. Lieberman F.S. Prados M.D. Fine H.A. A Phase I/II Trial of the Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor Romidepsin for Adults with Recurrent Malignant Glioma: North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study 03-03 Neuro-Oncology 2011 13 509 516 10.1093/neuonc/nor017 21377994 PMC3093337

256. Bogdahn U. Hau P. Stockhammer G. Venkataramana N.K. Mahapatra A.K. Suri A. Balasubramaniam A. Nair S. Oliushine V. Parfenov V. Targeted Therapy for High-Grade Glioma with the TGF-Β2 Inhibitor Trabedersen: Results of a Randomized and Controlled Phase IIb Study Neuro-Oncology 2011 13 132 142 10.1093/neuonc/noq142 20980335 PMC3018908

257. Wick A. Desjardins A. Suarez C. Forsyth P. Gueorguieva I. Burkholder T. Cleverly A.L. Estrem S.T. Wang S. Lahn M.M. Phase 1b/2a Study of Galunisertib, a Small Molecule Inhibitor of Transforming Growth Factor-Beta Receptor I, in Combination with Standard Temozolomide-Based Radiochemotherapy in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Malignant Glioma Investig. New Drugs 2020 38 1570 1579 10.1007/s10637-020-00910-9 32140889 PMC7497674

258. Blakeley J.O. Grossman S.A. Chi A.S. Mikkelsen T. Rosenfeld M.R. Ahluwalia M.S. Nabors L.B. Eichler A. Ribas I.G. Desideri S. Phase II Study of Iniparib with Concurrent Chemoradiation in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2019 25 73 79 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0110 30131387 PMC6367923

259. Robins H.I. Zhang P. Gilbert M.R. Chakravarti A. de Groot J.F. Grimm S.A. Wang F. Lieberman F.S. Krauze A. Trotti A.M. A Randomized Phase I/II Study of ABT-888 in Combination with Temozolomide in Recurrent Temozolomide Resistant Glioblastoma: An NRG Oncology RTOG Group Study J. Neurooncol. 2016 126 309 316 10.1007/s11060-015-1966-z 26508094 PMC4720526

260. Cao Y. Li X. Kong S. Shang S. Qi Y. CDK4/6 Inhibition Suppresses Tumour Growth and Enhances the Effect of Temozolomide in Glioma Cells J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2020 24 5135 5145 10.1111/jcmm.15156 32277580 PMC7205809

261. Sobhani N. D’Angelo A. Pittacolo M. Roviello G. Miccoli A. Corona S.P. Bernocchi O. Generali D. Otto T. Updates on the CDK4/6 Inhibitory Strategy and Combinations in Breast Cancer Cells 2019 8 321 10.3390/cells8040321 30959874 PMC6523967

262. Roeten M.S.F. Cloos J. Jansen G. Positioning of Proteasome Inhibitors in Therapy of Solid Malignancies Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2018 81 227 243 10.1007/s00280-017-3489-0 29184971 PMC5778165

263. Huang W.-J. Chen W.-W. Zhang X. Proteasome Inhibitors in Glioblastoma Oncol. Lett. 2017 13 1058 1062 10.3892/ol.2017.5585 28454213 PMC5403505

264. Di K. Lloyd G.K. Abraham V. MacLaren A. Burrows F.J. Desjardins A. Trikha M. Bota D.A. Marizomib Activity as a Single Agent in Malignant Gliomas: Ability to Cross the Blood-Brain Barrier Neuro-Oncology 2016 18 840 848 10.1093/neuonc/nov299 26681765 PMC4864261

265. Roth P. Mason W.P. Richardson P.G. Weller M. Proteasome Inhibition for the Treatment of Glioblastoma Expert Opin. Investig. Drugs 2020 29 1133 1141 10.1080/13543784.2020.1803827 32746640

266. Ceccacci E. Minucci S. Inhibition of Histone Deacetylases in Cancer Therapy: Lessons from Leukaemia Br. J. Cancer 2016 114 605 611 10.1038/bjc.2016.36 26908329 PMC4800301

267. Lee P. Murphy B. Miller R. Menon V. Banik N.L. Giglio P. Lindhorst S.M. Varma A.K. Vandergrift W.A. Patel S.J. Mechanisms and Clinical Significance of Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors: Epigenetic Glioblastoma Therapy Anticancer Res. 2015 35 615 625 25667438 PMC6052863

268. Chen R. Zhang M. Zhou Y. Guo W. Yi M. Zhang Z. Ding Y. Wang Y. The Application of Histone Deacetylases Inhibitors in Glioblastoma J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. CR 2020 39 138 10.1186/s13046-020-01643-6 32682428 PMC7368699

269. Han J. Alvarez-Breckenridge C.A. Wang Q.-E. Yu J. TGF-β Signaling and Its Targeting for Glioma Treatment Am. J. Cancer Res. 2015 5 945 955 26045979 PMC4449428

270. Birch J.L. Coull B.J. Spender L.C. Watt C. Willison A. Syed N. Chalmers A.J. Hossain-Ibrahim M.K. Inman G.J. Multifaceted Transforming Growth Factor-Beta (TGFβ) Signalling in Glioblastoma Cell. Signal. 2020 72 109638 10.1016/j.cellsig.2020.109638 32320860

271. Towner R.A. Zalles M. Saunders D. Smith N. Novel Approaches to Combat Chemoresistance against Glioblastomas Cancer Drug Resist. 2020 3 686 698 10.20517/cdr.2020.38 PMC8992560 35582224

272. Sawyer J.S. Anderson B.D. Beight D.W. Campbell R.M. Jones M.L. Herron D.K. Lampe J.W. McCowan J.R. McMillen W.T. Mort N. Synthesis and Activity of New Aryl- and Heteroaryl-Substituted Pyrazole Inhibitors of the Transforming Growth Factor-Beta Type I Receptor Kinase Domain J. Med. Chem. 2003 46 3953 3956 10.1021/jm0205705 12954047

273. Murnyák B. Kouhsari M.C. Hershkovitch R. Kálmán B. Marko-Varga G. Klekner Á. Hortobágyi T. PARP1 Expression and Its Correlation with Survival Is Tumour Molecular Subtype Dependent in Glioblastoma Oncotarget 2017 8 46348 46362 10.18632/oncotarget.18013 28654422 PMC5542272

274. Blakeley J.O. Grossman S.A. Mikkelsen T. Rosenfeld M.R. Peereboom D. Nabors L.B. Chi A.S. Emmons G. Ribas I.G. Supko J.G. Phase I Study of Iniparib Concurrent with Monthly or Continuous Temozolomide Dosing Schedules in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Malignant Gliomas J. Neurooncol. 2015 125 123 131 10.1007/s11060-015-1876-0 26285766 PMC4869687

275. Onishi M. Kurozumi K. Ichikawa T. Date I. Mechanisms of Tumor Development and Anti-Angiogenic Therapy in Glioblastoma Multiforme Neurol. Med. Chir. 2013 53 755 763 10.2176/nmc.ra2013-0200 24162241 PMC4508716

276. Friedman H.S. Prados M.D. Wen P.Y. Mikkelsen T. Schiff D. Abrey L.E. Yung W.K.A. Paleologos N. Nicholas M.K. Jensen R. Bevacizumab Alone and in Combination with Irinotecan in Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2009 27 4733 4740 10.1200/JCO.2008.19.8721 19720927

277. Vredenburgh J.J. Desjardins A. Herndon J.E. Marcello J. Reardon D.A. Quinn J.A. Rich J.N. Sathornsumetee S. Gururangan S. Sampson J. Bevacizumab plus Irinotecan in Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Clin. Oncol. 2007 25 4722 4729 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.2440 17947719

278. Brandes A.A. Gil-Gil M. Saran F. Carpentier A.F. Nowak A.K. Mason W. Zagonel V. Dubois F. Finocchiaro G. Fountzilas G. A Randomized Phase II Trial (TAMIGA) Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Continuous Bevacizumab Through Multiple Lines of Treatment for Recurrent Glioblastoma Oncologist 2019 24 521 528 10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0290 30266892 PMC6459244

279. Peters K.B. Lou E. Desjardins A. Reardon D.A. Lipp E.S. Miller E. Herndon J.E. McSherry F. Friedman H.S. Vredenburgh J.J. Phase II Trial of Upfront Bevacizumab, Irinotecan, and Temozolomide for Unresectable Glioblastoma Oncologist 2015 20 727 728 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0135 26025933 PMC4492239

280. Wirsching H.-G. Tabatabai G. Roelcke U. Hottinger A.F. Jörger F. Schmid A. Plasswilm L. Schrimpf D. Mancao C. Capper D. Bevacizumab plus Hypofractionated Radiotherapy versus Radiotherapy Alone in Elderly Patients with Glioblastoma: The Randomized, Open-Label, Phase II ARTE Trial Ann. Oncol. 2018 29 1423 1430 10.1093/annonc/mdy120 29648580

281. Reyes-Botero G. Cartalat-Carel S. Chinot O.L. Barrie M. Taillandier L. Beauchesne P. Catry-Thomas I. Barrière J. Guillamo J.-S. Fabbro M. Temozolomide Plus Bevacizumab in Elderly Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma and Poor Performance Status: An ANOCEF Phase II Trial (ATAG) Oncologist 2018 23 524.e44 10.1634/theoncologist.2017-0689 29472310 PMC5947454

282. Ghiaseddin A. Reardon D. Massey W. Mannerino A. Lipp E.S. Herndon J.E. McSherry F. Desjardins A. Randazzo D. Friedman H.S. Phase II Study of Bevacizumab and Vorinostat for Patients with Recurrent World Health Organization Grade 4 Malignant Glioma Oncologist 2018 23 157-e21 10.1634/theoncologist.2017-0501 29133513 PMC5813746

283. Vredenburgh J.J. Desjardins A. Herndon J.E. Dowell J.M. Reardon D.A. Quinn J.A. Rich J.N. Sathornsumetee S. Gururangan S. Wagner M. Phase II Trial of Bevacizumab and Irinotecan in Recurrent Malignant Glioma Clin. Cancer Res. 2007 13 1253 1259 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2309 17317837

284. Ney D.E. Carlson J.A. Damek D.M. Gaspar L.E. Kavanagh B.D. Kleinschmidt-DeMasters B.K. Waziri A.E. Lillehei K.O. Reddy K. Chen C. Phase II Trial of Hypofractionated Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Combined with Temozolomide and Bevacizumab for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2015 122 135 143 10.1007/s11060-014-1691-z 25524817

285. Balana C. De Las Penas R. Sepúlveda J.M. Gil-Gil M.J. Luque R. Gallego O. Carrato C. Sanz C. Reynes G. Herrero A. Bevacizumab and Temozolomide versus Temozolomide Alone as Neoadjuvant Treatment in Unresected Glioblastoma: The GENOM 009 Randomized Phase II Trial J. Neurooncol. 2016 127 569 579 10.1007/s11060-016-2065-5 26847813

286. Chauffert B. Feuvret L. Bonnetain F. Taillandier L. Frappaz D. Taillia H. Schott R. Honnorat J. Fabbro M. Tennevet I. Randomized Phase II Trial of Irinotecan and Bevacizumab as Neo-Adjuvant and Adjuvant to Temozolomide-Based Chemoradiation Compared with Temozolomide-Chemoradiation for Unresectable Glioblastoma: Final Results of the TEMAVIR Study from ANOCEF Ann. Oncol. 2014 25 1442 1447 10.1093/annonc/mdu148 24723487

287. Chinot O.L. Wick W. Mason W. Henriksson R. Saran F. Nishikawa R. Carpentier A.F. Hoang-Xuan K. Kavan P. Cernea D. Bevacizumab plus Radiotherapy–Temozolomide for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2014 370 709 722 10.1056/NEJMoa1308345 24552318

288. Weathers S.-P. Han X. Liu D.D. Conrad C.A. Gilbert M.R. Loghin M.E. O’Brien B.J. Penas-Prado M. Puduvalli V.K. Tremont-Lukats I. A Randomized Phase II Trial of Standard Dose Bevacizumab versus Low Dose Bevacizumab plus Lomustine (CCNU) in Adults with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2016 129 487 494 10.1007/s11060-016-2195-9 27406589 PMC5021605

289. Badruddoja M.A. Pazzi M. Sanan A. Schroeder K. Kuzma K. Norton T. Scully T. Mahadevan D. Ahmadi M.M. Phase II Study of Bi-Weekly Temozolomide plus Bevacizumab for Adult Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2017 80 715 721 10.1007/s00280-017-3405-7 28808777

290. Brandes A.A. Finocchiaro G. Zagonel V. Reni M. Caserta C. Fabi A. Clavarezza M. Maiello E. Eoli M. Lombardi G. AVAREG: A Phase II, Randomized, Noncomparative Study of Fotemustine or Bevacizumab for Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2016 18 1304 1312 10.1093/neuonc/now035 26951379 PMC4998997

291. Herrlinger U. Schäfer N. Steinbach J.P. Weyerbrock A. Hau P. Goldbrunner R. Friedrich F. Rohde V. Ringel F. Schlegel U. Bevacizumab Plus Irinotecan Versus Temozolomide in Newly Diagnosed O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase Nonmethylated Glioblastoma: The Randomized GLARIUS Trial J. Clin. Oncol. 2016 34 1611 1619 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.4691 26976423

292. Wick W. Gorlia T. Bendszus M. Taphoorn M. Sahm F. Harting I. Brandes A.A. Taal W. Domont J. Idbaih A. Lomustine and Bevacizumab in Progressive Glioblastoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2017 377 1954 1963 10.1056/NEJMoa1707358 29141164

293. Cloughesy T.F. Brenner A. de Groot J.F. Butowski N.A. Zach L. Campian J.L. Ellingson B.M. Freedman L.S. Cohen Y.C. Lowenton-Spier N. A Randomized Controlled Phase III Study of VB-111 Combined with Bevacizumab vs Bevacizumab Monotherapy in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma (GLOBE) Neuro-Oncology 2020 22 705 717 10.1093/neuonc/noz232 31844890 PMC7229248

294. Desjardins A. Reardon D.A. Coan A. Marcello J. Herndon J.E. Bailey L. Peters K.B. Friedman H.S. Vredenburgh J.J. Bevacizumab and Daily Temozolomide for Recurrent Glioblastoma Cancer 2012 118 1302 1312 10.1002/cncr.26381 21792866

295. Vredenburgh J.J. Desjardins A. Reardon D.A. Peters K.B. Herndon J.E. Marcello J. Kirkpatrick J.P. Sampson J.H. Bailey L. Threatt S. The Addition of Bevacizumab to Standard Radiation Therapy and Temozolomide Followed by Bevacizumab, Temozolomide and Irinotecan for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Clin. Cancer Res. 2011 17 4119 4124 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0120 21531816 PMC3117928

296. Reardon D.A. Desjardins A. Vredenburgh J.J. Gururangan S. Sampson J.H. Sathornsumetee S. McLendon R.E. Herndon J.E. Marcello J.E. Norfleet J. Metronomic Chemotherapy with Daily, Oral Etoposide plus Bevacizumab for Recurrent Malignant Glioma: A Phase II Study Br. J. Cancer 2009 101 1986 1994 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605412 19920819 PMC2795427

297. Gilbert M.R. Dignam J.J. Armstrong T.S. Wefel J.S. Blumenthal D.T. Vogelbaum M.A. Colman H. Chakravarti A. Pugh S. Won M. A Randomized Trial of Bevacizumab for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma N. Engl. J. Med. 2014 370 699 708 10.1056/NEJMoa1308573 24552317 PMC4201043

298. Iwamoto F.M. Lamborn K.R. Robins H.I. Mehta M.P. Chang S.M. Butowski N.A. Deangelis L.M. Abrey L.E. Zhang W.-T. Prados M.D. Phase II Trial of Pazopanib (GW786034), an Oral Multi-Targeted Angiogenesis Inhibitor, for Adults with Recurrent Glioblastoma (North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study 06-02) Neuro-Oncology 2010 12 855 861 10.1093/neuonc/noq025 20200024 PMC2940686

299. Brown N. McBain C. Nash S. Hopkins K. Sanghera P. Saran F. Phillips M. Dungey F. Clifton-Hadley L. Wanek K. Multi-Center Randomized Phase II Study Comparing Cediranib plus Gefitinib with Cediranib plus Placebo in Subjects with Recurrent/Progressive Glioblastoma PLoS ONE 2016 11 e0156369 10.1371/journal.pone.0156369 27232884 PMC4883746

300. Batchelor T.T. Mulholland P. Neyns B. Nabors L.B. Campone M. Wick A. Mason W. Mikkelsen T. Phuphanich S. Ashby L.S. Phase III Randomized Trial Comparing the Efficacy of Cediranib as Monotherapy, and in Combination with Lomustine, versus Lomustine Alone in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2013 31 3212 3218 10.1200/JCO.2012.47.2464 23940216 PMC4021043

301. Batchelor T.T. Duda D.G. di Tomaso E. Ancukiewicz M. Plotkin S.R. Gerstner E. Eichler A.F. Drappatz J. Hochberg F.H. Benner T. Phase II Study of Cediranib, an Oral Pan-Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2010 28 2817 2823 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.3988 20458050 PMC2903316

302. Muhic A. Poulsen H.S. Sorensen M. Grunnet K. Lassen U. Phase II Open-Label Study of Nintedanib in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Neurooncol. 2013 111 205 212 10.1007/s11060-012-1009-y 23184145

303. Norden A.D. Schiff D. Ahluwalia M.S. Lesser G.J. Nayak L. Lee E.Q. Rinne M.L. Muzikansky A. Dietrich J. Purow B. Phase II Trial of Triple Tyrosine Kinase Receptor Inhibitor Nintedanib in Recurrent High-Grade Gliomas J. Neurooncol. 2015 121 297 302 10.1007/s11060-014-1631-y 25338318

304. Gerstner E.R. Eichler A.F. Plotkin S.R. Drappatz J. Doyle C.L. Xu L. Duda D.G. Wen P.Y. Jain R.K. Batchelor T.T. Phase I Trial with Biomarker Studies of Vatalanib (PTK787) in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Treated with Enzyme Inducing Anti-Epileptic Drugs and Standard Radiation and Temozolomide J. Neurooncol. 2011 103 325 332 10.1007/s11060-010-0390-7 20821342 PMC4090923

305. Kalpathy-Cramer J. Chandra V. Da X. Ou Y. Emblem K.E. Muzikansky A. Cai X. Douw L. Evans J.G. Dietrich J. Phase II Study of Tivozanib, an Oral VEGFR Inhibitor, in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2017 131 603 610 10.1007/s11060-016-2332-5 27853960 PMC7672995

306. Reardon D.A. Desjardins A. Peters K.B. Gururangan S. Sampson J.H. McLendon R.E. Herndon J.E. Bulusu A. Threatt S. Friedman A.H. Phase II Study of Carboplatin, Irinotecan, and Bevacizumab for Bevacizumab Naïve, Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2012 107 155 164 10.1007/s11060-011-0722-2 21986722 PMC3616617

307. Dirven L. van den Bent M.J. Bottomley A. van der Meer N. van der Holt B. Vos M.J. Walenkamp A.M.E. Beerepoot L.V. Hanse M.C.J. Reijneveld J.C. The Impact of Bevacizumab on Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients Treated for Recurrent Glioblastoma: Results of the Randomised Controlled Phase 2 BELOB Trial Eur. J. Cancer 2015 51 1321 1330 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.03.025 25899986

308. Taal W. Oosterkamp H.M. Walenkamp A.M.E. Dubbink H.J. Beerepoot L.V. Hanse M.C.J. Buter J. Honkoop A.H. Boerman D. de Vos F.Y.F. Single-Agent Bevacizumab or Lomustine versus a Combination of Bevacizumab plus Lomustine in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma (BELOB Trial): A Randomised Controlled Phase 2 Trial Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 943 953 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70314-6 25035291

309. Schnell O. Thorsteinsdottir J. Fleischmann D.F. Lenski M. Abenhardt W. Giese A. Tonn J.-C. Belka C. Kreth F.W. Niyazi M. Re-Irradiation Strategies in Combination with Bevacizumab for Recurrent Malignant Glioma J. Neurooncol. 2016 130 591 599 10.1007/s11060-016-2267-x 27599828

310. Niyazi M. Harter P.N. Hattingen E. Rottler M. von Baumgarten L. Proescholdt M. Belka C. Lauber K. Mittelbronn M. Bevacizumab and Radiotherapy for the Treatment of Glioblastoma: Brothers in Arms or Unholy Alliance? Oncotarget 2016 7 2313 2328 10.18632/oncotarget.6320 26575171 PMC4823037

311. Chinot O.L. de La Motte Rouge T. Moore N. Zeaiter A. Das A. Phillips H. Modrusan Z. Cloughesy T. AVAglio: Phase 3 Trial of Bevacizumab plus Temozolomide and Radiotherapy in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme Adv. Ther. 2011 28 334 340 10.1007/s12325-011-0007-3 21432029

312. van Linde M.E. Verhoeff J.J.C. Richel D.J. van Furth W.R. Reijneveld J.C. Verheul H.M.W. Stalpers L.J.A. Bevacizumab in Combination with Radiotherapy and Temozolomide for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Multiforme Oncologist 2015 20 107 108 10.1634/theoncologist.2014-0418 25582142 PMC4319643

313. Sandmann T. Bourgon R. Garcia J. Li C. Cloughesy T. Chinot O.L. Wick W. Nishikawa R. Mason W. Henriksson R. Patients with Proneural Glioblastoma May Derive Overall Survival Benefit From the Addition of Bevacizumab to First-Line Radiotherapy and Temozolomide: Retrospective Analysis of the AVAglio Trial J. Clin. Oncol. 2015 33 2735 2744 10.1200/JCO.2015.61.5005 26124478 PMC5015426

314. Brave S.R. Ratcliffe K. Wilson Z. James N.H. Ashton S. Wainwright A. Kendrew J. Dudley P. Broadbent N. Sproat G. Assessing the Activity of Cediranib, a VEGFR-2/3 Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor, against VEGFR-1 and Members of the Structurally Related PDGFR Family Mol. Cancer Ther. 2011 10 861 873 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-10-0976 21441409

315. Schäfer N. Gielen G.H. Kebir S. Wieland A. Till A. Mack F. Schaub C. Tzaridis T. Reinartz R. Niessen M. Phase I Trial of Dovitinib (TKI258) in Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Cancer Res. Clin. Oncol. 2016 142 1581 1589 10.1007/s00432-016-2161-0 27100354 PMC11819080

316. Thanasupawat T. Natarajan S. Rommel A. Glogowska A. Bergen H. Krcek J. Pitz M. Beiko J. Krawitz S. Verma I.M. Dovitinib Enhances Temozolomide Efficacy in Glioblastoma Cells Mol. Oncol. 2017 11 1078 1098 10.1002/1878-0261.12076 28500786 PMC5537714

317. Reardon D.A. Egorin M.J. Desjardins A. Vredenburgh J.J. Beumer J.H. Lagattuta T.F. Gururangan S. Herndon J.E. Salvado A.J. Friedman H.S. Phase I Pharmacokinetic Study of the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Vatalanib (PTK787) plus Imatinib and Hydroxyurea for Malignant Glioma Cancer 2009 115 2188 2198 10.1002/cncr.24213 19248046 PMC2691174

318. Cloughesy T. Finocchiaro G. Belda-Iniesta C. Recht L. Brandes A.A. Pineda E. Mikkelsen T. Chinot O.L. Balana C. Macdonald D.R. Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Phase II Study of Onartuzumab Plus Bevacizumab Versus Placebo Plus Bevacizumab in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma: Efficacy, Safety, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor and O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase Biomarker Analyses J. Clin. Oncol. 2017 35 343 351 10.1200/JCO.2015.64.7685 27918718

319. Wen P.Y. Drappatz J. de Groot J. Prados M.D. Reardon D.A. Schiff D. Chamberlain M. Mikkelsen T. Desjardins A. Holland J. Phase II Study of Cabozantinib in Patients with Progressive Glioblastoma: Subset Analysis of Patients Naive to Antiangiogenic Therapy Neuro-Oncology 2018 20 249 258 10.1093/neuonc/nox154 29016998 PMC5777496

320. Wen P.Y. Schiff D. Cloughesy T.F. Raizer J.J. Laterra J. Smitt M. Wolf M. Oliner K.S. Anderson A. Zhu M. A Phase II Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of AMG 102 (Rilotumumab) in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2011 13 437 446 10.1093/neuonc/noq198 21297127 PMC3064694

321. de Groot J.F. Lamborn K.R. Chang S.M. Gilbert M.R. Cloughesy T.F. Aldape K. Yao J. Jackson E.F. Lieberman F. Robins H.I. Phase II Study of Aflibercept in Recurrent Malignant Glioma: A North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study J. Clin. Oncol. 2011 29 2689 2695 10.1200/JCO.2010.34.1636 21606416 PMC3139373

322. Blumenschein G.R. Mills G.B. Gonzalez-Angulo A.M. Targeting the Hepatocyte Growth Factor-CMET Axis in Cancer Therapy J. Clin. Oncol. 2012 30 3287 3296 10.1200/JCO.2011.40.3774 22869872 PMC3434988

323. Garnett J. Chumbalkar V. Vaillant B. Gururaj A.E. Hill K.S. Latha K. Yao J. Priebe W. Colman H. Elferink L.A. Regulation of HGF Expression by ΔEGFR-Mediated c-Met Activation in Glioblastoma Cells Neoplasia 2013 15 73 84 10.1593/neo.121536 23359207 PMC3556940

324. Huang M. Liu T. Ma P. Mitteer R.A. Zhang Z. Kim H.J. Yeo E. Zhang D. Cai P. Li C. C-Met-Mediated Endothelial Plasticity Drives Aberrant Vascularization and Chemoresistance in Glioblastoma J. Clin. Investig. 2016 126 1801 1814 10.1172/JCI84876 27043280 PMC4855929

325. Jahangiri A. De Lay M. Miller L.M. Carbonell W.S. Hu Y.-L. Lu K. Tom M.W. Paquette J. Tokuyasu T.A. Tsao S. Gene Expression Profile Identifies Tyrosine Kinase C-Met as a Targetable Mediator of Antiangiogenic Therapy Resistance Clin. Cancer Res. 2013 19 1773 1783 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-1281 23307858 PMC3618605

326. Lu K.V. Bergers G. Mechanisms of Evasive Resistance to Anti-VEGF Therapy in Glioblastoma CNS Oncol. 2013 2 49 65 10.2217/cns.12.36 23750318 PMC3673744

327. Das A. Cheng R.R. Hilbert M.L.T. Dixon-Moh Y.N. Decandio M. Vandergrift W.A. Banik N.L. Lindhorst S.M. Cachia D. Varma A.K. Synergistic Effects of Crizotinib and Temozolomide in Experimental FIG-ROS1 Fusion-Positive Glioblastoma Cancer Growth Metastasis 2015 8 51 60 10.4137/CGM.S32801 26648752 PMC4667559

328. Schiff D. Desjardins A. Cloughesy T. Mikkelsen T. Glantz M. Chamberlain M.C. Reardon D.A. Wen P.Y. Phase 1 Dose Escalation Trial of the Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Cabozantinib Concurrent with Temozolomide and Radiotherapy or Temozolomide after Radiotherapy in Newly Diagnosed Patients with High-Grade Gliomas Cancer 2016 122 582 587 10.1002/cncr.29798 26588662

329. Schneider K. Weyerbrock A. Doostkam S. Plate K. Machein M.R. Lack of Evidence for PlGF Mediating the Tumor Resistance after Anti-Angiogenic Therapy in Malignant Gliomas J. Neurooncol. 2015 121 269 278 10.1007/s11060-014-1647-3 25370707

330. Lassen U. Chinot O.L. McBain C. Mau-Sørensen M. Larsen V.A. Barrie M. Roth P. Krieter O. Wang K. Habben K. Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Study of the Antiplacental Growth Factor Monoclonal Antibody RO5323441 Combined with Bevacizumab in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 1007 1015 10.1093/neuonc/nov019 25665807 PMC5654352

331. Tabouret E. Denicolai E. Delfino C. Graillon T. Boucard C. Nanni I. Padovani L. Figarella-Branger D. Chinot O. Changes in PlGF and MET-HGF Expressions in Paired Initial and Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Neurooncol. 2016 130 431 437 10.1007/s11060-016-2251-5 27566180

332. Rosen L.S. Gordon M.S. Robert F. Matei D.E. Endoglin for Targeted Cancer Treatment Curr. Oncol. Rep. 2014 16 365 10.1007/s11912-013-0365-x 24445497

333. Ahluwalia M.S. Rogers L.R. Chaudhary R.T. Newton H.B. Seon B.K. Jivani M.A. Adams B.J. Shazer R.L. Theuer C.P. A Phase 2 Trial of TRC105 with Bevacizumab for Bevacizumab Refractory Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2016 34 2035 10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.2035

334. Galanis E. Anderson S.K. Butowski N.A. Hormigo A. Schiff D. Tran D.D. Omuro A.M.P. Jaeckle K.A. Kumar S. Kaufmann T.J. NCCTG N1174: Phase I/Comparative Randomized Phase (Ph) II Trial of TRC105 plus Bevacizumab versus Bevacizumab in Recurrent Glioblastoma (GBM) (Alliance) J. Clin. Oncol. 2017 35 2023 10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.2023

335. Afshar Moghaddam N. Mahsuni P. Taheri D. Evaluation of Endoglin as an Angiogenesis Marker in Glioblastoma Iran. J. Pathol. 2015 10 89 96 26351468 PMC4539765

336. Puduvalli V.K. Giglio P. Groves M.D. Hess K.R. Gilbert M.R. Mahankali S. Jackson E.F. Levin V.A. Conrad C.A. Hsu S.H. Phase II Trial of Irinotecan and Thalidomide in Adults with Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme Neuro-Oncology 2008 10 216 222 10.1215/15228517-2007-060 18314417 PMC2613824

337. Fadul C.E. Kingman L.S. Meyer L.P. Cole B.F. Eskey C.J. Rhodes C.H. Roberts D.W. Newton H.B. Pipas J.M. A Phase II Study of Thalidomide and Irinotecan for Treatment of Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Neurooncol. 2008 90 229 235 10.1007/s11060-008-9655-9 18661102 PMC3885231

338. Kesari S. Schiff D. Henson J.W. Muzikansky A. Gigas D.C. Doherty L. Batchelor T.T. Longtine J.A. Ligon K.L. Weaver S. Phase II Study of Temozolomide, Thalidomide, and Celecoxib for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma in Adults Neuro-Oncology 2008 10 300 308 10.1215/15228517-2008-005 18403492 PMC2563052

339. Groves M.D. Puduvalli V.K. Chang S.M. Conrad C.A. Gilbert M.R. Tremont-Lukats I.W. Liu T.-J. Peterson P. Schiff D. Cloughesy T.F. A North American Brain Tumor Consortium (NABTC 99-04) Phase II Trial of Temozolomide plus Thalidomide for Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Neurooncol. 2007 81 271 277 10.1007/s11060-006-9225-y 17031561

340. Stupp R. Hegi M.E. Gorlia T. Erridge S.C. Perry J. Hong Y.-K. Aldape K.D. Lhermitte B. Pietsch T. Grujicic D. Cilengitide Combined with Standard Treatment for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma with Methylated MGMT Promoter (CENTRIC EORTC 26071-22072 Study): A Multicentre, Randomised, Open-Label, Phase 3 Trial Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 1100 1108 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70379-1 25163906

341. Nabors L.B. Fink K.L. Mikkelsen T. Grujicic D. Tarnawski R. Nam D.H. Mazurkiewicz M. Salacz M. Ashby L. Zagonel V. Two Cilengitide Regimens in Combination with Standard Treatment for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma and Unmethylated MGMT Gene Promoter: Results of the Open-Label, Controlled, Randomized Phase II CORE Study Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 708 717 10.1093/neuonc/nou356 25762461 PMC4482861

342. Nabors L.B. Mikkelsen T. Hegi M.E. Ye X. Batchelor T. Lesser G. Peereboom D. Rosenfeld M.R. Olsen J. Brem S. A Safety Run-in and Randomized Phase 2 Study of Cilengitide Combined with Chemoradiation for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma (NABTT 0306) Cancer 2012 118 5601 5607 10.1002/cncr.27585 22517399 PMC3423527

343. Reardon D.A. Fink K.L. Mikkelsen T. Cloughesy T.F. O’Neill A. Plotkin S. Glantz M. Ravin P. Raizer J.J. Rich K.M. Randomized Phase II Study of Cilengitide, an Integrin-Targeting Arginine-Glycine-Aspartic Acid Peptide, in Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme J. Clin. Oncol. 2008 26 5610 5617 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.7510 18981465

344. Elinzano H. Hebda N. Luppe D. Turchetti W. Rosati K. Sikov W.M. Safran H. PSMA ADC for Progressive Glioblastoma: Phase II Brown University Oncology Research Group Study J. Clin. Oncol. 2016 34 2065 10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.2065

345. Riva M. Imbesi F. Beghi E. Galli C. Citterio A. Trapani P. Sterzi R. Collice M. Temozolomide and Thalidomide in the Treatment of Glioblastoma Multiforme Anticancer Res. 2007 27 1067 1071 17465245

346. Alexander B.M. Wang M. Yung W.K.A. Fine H.A. Donahue B.A. Tremont I.W. Richards R.S. Kerlin K.J. Hartford A.C. Curran W.J. A Phase II Study of Conventional Radiation Therapy and Thalidomide for Supratentorial, Newly-Diagnosed Glioblastoma (RTOG 9806) J. Neurooncol. 2013 111 33 39 10.1007/s11060-012-0987-0 23086432

347. Stupp R. Hegi M.E. Neyns B. Goldbrunner R. Schlegel U. Clement P.M.J. Grabenbauer G.G. Ochsenbein A.F. Simon M. Dietrich P.-Y. Phase I/IIa Study of Cilengitide and Temozolomide with Concomitant Radiotherapy Followed by Cilengitide and Temozolomide Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma J. Clin. Oncol. 2010 28 2712 2718 10.1200/JCO.2009.26.6650 20439646

348. Cianfrocca M.E. Kimmel K.A. Gallo J. Cardoso T. Brown M.M. Hudes G. Lewis N. Weiner L. Lam G.N. Brown S.C. Phase 1 Trial of the Antiangiogenic Peptide ATN-161 (Ac-PHSCN-NH(2)), a Beta Integrin Antagonist, in Patients with Solid Tumours Br. J. Cancer 2006 94 1621 1626 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603171 16705310 PMC2361324

349. Neal J. Wakelee H. AMG-386, a Selective Angiopoietin-1/-2-Neutralizing Peptibody for the Potential Treatment of Cancer Curr. Opin. Mol. Ther. 2010 12 487 495 20677100

350. Walia A. Yang J.F. Huang Y.-H. Rosenblatt M.I. Chang J.-H. Azar D.T. Endostatin’s Emerging Roles in Angiogenesis, Lymphangiogenesis, Disease, and Clinical Applications Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2015 1850 2422 2438 10.1016/j.bbagen.2015.09.007 26367079 PMC4624607

351. Chen J. Yao Q. Li D. Zhang J. Wang T. Yu M. Zhou X. Huan Y. Wang J. Wang L. Neoadjuvant Rh-Endostatin, Docetaxel and Epirubicin for Breast Cancer: Efficacy and Safety in a Prospective, Randomized, Phase II Study BMC Cancer 2013 13 248 10.1186/1471-2407-13-248 23693018 PMC3664086

352. Cui C. Mao L. Chi Z. Si L. Sheng X. Kong Y. Li S. Lian B. Gu K. Tao M. A Phase II, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Multicenter Trial of Endostar in Patients with Metastatic Melanoma Mol. Ther. 2013 21 1456 1463 10.1038/mt.2013.79 23670576 PMC3702105

353. Zhao X. Su Y. You J. Gong L. Zhang Z. Wang M. Zhao Z. Zhang Z. Li X. Wang C. Combining Antiangiogenic Therapy with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Increases Treatment Efficacy in Stage IIIA (N2) Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer without Increasing Adverse Effects Oncotarget 2016 7 62619 62626 10.18632/oncotarget.11547 27566586 PMC5308751

354. Saffar H. Noohi M. Tavangar S.M. Saffar H. Azimi S. Expression of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen (PSMA) in Brain Glioma and Its Correlation with Tumor Grade Iran. J. Pathol. 2018 13 45 53 29731795 PMC5929388

355. Anilkumar G. Barwe S.P. Christiansen J.J. Rajasekaran S.A. Kohn D.B. Rajasekaran A.K. Association of Prostate-Specific Membrane Antigen with Caveolin-1 and Its Caveolae-Dependent Internalization in Microvascular Endothelial Cells: Implications for Targeting to Tumor Vasculature Microvasc. Res. 2006 72 54 61 10.1016/j.mvr.2006.03.004 16713605

356. Hatoum A. Mohammed R. Zakieh O. The Unique Invasiveness of Glioblastoma and Possible Drug Targets on Extracellular Matrix Available online: https://www.dovepress.com/the-unique-invasiveness-of-glioblastoma-and-possible-drug-targets-on-e-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-CMAR (accessed on 19 June 2020) 10.2147/CMAR.S186142 PMC6395056 30881112

357. Rempe R.G. Hartz A.M. Bauer B. Matrix Metalloproteinases in the Brain and Blood–Brain Barrier: Versatile Breakers and Makers J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 2016 36 1481 1507 10.1177/0271678X16655551 27323783 PMC5012524

358. Mandel J.J. Yust-Katz S. Patel A.J. Cachia D. Liu D. Park M. Yuan Y. Kent T.A. de Groot J.F. Inability of Positive Phase II Clinical Trials of Investigational Treatments to Subsequently Predict Positive Phase III Clinical Trials in Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2018 20 113 122 10.1093/neuonc/nox144 29016865 PMC5761583

359. Ventz S. Lai A. Cloughesy T.F. Wen P.Y. Trippa L. Alexander B.M. Design and Evaluation of an External Control Arm Using Prior Clinical Trials and Real-World Data Clin. Cancer Res. 2019 25 4993 5001 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-0820 31175098 PMC6697596

360. Lee E.Q. Chukwueke U.N. Hervey-Jumper S.L. de Groot J.F. Leone J.P. Armstrong T.S. Chang S.M. Arons D. Oliver K. Verble K. Barriers to Accrual and Enrollment in Brain Tumor Trials Neuro-Oncology 2019 21 1100 1117 10.1093/neuonc/noz175.574 31175826 PMC7594546

361. Parker J.L. Kuzulugil S.S. Pereverzev K. Mac S. Lopes G. Shah Z. Weerasinghe A. Rubinger D. Falconi A. Bener A. Does Biomarker Use in Oncology Improve Clinical Trial Failure Risk? A Large-Scale Analysis Cancer Med. 2021 10 1955 1963 10.1002/cam4.3732 33620160 PMC7957156

362. Weller M. van den Bent M. Preusser M. Le Rhun E. Tonn J.C. Minniti G. Bendszus M. Balana C. Chinot O. Dirven L. EANO Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diffuse Gliomas of Adulthood Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2021 18 170 186 10.1038/s41571-020-00447-z 33293629 PMC7904519

363. Sestito S. Runfola M. Tonelli M. Chiellini G. Rapposelli S. New Multitarget Approaches in the War Against Glioblastoma: A Mini-Perspective Front. Pharmacol. 2018 9 874 10.3389/fphar.2018.00874 30123135 PMC6085564

364. Wolbers J.G. Novel Strategies in Glioblastoma Surgery Aim at Safe, Supra-Maximum Resection in Conjunction with Local Therapies Chin. J. Cancer 2014 33 8 15 10.5732/cjc.013.10219 24384236 PMC3905085

365. Sanai N. Polley M.-Y. McDermott M.W. Parsa A.T. Berger M.S. An Extent of Resection Threshold for Newly Diagnosed Glioblastomas: Clinical Article J. Neurosurg. 2011 115 3 8 10.3171/2011.2.JNS10998 21417701

366. Trifiletti D.M. Alonso C. Grover S. Fadul C.E. Sheehan J.P. Showalter T.N. Prognostic Implications of Extent of Resection in Glioblastoma: Analysis from a Large Database World Neurosurg. 2017 103 330 340 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.04.035 28427986

367. Jena L. McErlean E. McCarthy H. Delivery across the Blood-Brain Barrier: Nanomedicine for Glioblastoma Multiforme Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 2020 10 304 318 10.1007/s13346-019-00679-2 31728942 PMC7066289

368. Shi M. Sanche L. Convection-Enhanced Delivery in Malignant Gliomas: A Review of Toxicity and Efficacy J. Oncol. 2019 2019 9342796 10.1155/2019/9342796 31428153 PMC6679879

369. van den Bent M.J. Gao Y. Kerkhof M. Kros J.M. Gorlia T. van Zwieten K. Prince J. van Duinen S. Sillevis Smitt P.A. Taphoorn M. Changes in the EGFR Amplification and EGFRvIII Expression between Paired Primary and Recurrent Glioblastomas Neuro-Oncology 2015 17 935 941 10.1093/neuonc/nov013 25691693 PMC5762005

370. Wang J. Cazzato E. Ladewig E. Frattini V. Rosenbloom D.I.S. Zairis S. Abate F. Liu Z. Elliott O. Shin Y.-J. Clonal Evolution of Glioblastoma under Therapy Nat. Genet. 2016 48 768 776 10.1038/ng.3590 27270107 PMC5627776

371. Nathanson D.A. Gini B. Mottahedeh J. Visnyei K. Koga T. Gomez G. Eskin A. Hwang K. Wang J. Masui K. Targeted Therapy Resistance Mediated by Dynamic Regulation of Extrachromosomal Mutant EGFR DNA Science 2014 343 72 76 10.1126/science.1241328 24310612 PMC4049335

372. Huang L. Fu L. Mechanisms of Resistance to EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors Acta Pharm. Sin. B 2015 5 390 401 10.1016/j.apsb.2015.07.001 26579470 PMC4629442

373. An Z. Aksoy O. Zheng T. Fan Q.-W. Weiss W.A. Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor and EGFRvIII in Glioblastoma: Signaling Pathways and Targeted Therapies Oncogene 2018 37 1561 1575 10.1038/s41388-017-0045-7 29321659 PMC5860944

374. Goodwin C.R. Rath P. Oyinlade O. Lopez H. Mughal S. Xia S. Li Y. Kaur H. Zhou X. Ahmed A.K. Crizotinib and Erlotinib Inhibits Growth of C-Met+/EGFRvIII+ Primary Human Glioblastoma Xenografts Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2018 171 26 33 10.1016/j.clineuro.2018.02.041 29803091

375. Akhavan D. Pourzia A.L. Nourian A.A. Williams K.J. Nathanson D. Babic I. Villa G.R. Tanaka K. Nael A. Yang H. De-Repression of PDGFRβ Transcription Promotes Acquired Resistance to EGFR Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Glioblastoma Patients Cancer Discov. 2013 3 534 547 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-12-0502 23533263 PMC3651754

376. Mellinghoff I.K. Wang M.Y. Vivanco I. Haas-Kogan D.A. Zhu S. Dia E.Q. Lu K.V. Yoshimoto K. Huang J.H.Y. Chute D.J. Molecular Determinants of the Response of Glioblastomas to EGFR Kinase Inhibitors N. Engl. J. Med. 2005 353 2012 2024 10.1056/NEJMoa051918 16282176

377. Bhat K.P.L. Balasubramaniyan V. Vaillant B. Ezhilarasan R. Hummelink K. Hollingsworth F. Wani K. Heathcock L. James J.D. Goodman L.D. Mesenchymal Differentiation Mediated by NF-ΚB Promotes Radiation Resistance in Glioblastoma Cancer Cell 2013 24 331 346 10.1016/j.ccr.2013.08.001 23993863 PMC3817560

378. Halliday J. Helmy K. Pattwell S.S. Pitter K.L. LaPlant Q. Ozawa T. Holland E.C. In Vivo Radiation Response of Proneural Glioma Characterized by Protective P53 Transcriptional Program and Proneural-Mesenchymal Shift Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014 111 5248 5253 10.1073/pnas.1321014111 24706837 PMC3986190

379. Ghosh D. Nandi S. Bhattacharjee S. Combination Therapy to Checkmate Glioblastoma: Clinical Challenges and Advances Clin. Transl. Med. 2018 7 33 10.1186/s40169-018-0211-8 30327965 PMC6191404

380. Eskilsson E. Røsland G.V. Solecki G. Wang Q. Harter P.N. Graziani G. Verhaak R.G.W. Winkler F. Bjerkvig R. Miletic H. EGFR Heterogeneity and Implications for Therapeutic Intervention in Glioblastoma Neuro-Oncology 2018 20 743 752 10.1093/neuonc/nox191 29040782 PMC5961011

381. Burkhardt J.-K. Riina H. Shin B.J. Christos P. Kesavabhotla K. Hofstetter C.P. Tsiouris A.J. Boockvar J.A. Intra-Arterial Delivery of Bevacizumab after Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption for the Treatment of Recurrent Glioblastoma: Progression-Free Survival and Overall Survival World Neurosurg. 2012 77 130 134 10.1016/j.wneu.2011.05.056 22405392 PMC3743246

382. Boockvar J.A. Tsiouris A.J. Hofstetter C.P. Kovanlikaya I. Fralin S. Kesavabhotla K. Seedial S.M. Pannullo S.C. Schwartz T.H. Stieg P. Safety and Maximum Tolerated Dose of Superselective Intraarterial Cerebral Infusion of Bevacizumab after Osmotic Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption for Recurrent Malignant Glioma. Clinical Article J. Neurosurg. 2011 114 624 632 10.3171/2010.9.JNS101223 20964595 PMC3622705

383. Alter R.A. White T.G. Fanous A.A. Chakraborty S. Filippi C.G. Pisapia D.J. Tsiouris A.J. Boockvar J.A. Long-Term Benefit of Intra-Arterial Bevacizumab for Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Exp. Ther. Oncol. 2017 12 67 71 28472567

384. Chakraborty S. Filippi C.G. Burkhardt J.-K. Fralin S. Ray A. Wong T. Ortiz R. Langer D.J. Boockvar J.A. Durability of Single Dose Intra-Arterial Bevacizumab after Blood/Brain Barrier Disruption for Recurrent Glioblastoma J. Exp. Ther. Oncol. 2016 11 261 267 27849336

385. Heiland D.H. Masalha W. Franco P. Machein M.R. Weyerbrock A. Progression-Free and Overall Survival in Patients with Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme Treated with Last-Line Bevacizumab versus Bevacizumab/Lomustine J. Neurooncol. 2016 126 567 575 10.1007/s11060-015-2002-z 26614518

386. Chinot O.L. Cilengitide in Glioblastoma: When Did It Fail? Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 1044 1045 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70403-6 25163907

387. Stupp R. Picard M. Weller M. Does Cilengitide Deserve Another Chance?-Authors’ Reply Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 e585 e586 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71121-0 25456377

388. Tucci M. Stucci S. Silvestris F. Does Cilengitide Deserve Another Chance? Lancet Oncol. 2014 15 e584 e585 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70462-0 25456376

389. Reynolds A.R. Hart I.R. Watson A.R. Welti J.C. Silva R.G. Robinson S.D. Da Violante G. Gourlaouen M. Salih M. Jones M.C. Stimulation of Tumor Growth and Angiogenesis by Low Concentrations of RGD-Mimetic Integrin Inhibitors Nat. Med. 2009 15 392 400 10.1038/nm.1941 19305413

390. Eisele G. Wick A. Eisele A.-C. Clément P.M. Tonn J. Tabatabai G. Ochsenbein A. Schlegel U. Neyns B. Krex D. Cilengitide Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma Patients Does Not Alter Patterns of Progression J. Neurooncol. 2014 117 141 145 10.1007/s11060-014-1365-x 24442484

391. Weller M. Nabors L.B. Gorlia T. Leske H. Rushing E. Bady P. Hicking C. Perry J. Hong Y.-K. Roth P. Cilengitide in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma: Biomarker Expression and Outcome Oncotarget 2016 7 15018 15032 10.18632/oncotarget.7588 26918452 PMC4924768

392. Cosset É. Weis S.M. Cheresh D.A. Re-Thinking the Preclinical Development of GBM Therapeutics Oncoscience 2018 5 11 12 10.18632/oncoscience.396 29556513 PMC5854288

393. Cosset É. Ilmjärv S. Dutoit V. Elliott K. von Schalscha T. Camargo M.F. Reiss A. Moroishi T. Seguin L. Gomez G. Glut3 Addiction Is a Druggable Vulnerability for a Molecularly Defined Subpopulation of Glioblastoma Cancer Cell 2017 32 856 868.e5 10.1016/j.ccell.2017.10.016 29198914 PMC5730343

394. Uneda A. Kurozumi K. Fujimura A. Fujii K. Ishida J. Shimazu Y. Otani Y. Tomita Y. Hattori Y. Matsumoto Y. Differentiated Glioblastoma Cells Accelerate Tumor Progression by Shaping the Tumor Microenvironment via CCN1-Mediated Macrophage Infiltration Acta Neuropathol. Commun. 2021 9 29 10.1186/s40478-021-01124-7 33618763 PMC7898455

395. Wang X. Prager B.C. Wu Q. Kim L.J.Y. Gimple R.C. Shi Y. Yang K. Morton A.R. Zhou W. Zhu Z. Reciprocal Signaling between Glioblastoma Stem Cells and Differentiated Tumor Cells Promotes Malignant Progression Cell Stem Cell 2018 22 514 528.e5 10.1016/j.stem.2018.03.011 29625067 PMC5947947

396. Petroni G. Buqué A. Zitvogel L. Kroemer G. Galluzzi L. Immunomodulation by Targeted Anticancer Agents Cancer Cell 2021 39 310 345 10.1016/j.ccell.2020.11.009 33338426

397. Martins T.A. Schmassmann P. Shekarian T. Boulay J.-L. Ritz M.-F. Zanganeh S. Vom Berg J. Hutter G. Microglia-Centered Combinatorial Strategies Against Glioblastoma Front. Immunol. 2020 11 571951 10.3389/fimmu.2020.571951 33117364 PMC7552736

398. Fukumura D. Kloepper J. Amoozgar Z. Duda D.G. Jain R.K. Enhancing Cancer Immunotherapy Using Antiangiogenics: Opportunities and Challenges Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2018 15 325 340 10.1038/nrclinonc.2018.29 29508855 PMC5921900

399. Song Y. Fu Y. Xie Q. Zhu B. Wang J. Zhang B. Anti-Angiogenic Agents in Combination with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Promising Strategy for Cancer Treatment Front. Immunol. 2020 11 1956 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01956 32983126 PMC7477085