Open, reproducible, and replicable research practices are a fundamental part of science. Training is often organized on a grassroots level, offered by early career researchers, for early career researchers. Buffet style courses that cover many topics can inspire participants to try new things; however, they can also be overwhelming. Participants who want to implement new practices may not know where to start once they return to their research team. We describe ten simple rules to guide participants of relevant training courses in implementing robust research practices in their own projects, once they return to their research group. This includes (1) prioritizing and planning which practices to implement, which involves obtaining support and convincing others involved in the research project of the added value of implementing new practices; (2) managing problems that arise during implementation; and (3) making reproducible research and open science practices an integral part of a future research career. We also outline strategies that course organizers can use to prepare participants for implementation and support them during this process.

Mesenchymal glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs), a subpopulation in glioblastoma that are responsible for therapy resistance and tumor spreading in the brain, reportedly upregulate aldehyde dehydrogenase isoform-1A3 (ALDH1A3) which can be inhibited by disulfiram (DSF), an FDA-approved drug formerly prescribed in alcohol use disorder. Reportedly, DSF in combination with Cu²⁺ ions exerts multiple tumoricidal, chemo- and radio-therapy-sensitizing effects in several tumor entities. The present study aimed to quantify these DSF effects in glioblastoma stem cells in vitro, regarding dependence on ALDH1A3 expression. To this end, two patient-derived GSC cultures with differing ALDH1A3 expression were pretreated (in the presence of CuSO₄, 100 nM) with DSF (0 or 100 nM) and the DNA-alkylating agent temozolomide (0 or 30 µM) and then cells were irradiated with a single dose of 0–8 Gy. As read-outs, cell cycle distribution and clonogenic survival were determined by flow cytometry and limited dilution assay, respectively. As a result, DSF modulated cell cycle distribution in both GSC cultures and dramatically decreased clonogenic survival independently of ALDH1A3 expression. This effect was additive to the impairment of clonogenic survival by radiation, but not associated with radiosensitization. Of note, cotreatment with temozolomide blunted the DSF inhibition of clonogenic survival. In conclusion, DSF targets GSCs independent of ALDH1A3 expression, suggesting a therapeutic efficacy also in glioblastomas with low mesenchymal GSC populations. As temozolomide somehow antagonized the DSF effects, strategies for future combination of DSF with the adjuvant standard therapy (fractionated radiotherapy and concomitant temozolomide chemotherapy followed by temozolomide maintenance therapy) are not supported by the present study.

Identification of prognostic or predictive molecular markers in glioblastoma resection specimens may lead to strategies for therapy stratification and personalized treatment planning. Here, we analyzed in primary glioblastoma stem cell (pGSC) cultures the mRNA abundances of seven stem cell (MSI1, Notch1, nestin, Sox2, Oct4, FABP7 and ALDH1A3), and three radioresistance or invasion markers (CXCR4, IK_Ca and BK_Ca). From these abundances, an mRNA signature was deduced which describes the mesenchymal‐to‐proneural expression profile of an individual GSC culture. To assess its functional significance, we associated the GSC mRNA signature with the clonogenic survival after irradiation with 4 Gy and the fibrin matrix invasion of the GSC cells. In addition, we compared the molecular pGSC mRNA signature with the tumor recurrence pattern and the overall survival of the glioblastoma patients from whom the pGSC cultures were derived. As a result, the molecular pGSC mRNA signature correlated positively with the pGSC radioresistance and matrix invasion capability in vitro. Moreover, patients with a mesenchymal (>median) mRNA signature in their pGSC cultures exhibited predominantly a multifocal tumor recurrence and a significantly (univariate log rank test) shorter overall survival than patients with proneural (≤median mRNA signature) pGSCs. The tumors of the latter recurred predominately unifocally. We conclude that our pGSC cultures induce/select those cell subpopulations of the heterogeneous brain tumor that determine disease progression and therapy outcome. In addition, we further postulate a clinically relevant prognostic/predictive value for the 10 mRNAs‐based mesenchymal‐to‐proneural signature of the GSC subpopulations in glioblastoma.

Methadone, which is used as maintenance medication for outpatient treatment of opioid dependence or as an analgesic drug, has been suggested by preclinical in vitro and mouse studies to induce cell death and sensitivity to chemo- or radiotherapy in leukemia, glioblastoma, and carcinoma cells. These data together with episodical public reports on long-term surviving cancer patients who use methadone led to a hype of methadone as an anti-cancer drug in social and public media. However, clinical evidence for a tumoricidal effect of methadone is missing and prospective clinical trials, except in colorectal cancer, are not envisaged because of the limited preclinical data available. The present article reviews the pharmacokinetics, potential molecular targets, as well as the evidence for a tumoricidal effect of methadone in view of the therapeutically achievable doses in the brain. Moreover, it provides original in vitro data showing that methadone at clinically relevant concentrations fails to impair clonogenicity or radioresistance of glioblastoma cells.

The intermediate-conductance calcium-activated potassium channel K_Ca3.1 has been proposed to be a new potential target for glioblastoma treatment. This study analyzed the effect of combined irradiation and K_Ca3.1-targeting with TRAM-34 in the syngeneic, immune-competent orthotopic SMA-560/VM/Dk glioma mouse model. Whereas neither irradiation nor TRAM-34 treatment alone meaningfully prolonged the survival of the animals, the combination significantly prolonged the survival of the mice. We found an irradiation-induced hyperinvasion of glioma cells into the brain, which was inhibited by concomitant TRAM-34 treatment. Interestingly, TRAM-34 did neither radiosensitize nor impair SMA-560’s intrinsic migratory capacities in vitro. Exploratory findings hint at increased TGF-β1 signaling after irradiation. On top, we found a marginal upregulation of MMP9 mRNA, which was inhibited by TRAM-34. Last, infiltration of CD3⁺, CD8⁺ or FoxP3⁺ T cells was not impacted by either irradiation or K_Ca3.1 targeting and we found no evidence of adverse events of the combined treatment. We conclude that concomitant irradiation and TRAM-34 treatment is efficacious in this preclinical glioma model.

Drug repurposing is a complementary pathway for introducing new drugs against cancer. Broad systematic assessments of ongoing repurposing efforts in oncology are lacking, but may be helpful to critically appraise current and future efforts. Hence, we conducted a systematic PubMed search encompassing 100 frequently prescribed and 100 randomly selected drugs, and assessed the published preclinical anti-cancer effects. Furthermore, we evaluated all the identified original articles for methodological quality. We found reports indicating anti-cancer effects for 138/200 drugs, especially among frequently prescribed drugs (81/100). Most were reports suggesting single-agent activity of the drugs (61%). Basic information, such as the cell line used or control treatments utilized, were reported consistently, while more detailed information (e.g., excluded data) was mostly missing. The majority (56%) of in vivo studies reported randomizing animals, while only few articles stated that the experiments were conducted in a blinded fashion. In conclusion, we found promising reports of anti-cancer effects for the majority of the assessed drugs, but speculate that many of them are false-positive findings. Reward systems should be adjusted to encourage the widespread usage of high reporting quality and bias-reducing methodologies, aiming to decrease the rate of false-positive results, and thereby increasing the trust in the findings.