Nowadays, due to recent advances in molecular biology, the pathogenesis of glioblastoma is better understood. For the newly diagnosed, the current standard of care is represented by resection followed by radiotherapy and temozolomide administration, but because median overall survival remains poor, new diagnosis and treatment strategies are needed. Due to the quick progression, even with aggressive multimodal treatment, glioblastoma remains almost incurable. It is known that epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) amplification is a characteristic of the classical subtype of glioma. However, targeted therapies against this type of receptor have not yet shown a clear clinical benefit. Many factors contribute to resistance, such as ineffective blood–brain barrier penetration, heterogeneity, mutations, as well as compensatory signaling pathways. A better understanding of the EGFR signaling network, and its interrelations with other pathways, are essential to clarify the mechanisms of resistance and create better therapeutic agents.

Glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs) are cells with a self-renewal ability and capacity to initiate tumors upon serial transplantation that have been linked to tumor cell heterogeneity. Most standard treatments fail to completely eradicate GSCs, causing the recurrence of the disease. GSCs could represent one reason for the low efficacy of cancer therapy and for the short relapse time. Nonetheless, experimental data suggest that the presence of therapy-resistant GSCs could explain tumor recurrence. Therefore, to effectively target GSCs, a comprehensive understanding of their biology and the survival and developing mechanisms during treatment is mandatory. This review provides an overview of the molecular features, microenvironment, detection, and targeting strategies of GSCs, an essential information required for an efficient therapy. Despite the outstanding results in oncology, researchers are still developing novel strategies, of which one could be targeting the GSCs present in the hypoxic regions and invasive edge of the glioblastoma.

The race to find an effective treatment for glioblastoma (GBM) remains a critical topic, because of its high aggressivity and impact on survival and the quality of life. Currently, due to GBM’s high heterogeneity, the conventional treatment success rate and response to therapy are relatively low, with a median survival rate of less than 20 months. A new point of view can be provided by the comprehension of the tumor microenvironment (TME) in pursuance of the development of new therapeutic strategies to aim for a longer survival rate with an improved quality of life and longer disease-free interval (DFI). The main components of the GBM TME are represented by the extracellular matrix (ECM), glioma cells and glioma stem cells (GSCs), immune cells (microglia, macrophages, neutrophils, lymphocytes), neuronal cells, all of them having dynamic interactions and being able to influence the tumoral growth, progression, and drug resistance thus being a potential therapeutic target. This paper will review the latest research on the GBM TME and the potential therapeutic targets to form an up-to-date strategy.

Cancer remains one of the most difficult to manage healthcare problems. The last two decades have been considered the golden age of cancer research, with major breakthroughs being announced on a regular basis. However, the major problem regarding cancer treatment is the incapability to selectively target cancer cells, with certain populations of tumors still remaining alive after treatment. The main focus of researchers is to develop treatments that are both effective and selective in targeting malignant cells. In this regard, bioavailability can be increased by overcoming the biological barriers encountered in the active agent’s pathway, creating carrier vehicles that have the ability to target malignant cells and effectively release the active agent. Since its appearance, nanomedicine has provided many answers to these challenges, but still, some expectations were not satisfied. In this review, we focused on the most recent developments in targeted drug delivery. Furthermore, a summary of different types of nanoparticles used to deliver active therapeutic agents in oncology is presented, along with details on the nanodrugs that were clinically approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), until April 2019.

The epidermal growth factor, latrophilin, and seven transmembrane domain–containing protein 1 (ELTD1), is a member of the G–protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) superfamily. Although discovered in 2001, ELTD1 has been investigated only by a few research groups, and important data about its role in normal and tumor cells is still missing. Even though its functions and structure are not yet fully understood, recent studies show that ELTD1 has a role in both physiological and pathological angiogenesis, and it appears to be a very important biomarker and a molecular target in cancer diseases. Upregulation of ELTD1 in malignant cells has been reported, and correlated with poor cancer prognosis. This review article aims to compile the existing data and to discuss the current knowledge on ELTD1 structure and signaling, and its role in physiological and neoplastic conditions.

Background: Astrocytoma, the most common type of glioma, can histologically be low or high grade. Treatment recommendations for astrocytic tumors are based on the histopathological and molecular phenotype. For grade 2 astrocytoma, the combination of radiotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy with procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine (PCV) is better than radiotherapy alone. Temozolomide (TMZ) is being increasingly recognized as a replacement for PCV in brain tumor therapy, due to the lower myelotoxicity. TMZ is currently a well-established first-line treatment for grade 3 astrocytoma, grade 4 astrocytoma, and glioblastoma and it is also sporadically used for grade 2 astrocytoma. However, TMZ faces multiple challenges such as adverse effects and drug resistance. Methods: In this study, we compared the cytotoxic effect induced by TMZ and doxorubicin (DOXO), alone and in combination, on a low-grade astrocytoma cell line (AC1B) and a high-grade glioma cell line (GB1B). Results: We found that TMZ and DOXO, each produced a cytotoxic effect in monotherapy. GB1B cell line was more sensitive to the treatment than AC1B cells, at a 7- and 10-day exposure to the DOXO. However, when the duration of the treatment was extended to 14 days, GB1B cells became more resistant to DOXO treatment, compared to AC1B cells. Regarding the treatment with TMZ, GB1B exhibited greater resistance to TMZ compared to AC1B, across all studied intervals and the resistance to treatment of GB1B increased with longer exposure time. However, in combined therapy, the drugs did not exert a synergistic effect on any astrocytic cell line. Conclusions: The current data suggest that both TMZ and DOXO exhibit efficient therapeutic effects on low- and high-grade glioma cells. However, no synergistic effect was observed for combined therapy.