Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) can lead to devastating outcomes including vasospasm, cognitive decline, and even death. Currently, treatment options are limited for this potentially life threatening injury. Recent evidence suggests that neuroinflammation plays a critical role in injury expansion and brain damage. Red blood cell breakdown products can lead to the release of inflammatory cytokines that trigger vasospasm and tissue injury. Preclinical models have been used successfully to improve understanding about neuroinflammation following aneurysmal rupture. The focus of this review is to provide an overview of how neuroinflammation relates to secondary outcomes such as vasospasm after aneurysmal rupture and to critically discuss pharmaceutical agents that warrant further investigation for the treatment of subarachnoid hemorrhage. We provide a concise overview of the neuroinflammatory pathways that are upregulated following aneurysmal rupture and how these pathways correlate to long-term outcomes. Treatment of aneurysm rupture is limited and few pharmaceutical drugs are available. Through improved understanding of biochemical mechanisms of injury, novel treatment solutions are being developed that target neuroinflammation. In the final sections of this review, we highlight a few of these novel treatment approaches and emphasize why targeting neuroinflammation following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage may improve patient care. We encourage ongoing research into the pathophysiology of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, especially in regards to neuroinflammatory cascades and the translation to randomized clinical trials.

The present review aimed to establish an understanding of the pathophysiology of leptomeningeal disease as it relates to late-stage development among different cancer types. For our purposes, the focused metastatic malignancies include breast cancer, lung cancer, melanoma, primary central nervous system tumors, and hematologic cancers (lymphoma, leukemia, and multiple myeloma). Of note, our discussion was limited to cancer-specific leptomeningeal metastases secondary to the aforementioned primary cancers. LMD mechanisms secondary to non-cancerous pathologies, such as infection or inflammation of the leptomeningeal layer, were excluded from our scope of review. Furthermore, we intended to characterize general leptomeningeal disease, including the specific anatomical infiltration process/area, CSF dissemination, manifesting clinical symptoms in patients afflicted with the disease, detection mechanisms, imaging modalities, and treatment therapies (both preclinical and clinical). Of these parameters, leptomeningeal disease across different primary cancers shares several features. Pathophysiology regarding the development of CNS involvement within the mentioned cancer subtypes is similar in nature and progression of disease. Consequently, detection of leptomeningeal disease, regardless of cancer type, employs several of the same techniques. Cerebrospinal fluid analysis in combination with varied imaging (CT, MRI, and PET-CT) has been noted in the current literature as the gold standard in the diagnosis of leptomeningeal metastasis. Treatment options for the disease are both varied and currently in development, given the rarity of these cases. Our review details the differences in leptomeningeal disease as they pertain through the lens of several different cancer subtypes in an effort to highlight the current state of targeted therapy, the potential shortcomings in treatment, and the direction of preclinical and clinical treatments in the future. As there is a lack of comprehensive reviews that seek to characterize leptomeningeal metastasis from various solid and hematologic cancers altogether, the authors intended to highlight not only the overlapping mechanisms but also the distinct patterning of disease detection and progression as a means to uniquely treat each metastasis type. The scarcity of LMD cases poses a barrier to more robust evaluations of this pathology. However, as treatments for primary cancers have improved over time, so has the incidence of LMD. The increase in diagnosed cases only represents a small fraction of LMD-afflicted patients. More often than not, LMD is determined upon autopsy. The motivation behind this review stems from the increased capacity to study LMD in spite of scarcity or poor patient prognosis. In vitro analysis of leptomeningeal cancer cells has allowed researchers to approach this disease at the level of cancer subtypes and markers. We ultimately hope to facilitate the clinical translation of LMD research through our discourse.

Studies using traditional treatment strategies for mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) have produced limited clinical success. Interest in treatment for mild TBI is at an all time high due to its association with the development of chronic traumatic encephalopathy and other neurodegenerative diseases, yet therapeutic options remain limited. Traditional pharmaceutical interventions have failed to transition to the clinic for the treatment of mild TBI. As such, many pre-clinical studies are now implementing non-pharmaceutical therapies for TBI. These studies have demonstrated promise, particularly those that modulate secondary injury cascades activated after injury. Because no TBI therapy has been discovered for mild injury, researchers now look to pharmaceutical supplementation in an attempt to foster success in human clinical trials. Non-traditional therapies, such as acupuncture and even music therapy are being considered to combat the neuropsychiatric symptoms of TBI. In this review, we highlight alternative approaches that have been studied in clinical and pre-clinical studies of TBI, and other related forms of neural injury. The purpose of this review is to stimulate further investigation into novel and innovative approaches that can be used to treat the mechanisms and symptoms of mild TBI.