Glioblastoma (GBM) remains one of the most difficult tumors to treat. The mean overall survival rate of 15 months and the 5-year survival rate of 5% have not significantly changed for almost 2 decades. Despite progress in understanding the pathophysiology of the disease, no new effective treatments to combine with radiation therapy after surgical tumor debulking have become available since the introduction of temozolomide in 1999. One of the main reasons for this is the scarcity of compounds that cross the blood–brain barrier (BBB) and reach the brain tumor tissue in therapeutically effective concentrations. In this review, we focus on the role of the BBB and its importance in developing brain tumor treatments. Moreover, we discuss drug repurposing, a drug discovery approach to identify potential effective candidates with optimal pharmacokinetic profiles for central nervous system (CNS) penetration and that allows rapid implementation in clinical trials. Additionally, we provide an overview of repurposed candidate drug currently being investigated in GBM at the preclinical and clinical levels. Finally, we highlight the importance of phase 0 trials to confirm tumor drug exposure and we discuss emerging drug delivery technologies as an alternative route to maximize therapeutic efficacy of repurposed candidate drug.

Background: Glioblastoma is an aggressive and incurable type of brain cancer. Little progress has been made in the development of effective new therapies in the past decades. The blood–brain barrier (BBB) and drug efflux pumps, which together hamper drug delivery to these tumors, play a pivotal role in the gap between promising preclinical findings and failure in clinical trials. Therefore, selecting drugs that can reach the tumor region in pharmacologically effective concentrations is of major importance. Methods: In the current study, we utilized a drug selection platform to identify candidate drugs by combining in vitro oncological drug screening data and pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles for central nervous system (CNS) penetration using the multiparameter optimization (MPO) score. Furthermore, we developed intracranial patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models that recapitulated the in situ characteristics of glioblastoma and characterized them in terms of vascular integrity, BBB permeability and expression of ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters. Omacetaxine mepesuccinate (OMA) was selected as a proof-of-concept drug candidate to validate our drug selection pipeline. Results: We assessed OMA’s PK profile in three different orthotopic mouse PDX models and found that OMA reaches the brain tumor tissue at concentrations ranging from 2- to 11-fold higher than in vitro IC₅₀ values on patient-derived glioblastoma cell cultures. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that OMA, a drug selected for its in vitro anti-glioma activity and CNS- MPO score, achieves brain tumor tissue concentrations exceeding its in vitro IC₅₀ values in patient-derived glioblastoma cell cultures, as shown in three orthotopic mouse PDX models. We emphasize the importance of such approaches at the preclinical level, highlighting both their significance and limitations in identifying compounds with potential clinical implementation in glioblastoma.

Chemotherapy using temozolomide is the standard treatment for patients with glioblastoma. Despite treatment, prognosis is still poor largely due to the emergence of temozolomide resistance. This resistance is closely linked to the widely recognized inter- and intra-tumoral heterogeneity in glioblastoma, although the underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood. To induce temozolomide resistance, we subjected 21 patient-derived glioblastoma cell cultures to Temozolomide treatment for a period of up to 90 days. Prior to treatment, the cells’ molecular characteristics were analyzed using bulk RNA sequencing. Additionally, we performed single-cell RNA sequencing on four of the cell cultures to track the evolution of temozolomide resistance. The induced temozolomide resistance was associated with two distinct phenotypic behaviors, classified as “adaptive” (ADA) or “non-adaptive” (N-ADA) to temozolomide. The ADA phenotype displayed neurodevelopmental and metabolic gene signatures, whereas the N-ADA phenotype expressed genes related to cell cycle regulation, DNA repair, and protein synthesis. Single-cell RNA sequencing revealed that in ADA cell cultures, one or more subpopulations emerged as dominant in the resistant samples, whereas N-ADA cell cultures remained relatively stable. The adaptability and heterogeneity of glioblastoma cells play pivotal roles in temozolomide treatment and contribute to the tumor’s ability to survive. Depending on the tumor’s adaptability potential, subpopulations with acquired resistance mechanisms may arise.

One of the main causes of poor prognoses in patient with glioblastoma (GBM) is drug resistance to current standard treatment, which includes chemoradiation and adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ). In addition, the concept of cancer stem cells provides new insights into therapy resistance and management also in GBM and glioblastoma stem cell-like cells (GSCs), which might contribute to therapy resistance. Bone morphogenetic protein-4 (BMP4) stimulates astroglial differentiation of GSCs and thereby reduces their self-renewal capacity. Exposure of GSCs to BMP4 may also sensitize these cells to TMZ. A recent phase I trial has shown that local delivery of BMP4 is safe, but a large variation in survival is seen in these treated patients and in features of their cultured tumors. We wanted to combine TMZ and BMP4 (TMZ + BMP4) therapy and assess the inter-tumoral variability in response to TMZ + BMP4 in patient-derived GBM cultures. A phase II trial could then benefit a larger group of patients than those treated with BMP4 only. We first show that simultaneous treatment with TMZ + BMP4 is more effective than sequential treatment. Second, when applying our optimized treatment protocol, 70% of a total of 20 GBM cultures displayed TMZ + BMP4 synergy. This combination induces cellular apoptosis and does not inhibit cell proliferation. Comparative bulk RNA-sequencing indicates that treatment with TMZ + BMP4 eventually results in decreased MAPK signaling, in line with previous evidence that increased MAPK signaling is associated with resistance to TMZ. Based on these results, we advocate further clinical trial research to test patient benefit and validate pathophysiological hypothesis.