Current treatment guidelines for the management of recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) are far from definitive, and the prognosis remains dismal. Despite recent advancements in the pharmacological and surgical fields, numerous doubts persist concerning the optimal strategy that clinicians should adopt for patients who fail the first lines of treatment and present signs of progressive disease. With most recurrences being located within the margins of the previously resected lesion, a comprehensive molecular and genetic profiling of rGBM revealed substantial differences compared with newly diagnosed disease. In the present comprehensive review, we sought to examine the current treatment guidelines and the new perspectives that polarize the field of neuro-oncology, strictly focusing on progressive disease. For this purpose, updated PRISMA guidelines were followed to search for pivotal studies and clinical trials published in the last five years. A total of 125 articles discussing locoregional management, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy strategies were included in our analysis, and salient findings were critically summarized. In addition, an in-depth description of the molecular profile of rGBM and its distinctive characteristics is provided. Finally, we integrate the above-mentioned evidence with the current guidelines published by international societies, including AANS/CNS, EANO, AIOM, and NCCN.

Background: This review focuses on the recently published evidence on tumor treating fields (TTFields) administered alone or in combination with locoregional and systemic options for treating glioblastoma (GBM) in the past ten years. The aim is to critically summarize the novelty and results obtained with this innovative tool, which is becoming part of the armamentarium of neurosurgeons and neuro-oncologists. Methods: A comprehensive search and analysis were conducted on pivotal studies published in the past ten years. Furthermore, all completed clinical trials, whose results were published on clinicaltrials.gov, were examined and included in the present review, encompassing both recurrent (r) and newly diagnosed (n) GBM. Finally, an additional examination of the ongoing clinical trials was also conducted. Results: Recent trials have shown promising results both in patients with nGBM and rGBM/progressive (rGBM), leading to Food and Drug Administration approval in selected patients and the Congress of Neurological Surgeons to include TTFields into current guidelines on the management of GBM (P100034/S001-029). Recently, different randomized trials have demonstrated promising results of TTFields in combination with standard treatment of n- and rGBM, especially when considering progression-free and overall survival, maintaining a low rate of mild to moderate adverse events. Conclusion: Optimal outcomes were obtained in nGBM and progressive disease. A possible future refinement of TTFields could significantly impact the treatment of rGBM and the actual standard of care for GBM, given the better safety profile and survival effects.

Background/Objectives: The methylation status of the O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter in gliomas has emerged as a critical biomarker for prognosis and treatment response. Conventional methods for assessing MGMT promoter methylation, such as methylation-specific PCR, are invasive and require tissue sampling. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed in compliance with the updated PRISMA 2020 guidelines within electronic databases MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and IEEE Xplore. Search terms, including “MGMT”, “methylation”, “glioma”, “glioblastoma”, “machine learning”, “deep learning”, and “radiomics”, were adopted in various MeSH combinations. Original studies in the English, Italian, German, and French languages were considered for inclusion. Results: This review analyzed 34 studies conducted in the last six years, focusing on assessing MGMT methylation status using radiomics (RD), deep learning (DL), or combined approaches. These studies utilized radiological data from the public (e.g., BraTS, TCGA) and private institutional datasets. Sixteen studies focused exclusively on glioblastoma (GBM), while others included low- and high-grade gliomas. Twenty-seven studies reported diagnostic accuracy, with fourteen achieving values above 80%. The combined use of DL and RD generally resulted in higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity, although some studies reported lower minimum accuracy compared to studies using a single model. Conclusions: The integration of RD and DL offers a powerful, non-invasive tool for precisely recognizing MGMT promoter methylation status in gliomas, paving the way for enhanced personalized medicine in neuro-oncology. The heterogeneity of study populations, data sources, and methodologies reflected the complexity of the pipeline and machine learning algorithms, which may require general standardization to be implemented in clinical practice.

Study Design: Retrospective comparative study. Objective: This multicenter European study aimed to compare the accuracy, complication rates, and incidence of revision surgery associated with three distinct cervical pedicle screw (CPS) insertion techniques: freehand, navigation-assisted (Loop-X/O-arm), and patient-specific 3D-template guided approaches. The primary endpoint was to provide evidence to support decision-making in cervical spine instrumentation. Methods: A retrospective, observational study analyzed prospectively collected data from 97 adult patients who underwent posterior cervical fusion with CPS between January 2019 and August 2024. Screw accuracy was assessed using intraoperative or postoperative CT scans, according to the Gertzbein–Robbins classification. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were systematically evaluated. Results: A total of 369 CPS were implanted, with an overall accuracy (Grade A/B) of 90.7%. Patient-specific 3D-templates yielded the highest accuracy (97.7% of grade A/B screws), significantly superior to navigation-assisted (85.5%) and freehand (80.0%) techniques ( P < .001). The lowest accuracy was observed at the C2 level (79.4%; P < .001). Patients over 60 years of age undergoing surgery at the C2 level had a 4.7-fold increased likelihood of suboptimal (Grade > B) screw placement ( P = .016). The overall rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications was significantly higher in the freehand and navigation-assisted groups ( P < .05). Conclusion: CPSs are safe and effective for cervical fusion, with acceptable complication rates. Patient-specific 3D templates offer superior accuracy and fewer complications, but its applicability is limited in urgent cases. Navigation provides good accuracy, but is associated with higher costs and potential technical inconveniences. Technique selection should consider surgeon expertise, resources, and patient-specific factors.