Glioblastoma (GBM) is characterized by aggressive growth and high rates of recurrence. Despite the advancements in conventional therapies, the prognosis for GBM patients remains poor. Immunotherapy has recently emerged as a potential treatment option. The aim of this systematic review is to assess the current strategies and future perspectives of the GBM immunotherapy strategies. A systematic search was conducted across major medical databases (PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library) up to 3 September 2023. The search strategy utilized relevant Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords related to “glioblastomas,” “immunotherapies,” and “treatment.” The studies included in this review consist of randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, and cohort studies reporting on the use of immunotherapies for the treatment of gliomas in human subjects. A total of 1588 papers are initially identified. Eligibility is confirmed for 752 articles, while 655 are excluded for various reasons, including irrelevance to the research topic (627), insufficient method and results details (12), and being case-series or cohort studies (22), systematic literature reviews, or meta-analyses (3). All the studies within the systematic review were clinical trials spanning from 1995 to 2023, involving 6383 patients. Neuro-oncology published the most glioma immunotherapy-related clinical trials (15/97, 16%). Most studies were released between 2018 and 2022, averaging nine publications annually during this period. Adoptive cellular transfer chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells were the primary focus in 11% of the studies, with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), oncolytic viruses (OVs), and cancer vaccines (CVs) comprising 26%, 12%, and 51%, respectively. Phase-I trials constituted the majority at 51%, while phase-III trials were only 7% of the total. Among these trials, 60% were single arm, 39% double arm, and one multi-arm. Immunotherapies were predominantly employed for recurrent GBM (55%). The review also revealed ongoing clinical trials, including 9 on ICIs, 7 on CVs, 10 on OVs, and 8 on CAR T cells, totaling 34 trials, with phase-I trials representing the majority at 53%, and only one in phase III. Overcoming immunotolerance, stimulating robust tumor antigen responses, and countering immunosuppressive microenvironment mechanisms are critical for curative GBM immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors, show promise, with the ongoing research aiming to enhance their effectiveness. Personalized cancer vaccines, especially targeting neoantigens, offer substantial potential. Oncolytic viruses exhibited dual mechanisms and a breakthrough status in the clinical trials. CAR T-cell therapy, engineered for specific antigen targeting, yields encouraging results, particularly against IL13 Rα2 and EGFRvIII. The development of second-generation CAR T cells with improved specificity exemplifies their adaptability.

The most common primary brain tumor is glioblastoma (GBM), yet the current therapeutic options for this disease are not promising. Although immunotherapeutic techniques have shown poor success in GBM thus far despite efforts, new developments provide optimism. One of these developments is chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell treatment, which includes removing and genetically modifying autologous T cells to produce a receptor that targets a GBM antigen before reintroducing the cells into the patient’s body. A number of preclinical studies have produced encouraging results, which have led to the start of clinical trials assessing these CAR-T cell treatments for GBM and other brain tumors. Although results in tumors such as diffuse intrinsic pontine gliomas and lymphomas have been promising, preliminary findings in GBM have not produced any clinical benefits. The paucity of particular antigens in GBM, their inconsistent expression patterns, and the possible immunoediting-induced loss of these antigens after antigen-targeted therapy are some possible causes for this discrepancy. The goal of this systematic literature review is to assess potential approaches for creating CAR-T cells that are more effective for this indication, as well as the clinical experiences that are already being had with CAR-T cell therapy in GBM. Up until 9 May 2024, a thorough search was carried out across the three main medical databases: PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. Relevant Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords associated with “glioblastoma”, “CAR-T”, “T cell therapy”, “overall survival”, and “progression free survival” were employed in the search approach. Preclinical and clinical research on the application of CAR-T cells as a therapeutic approach for GBM are included in the review. A total of 838 papers were identified. Of these, 379 articles were assessed for eligibility, resulting in 8 articles meeting the inclusion criteria. The included studies were conducted between 2015 and 2023, with a total of 151 patients enrolled. The studies varied in CAR-T cell types. EGFRvIII CAR-T cells were the most frequently investigated, used in three studies (37.5%). Intravenous delivery was the most common method of delivery (62.5%). Median OS ranged from 5.5 to 11.1 months across the studies. PFS was reported in only two studies, with values of 7.5 months and 1.3 months. This systematic review highlights the evolving research on CAR-T cell therapy for GBM, emphasizing its potential despite challenges. Targeting antigens like EGFRvIII and IL13Rα2 shows promise in treating recurrent GBM. However, issues such as antigen escape, tumor heterogeneity, and immunosuppression require further optimization. Innovative delivery methods, combination therapies, and personalized approaches are crucial for enhancing CAR-T cell efficacy. Ongoing research is essential to refine these therapies and improve outcomes for GBM patients.

Gliomas’ aggressive nature and resistance to therapy make them a major problem in oncology. Gliomas continue to have dismal prognoses despite significant advancements in medical science, and traditional treatments like surgery, radiation (RT), and chemotherapy (CT) frequently prove to be ineffective. After glioma stem cells (GSCs) were discovered, the traditional view of gliomas as homogeneous masses changed. GSCs are essential for tumor growth, treatment resistance, and recurrence. These cells’ distinct capacities for differentiation and self-renewal are changing our knowledge of the biology of gliomas. This systematic literature review aims to uncover the molecular mechanisms driving glioma progression associated with GSCs. The systematic review adhered to PRISMA guidelines, with a thorough literature search conducted on PubMed, Ovid MED-LINE, and Ovid EMBASE. The first literature search was performed on 1 March 2024, and the search was updated on 15 May 2024. Employing MeSH terms and Boolean operators, the search focused on molecular mechanisms associated with GCSs-mediated glioma progression. Inclusion criteria encompassed English language studies, preclinical studies, and clinical trials. A number of 957 papers were initially identified, of which 65 studies spanning from 2005 to 2024 were finally included in the review. The main GSC model distribution is arranged in decreasing order of frequency: U87: 20 studies (32.0%); U251: 13 studies (20.0%); A172: 4 studies (6.2%); and T98G: 2 studies (3.17%). From most to least frequent, the distribution of the primary GSC pathway is as follows: Notch: 8 studies (12.3%); STAT3: 6 studies (9.2%); Wnt/β-catenin: 6 studies (9.2%); HIF: 5 studies (7.7%); and PI3K/AKT: 4 studies (6.2%). The distribution of molecular effects, from most to least common, is as follows: inhibition of differentiation: 22 studies (33.8%); increased proliferation: 18 studies (27.7%); enhanced invasive ability: 15 studies (23.1%); increased self-renewal: 5 studies (7.7%); and inhibition of apoptosis: 3 studies (4.6%). This work highlights GSC heterogeneity and the dynamic interplay within the glioblastoma microenvironment, underscoring the need for a tailored approach. A few key pathways influencing GSC behavior are JAK/STAT3, PI3K/AKT, Wnt/β-catenin, and Notch. Therapy may target these pathways. This research urges more study to fill in knowledge gaps in the biology of GSCs and translate findings into useful treatment approaches that could improve GBM patient outcomes.

Background: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is the infectious agent responsible for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Respiratory and gastrointestinal manifestations of SARS-CoV-2 are well described, less defined is the clinical neurological spectrum of COVID-19. We reported a case of COVID-19 patient with acute monophasic Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), and a literature review on the SARS-CoV-2 and GBS etiological correlation. Case Description: A 68 years-old man presented to the emergency department with symptoms of acute progressive symmetric ascending flaccid tetraparesis. Oropharyngeal swab for SARS-CoV-2 tested positive. Neurological examination showed bifacial nerve palsy and distal muscular weakness of lower limbs. The cerebrospinal fluid assessment showed an albuminocytologic dissociation. Electrophysiological studies showed delayed distal latencies and absent F waves in early course. A diagnosis of Acute Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyradiculoneuropathy (AIDP) subtype of GBS was then made. Conclusions: Neurological manifestations of COVID-19 are still under study. The case we described of GBS in COVID-19 patient adds to those already reported in the literature, in support of SARS-CoV-2 triggers GBS. COVID-19 associated neurological clinic should probably be seen not as a corollary of classic respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms, but as SARS-CoV-2-related standalone clinical entities. To date, it is essential for all Specialists, clinicians and surgeons, to direct attention towards the study of this virus, to better clarify the spectrum of its neurological manifestations.

Background: The blood–brain barrier (BBB) regulates brain substance entry, posing challenges for treating brain diseases. Traditional methods face limitations, leading to the exploration of non-invasive intranasal drug delivery. This approach exploits the direct nose-to-brain connection, overcoming BBB restrictions. Intranasal delivery enhances drug bioavailability, reduces dosage, and minimizes systemic side effects. Notably, lipid nanoparticles, such as solid lipid nanoparticles and nanostructured lipid carriers, offer advantages like improved stability and controlled release. Their nanoscale size facilitates efficient drug loading, enhancing solubility and bioavailability. Tailored lipid compositions enable optimal drug release, which is crucial for chronic brain diseases. This review assesses lipid nanoparticles in treating neuro-oncological and neurodegenerative conditions, providing insights for effective nose-to-brain drug delivery. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across major medical databases (PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Scopus) up to 6 January 2024. The search strategy utilized relevant Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms and keywords related to “lipid nanoparticles”, “intranasal administration”, “neuro-oncological diseases”, and “neurodegenerative disorders”. This review consists of studies in vitro, in vivo, or ex vivo on the intranasal administration of lipid-based nanocarriers for the treatment of brain diseases. Results: Out of the initial 891 papers identified, 26 articles met the eligibility criteria after a rigorous analysis. The exclusion of 360 articles was due to reasons such as irrelevance, non-reporting selected outcomes, the article being a systematic literature review or meta-analysis, and lack of method/results details. This systematic literature review, focusing on nose-to-brain drug delivery via lipid-based nanocarriers for neuro-oncological, neurodegenerative, and other brain diseases, encompassed 60 studies. A temporal distribution analysis indicated a peak in research interest between 2018 and 2020 (28.3%), with a steady increase over time. Regarding drug categories, Alzheimer’s disease was prominent (26.7%), followed by antiblastic drugs (25.0%). Among the 65 drugs investigated, Rivastigmine, Doxorubicin, and Carmustine were the most studied (5.0%), showcasing a diverse approach to neurological disorders. Notably, solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) were predominant (65.0%), followed by nanostructured lipid carriers (NLCs) (28.3%), highlighting their efficacy in intranasal drug delivery. Various lipids were employed, with glyceryl monostearate being prominent (20.0%), indicating preferences in formulation. Performance assessment assays were balanced, with in vivo studies taking precedence (43.3%), emphasizing the translation of findings to complex biological systems for potential clinical applications. Conclusions: This systematic review reveals the transformative potential of intranasal lipid nanoparticles in treating brain diseases, overcoming the BBB. Positive outcomes highlight the effectiveness of SLNs and NLCs, which are promising new approaches for ailments from AD to stroke and gliomas. While celebrating progress, addressing challenges like nanoparticle toxicity is also crucial.

Background: Spheno-orbital meningiomas (SOMs) are rare tumors arising from the meninges surrounding the sphenoid bone and orbital structures. Surgical resection is the primary treatment approach for SOMs. Several surgical approaches have been described during the decades, including microsurgical transcranial (MTAs), endoscopic endonasal (EEAs), endoscopic transorbital (ETOAs), and combined approaches, and the choice of surgical approach remains a topic of debate. Purpose: This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to compare the clinical and surgical outcomes of different surgical approaches used for the treatment of SOMs, discussing surgical techniques, outcomes, and factors influencing surgical decision making. Methods: A comprehensive literature review of the databases PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Ovid EMBASE was conducted for articles published on the role of surgery for the treatment of SOMs until 2023. The systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled event rates and assess heterogeneity. Fixed- and random-effects were used to assess 95% confidential intervals (CIs) of presenting symptoms, outcomes, and complications. Results: A total of 59 studies comprising 1903 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Gross total resection (GTR) rates ranged from 23.5% for ETOAs to 59.8% for MTAs. Overall recurrence rate after surgery was 20.7%. Progression-free survival (PFS) rates at 5 and 10 years were 75.5% and 49.1%, respectively. Visual acuity and proptosis improvement rates were 57.5% and 79.3%, respectively. Postoperative cranial nerve (CN) focal deficits were observed in 20.6% of cases. The overall cerebro-spinal fluid (CSF) leak rate was 3.9%, and other complications occurred in 13.9% of cases. MTAs showed the highest GTR rates (59.8%, 95%CI = 49.5–70.2%; p = 0.001) but were associated with increased CN deficits (21.0%, 95%CI = 14.5–27.6%). ETOAs had the lowest GTR rates (23.5%, 95%CI = 0.0–52.5%; p = 0.001), while combined ETOA and EEA had the highest CSF leak rates (20.3%, 95%CI = 0.0–46.7%; p = 0.551). ETOAs were associated with better proptosis improvement (79.4%, 95%CI = 57.3–100%; p = 0.002), while anatomical class I lesions were associated with better visual acuity (71.5%, 95%CI = 63.7–79.4; p = 0.003) and proptosis (60.1%, 95%CI = 38.0–82.2; p = 0.001) recovery. No significant differences were found in PFS rates between surgical approaches. Conclusion: Surgical treatment of SOMs aims to preserve visual function and improve proptosis. Different surgical approaches offer varying rates of GTR, complications, and functional outcomes. A multidisciplinary approach involving a skull base team is crucial for optimizing patient outcomes.