Search

Background: Intrinsic or environmental stresses trigger the accumulation of improperly folded proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), leading to ER stress. To cope with this, cells have evolved an adaptive mechanism named the unfolded protein response (UPR) which is hijacked by tumor cells to develop malignant features. Glioblastoma (GB), the most aggressive and lethal primary brain tumor, relies on UPR to sustain growth. We recently showed that IRE1 alpha (referred to IRE1 hereafter), 1 of the UPR transducers, promotes GB invasion, angiogenesis, and infiltration by macrophage. Hence, high tumor IRE1 activity in tumor cells predicts a worse outcome. Herein, we characterized the IRE1-dependent signaling that shapes the immune microenvironment toward monocytes/macrophages and neutrophils., Methods: We used human and mouse cellular models in which IRE1 was genetically or pharmacologically invalidated and which were tested in vivo. Publicly available datasets from GB patients were also analyzed to confirm our findings., Results: We showed that IRE1 signaling, through both the transcription factor XBP1s and the regulated IRE1-dependent decay controls the expression of the ubiquitin-conjugating E2 enzyme UBE2D3. In turn, UBE2D3 activates the NFκB pathway, resulting in chemokine production and myeloid infiltration in tumors., Conclusions: Our work identifies a novel IRE1/UBE2D3 proinflammatory axis that plays an instrumental role in GB immune regulation., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Anaplastic gangliogliomas (GGGs) are rare tumors whose natural history is poorly documented. We aimed to define their clinical and imaging features and to identify prognostic factors., Methods: Consecutive cases of anaplastic GGGs in adults prospectively entered into the French Brain Tumor Database between March 2004 and April 2014 were screened. After diagnosis was confirmed by pathological review, clinical, imaging, therapeutic, and outcome data were collected retrospectively., Results: Forty-three patients with anaplastic GGG (median age, 49.4 y) from 18 centers were included. Presenting symptoms were neurological deficit (37.2%), epileptic seizure (37.2%), or increased intracranial pressure (25.6%). Typical imaging findings were unifocal location (94.7%), contrast enhancement (88.1%), central necrosis (43.2%), and mass effect (47.6%). Therapeutic strategy included surgical resection (95.3%), adjuvant radiochemotherapy (48.8%), or radiotherapy alone (27.9%). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 8.0 and 24.7 months, respectively. Three- and 5-year tumor recurrence rates were 69% and 100%, respectively. The 5-year survival rate was 24.9%. Considering unadjusted significant prognostic factors, tumor midline crossing and frontal location were associated with shorter OS. Temporal and parietal locations were associated with longer and shorter PFS, respectively. None of these factors remained statistically significant in multivariate analysis., Conclusions: We report a large series providing clinical, imaging, therapeutic, and prognostic features of adult patients treated for an intracerebral anaplastic GGG. Our results show that pathological diagnosis is difficult, that survivals are only slightly better than for glioblastomas, and that complete surgical resection followed with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy offers longer survival., (© The Author(s) 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Background: The standard of care for newly diagnosed glioblastoma is maximal safe surgical resection, followed by chemoradiation therapy. We assessed carmustine wafer implantation efficacy and safety when used in combination with standard care., Methods: Included were adult patients with (n = 354, implantation group) and without (n = 433, standard group) carmustine wafer implantation during first surgical resection followed by chemoradiation standard protocol. Multivariate and case-matched analyses (controlled propensity-matched cohort, 262 pairs of patients) were conducted., Results: The median progression-free survival was 12.0 months (95% CI: 10.7-12.6) in the implantation group and 10.0 months (9.0-10.0) in the standard group and the median overall survival was 20.4 months (19.0-22.7) and 18.0 months (17.0-19.0), respectively. Carmustine wafer implantation was independently associated with longer progression-free survival in patients with subtotal/total surgical resection in the whole series (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI: 0.63-0.92], P = .005) and after propensity matching (HR, 0.74 [95% CI: 0.60-0.92], P = .008), whereas no significant difference was found for overall survival (HR, 0.95 [0.80-1.13], P = .574; HR, 1.06 [0.87-1.29], P = .561, respectively). Surgical resection at progression whether alone or combined with carmustine wafer implantation was independently associated with longer overall survival in the whole series (HR, 0.58 [0.44-0.76], P < .0001; HR, 0.54 [0.41-0.70], P < .0001, respectively) and after propensity matching (HR, 0.56 [95% CI: 0.40-0.78], P < .0001; HR, 0.46 [95% CI: 0.33-0.64], P < .0001, respectively). The higher postoperative infection rate in the implantation group did not affect survival., Conclusions: Carmustine wafer implantation during surgical resection followed by the standard chemoradiation protocol for newly diagnosed glioblastoma in adults resulted in a significant progression-free survival benefit., (© The Author(s) 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)