Cited by 83Glioma Diagnosis and TreatmentCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersImmunotherapy and Immune Responses

Neoadjuvant triplet immune checkpoint blockade in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Open access
Long, Georgina V., Shklovskaya, Elena, Satgunaseelan, Laveniya, Mao, Yizhe, da Silva, Inês Pires, Perry, Kristen A., Diefenbach, Russell J., Gide, Tuba N. +27 more·2025·Nature Medicine

Abstract

Glioblastoma (GBM) is an aggressive primary adult brain tumor that rapidly recurs after standard-of-care treatments, including surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy. While immune checkpoint inhibitor therapies have transformed outcomes in many tumor types, particularly when used neoadjuvantly or as a first-line treatment, including in melanoma brain metastases, they have shown limited efficacy in patients with resected or recurrent GBM. The lack of efficacy has been attributed to the scarcity of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and low tumor mutation burden typical of GBM tumors, plus exclusion of large molecules from the brain parenchyma. We hypothesized that upfront neoadjuvant combination immunotherapy, administered with disease in situ, could induce a stronger immune response than treatment given after resection or after recurrence. Here, we present a case of newly diagnosed IDH - wild-type, MGMT promoter unmethylated GBM, treated with a single dose of neoadjuvant triplet immunotherapy (anti-programmed cell death protein 1 plus anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte protein 4 plus anti-lymphocyte-activation gene 3) followed by maximal safe resection 12 days later. The anti-programmed cell death protein 1 drug was bound to TILs in the resected GBM and there was marked TIL infiltration and activation compared with the baseline biopsy. After 17 months, there is no definitive sign of recurrence. If used first line, before safe maximal resection, checkpoint inhibitors are capable of immune activation in GBM and may induce a response. A clinical trial of first-line neoadjuvant combination checkpoint inhibitor therapy in newly diagnosed GBM is planned (GIANT; trial registration no. NCT06816927 ).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41591-025-03512-1

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Checkpoint inhibitors against CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1 have shown only very limited benefits in patients with GBM.

    “Immunotherapies such as checkpoint inhibitors against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed death-1 (PD-1)/PD ligand 1 (PD-L1) have represented a major advancement in the treatment of several types of solid tumour; however, these treatments have shown only very limited benefits in patients with GBM [7–9].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 49 · Cited by 83

Authors
Long, G. V., Shklovskaya, E., Satgunaseelan, L., Mao, Y., da Silva, I. P., Perry, K. A., Diefenbach, R. J., Gide, T. N., Shivalingam, B., Buckland, M. E., Gonzalez, M., Caixeiro, N., Vergara, I. A., Bai, X., Rawson, R. V., Hsiao, E., Palendira, U., Phan, T. G., Menzies, A. M., Carlino, M. S., Quek, C., Grimmond, S. M., Vissers, J. H. A., Yeo, D., Rasko, J. E. J., Khasraw, M., Neyns, B., Reardon, D. A., Ashley, D. M., Wheeler, H., Back, M., Scolyer, R. A., Drummond, J., Wilmott, J. S., & Rizos, H.
Affiliations
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (BE)
  • Center for Neuro-Oncology (US)
  • Royal North Shore Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Long, Georgina V.
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2025-02-27
Volume
31
Issue
5
Pages
1557-1566
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W4408063824
Cited by
83
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 33
FWCI
53.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Department of Health | National Health and Medical Research Council
  • Cancer Institute NSW (2020/ECF1244, 2020/ECF1153, 2021/CBG0002)
  • University of Sydney
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Genetics › Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
Keywords
glioblastoma, neoadjuvant immunotherapy, immune checkpoint inhibitors, PD-1, CTLA-4, LAG-3, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, IDH-wildtype, first-line therapy, maximal safe resection, tumor microenvironment, tumor mutational burden, brain tumor immunotherapy
MeSH terms
Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors, Adult, Brain Neoplasms, Female, Glioblastoma, Humans, Immunotherapy, Male, Middle Aged, Lymphocytes, Tumor-Infiltrating, Neoadjuvant Therapy, Tumor Microenvironment, Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review