Glioma, High Grade

Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary brain tumor in adults, with a poor prognosis despite maximal treatment. Current evidence suggests that supramaximal resection, including non-enhancing FLAIR-hyperintense regions, improves survival. However, the extent of FLAIR resection is often limited by functional constraints and its non-specific nature, as it may represent both tumor infiltration and peritumoral edema. This study explores the role of 18F-DOPA PET in refining supramaximal resection by providing a more specific surgical target beyond contrast-enhancing areas. Objective: To evaluate the impact of 18F-DOPA PET-guided resection on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in GBM patients, by comparing outcomes between those undergoing PET-RM integrated resection versus conventional MRI-guided resection. Methods: ResPGlioma is a multicenter, prospective, non-randomized study conducted at IRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino (Genoa) and AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza (Turin). Patients with newly diagnosed, supratentorial, high-grade gliomas undergo preoperative 18F-DOPA PET and MRI. Surgery follows the principle of maximal safe resection, with postoperative MRI at 48 hours assessing the extent of resection (EOR). To confirm PET resection or non-PET resection status, patients will undergo a postoperative 18F-DOPA PET scan at 30 ± 7 days following surgery, prior to the initiation of chemoradiotherapy. Patients are categorized based on EOR criteria (RANO) and PET volume resection (PET-resection vs. PET non-resection). Statistical analyses include Kaplan-Meier survival curves and regression models to identify prognostic factors.Patients are categorized based on EOR criteria (RANO) and PET volume resection (PET-resection vs. PET non-resection). Statistical analyses include Kaplan-Meier survival curves and regression models to identify prognostic factors. Expected Outcomes: The authors hypothesize that PET-guided resection improves PFS and OS by enabling a more precise tumor removal beyond contrast-enhancing margins while preserving neurological function. Preliminary data support that PET hypercaptant areas contain viable tumor cells and should be resected. This approach may offer a more accessible yet effective alternative to FLAIR-guided supramaximal resection.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether Neuromodulation-Induced-Cortical-Prehabilitation (NICP)-using physical therapy (constraint-induced movement training, CIM) alone or combined with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)-can promote motor-cortex neuroplasticity before surgery in adults with high-grade gliomas near the motor pathway. It will also learn about the feasibility and safety of these prehabilitation strategies around the time of surgery. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. Does CIM (with or without rTMS) produce measurable motor-cortex plasticity from baseline to pre-surgery as assessed by neuronavigated TMS (nTMS)? 2. Does adding rTMS to CIM lead to greater neuroplastic changes than CIM alone? 3. What clinical, radiological, and neurophysiological outcomes are observed after surgery in participants who receive prehabilitation compared with controls? Researchers will compare standard care (control) vs CIM-based physical therapy vs CIM plus rTMS to see if these approaches induce preoperative neuroplastic changes that may support better surgical outcomes. Participants will: 1. Be randomized to one of three groups: control, CIM physical therapy, or CIM + rTMS• Undergo nTMS motor mapping and excitability testing at baseline (T0) and the day before surgery (T1) 2. Undergo planned tumor surgery (according to standard methods of care) and complete postoperative clinical, imaging, and neurophysiological follow-up assessments.

This clinical trial is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a universal mRNA vaccine targeting a panel of glioma-associated mutations in patients with recurrent or progressive high-grade glioma. The primary objectives are to address the following key questions: 1) Is the mRNA vaccine safe for this patient population? 2) Does the vaccine stimulate an anti-tumor immune response and promote tumor regression? Participants will receive the vaccine according to the following schedule: 1. one injection per week for four consecutive weeks, followed by one injection every four weeks for four cycles, and subsequently, one injection every 12 weeks for maintenance. 2. Safety and efficacy assessments, including detailed recording of adverse events and tumor growth evaluation, will be conducted at follow-up visits scheduled for weeks 6, 12, and months 6, 9, 12, 18, 24, and 36 post-treatment initiation.