What allows glioblastoma to return
Our Glioblastoma Recurrence Programme examines malignant cells that survive treatment and asks whether interrupting their contribution to regrowth could support a new therapeutic approach.
Scientific programme title: Treatment-Surviving Malignant Cell States in Glioblastoma: Causal Contributions to Recurrence and Therapeutic Selectivity
Glioblastoma can contain malignant cells in different biological states. Treatment changes the population that remains. Understanding which survivors can drive or support regrowth is a central question for this programme.
First understand the survivors
We want to distinguish cells that directly rebuild a tumour from those that help other cells survive, and from cells that accompany recurrence without causing it. This means connecting malignant-cell identity and treatment history with what those cells do over time.
The decisive question is causal: when a particular population is changed or removed, does the capacity for regrowth change in a reproducible way?
Then examine a possible vulnerability
One of our selected questions concerns GPX4, a protein involved in protecting cells against damaging lipid oxidation. Published research has identified GPX4-related vulnerability in particular glioblastoma cell states. Our proposed work asks whether a useful dependency remains after senescent-cell depletion, and whether a sequence of interventions addresses a distinct population of survivors.
That sequence needs a careful comparison. Greater immediate cell loss alone would leave the central question unanswered. We need to understand which cells were affected, what happens after treatment is withdrawn, and whether the effect can be achieved whilst preserving normal neural function.
Two selected studies
Characterising the Contribution of Treatment-Surviving Malignant Cell States to Glioblastoma Recurrence Following Chemoradiotherapy
Evaluating GPX4-Dependent Ferroptosis as a Vulnerability in Glioblastoma Cells Persisting After Senescent-Cell Depletion
Together, these questions link survivor identity to an intervention rationale. Model qualification, appropriate exposure, and the behaviour of normal neural systems are part of how we intend to judge the work.
Developing the programme with others
Scientific development includes discussions with Monica Olcina and Lucy Brooks in the University of Oxford’s Department of Oncology. We are also in discussion with Neurochase about candidate and delivery assessment, and with brainstrust’s PRIME team about patient and caregiver involvement.
These conversations bring different perspectives to the same development challenge: what would make the next study informative, feasible, and meaningful?
Where the programme stands
The programme is at the stage of scientific design and development planning. NEUVIOR is not currently recruiting people to a glioblastoma clinical trial or offering an experimental treatment.