First-line high-dose therapy and autologous blood stem cell transplantation in patients with primary central nervous system non-Hodgkin lymphomas-a single-centre experience in 61 patients.

Primary central nervous system non-Hodgkin lymphomas (PCNS-NHLs) are extranodal B-cell lymphomas with poor prognosis. The role of high-dose therapy (HDT) followed by autologous blood stem cell transplantation (ASCT) as first-line therapy is still not clear. We retrospectively collected long-term follow up data of 61 consecutive patients with PCNS-NHL at the University Hospital Düsseldorf from January 2004 to December 2016. Thirty-six patients were treated with conventional chemoimmunotherapy (cCIT) only (CT-group). Seventeen patients received an induction cCIT followed by HDT and ASCT. In the CT-group, the overall response rate (ORR) was 61% (CR 47%, PR 14%), and there were 8% treatment-related deaths (TRD). Progression-free survival (PFS) was 31.8 months, and overall survival (OS) was 57.3 months. In the HDT-group, the ORR was 88% (59% CR, 29% PR), and there were 6% TRD. Median PFS and OS were not reached at 5 years. The 5-year PFS and OS were 64.7%. After a median follow up of 71 months, 10 patients (59%) were still alive in CR/PR following HDT and ASCT, one patient was treated for progressive disease (PD), and 7 had died (41%, 6 PD, 1 TRD). All patients achieving CR prior to HDT achieved durable CR. In the CT-group, 8 patients (22%) were alive in CR/PR after a median follow-up of 100 months. Twenty-eight patients died (78%, 24 PD, 2 TRD, 2 deaths in remission). In the univariate analysis, the HDT-group patients had significantly better PFS (not reached vs 31.8 months, p = 0.004) and OS (not reached vs 57.3 months, p = 0.021). The multivariate analysis showed HDT was not predictive for survival. Treatment with HDT + ASCT is feasible and offers the chance for long-term survival with low treatment-related mortality in younger patients. In this analysis, ORR, PFS and OS were better with HDT than with conventional cCIT alone. This result was not confirmed in the multivariate analysis, and further studies need to be done to examine the role of HDT in PCNSL.

Integrated diagnostics of diffuse astrocytic and oligodendroglial tumors.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse astrocytic and oligodendroglial gliomas are the most common neuroepithelial tumors. Their classification is based on the integration of histological and molecular findings according to the classification of tumors of the central nervous system published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2016. OBJECTIVES: This review describes the different entities and variants of diffuse gliomas and summarizes the current diagnostic criteria for these tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the 2016 WHO classification and selected other publications, the histomolecular diagnostics of diffuse gliomas is presented and illustrated. RESULTS: Diffuse gliomas are divided into isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant or IDH-wildtype gliomas by detection of mutations in the IDH1 or IDH2 genes. Among the IDH-mutant gliomas, oligodendroglial tumors are characterized by combined losses of chromosome arms 1p and 19q. Loss of nuclear expression of the ATRX protein is a marker of IDH- mutant astrocytic gliomas. Glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype, is the most common diffuse glioma. Diffuse and anaplastic astrocytic gliomas without IDH mutation should be further evaluated for molecular features of glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype. Diffuse gliomas in the thalamus, brainstem, or spinal cord carrying a histone 3 (H3)-K27M mutation are classified as diffuse midline gliomas, H3-K27M-mutant. By determining the IDH and 1p/19q status, oligoastrocytomas can be stratified into either astrocytic or oligodendroglial gliomas. Gliomatosis cerebri is no longer regarded as a distinct glioma entity. CONCLUSIONS: Diffuse gliomas can today be classified accurately and reproducibly by means of histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular analyses.

[Integrated diagnostics of diffuse astrocytic and oligodendroglial tumors. German version]. / Integrierte Diagnostik der diffusen astrozytären und oligodendroglialen Gliome.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse astrocytic and oligodendroglial gliomas are the most common neuroepithelial tumors. Their classification is based on the integration of histological and molecular findings according to the classification of tumors of the central nervous system published by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2016. OBJECTIVES: This review describes the different entities and variants of diffuse gliomas and summarizes the current diagnostic criteria for these tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the 2016 WHO classification and selected other publications, the histomolecular diagnostics of diffuse gliomas is presented and illustrated. RESULTS: Diffuse gliomas are divided into isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant or IDH-wildtype gliomas by detection of mutations in the IDH1 or IDH2 genes. Among the IDH-mutant gliomas, oligodendroglial tumors are characterized by combined losses of chromosome arms 1p and 19q. Loss of nuclear expression of the ATRX protein is a marker of IDH- mutant astrocytic gliomas. Glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype, is the most common diffuse glioma. Diffuse and anaplastic astrocytic gliomas without IDH mutation should be further evaluated for molecular features of glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype. Diffuse gliomas in the thalamus, brainstem, or spinal cord carrying a histone 3 (H3)-K27M mutation are classified as diffuse midline gliomas, H3-K27M-mutant. By determining the IDH and 1p/19q status, oligoastrocytomas can be stratified into either astrocytic or oligodendroglial gliomas. Gliomatosis cerebri is no longer regarded as a distinct glioma entity. CONCLUSIONS: Diffuse gliomas can today be classified accurately and reproducibly by means of histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular analyses.

MiR-16-5p is frequently down-regulated in astrocytic gliomas and modulates glioma cell proliferation, apoptosis and response to cytotoxic therapy.

AIMS: Aberrant expression of microRNAs (miRNAs) is frequent in various cancers including gliomas. We aimed to characterize the role of miR-16-5p as a candidate tumour suppressor miRNA in gliomas. METHODS: Real-time PCR-based approaches were used for miRNA and mRNA expression profiling of glioma and non-neoplastic brain tissues as well as glioma cell lines. Protein levels were determined by Western blotting. In vitro analyses were performed following overexpression of miR-16-5p, trichostatin A (TSA) treatment, and siRNA-mediated knock-down of HDAC3 in glioma cells. Effects of miR-16-5p on glioma cell viability, apoptosis and response to irradiation and temozolomide (TMZ) were assessed. RESULTS: Expression of miR-16-5p was reduced relative to control brain tissue in isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant astrocytomas of World Health Organization (WHO) grades II, III and IV, and a subset of IDH-wildtype glioblastomas WHO grade IV. MiR-16-5p expression was lower in IDH-mutant than in IDH-wildtype gliomas, and down-regulated in IDH-wildtype glioma lines. MiR-16-5p overexpression reduced expression of important cell cycle and apoptosis regulators in glioma cells, including CDK6, CDC25A, CCND3, CCNE1, WEE1, CHEK1, BCL2 and MCL1. In line, CDK6, WEE1, CHEK1, BCL2 and MCL1 transcript levels were increased in WHO grade III or IV gliomas. TSA treatment and HDAC3 knockdown in glioma cells induced miR-16-5p up-regulation and reduced expression of its targets. Moreover, miR-16-5p overexpression inhibited proliferation and induced apoptosis in various glioma cell lines and increased sensitivity of A172 glioma cells to irradiation and TMZ. CONCLUSION: Reduced expression of miR-16-5p contributes to glioma cell proliferation, survival and resistance to cytotoxic therapy.