RESUMO
The 2021 World Health Organization (WHO) grading system of isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant astrocytomas relies on histological features and the presence of homozygous deletion of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A and 2B (CDKN2A/B). DNA methylation profiling has become highly relevant in the diagnosis of central nervous system (CNS) tumors including gliomas, and it has been incorporated into routine clinical diagnostics in some countries. In this study, we, therefore, examined the value of DNA methylation-based classification for prognostication of patients with IDH-mutant astrocytomas. We analyzed histopathological diagnoses, genome-wide DNA methylation array data, and chromosomal copy number alteration profiles from a cohort of 385 adult-type IDH-mutant astrocytomas, including a local cohort of 127 cases and 258 cases from public repositories. Prognosis based on WHO 2021 CNS criteria (histological grade and CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion status), other relevant chromosomal/gene alterations in IDH-mutant astrocytomas and DNA methylation-based subclassification according to the molecular neuropathology classifier were assessed. We demonstrate that DNA methylation-based classification of IDH-mutant astrocytomas can be used to predict outcome of the patients equally well as WHO 2021 CNS criteria. In addition, methylation-based subclassification enabled the identification of IDH-mutant astrocytoma patients with poor survival among patients with grade 3 tumors and patients with grade 4 tumors with a more favorable outcome. In conclusion, DNA methylation-based subclassification adds prognostic information for IDH-mutant astrocytomas that can further refine the current WHO 2021 grading scheme for these patients.
RESUMO
Introduction: Meningiomas account for nearly 40% of intracranial tumors. Recently, the immunohistochemistry (IHC) markers S100B, SCGN, ACADL and MCM2 have been shown to be associated with underlying biological subtypes of meningioma (MG1-MG4). We aimed to evaluate these IHC markers in a clinical setting. Research question: Are the new proposed IHC markers clinically useful? Methods: In total, 244 patients with meningiomas with tissue in TMAs were included and the IHC markers S100B, SCGN, ACADL and MCM2 were analyzed. Two sets of analyses were performed; the first included all samples with any staining considered positive, the second only samples with >10% immunopositivity. PFS and OS were analyzed in correlation to immunopositivity in the second analysis set. Results: In the first set of analyses only 26.2% of samples could be to allocate to one group. No further analyses were performed with this selection. In the second set of analyses 52.0% could be allocated to a group. There was an enrichment of WHO grade 2 and 3 tumors in MG3 and MG4 as compared to MG1 (24.1% and 25.7% vs. 12.1%). Both the molecular group (p â= â0.032) and WHO grade (p â= â0.005) had significant impact on PFS, but only WHO grade predicted OS (p â= â0.033). Conclusion: We studied the proposed new method of classifying meningiomas into groups MG1, MG2, MG3 and MG4 using IHC markers, but found difficulties applying the classification system in our material mainly due to lack of exclusivity of markers. Thus, in its present form the classification method lacks clinical applicability.
