BACKGROUND: Glioblastomas exhibit a remarkable tendency toward morphologic diversity. Although rare, pseudoepithelial components (adenoid or epithelioid) or true epithelial differentiation may occur, posing a significant diagnostic challenge. METHODS: Hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides were reviewed, and immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization were performed. RESULTS: The patients included 38 men and 20 women. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years (interquartile range [IQR], 50 years-67 years), and the median overall survival was 7 months (IQR, 4 months-11 months). "Adenoid" glioblastomas (A-GBM) predominated (48%). True epithelial glioblastomas (TE-GBM) were next most frequent based on morphology and immunohistochemistry (35%), followed by epithelioid glioblastomas (E-GBM) (17%). Overall, 25 (43%) tumors featured a sarcomatous component. Molecular cytogenetic abnormalities identified by fluorescent in situ hybridization in A-GBM, E-GBM, and TE-GBM, respectively, included p16 deletion/-9 (60%, 71%, 64%); chromosome 10 loss (40%, 63%, 57%), chromosome 7 gain without EGFR amplification (70%, 38%, 40%), EGFR amplification (10%, 50%, 27%), PTEN deletion (10%, 25%, 29%), PDGFRA amplification (10%, 25%, 0%), and RB1 deletion/-13q (50%, 0%, 14%). Abnormalities identified by immunohistochemistry included p21 immunonegativity (60%, 25%, 93%), which was most frequent in TE-GBM (P = .008), strong nuclear p53 staining (29%, 29%, 41%), strong membranous staining for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) (21%, 63%, 19%), which was most frequent in E-GBM (P = .03), and an increased frequency of p27 immunonegativity in gliosarcomas (15% negative, 85% focal) compared with tumors without sarcoma (38% strongly positive) (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Pseudoepithelial and true epithelial morphology are rare phenomena in GBM and may be associated with a similar poor prognosis. These tumors demonstrate proportions of molecular genetic abnormalities varying somewhat from conventional GBM.
BACKGROUND:Glioblastomas exhibit a remarkable tendency toward morphologic diversity. Although rare, pseudoepithelial components (adenoid or epithelioid) or true epithelial differentiation may occur, posing a significant diagnostic challenge. METHODS:Hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides were reviewed, and immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization were performed. RESULTS: The patients included 38 men and 20 women. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years (interquartile range [IQR], 50 years-67 years), and the median overall survival was 7 months (IQR, 4 months-11 months). "Adenoid" glioblastomas (A-GBM) predominated (48%). True epithelial glioblastomas (TE-GBM) were next most frequent based on morphology and immunohistochemistry (35%), followed by epithelioid glioblastomas (E-GBM) (17%). Overall, 25 (43%) tumors featured a sarcomatous component. Molecular cytogenetic abnormalities identified by fluorescent in situ hybridization in A-GBM, E-GBM, and TE-GBM, respectively, included p16 deletion/-9 (60%, 71%, 64%); chromosome 10 loss (40%, 63%, 57%), chromosome 7 gain without EGFR amplification (70%, 38%, 40%), EGFR amplification (10%, 50%, 27%), PTEN deletion (10%, 25%, 29%), PDGFRA amplification (10%, 25%, 0%), and RB1 deletion/-13q (50%, 0%, 14%). Abnormalities identified by immunohistochemistry included p21 immunonegativity (60%, 25%, 93%), which was most frequent in TE-GBM (P = .008), strong nuclear p53 staining (29%, 29%, 41%), strong membranous staining for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) (21%, 63%, 19%), which was most frequent in E-GBM (P = .03), and an increased frequency of p27 immunonegativity in gliosarcomas (15% negative, 85% focal) compared with tumors without sarcoma (38% strongly positive) (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Pseudoepithelial and true epithelial morphology are rare phenomena in GBM and may be associated with a similar poor prognosis. These tumors demonstrate proportions of molecular genetic abnormalities varying somewhat from conventional GBM.
Authors: Roger Stupp; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Michael Weller; Barbara Fisher; Martin J B Taphoorn; Karl Belanger; Alba A Brandes; Christine Marosi; Ulrich Bogdahn; Jürgen Curschmann; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Thierry Gorlia; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; René O Mirimanoff Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rameen Beroukhim; Gad Getz; Leia Nghiemphu; Jordi Barretina; Teli Hsueh; David Linhart; Igor Vivanco; Jeffrey C Lee; Julie H Huang; Sethu Alexander; Jinyan Du; Tweeny Kau; Roman K Thomas; Kinjal Shah; Horacio Soto; Sven Perner; John Prensner; Ralph M Debiasi; Francesca Demichelis; Charlie Hatton; Mark A Rubin; Levi A Garraway; Stan F Nelson; Linda Liau; Paul S Mischel; Tim F Cloughesy; Matthew Meyerson; Todd A Golub; Eric S Lander; Ingo K Mellinghoff; William R Sellers Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-12-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: A Broniscer; R G Tatevossian; N D Sabin; P Klimo; J Dalton; R Lee; A Gajjar; D W Ellison Journal: Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 8.090
Authors: Sophie A Dusoswa; Jan Verhoeff; Erik Abels; Santiago P Méndez-Huergo; Diego O Croci; Lisan H Kuijper; Elena de Miguel; Valerie M C J Wouters; Myron G Best; Ernesto Rodriguez; Lenneke A M Cornelissen; Sandra J van Vliet; Pieter Wesseling; Xandra O Breakefield; David P Noske; Thomas Würdinger; Marike L D Broekman; Gabriel A Rabinovich; Yvette van Kooyk; Juan J Garcia-Vallejo Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Dayane B Koshiyama; Patrícia Trevisan; Carla Graziadio; Rafael F M Rosa; Bibiana Cunegatto; Juliete Scholl; Valentina O Provenzi; Alexandre P de Sá; Fabiano P Soares; Maíra C Velho; Nelson de A P Filho; Ceres A Oliveira; Paulo R G Zen Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Bette Kay Kleinschmidt-DeMasters; Dara L Aisner; Diane K Birks; Nicholas K Foreman Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Andrey Korshunov; Lukas Chavez; Tanvi Sharma; Marina Ryzhova; Daniel Schrimpf; Damian Stichel; David Capper; Dominik Sturm; Marcel Kool; Antje Habel; Bette K Kleinschmidt-DeMasters; Marc Rosenblum; Oksana Absalyamova; Andrey Golanov; Peter Lichter; Stefan M Pfister; David T W Jones; Arie Perry; Andreas von Deimling Journal: Brain Pathol Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 6.508