Catherine Godfraind1. 1. Institute of Neuroscience, Laboratory of Pathology, Université catholique de Louvain, Avenue Hippocrate 10, 1200, Brussels, Belgium. catherine.godfraind@uclouvain.be
Abstract
PURPOSE: Bailey and Cushing established ependymoma as a brain tumour entity in the first brain tumour classification (1926). Diagnosis of ependymomas is not subject to controversy as long as other tumours presenting ependymoma-like features have been ruled out. Grading conversely is a source of debate. Description of histological features establishing diagnosis and grading of ependymomas may help to better understand this controversy. METHODS: Literature has been reviewed using PubMed with the following key words: ependymoma, +/- prognosis, +/- biomaker, +/- grading, +/- immunohistochemistry, +/- proliferative index. RESULTS: Grading controversy arises from elusive WHO features and individual characteristics of ependymomas including tumour location, tumour pattern/variant and variable expression of biomarkers. CONCLUSION: There is a need for a grading scheme with a proven general ability to dissociate grades, and to predict individual clinical evolution. Only then will stratified and targeted therapeutics for ependymal tumours be possible.
PURPOSE: Bailey and Cushing established ependymoma as a brain tumour entity in the first brain tumour classification (1926). Diagnosis of ependymomas is not subject to controversy as long as other tumours presenting ependymoma-like features have been ruled out. Grading conversely is a source of debate. Description of histological features establishing diagnosis and grading of ependymomas may help to better understand this controversy. METHODS: Literature has been reviewed using PubMed with the following key words: ependymoma, +/- prognosis, +/- biomaker, +/- grading, +/- immunohistochemistry, +/- proliferative index. RESULTS: Grading controversy arises from elusive WHO features and individual characteristics of ependymomas including tumour location, tumour pattern/variant and variable expression of biomarkers. CONCLUSION: There is a need for a grading scheme with a proven general ability to dissociate grades, and to predict individual clinical evolution. Only then will stratified and targeted therapeutics for ependymal tumours be possible.
Authors: Erkan Kurt; Ping-Pin Zheng; Wim C J Hop; Marcel van der Weiden; Meike Bol; Martin J van den Bent; Cees J J Avezaat; Johan M Kros Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-01-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Min Wang; Tarik Tihan; Amyn M Rojiani; Surender R Bodhireddy; Richard A Prayson; John J Iacuone; Ajit J Alles; David J Donahue; Richard B Hessler; Jung H Kim; Mark Haas; Marc K Rosenblum; Peter C Burger Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Thomas E Merchant; Jesse J Jenkins; Peter C Burger; Robert A Sanford; Scot H Sherwood; Dana Jones-Wallace; Richard L Heideman; Stephen J Thompson; Kathleen J Helton; Larry E Kun Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-05-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Lee Ridley; Ruman Rahman; Marie-Anne Brundler; David Ellison; James Lowe; Keith Robson; Emma Prebble; Inga Luckett; Richard J Gilbertson; Sheila Parkes; Vikki Rand; Beth Coyle; Richard G Grundy Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2008-08-13 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: T Komori; B W Scheithauer; D C Anthony; M K Rosenblum; R E McLendon; R M Scott; H Okazaki; M Kobayashi Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Stefan Wolfsberger; Ingeborg Fischer; Romana Höftberger; Peter Birner; Irene Slavc; Karin Dieckmann; Thomas Czech; Herbert Budka; Johannes Hainfellner Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: M Carter; J Nicholson; F Ross; J Crolla; R Allibone; V Balaji; R Perry; D Walker; R Gilbertson; D W Ellison Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2002-03-18 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Elizabeth Vera-Bolanos; Kenneth Aldape; Ying Yuan; Jimin Wu; Khalida Wani; Mary Jo Necesito-Reyes; Howard Colman; Girish Dhall; Frank S Lieberman; Philippe Metellus; Tom Mikkelsen; Antonio Omuro; Sonia Partap; Michael Prados; H Ian Robins; Riccardo Soffietti; Jing Wu; Mark R Gilbert; Terri S Armstrong Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-08-13 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Su Guan; Ruijun Shen; Tiffany Lafortune; Ningyi Tiao; Peter Houghton; W K Alfred Yung; Dimpy Koul Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 12.300