BACKGROUND: Promoter methylation of the DNA repair gene, O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT), is associated with improved treatment outcome for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) treated with standard chemoradiation. To determine the prognostic significance of MGMT protein expression as assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and its relationship with methylation, we analyzed MGMT expression and promoter methylation with survival in a retrospective patient cohort. METHODS: We identified 418 patients with newly diagnosed GBM at University of California Los Angeles Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles, nearly all of whom received chemoradiation, and determined MGMT expression by IHC, and MGMT promoter methylation by methylation-specific PCR (MSP) and bisulfite sequencing (BiSEQ) of 24 neighboring CpG sites. RESULTS: With use of the median percentage of cells staining by IHC as the threshold, patients with <30% staining had progression-free survival (PFS) of 10.9 months and overall survival (OS) of 20.5 months, compared with PFS of 7.8 months (P < .0001) and OS of 16.7 months (P < .0001) among patients with ≥30% staining. Inter- and intrareader correlation of IHC staining was high. Promoter methylation status by MSP was correlated with IHC staining. However, low IHC staining was frequently observed in the absence of promoter methylation. Increased methylation density determined by BiSEQ correlated with both decreased IHC staining and increased survival, providing a practical semiquantitative alternative to MSP. On the basis of multivariate analysis validated by bootstrap analysis, patients with tandem promoter methylation and low expression demonstrated improved OS and PFS, compared with the other combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal assessment of MGMT status as a prognostic biomarker for patients with newly diagnosed GBM treated with chemoradiation requires determination of both promoter methylation and IHC protein expression.
BACKGROUND: Promoter methylation of the DNA repair gene, O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT), is associated with improved treatment outcome for newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) treated with standard chemoradiation. To determine the prognostic significance of MGMT protein expression as assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and its relationship with methylation, we analyzed MGMT expression and promoter methylation with survival in a retrospective patient cohort. METHODS: We identified 418 patients with newly diagnosed GBM at University of California Los Angeles Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles, nearly all of whom received chemoradiation, and determined MGMT expression by IHC, and MGMT promoter methylation by methylation-specific PCR (MSP) and bisulfite sequencing (BiSEQ) of 24 neighboring CpG sites. RESULTS: With use of the median percentage of cells staining by IHC as the threshold, patients with <30% staining had progression-free survival (PFS) of 10.9 months and overall survival (OS) of 20.5 months, compared with PFS of 7.8 months (P < .0001) and OS of 16.7 months (P < .0001) among patients with ≥30% staining. Inter- and intrareader correlation of IHC staining was high. Promoter methylation status by MSP was correlated with IHC staining. However, low IHC staining was frequently observed in the absence of promoter methylation. Increased methylation density determined by BiSEQ correlated with both decreased IHC staining and increased survival, providing a practical semiquantitative alternative to MSP. On the basis of multivariate analysis validated by bootstrap analysis, patients with tandem promoter methylation and low expression demonstrated improved OS and PFS, compared with the other combinations. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal assessment of MGMT status as a prognostic biomarker for patients with newly diagnosed GBM treated with chemoradiation requires determination of both promoter methylation and IHC protein expression.
Authors: Jihong Zhang; Malcolm F G Stevens; Charles A Laughton; Srinivasan Madhusudan; Tracey D Bradshaw Journal: Oncology Date: 2010-03-31 Impact factor: 2.935
Authors: Michael Weller; Roger Stupp; Guido Reifenberger; Alba A Brandes; Martin J van den Bent; Wolfgang Wick; Monika E Hegi Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2009-12-08 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Stuart A Grossman; Xiaobu Ye; Steven Piantadosi; Serena Desideri; Louis B Nabors; Myrna Rosenfeld; Joy Fisher Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-04-06 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Michael Weller; Jörg Felsberg; Christian Hartmann; Hilmar Berger; Joachim P Steinbach; Johannes Schramm; Manfred Westphal; Gabriele Schackert; Matthias Simon; Jörg C Tonn; Oliver Heese; Dietmar Krex; Guido Nikkhah; Torsten Pietsch; Otmar Wiestler; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Markus Loeffler Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-10-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Isabella Gomes; Daniel Antunes Moreno; Mariana Bisarro Dos Reis; Luciane Sussuchi da Silva; Letícia Ferro Leal; Gisele Melo Gonçalves; Caio Augusto Pereira; Marco Antônio Oliveira; Marcus de Medeiros Matsushita; Rui Manuel Reis Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2021-01-05 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Rikke H Dahlrot; Mia D Sørensen; Ann Mari Rosager; Sofie Hellwege; Julie A Bangsø; Tine Rosenberg; Stine A Petterson; Jacob Klitkou; Sigurd Fosmark; Steinbjørn Hansen; Bjarne W Kristensen Journal: CNS Oncol Date: 2014-07
Authors: Rikke H Dahlrot; Pia Larsen; Henning B Boldt; Melissa S Kreutzfeldt; Steinbjørn Hansen; Jacob B Hjelmborg; Bjarne Winther Kristensen Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Robert W Rapkins; Fan Wang; HuyTram N Nguyen; Timothy F Cloughesy; Albert Lai; Wendy Ha; Anna K Nowak; Megan P Hitchins; Kerrie L McDonald Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2015-04-24 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: HuyTram N Nguyen; Amy Lie; Tie Li; Reshmi Chowdhury; Fei Liu; Byram Ozer; Bowen Wei; Richard M Green; Benjamin M Ellingson; He-Jing Wang; Robert Elashoff; Linda M Liau; William H Yong; Phioanh L Nghiemphu; Timothy Cloughesy; Albert Lai Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 12.300