BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of co-polsomy of chromosome 1q and 19p in 1p/19q codeleted oligodendroglial tumors (ODGs). METHODS: In a series of 148 ODGs with 1p/19q deletion, co-polysomy of 1q and 19p was detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Log-rank analysis and Cox regression methods were used to compare Kaplan-Meier plots and identify factors associated with worse prognosis. RESULTS: There were 104 (70.3%) low-grade ODGs and 44 (29.7%) high-grade ODGs. Co-polysomy was independently associated with shorter progression-free survival and overall survival in 1p/19q codeleted ODGs, irrespective of tumor grades. The odds ratio of without and with co-polysomy was 0.263 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.089-0.771; P = .015) for progression-free survival and 0.213 (95% CI, 0.060-0.756; P = .017) for overall survival. Subgroup analysis confirmed this trend in both low-grade and high-grade ODGs, although the P value for high-grade ODGs was marginally significant. CONCLUSIONS: Co-polysomy of 1q and 19p could be used as a marker to independently predict worse prognoses and guide individual therapy in 1p/19q codeleted ODGs.
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of co-polsomy of chromosome 1q and 19p in 1p/19q codeleted oligodendroglial tumors (ODGs). METHODS: In a series of 148 ODGs with 1p/19q deletion, co-polysomy of 1q and 19p was detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Log-rank analysis and Cox regression methods were used to compare Kaplan-Meier plots and identify factors associated with worse prognosis. RESULTS: There were 104 (70.3%) low-grade ODGs and 44 (29.7%) high-grade ODGs. Co-polysomy was independently associated with shorter progression-free survival and overall survival in 1p/19q codeleted ODGs, irrespective of tumor grades. The odds ratio of without and with co-polysomy was 0.263 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.089-0.771; P = .015) for progression-free survival and 0.213 (95% CI, 0.060-0.756; P = .017) for overall survival. Subgroup analysis confirmed this trend in both low-grade and high-grade ODGs, although the P value for high-grade ODGs was marginally significant. CONCLUSIONS: Co-polysomy of 1q and 19p could be used as a marker to independently predict worse prognoses and guide individual therapy in 1p/19q codeleted ODGs.
Authors: David Scheie; Per Arne Andresen; Milada Cvancarova; Anne Signe Bø; Eirik Helseth; Kari Skullerud; Klaus Beiske Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Gregory Cairncross; Brian Berkey; Edward Shaw; Robert Jenkins; Bernd Scheithauer; David Brachman; Jan Buckner; Karen Fink; Luis Souhami; Normand Laperierre; Minesh Mehta; Walter Curran Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Martin J van den Bent; Antoine F Carpentier; Alba A Brandes; Marc Sanson; Martin J B Taphoorn; Hans J J A Bernsen; Marc Frenay; Cees C Tijssen; Wolfgang Grisold; Laslo Sipos; Hanny Haaxma-Reiche; Johannes M Kros; Mathilde C M van Kouwenhoven; Charles J Vecht; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; Thierry Gorlia Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-06-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Andrea L Wiens; Liang Cheng; Elizabeth C Bertsch; Karen A Johnson; Shaobo Zhang; Eyas M Hattab Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: K Hoang-Xuan; L Capelle; M Kujas; S Taillibert; H Duffau; J Lejeune; M Polivka; E Crinière; Y Marie; K Mokhtari; A F Carpentier; F Laigle; J M Simon; P Cornu; P Broët; M Sanson; J Y Delattre Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-08-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: J A Kraus; J Koopmann; P Kaskel; D Maintz; S Brandner; J Schramm; D N Louis; O D Wiestler; A von Deimling Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 1995-01 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: J G Cairncross; K Ueki; M C Zlatescu; D K Lisle; D M Finkelstein; R R Hammond; J S Silver; P C Stark; D R Macdonald; Y Ino; D A Ramsay; D N Louis Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1998-10-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Alexandra McAleenan; Hayley E Jones; Ashleigh Kernohan; Tomos Robinson; Lena Schmidt; Sarah Dawson; Claire Kelly; Emmelyn Spencer Leal; Claire L Faulkner; Abigail Palmer; Christopher Wragg; Sarah Jefferies; Sebastian Brandner; Luke Vale; Julian Pt Higgins; Kathreena M Kurian Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-03-02
Authors: Hui Chen; Cheddhi Thomas; Felipe Andres Munoz; Sanda Alexandrescu; Craig M Horbinski; Adriana Olar; Declan McGuone; Sandra Camelo-Piragua; Lu Wang; Elena Pentsova; Joanna Phillips; Kenneth Aldape; Wen Chen; A John Iafrate; Andrew S Chi; David Zagzag; John G Golfinos; Dimitris G Placantonakis; Marc Rosenblum; Pamela Ohman-Strickland; Meera Hameed; Matija Snuderl Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 13.029
Authors: Christian Hartmann; David E Reuss; Abigail K Suwala; Marius Felix; Dennis Friedel; Damian Stichel; Daniel Schrimpf; Felix Hinz; Ekkehard Hewer; Leonille Schweizer; Hildegard Dohmen; Ute Pohl; Ori Staszewski; Andrey Korshunov; Marco Stein; Thidathip Wongsurawat; Pornsuk Cheunsuacchon; Sith Sathornsumetee; Christian Koelsche; Clinton Turner; Emilie Le Rhun; Angelika Mühlebner; Philippe Schucht; Koray Özduman; Takahiro Ono; Hiroaki Shimizu; Marco Prinz; Till Acker; Christel Herold-Mende; Tobias Kessler; Wolfgang Wick; David Capper; Pieter Wesseling; Felix Sahm; Andreas von Deimling Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2021-12-30 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Sebastian Brandner; Alexandra McAleenan; Hayley E Jones; Ashleigh Kernohan; Tomos Robinson; Lena Schmidt; Sarah Dawson; Claire Kelly; Emmelyn Spencer Leal; Claire L Faulkner; Abigail Palmer; Christopher Wragg; Sarah Jefferies; Luke Vale; Julian P T Higgins; Kathreena M Kurian Journal: Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol Date: 2022-03-03 Impact factor: 6.250