Pei Yang1, Jinquan Cai1, Wei Yan1, Wei Zhang1, Yinyan Wang1, Baoshi Chen1, Guilin Li1, Shouwei Li1, Chenxing Wu1, Kun Yao1, Wenbin Li1, Xiaoxia Peng1, Yongping You1, Ling Chen1, Chuanlu Jiang1, Xiaoguang Qiu1, Tao Jiang1. 1. Beijing Neurosurgical Institute, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (P.Y., W.Z., Y.W., X.Q., T.J.); Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (P.Y., W.Z., Y.W., B.C., T.J.); Department of Neurosurgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China (J.C., C.J.); Department of Neurosurgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China (W.Y., Y.Y.); Department of Pathology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (G.L.); Department of Neurosurgery, Beijing Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (S.L., C.W.); Department of Pathology, Beijing Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (K.Y.); Department of Oncology, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (W.L.); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, Capital Medical University (X.P.); Department of Neurosurgery, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China (L.C.); Department of Radiation Therapy, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (X.Q.); China National Clinical Research Center for Neurological Diseases (T.J.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Grade II and III gliomas have variable clinical behaviors, showing the distinct molecular genetic alterations from glioblastoma (GBM), many of which eventually transform into more aggressive tumors. Since the classifications of grade II/III gliomas based on the genetic alterations have been recently emerging, it is now a trend to include molecular data into the standard diagnostic algorithm of glioma. METHODS: Here we sequenced TERT promoter mutational status (TERTp-mut) in the DNA of 377 grade II/III gliomas and analyzed the clinical factors, molecular aberrations, and transcriptome profiles. RESULTS: We found that TERTp-mut occurred in 145 of 377 grade II and III gliomas (38.5%), mutually exclusive with a TP53 mutation (TP53-mut; P < .001) and coincident with a 1p/19q co-deletion (P = .002). TERTp-mut was an independent predictive factor of a good prognosis in all patients (P = .048). It has been an independent factor associated with a good outcome in the IDH mutation (IDH-mut) subgroup (P = .018), but it has also been associated with a poor outcome in the IDH wild-type (IDH-wt) subgroup (P = .049). Combining TERTp-mut and IDH-mut allowed the grade II/III malignancies to be reclassified into IDH-mut/TERTp-mut, IDH-mut only, TERTp-mut only, and IDH-wt/TERTp-wt. 1p/19q co-deletion, TP53-muts, Ki-67 expression differences, and p-MET expression differences characterized IDH-mut/TERTp-mut, IDH-mut only, TERTp-mut only, and IDH-wt/TERTp-wt subtypes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that TERTp-mut combined with IDH-mut allowed simple classification of grade II/III gliomas for stratifying patients and clarifying diagnostic accuracy by supplementing standard histopathological criteria.
BACKGROUND: Grade II and III gliomas have variable clinical behaviors, showing the distinct molecular genetic alterations from glioblastoma (GBM), many of which eventually transform into more aggressive tumors. Since the classifications of grade II/III gliomas based on the genetic alterations have been recently emerging, it is now a trend to include molecular data into the standard diagnostic algorithm of glioma. METHODS: Here we sequenced TERT promoter mutational status (TERTp-mut) in the DNA of 377 grade II/III gliomas and analyzed the clinical factors, molecular aberrations, and transcriptome profiles. RESULTS: We found that TERTp-mut occurred in 145 of 377 grade II and III gliomas (38.5%), mutually exclusive with a TP53 mutation (TP53-mut; P < .001) and coincident with a 1p/19q co-deletion (P = .002). TERTp-mut was an independent predictive factor of a good prognosis in all patients (P = .048). It has been an independent factor associated with a good outcome in the IDH mutation (IDH-mut) subgroup (P = .018), but it has also been associated with a poor outcome in the IDH wild-type (IDH-wt) subgroup (P = .049). Combining TERTp-mut and IDH-mut allowed the grade II/III malignancies to be reclassified into IDH-mut/TERTp-mut, IDH-mut only, TERTp-mut only, and IDH-wt/TERTp-wt. 1p/19q co-deletion, TP53-muts, Ki-67 expression differences, and p-MET expression differences characterized IDH-mut/TERTp-mut, IDH-mut only, TERTp-mut only, and IDH-wt/TERTp-wt subtypes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results showed that TERTp-mut combined with IDH-mut allowed simple classification of grade II/III gliomas for stratifying patients and clarifying diagnostic accuracy by supplementing standard histopathological criteria.
Authors: Tiffany Doucette; Ganesh Rao; Arvind Rao; Li Shen; Kenneth Aldape; Jun Wei; Kristine Dziurzynski; Mark Gilbert; Amy B Heimberger Journal: Cancer Immunol Res Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 11.151
Authors: Christian Koelsche; Felix Sahm; David Capper; David Reuss; Dominik Sturm; David T W Jones; Marcel Kool; Paul A Northcott; Benedikt Wiestler; Katja Böhmer; Jochen Meyer; Christian Mawrin; Christian Hartmann; Michel Mittelbronn; Michael Platten; Benjamin Brokinkel; Marcel Seiz; Christel Herold-Mende; Andreas Unterberg; Jens Schittenhelm; Michael Weller; Stefan Pfister; Wolfgang Wick; Andrey Korshunov; Andreas von Deimling Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Heidi S Phillips; Samir Kharbanda; Ruihuan Chen; William F Forrest; Robert H Soriano; Thomas D Wu; Anjan Misra; Janice M Nigro; Howard Colman; Liliana Soroceanu; P Mickey Williams; Zora Modrusan; Burt G Feuerstein; Ken Aldape Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Kyle M Walsh; Terri Rice; Paul A Decker; Matthew L Kosel; Thomas Kollmeyer; Helen M Hansen; Shichun Zheng; Lucie S McCoy; Paige M Bracci; Erik Anderson; George Hsuang; Joe L Wiemels; Alexander R Pico; Ivan Smirnov; Annette M Molinaro; Tarik Tihan; Mitchell S Berger; Susan M Chang; Michael D Prados; Daniel H Lachance; Hugues Sicotte; Jeanette E Eckel-Passow; John K Wiencke; Robert B Jenkins; Margaret R Wrensch Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-06-03 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: M Labussière; A L Di Stefano; V Gleize; B Boisselier; M Giry; S Mangesius; A Bruno; R Paterra; Y Marie; A Rahimian; G Finocchiaro; R S Houlston; K Hoang-Xuan; A Idbaih; J-Y Delattre; K Mokhtari; M Sanson Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2014-10-14 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Ruben Nogales-Cadenas; Pedro Carmona-Saez; Miguel Vazquez; Cesar Vicente; Xiaoyuan Yang; Francisco Tirado; Jose María Carazo; Alberto Pascual-Montano Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2009-05-22 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Martin J van den Bent; Michael Weller; Patrick Y Wen; Johan M Kros; Ken Aldape; Susan Chang Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Anvesh Jalasutram; John L Caniglia; Kiran K Velpula; Maheedhara R Guda; Sarah E Bach; Andrew J Tsung Journal: Am J Transl Res Date: 2022-01-15 Impact factor: 4.060
Authors: M Unterrainer; I Winkelmann; B Suchorska; A Giese; V Wenter; F W Kreth; J Herms; P Bartenstein; J C Tonn; N L Albert Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-02-27 Impact factor: 9.236