| Literature DB >> 27049832 |
Eleonora Duregon1, Luca Bertero2, Alessandra Pittaro2, Riccardo Soffietti3, Roberta Rudà3, Morena Trevisan4,5, Mauro Papotti1, Laura Ventura6, Rebecca Senetta2, Paola Cassoni2.
Abstract
Despite several molecular signatures for "lower grade diffuse gliomas" (LGG) have been identified, WHO grade still remains a cornerstone of treatment guidelines. Mitotic count bears a crucial role in its definition, although limited by the poor reproducibility of standard Hematoxylin & Eosin (H&E) evaluation. Phospho-histone-H3 (PHH3) and Ki-67 have been proposed as alternative assays of cellular proliferation. Therefore in the present series of 141 LGG, the molecular characterization (namely IDH status, 1p/19q co-deletion and MGMT promoter methylation) was integrated with the tumor "proliferative trait" (conventional H&E or PHH3-guided mitotic count and Ki-67 index) in term of prognosis definition. Exclusively high PHH3 and Ki-67 values were predictor of poor prognosis (log rank test, P = 0.0281 for PHH3 and P = 0.032 for Ki-67), unlike standard mitotic count. Based on Cox proportional hazard regression analyses, among all clinical (age), pathological (PHH3 and Ki-67) and molecular variables (IDH, 1p/19q codeletion and MGMT methylation) with a prognostic relevance at univariate survival analysis, only IDH expression (P = 0.001) and Ki-67 proliferation index (P = 0.027) proved to be independent prognostic factors. In addition, stratifying by IDH expression status, high Ki-67 retained its prognostic relevance uniquely in the IDH negative patient (P = 0.029) doubling their risk of death (hazard ratio = 2.27). Overall, PHH3 immunostaining is the sole reliable method with a prognostic value to highlight mitotic figures in LGG. Ki-67 proliferation index exceeds PHH3 mitotic count as a predictor of patient's prognosis, and should be integrated with molecular markers in a comprehensive grading system for LGG.Entities:
Keywords: Ki-67 index; Pathology Section; lower grade gliomas; phospho-histone H3; prognosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27049832 PMCID: PMC5008278 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.8498
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Clinicopathological features of the whole series
| All patients | IDH | 1p/19q | MGMT methylation | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 41 | 34 | 14 | 34 | ||
| 58 | 36 | 15 | 46 | ||
| 31 | 22 | 8 | 25 | ||
| 67 | 41 | 29 | 50 | ||
| 118 | 62 | 30 | 84 | ||
| 23 | 16 | 7 | 21 |
Abbreviations: RT, radiotherapy; TMZ, temozolomide.
Figure 1Clinical and molecular data regarding the whole cohort of 141 LGG
Each column represents a patient. In two patients with wild type IDH and lacking 1p/19q co-deletion, the tissue was insufficient for IDH direct sequencing.
Figure 2Diagram illustrating analysis strategy and number of patients included at each step
Given that some samples had missing clinical or molecular data, fewer patient samples were available for Cox-Proportional Hazards analysis.
Figure 3Quasi-Poisson regression model for PHH3 versus H&E mitotic counts for Observer 1 [PHH3 = exp(0.62+0.14xH&E)]
(A) and for Observer 2 [PHH3 = exp(0.66+0.26xH&E)] (B). Bland-Altman plots demonstrating the mean difference between mitotic counts produced by two observers (H&E1 and PHH31 for Observer 1; H&E2 and PHH32 for Observer 2) based on H&E (−0.468, 95% confidence interval = −2.78, 1.84) C. and on PHH3 stained slides (0.68, 95% confidence interval = −3.65, 2.28) (D). Quasi-Poisson regression model for Ki-67 index versus H&E [E, H&E = exp(−0.18+0.07xKi67)] and PHH3 mitotic count [F, PHH3 = exp(0.75+0.07xKi-67)].
Univariate analysis for overall survival
| HR | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.03 | 1.01-1.05 | ||
| 1.11 | 0.49-2.46 | 0.806 | |
| 1.10 | 0.91-1.31 | 0.331 | |
| 1.11 | 1.01-1.23 | ||
| 1.05 | 1.01-1.10 | ||
| 3.66 | 2.04-6.66 | ||
| 2.99 | 1.23-7.14 | ||
| 2.12 | 1.2-3.77 |
Abbreviations: HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval.
Quantitative variable
*significant parameters at multivariate analysis: Ki-67: HR = 2.28 (95% CI 0.44-1.22), P = 0.001; IDH status: HR = 4.36 (95% CI 3.32-8.18), P = 0.0001.
Figure 4Overall survival curves of wild type IDH LGG segregated into two prognostic groups according to Ki-67 proliferation index