BACKGROUND: Between 2011 and 2016, O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation testing at University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) was performed through LabCorp, using a threshold of 2 to distinguish MGMT methylated from unmethylated tumors. In this study, we sought to determine whether the magnitude of the methylation score correlated with outcome. METHODS: We identified 165 newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type and temozolomide-treated upfront patients at UCLA and Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles with LabCorp-derived quantitative MGMT scores obtained on pretreatment tissue samples. Using LabCorp's threshold, we found 102 unmethylated and 63 methylated patients. We then further substratified each group based on the magnitude of the score, and performed Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We validated that the standard LabCorp threshold of 2 could separate our cohort by survival, showing longer OS and PFS for MGMT methylated patients vs unmethylated patients. Cox regression analysis confirmed that MGMT (<1) patients had worse outcome, with OS and PFS hazard ratios of 2.375 (P = .053) and 2.463 (P = .023), respectively, when compared to the MGMT (1-1.99) patients. Contrary to our expectation, when we substratified the ≥2 (methylated) group, we did not find a dose-dependent relationship between the magnitude of MGMT methylation and improved survival. CONCLUSIONS: The MGMT unmethylated group contains a partially methylated group (greater than 1) that shares survival benefits similar to the methylated group. However, we did not demonstrate an association of very high methylation scores with increased survival. These findings will require validation in additional independent clinical data sets.
BACKGROUND: Between 2011 and 2016, O-6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation testing at University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) was performed through LabCorp, using a threshold of 2 to distinguish MGMT methylated from unmethylated tumors. In this study, we sought to determine whether the magnitude of the methylation score correlated with outcome. METHODS: We identified 165 newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type and temozolomide-treated upfront patients at UCLA and Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles with LabCorp-derived quantitative MGMT scores obtained on pretreatment tissue samples. Using LabCorp's threshold, we found 102 unmethylated and 63 methylated patients. We then further substratified each group based on the magnitude of the score, and performed Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We validated that the standard LabCorp threshold of 2 could separate our cohort by survival, showing longer OS and PFS for MGMT methylated patients vs unmethylated patients. Cox regression analysis confirmed that MGMT (<1) patients had worse outcome, with OS and PFS hazard ratios of 2.375 (P = .053) and 2.463 (P = .023), respectively, when compared to the MGMT (1-1.99) patients. Contrary to our expectation, when we substratified the ≥2 (methylated) group, we did not find a dose-dependent relationship between the magnitude of MGMT methylation and improved survival. CONCLUSIONS: The MGMT unmethylated group contains a partially methylated group (greater than 1) that shares survival benefits similar to the methylated group. However, we did not demonstrate an association of very high methylation scores with increased survival. These findings will require validation in additional independent clinical data sets.
Authors: Patrick Y Wen; David R Macdonald; David A Reardon; Timothy F Cloughesy; A Gregory Sorensen; Evanthia Galanis; John Degroot; Wolfgang Wick; Mark R Gilbert; Andrew B Lassman; Christina Tsien; Tom Mikkelsen; Eric T Wong; Marc C Chamberlain; Roger Stupp; Kathleen R Lamborn; Michael A Vogelbaum; Martin J van den Bent; Susan M Chang Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David N Louis; Arie Perry; Guido Reifenberger; Andreas von Deimling; Dominique Figarella-Branger; Webster K Cavenee; Hiroko Ohgaki; Otmar D Wiestler; Paul Kleihues; David W Ellison Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 17.088
Authors: Shadi Lalezari; Arthur P Chou; Anh Tran; Orestes E Solis; Negar Khanlou; Weidong Chen; Sichen Li; Jose A Carrillo; Reshmi Chowdhury; Julia Selfridge; Desiree E Sanchez; Ryan W Wilson; Mira Zurayk; Jonathan Lalezari; Jerry J Lou; Laurel Ormiston; Karen Ancheta; Robert Hanna; Paul Miller; David Piccioni; Benjamin M Ellingson; Colin Buchanan; Paul S Mischel; Phioanh L Nghiemphu; Richard Green; He-Jing Wang; Whitney B Pope; Linda M Liau; Robert M Elashoff; Timothy F Cloughesy; William H Yong; Albert Lai Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-01-17 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Olivier L Chinot; Wolfgang Wick; Warren Mason; Roger Henriksson; Frank Saran; Ryo Nishikawa; Antoine F Carpentier; Khe Hoang-Xuan; Petr Kavan; Dana Cernea; Alba A Brandes; Magalie Hilton; Lauren Abrey; Timothy Cloughesy Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mark R Gilbert; James J Dignam; Terri S Armstrong; Jeffrey S Wefel; Deborah T Blumenthal; Michael A Vogelbaum; Howard Colman; Arnab Chakravarti; Stephanie Pugh; Minhee Won; Robert Jeraj; Paul D Brown; Kurt A Jaeckle; David Schiff; Volker W Stieber; David G Brachman; Maria Werner-Wasik; Ivo W Tremont-Lukats; Erik P Sulman; Kenneth D Aldape; Walter J Curran; Minesh P Mehta Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-02-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Roger Stupp; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Michael Weller; Barbara Fisher; Martin J B Taphoorn; Karl Belanger; Alba A Brandes; Christine Marosi; Ulrich Bogdahn; Jürgen Curschmann; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Thierry Gorlia; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; René O Mirimanoff Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Milena Cankovic; Marina N Nikiforova; Matija Snuderl; Adekunle M Adesina; Neal Lindeman; Patrick Y Wen; Eudocia Q Lee Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2013-07-17 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Mark R Gilbert; Meihua Wang; Kenneth D Aldape; Roger Stupp; Monika E Hegi; Kurt A Jaeckle; Terri S Armstrong; Jeffrey S Wefel; Minhee Won; Deborah T Blumenthal; Anita Mahajan; Christopher J Schultz; Sara Erridge; Brigitta Baumert; Kristen I Hopkins; Tzahala Tzuk-Shina; Paul D Brown; Arnab Chakravarti; Walter J Curran; Minesh P Mehta Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-10-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Amir Samii; Maxim Sorokin; Souvik Kar; Luidmila Makovskaia; Andrew Garazha; Christian Hartmann; Aleksey Moisseev; Ella Kim; Alf Giese; Anton Buzdin Journal: Cold Spring Harb Mol Case Stud Date: 2021-08-02