| Literature DB >> 33085022 |
Vilde Elisabeth Mikkelsen1, Ole Solheim2,3, Øyvind Salvesen4, Sverre Helge Torp5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glioblastomas (GBMs) are known for having a vastly heterogenous histopathology. Several studies have shown that GBMs can be histologically undergraded due to sampling errors of small tissue samples. We sought to explore to what extent histological features in GBMs are dependent on the amount of viable tissue on routine slides from both biopsied and resected tumors.Entities:
Keywords: Biopsy; Glioblastoma; Grading; Histopathology; Magnetic resonance imaging; Sampling error
Year: 2020 PMID: 33085022 PMCID: PMC8195928 DOI: 10.1007/s00701-020-04608-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) ISSN: 0001-6268 Impact factor: 2.216
Fig. 1Examples of the three categories of tissue amount. The area of viable tissue was subjectively categorized in each case into the categories “sparse” (a, d), “medium” (b, e), or “substantial” (c, f). d–f Annotations of the viable proportion of the tissue in the same cases (a–c). In these examples, the collective areas of viable tissue were 32 mm2 for the “sparse” category (d), 110 mm2 for the “medium” category (e), and 279 mm2 for the “substantial” category (f). All three examples had no additional routine HE slides. The “sparse” example had no additional FFPE slides from previously frozen tissue, whereas both the “medium” and “substantial” example had one additional section from previously frozen tissue with sparse tissue amount. All three exemplified cases had resections. Hematoxylin-eosin stained tissue slides at × 0.5 magnification. Scale bars 5 mm. Tissue slides were scanned with a Hamamatsu NanoZoomer S60 scanner (Hamamatsu Photonics, Japan) and images created from exportations using the NDP.view2 software (version 2.7.52) (Hamamatsu)
Histopathology and tissue amount
| Histopathological feature | Sparse tissue ( | Medium tissue ( | Substantial tissue ( | Test performed | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Necroses | |||||
| • Large, ischemic ( | 90% (44) | 90% (26) | 89% (25) | 1.000 | Fisher’s exact |
| • Small ( | 69% (34) | 90% (26) | 100% (28) | 0.001* | Fisher’s exact |
| Palisades ( | 51% (25) | 86% (24) | 89% (25) | < 0.001* | Chi-square |
| Microvascular proliferation ( | 55% (27) | 90% (26) | 100% (28) | < 0.001* | Chi-square |
| Cellular density | |||||
| • Low ( | 10% (5) | 0% (0) | 0% (0) | Fisher’s exact | |
| • Moderate ( | 69% (34) | 59% (17) | 64% (18) | ||
| • High ( | 20% (10) | 41% (12) | 36% (10) | 0.074 | |
| Atypia | |||||
| • Mild ( | 6% (3) | 0% (0) | 0% (0) | Fisher’s exact | |
| • Moderate ( | 84% (41) | 79% (23) | 61% (17) | ||
| • Severe ( | 10% (5) | 21% (6) | 39% (11) | 0.017* | |
| Median mitotic count (range)b | 5 (0–34) | 13 (0–65) | 22 (2–43) | < 0.001* | Kruskal-Wallis |
| Vascular features | |||||
| • Thromboses ( | 78% (38) | 83% (24) | 93% (26) | 0.280 | Fisher’s exact |
| • Hemorrhage ( | 67% (33) | 86% (25) | 93% (26) | 0.016* | Chi-square |
| • Pseudorosettes ( | 9% (4) | 25% (7) | 39% (11) | 0.006* | Chi-square |
| Secondary structures of Scherer | |||||
| • Perineuronal satellitosis ( | 52% (13) | 43% (6) | 52% (14) | 0.834 | Chi-square |
| • Angiocentric structures ( | 32% (8) | 50% (7) | 44% (12) | 0.487 | Chi-square |
| • Subpial clustering ( | 0% (0) | 40% (4) | 33% (8) | 0.042* | Fisher’s exact |
| Desmoplasia ( | 57% (28) | 66% (19) | 71% (20) | 0.437 | Chi-square |
| Leukocytes | |||||
| • Macrophages ( | 90% (44) | 93% (27) | 100% (28) | 0.314 | Fisher’s exact |
| • Lymphocytic infiltration ( | 53% (26) | 62% (18) | 86% (24) | 0.015* | Chi-square |
| Small cell glioblastoma ( | 8% (4) | 14% (4) | 29% (8) | 0.057 | Fisher’s exact |
| Cellular differentiation | |||||
| • Gemistocytes ( | 14% (7) | 31% (9) | 25% (7) | 0.197 | Chi-square |
| • Small cells ( | 12% (6) | 41% (12) | 11% (3) | 0.003* | Chi-square |
| • Sarcomatous cells ( | 16% (8) | 17% (5) | 21% (6) | 0.849 | Chi-square |
| • Myxomatoid ( | 14% (7) | 14% (4) | 11% (3) | 0.939 | Fisher’s exact |
| • Giant cells ( | 8% (4) | 7% (2) | 14% (4) | 0.631 | Fisher’s exact |
| • Primitive neuronal ( | 6% (3) | 14% (4) | 4% (1) | 0.400 | Fisher’s exact |
| • Oligodendroglial ( | 4% (2) | 10% (3) | 7% (2) | 0.541 | Fisher’s exact |
| Median Ki67/MIB-1 PI (range) | 11.5 (1.4–57.3) | 17.5 (5.3–53.3) | 14.7 (5.1–37.3) | 0.036* | Kruskal-Wallis |
| Median CD105-MVD count (range)f | 10.3 (0.7–48) | 12.7 (6–37.7) | 18.3 (1.7–50) | 0.003* | Kruskal-Wallis |
PI proliferative index, MVD microvessel density, n absolute number of cases
aOne case was not possible to assess for palisades
bOne case had inadequate morphology for the counting of mitoses
cThree cases could not be assessed for pseudorosettes
dOnly cases with infiltration zones into gray matter were assessed (n = 66) [27]
eOnly cases showing areas with outer brain surface were assessed (n = 45) [27]
fFive cases could not be assessed for CD105-MVD [28]
*Significantly associated, p ≤ 0.05
Distributions of the number of cases or median values of the histological features within the tissue amount categories. The p values are from tests of association between histology and tissue amount
Clinical features and tissue amount
| Sparse tissue ( | Medium tissue ( | Substantial tissue ( | Test performed | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surgical procedure | |||||
| • Biopsy ( | 31% (15) | 7% (2) | 0% (0) | Fisher’s exact | |
| • Cytoreduction ( | 43% (21) | 66% (19) | 68% (19) | ||
| • GTR ( | 27% (13) | 28% (8) | 32% (9) | 0.003* | |
| Median preoperative total tumor volume (range) | 24.0 mL (1.7–92.9) | 33.1 mL (1.0–82.9) | 35.5 mL (1.5–243.5) | 0.176 | Kruskal-Wallis |
| Median preoperative contrast-enhancing volume (range) | 15.1 mL (1.0–53.4) | 15.7 mL (0.9–63.9) | 23.2 mL (1.4–215.4) | 0.246 | Kruskal-Wallis |
| Median number of tissue sections (range) | 2 (1–18) | 2 (2–19) | 4 (2–23) | < 0.001* | Kruskal-Wallis |
| Median tissue volume (range)a | 0.13 cm3 (0.02–3.66) | 1.36 cm3 (0.06–40.74) | 11.63 cm3 (2.88–42.85) | < 0.001* | Kruskal-Wallis |
GTR gross total resection, CI confidence interval, n absolute number of cases
aEstimated in 89 of the patients, tissue volume was not possible to estimate in the excluded cases due to inadequate descriptions
*Statistically significant, p ≤ 0.05
Distributions of the type of surgical procedure and preoperative MRI volumetrics across the tissue amount categories. The p values are from tests of association between the clinical features and tissue amount
Post hoc pairwise comparisons of the tissue amount subgroups and quantitative variables
| Tissue amount | “Sparse” vs “medium” | “Sparse” vs “substantial” | “Medium” vs “substantial” |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mitotic count | 0.002* | < 0.001* | 0.198 |
| Ki-67/MIB-1 PI | 0.018* | 0.071 | 0.555 |
| CD105-MVD | 0.088 | 0.001* | 0.033* |
| Number of sections | 0.394 | < 0.001* | < 0.001* |
| Tissue volume | < 0.001* | < 0.001* | < 0.001* |
PI proliferative index, MVD microvessel density, vs versus
*Significant associations, p ≤ 0.05
The table presents p values from subgroup Mann-Whitney U analyses of association between quantitative variables and the tissue categories