Literature DB >> 33134923

TERT promoter mutation associated with multifocal phenotype and poor prognosis in patients with IDH wild-type glioblastoma.

Zensho Kikuchi1, Ichiyo Shibahara2, Tetsu Yamaki1, Ema Yoshioka3, Tomoko Shofuda3, Rintaro Ohe4, Ken-Ichiro Matsuda1, Ryuta Saito5, Masayuki Kanamori5, Yonehiro Kanemura3, Toshihiro Kumabe2, Teiji Tominaga5, Yukihiko Sonoda1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although mutations in the promoter region of the telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERTp) gene are the most common alterations in glioblastoma (GBM), their clinical significance remains unclear. Therefore, we investigated the impact of TERTp status on patient outcome and clinicopathological features in patients with GBM over a long period of follow-up.
METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 153 cases of GBM. Six patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) or H3F3A gene mutations were excluded from this study. Among the 147 cases of IDH wild-type GBM, 92 (62.6%) had the TERTp mutation. Clinical, immunohistochemical, and genetic factors (BRAF, TP53 gene mutation, CD133, ATRX expression, O 6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase [MGMT] promoter methylation) and copy number alterations (CNAs) were investigated.
RESULTS: GBM patients with the TERTp mutation were older at first diagnosis versus those with TERTp wild type (66.0 vs. 60.0 years, respectively, P = .034), and had shorter progression-free survival (7 vs. 10 months, respectively, P = .015) and overall survival (16 vs. 24 months, respectively, P = .017). Notably, magnetic resonance imaging performed showed that TERTp-mutant GBM was strongly associated with multifocal/distant lesions (P = .004). According to the CNA analysis, TERTp mutations were positively correlated with EGFR amp/gain, CDKN2A deletion, and PTEN deletion; however, these mutations were negatively correlated with PDGFR amp/gain, CDK4 gain, and TP53 deletion.
CONCLUSIONS: TERTp mutations were strongly correlated with multifocal/distant lesions and poor prognosis in patients with IDH wild-type GBM. Less aggressive GBM with TERTp wild type may be a distinct clinical and molecular subtype of IDH wild-type GBM.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press, the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  IDH wild type; TERT promoter; distant; glioblastoma; multifocal

Year:  2020        PMID: 33134923      PMCID: PMC7586143          DOI: 10.1093/noajnl/vdaa114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurooncol Adv        ISSN: 2632-2498


TERTp mutations strongly correlated with multifocal/distant lesions and poor prognosis in patients with IDH wild-type GBM. The IDH wild-type GBM with and without TERTp mutations may be a distinct clinical and molecular subtype. Mutations in the promoter region of the telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERTp) gene are the most common mutations in isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioblastoma (GBM). While TERTp mutations are correlated with poor prognosis, aggressive clinicopathological characteristics, and metastasis in other cancers, their clinical significance in GBM remains unclear. Here, we analyzed GBMs to determine whether the TERTp status is associated with other clinical and molecular factors. Particularly, this study focused on whether multifocal/distant lesions were observed during the clinical course. In this study, we demonstrated that TERTp-mutant GBMs are strongly associated with the prognosis and multifocal/distant lesions during a long follow-up period. In addition, TERTp mutation was positively correlated with EGFR amp/gain, CDKN2A deletion, and PTEN deletion; however, it negatively correlated with PDGFR amp/gain, CDK4 gain, and TP53 deletion. Less aggressive GBM with TERTp wild type could be distinct clinical and molecular subtype of IDH wild-type GBM. Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant tumor affecting the central nervous system in adults.[1] Despite of radical surgery combined with concomitant chemoradiation therapy based on temozolomide, the median survival of patients is approximately 18 months.[2] According to the World Health Organization revised neuropathological criteria, these tumors are divided into 2 categories, namely isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type and IDH-mutant GBMs. In addition, recent reports indicated that 70%–80% of GBM genomes harbor either C228T or C250T mutations in the promoter region of the telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERTp) gene.[3,4] These mutations are associated with enhanced telomere maintenance.[5-7] Although several studies reported the prognostic significance of TERTp mutation in patients with GBM, its clinical and pathological roles remain unclear.[3-6] Recently, GBM patients with unmethylated O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) and TERTp mutation have a worse prognosis than those with TERTp wild type.[3,8] However, the mechanism of interaction of TERTp mutation and MGMT promoter methylation is not well established. Regarding imaging analysis, necrosis detected through magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been reported to indicate the presence of TERTp mutation.[9] However, predicting the TERTp status by preoperative imaging study alone remains difficult. A recent systematic review and meta-analyses stated that the incidence of solitary GBM is 83%.[10] Other previous studies showed that 20% of patients with GBM had multiple lesions and their prognosis was worse than that recorded in patients with a single lesion.[11] In this study, we analyzed GBMs to determine whether the TERTp status was associated with other clinical and molecular factors. Particularly, this study utilized MRI to determine the development of multifocal/distant lesions during the clinical course.

Materials and Methods

Patients and Samples

This retrospective study was conducted with the approval of the Ethics Committees of the Tohoku University School of Medicine and Yamagata University School of Medicine. Written informed consent was provided by all patients prior to their participation in the study. Between January 2009 and October 2019, a total of 153 patients (89 treated at Yamagata University Hospital [Yamagata cohort] and 64 treated at Tohoku University Hospital [Tohoku cohort]) were analyzed. All patients met the following inclusion criteria: (1) diagnosis of GBM, World Health Organization grade IV; (2) no history of lower-grade tumors; (3) availability of genomic DNA; and (4) availability of information regarding events, such as recurrence or death during the follow-up period, or absence of such events for ≥12 months of follow-up. Patients who had previously undergone biopsies were excluded from the study. Tumor specimens were obtained from a lesion that exhibited enhancement on gadolinium-enhanced MRI and immediately stored at −80°C until DNA extraction (Figure 1).
Figure 1.

Definition of multifocal lesion. Representative gadolinium-enhanced MRI scans of patients treated at Yamagata University Hospital. The scans were obtained at diagnosis and after surgery, and at the first and second recurrence. (A) Multifocal lesions at diagnosis. (B) Multifocal/distant lesion at first recurrence. Eight months after surgery, an enhanced lesion was observed at a location distant from the initial lesion (arrow). (C) Local recurrence during the entire follow-up period. (D) Multifocal/distant lesion at second recurrence. Seven months after surgery, local recurrence was observed adjacent to the resection cavity. Ten months later, an enhanced lesion was detected at a distant location (arrow).

Definition of multifocal lesion. Representative gadolinium-enhanced MRI scans of patients treated at Yamagata University Hospital. The scans were obtained at diagnosis and after surgery, and at the first and second recurrence. (A) Multifocal lesions at diagnosis. (B) Multifocal/distant lesion at first recurrence. Eight months after surgery, an enhanced lesion was observed at a location distant from the initial lesion (arrow). (C) Local recurrence during the entire follow-up period. (D) Multifocal/distant lesion at second recurrence. Seven months after surgery, local recurrence was observed adjacent to the resection cavity. Ten months later, an enhanced lesion was detected at a distant location (arrow).

Classification of GBM According to Preoperative MRI

MRI sequences were acquired on a 1.5-T or 3.0-T scanner and typically included axial T1-weighted, T2-weighted fast spin-echo, and fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery sequences as well as a postcontrast 3-dimensional spoiled gradient-recalled acquisition in the steady state T1-weighted sequence. Contrast-enhanced lesions (CELs) were assessed to clarify whether they were in contact with the subventricular zone, as previously described.[12]

Definition of Multifocal/Distant Lesions

One or more enhancing noncontiguous lesions >1 cm distant from the original tumor on preoperative MRI were defined as multifocal/distant lesions at diagnosis.[13] In addition, as previously reported, “multifocal/distant lesions at recurrence” were defined as distant or multifocal recurrence. Recurrence was characterized by the development of new CEL centered >3 cm distant from the primary resection cavity or at the margins of the primary residual tumor, or at more than 1 site, with each lesion having a well-defined border and the patient exhibiting normal brain signals.[14,15]

Clinical Parameters

The clinical profiles of patients were obtained from their medical records. The majority of patients underwent radical surgery followed by chemotherapy (nimustine hydrochloride [ACNU] or temozolomide) and radiotherapy. Total surgical resection was defined as the disappearance of CEL according to pre- and postoperative gadolinium-enhanced MRI studies. In cases in which the primary tumor recurred, patients underwent salvage surgery, second-line chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or palliative therapy. The Ki-67 labeling index was determined by immunohistochemical staining of resected specimens with the Ki-67 antigen (Dako, Agilent Technologies). We also analyzed the expression of CD133 (Miltenyi Biotec), p53 (Dako, Agilent Technologies), and ATRX (Abcam) by immunohistochemical staining. The expression of CD133 in 144 patients among the Yamagata and Tohoku cohorts was previously reported.[16,17]

Prognosis

Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the interval between the day of first surgery and the day of recurrence detection on MRI scans. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time between the day of the first operation and the day of death or final follow-up.

Molecular Analysis

Genomic DNA was extracted with the QIAamp DNA mini kit (Qiagen), according to the instructions provided by the manufacturer. The isocitrate dehydrogenase1/2 (IDH1/2), H3F3A, HIST1H3B, TP53, BRAF, and TERTp genes were amplified via polymerase chain reaction (PCR), and sequencing was conducted as previously described.[18,19] In the MGMT promoter methylation analysis, we performed methylation-specific PCR or quantitative methylation-specific PCR following the bisulfite modification of tumor DNA.[19] To assess copy number alterations (CNAs), we performed Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) using the SALSA MLPA KIT P105 (version D2), in accordance with the manufacturer’s protocol (MRC Holland).[20] The P105 kit is designed to detect CNAs typically found in gliomas and includes probes against the PDGFRA, EGFR, CDKN2A, PTEN, TP53, CDK4, MDM2, and NFKBIA genes. Based on the previous publications, the CNA categories were classified according to the following thresholds: homozygous deletion (x ≤ 0.4), hemizygous deletion (0.4 < x ≤ 0.7), gain (1.3 ≤ x < 2.0), and amplification (x ≥ 2.0).[20,21] We used OncoPrinter, a tool provided by the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics (cbioportal.org/oncoprinter), to visualize and analyze our data with some modifications.[22,23]

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using the SPSS (IBM Japan) software. The relationship between 2 variables was evaluated using the Mann–Whitney U test and Fisher’s exact test. Estimates of PFS and OS were calculated with the Kaplan–Meier method, and the Log-rank (Mantel–Cox) test was used to evaluate differences between the groups. Cox regression was used for the multivariate analysis. The significance level was set at P < .05.

Results

Population and Tumor Characteristics on MRI

A total of 153 patients, including 82 males and 71 females with a median age of 63 years (range: 27–86 years) and median preoperative Karnofsky Performance Status of 80 (range: 30–100), were included in the present study. Patients in the Yamagata cohort were older than those in the Tohoku cohort (P < .001) (Supplementary Table 1). Genomic DNA and paraffin-embedded samples were obtained from all patients. The median duration of the follow-up period was 17 months (range: 1–152 months), and 119 patients (77.8%) expired. Total surgical resection was achieved in 96 patients (62.7%). In this group, IDH1, H3F3A, and BRAF gene mutations were detected in 4 (2.6%), 2 (1.3%), and 1 patient (0.65%), respectively; however, neither IDH2 nor HIST1H3B gene mutations were detected. TERTp gene mutations were detected in 92 patients (60.1%), including 65 (42.5%) and 27 (17.6%) with C228T and C250T mutations, respectively. Although the frequency of TERTp gene mutations in the Yamagata cohort was higher than that in the Tohoku cohort (P = .019, Supplementary Table 1), there was no significant difference in the mutation frequency in older patients (age ≥60) between the 2 cohorts (P = .348) (data not shown). MGMT gene promoter methylation was found in 62 patients (40.5%). Postoperative treatments consisted of radiation alone for 6 patients, while the remaining 147 patients received combined radiation and chemotherapy with temozolomide (n = 123), ACNU (n = 14), or other agents (n = 10). Bevacizumab was administered as first- and second-line therapy in 1 and 50 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences observed in PFS and OS between patients treated with ACNU and temozolomide (data not shown). TP53 gene mutations and/or strong immunoreactivity of p53 were found in 63 patients (43.4%) (Figure 2). Eleven of 88 patients (12.5%) displayed the loss of ATRX expression. The major CNAs frequently observed in 139 GBMs included EGFR amp/gain (66.2%), CDKN2A deletion (60.4%), and PTEN deletion (51.8%) (Figure 2 and Table 1).
Figure 2.

Genetic distribution in 153 GBMs. Mutations, CNAs, and methylation were generated and visualized by OncoPrinter via the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics (cbioportal.org/oncoprinter) with some modifications.[22,23] The diagram shows the landscape of the molecular characteristics of GBMs, which are sorted by IDH, H3F3A, and TERTp mutations. N/A, not available.

Table 1.

Relationships Between TERTp Status and Other Prognostic Factors

Total (n = 147) TERTp wild type (n = 55) TERTp mutant (n = 92) P
Sex, female, n (%)66 (44.8)27 (49.1)39 (42.4).494b
Age, y, median (range)64 (27–86)60 (27–82)66 (32–86) .034 a
Preoperative KPS ≥80, n (%)84 (60.0)27 (51.9)57 (64.8).155b
Gross total resection, n (%)93 (63.2)33 (60.0)60 (65.2).597b
CD133 expression, mean (%)12.7 ± 12.912.1 ± 11.112.9 ± 13.8.729a
Ki-67 labeling index, mean (%)33.8 ± 17.934.8 ± 17.933.2 ± 18.0.477a
Multifocal/distant lesions
 At diagnosis, n (%)21 (14.3)4 (7.3)17 (18.5).087b
 At recurrence, n (%)45 (30.6)12 (21.8)33 (35.9).096b
  At the first recurrence, n (%)30 (20.4)8 (14.5)22 (23.9).208b
  At the second recurrence, n (%)15 (10.2)4 (7.3)11 (12.0).415b
 Total, n (%)66 (44.9)16 (29.1)50 (54.3) .004 b
MGMT gene promoter methylation, n (%)57 (38.8)19 (34.5)38 (41.3).485b
TP53 gene mutation, n (%)57 (40.7)19 (37.3)38 (42.7).477b
Loss of ATRX expression, n (%)11 (12.5)6 (22.2)5 (8.2).085b
CNA PDGFR Amp, n (%)11 (7.9)9 (17.6)2 (2.3) .002 b
Gain, n (%)8 (5.8)5 (9.8)3 (3.4).143b
Amp/gain, n (%)19 (13.7)14 (27.5)5 (5.7) .001 b
EGFR Amp, n (%)46 (33.1)8 (15.7)38 (43.2) .001 b
Gain, n (%)46 (33.1)7 (13.7)39 (44.3) <.0001 b
Amp/gain, n (%)92 (66.2)15 (29.4)77 (87.5) <.0001 b
CDKN2A Homo, n (%)61 (43.9)20 (39.2)41 (46.6).479b
Hemi, n (%)23 (16.5)5 (9.8)18 (20.5).154b
Deletion, n (%)84 (60.4)25 (49.0)59 (67.0) .048 b
PTEN Homo, n (%)8 (5.8)1 (2.0)7 (8.0).258b
Hemi, n (%)64 (46.0)8 (15.7)56 (63.6) <.0001 b
Deletion, n (%)72 (51.8)9 (17.6)63 (71.6) <.0001 b
CDK4 Amp, n (%)13 (9.4)4 (7.8)9 (10.2).768b
Gain, n (%)9 (6.5)7 (13.7)2 (2.3) .012 b
Amp/gain, n (%)22 (15.8)11 (21.6)11 (12.5).227b
MDM2 Amp, n (%)16 (11.5)6 (11.8)10 (11.4)1.000b
Gain, n (%)5 (3.6)4 (7.8)1 (1.1).061b
Amp/gain, n (%)21 (15.1)10 (19.6)11 (12.5).327b
NFKBIA Hemi, n (%)20 (14.4)8 (15.7)12 (13.6).804b
TP53 Hemi, n (%)23 (16.5)16 (31.4)7 (8.1) .001 b
Mut/Hemi, n (%)12 (8.6)7 (13.7)5 (5.7).124b
SVZ-positive, n (%)66 (44.9)25 (45.5)41 (44.6)1.000b

Amp, amplification; Hemi, hemizygous deletion; Homo, homozygous deletion; KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status; Mut, mutation; SVZ, subventricular zone. P values <0.05 are in bold.

aMann–Whitney test.

bFisher’s exact test.

Genetic distribution in 153 GBMs. Mutations, CNAs, and methylation were generated and visualized by OncoPrinter via the cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics (cbioportal.org/oncoprinter) with some modifications.[22,23] The diagram shows the landscape of the molecular characteristics of GBMs, which are sorted by IDH, H3F3A, and TERTp mutations. N/A, not available. Relationships Between TERTp Status and Other Prognostic Factors Amp, amplification; Hemi, hemizygous deletion; Homo, homozygous deletion; KPS, Karnofsky Performance Status; Mut, mutation; SVZ, subventricular zone. P values <0.05 are in bold. aMann–Whitney test. bFisher’s exact test.

Correlation Analyses Between the TERTp Status and Other Prognostic Factors

Six patients with IDH1 or H3F3A mutations were excluded from this study. Therefore, we analyzed 147 GBM patients with IDH wild type to determine the factors correlated with the TERTp mutation. The median age was higher in GBM patients with TERTp mutation than those with TERTp wild type (P = .034) (Table 1). In terms of MRI characteristics, 21 of the 147 patients (14.3%) had multifocal/distant lesions at diagnosis (Table 1). During the follow-up, 129 patients (87.7%) experienced the first recurrence, which included local recurrence and multifocal/distant recurrence in 99 (67.3%) and 30 (20.4%) patients, respectively. Among the patients with a well-controlled first recurrent lesion, 15 patients (10.2%) had new multifocal/distant lesions at second recurrence. Neither local nor distal recurrence was observed at the time of the last observation in the remaining 18 patients (12.3%). Although multifocal/distant lesions at diagnosis or recurrence were weakly correlated with TERTp mutations (P = .087 and P = .096, respectively), these lesions were significantly more common in patients with TERTp-mutant GBM than in patients with TERTp wild-type GBM during the entire follow-up period (P = .004, Table 1). The loss of ATRX expression occurred more frequently in TERTp wild-type GBM; however, this difference was not significant (P = .085, Table 1). EGFR amp/gain, CDKN2A deletion, and PTEN deletion were significantly associated with TERTp mutations (P < .0001, P = .048, and P < .0001, respectively, Figure 2 and Table 1). Conversely, PDGFR amp/gain, CDK4 gain, and TP53 hemizygous deletion were more frequently observed in TERTp wild-type GBM (P = .001, P = .012, and P = .001, respectively, Figure 2 and Table 1).

Univariate Analysis for the Prediction of PFS and OS

The median PFS and OS for the patients with IDH wild-type GBM were 8 and 18 months, respectively (Table 2). Based on the Kaplan–Meier analysis, longer PFS and OS were correlated with TERTp wild type (P = .015 and P = .017, respectively) (Figure 3A and B; Table 2), gross total resection (P < .001 and P <.001, respectively) (Table 2), MGMT gene promoter methylation (P = .037 and P = .015, respectively) (Table 2), CDK4 amp/gain (P = .015 and P = .042, respectively), and local lesions (P = .006 and P = .001, respectively) (Table 2). The female sex was associated with longer PFS (P = .047) (Table 2).
Table 2.

Clinical and Genetic Parameters Affecting PFS and OS in Primary GBM

ParametersNo. of patients (n = 147)PFSOS
Median (months) P*Median (months) P*
147818
TERTp status
 Mutated92716
 Wild type5510 .015 24 .017
Sex
 Female66922
 Male817 .047 16.055
Age at diagnosis
 <60 years52818
>60 years957.17219.115
Preoperative KPS
>8084821
 <80567.72515.294
Surgery
Gross toral resection931123
Absence of gross total resection544 <.001 11 <.001
Ki-67 labeling index
 Low (<30%)55820
 High (>30%)687.21216.061
CD133 expression
 Low (<15%)97821
 High (>15%)477.48017.146
MGMT
 Methylated571324
 Unmethylated907 .037 16 .015
PDGFR
 Amp/gain191017
 Retain1208.91620.669
EGFR
 Amp/gain92717
 Retain4710.06024.142
CDKN2A
 Deletion84917
 Retain558.52221.350
PTEN
 Deletion72919
 Retain678.28119.497
CDK4
 Amp/gain221934
 Retain1177 .015 18 .042
MDM2
 Amp/gain211024
 Retain1188.79518.368
NFKBIA
 Deletion201321
 Retain1198.80218.662
TP53
 Mut/deletion681019
 Wild type767.05419.580
SVZ
 Positive66716
 Negative748.95221.267
Numbers of lesion
Multifocal/distant lesions66716
 Local lesion819 .006 23 .001
Cohort site
 Yamagata88717
 Tohoku599.13722.107

SVZ, subventricular zone. P values <0.05 are in bold.

*Log-rank test.

Figure 3.

(A and B) Kaplan–Meier curves based on the TERTp mutation in patients with IDH wild-type GBM. (A) PFS. (B) OS. (C and D) Kaplan–Meier curves based on the combination of TERTp mutation and MGMT promoter methylation in patients with IDH wild-type GBM. (C) PFS. (D) OS.

Clinical and Genetic Parameters Affecting PFS and OS in Primary GBM SVZ, subventricular zone. P values <0.05 are in bold. *Log-rank test. (A and B) Kaplan–Meier curves based on the TERTp mutation in patients with IDH wild-type GBM. (A) PFS. (B) OS. (C and D) Kaplan–Meier curves based on the combination of TERTp mutation and MGMT promoter methylation in patients with IDH wild-type GBM. (C) PFS. (D) OS. To determine whether the TERTp mutation was negatively correlated with PFS and OS in the non-multifocal/distant group, we analyzed the survival of the 81 patients in the non-multifocal/distant group. The median PFS and OS were 9 and 23 months, respectively, with no significant correlation of PFS and OS with the TERTp mutation (P = .129 and P = .148, respectively) (data not shown). We also investigated the prognostic value of TERTp mutation in combination with MGMT promoter methylation. Among patients with TERTp mutation, unmethylated MGMT was significantly associated with poor PFS and OS (P < .0001 and P < .0001, respectively) (Figure 3C and D). However, among patients with TERTp wild type, there was no significant difference of PFS and OS between patients with and without MGMT promotor methylation (P = .938 and P = .699, respectively) (Figure 3C and D).

Factors Associated With Multifocal/Distant Lesions

We investigated several factors to determine whether they correlated with multifocal/distant lesions. As shown in Supplementary Table 2, TERTp mutations, the expression of CD133, and PTEN deletion were significantly associated with multifocal lesions (P = .004, P = .004, and P = .004, respectively).

Multivariate Analysis of Prognostic Factors

The factors included in the multivariate analysis for PFS and OS were TERTp status, sex, age, extent of resection, Ki-67 labeling index, MGMT gene promoter methylation, CDK4 amp/gain, number of lesions, and cohort site. We found that TERTp mutation, absence of gross total resection, and MGMT gene promoter unmethylation were independent unfavorable prognostic factors for PFS (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.0, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2–3.3, P = .006; HR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.3–3.5, P = .002; and HR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.3–3.0, P = .002, respectively) (Table 3). TERTp mutations (HR: 2.0, 95% CI: 1.2–3.3, P = .010), absence of total resection (HR: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.7–4.8, P < .001), and MGMT gene promoter unmethylation (HR: 2.2, 95% CI: 1.4–3.5, P = .001) were independent unfavorable prognostic factors for OS.
Table 3.

Multivariate Analysis of Independent Prognostic Factors Associated With PFS and OS

ParametersPFSOS
HR95% CI P*HR95% CI P
TERTp status
Mutant vs. wild type2.01.2–3.3 .006 2.01.2–3.3 .010
Sex
 Male vs. female1.30.9–2.0.2181.40.9–2.2.157
Age
 ≥60 vs. <601.20.8–2.0.3641.10.7–1.9.600
Gross total resection
 No vs. Yes2.21.3–3.5 .002 2.91.7–4.8 <.001
Ki-67 labeling index
 ≥30 vs. <301.40.9–2.1.1291.51.0–2.4.069
MGMT
Unmethylated vs. methylated2.01.3–3.0.0022.21.4–3.5 .001
CDK4
Amp/gain vs. retain1.50.8–2.8.2611.50.7–2.9.284
Number of lesions
Multifocal/distant vs. local1.30.8–2.0.3271.30.8–2.2.241
Cohort site
Yamagata vs. Tohoku1.10.7–1.7.6561.10.7–1.8.589

P values <.05 are in bold.

Multivariate Analysis of Independent Prognostic Factors Associated With PFS and OS P values <.05 are in bold.

Discussion

TERTp mutation is the most common alteration in GBM; however, the clinical impact of TERTp mutations in GBM remains unclear. To understand the poor prognosis of GBM with TERTp mutations, we hypothesized that malignant clinical features exist in this group. Long-term follow-up revealed that the cumulative incidence of multiple/distant lesions was significantly higher in GBM with TERTp mutations than in patients with TERTp wild-type GBM. Conversely, the non-multifocal/distant group did not show any differences in PFS and OS based on TERTp status. Therefore, we, for the first time, demonstrated that GBM with TERTp mutations has a poor prognosis because of its clinically aggressive behavior. In accordance with this finding, several studies regarding other cancers demonstrated that these mutations were correlated with a poor prognosis, aggressive clinicopathological characteristics, and metastasis.[24-28] Xing et al. found that TERTp mutation strongly correlated with vascular invasion in patients with papillary thyroid cancer.[25] Yuan et al. reported that thyroid cancer patients with the TERTp mutation have a 4-fold higher risk of distant metastasis than those with TERTp wild type.[27] The frequency of TERTp mutations in our study was 62.6%, which is lower than that of previous reports from North America and European countries, which reported mutation frequencies of 73%–75% in IDH wild-type GBMs.[3-5] Other reports from Japan also showed relatively low frequencies of TERTp mutations among IDH wild-type GBM, ranging from 50% to 70%.[6,9,29] Thus, racial differences in the frequency of TERTp mutations may exist. One possible explanation for the low frequency of TERTp mutations in the Japanese cohort is that other mechanisms involved with replicative immortality in TERTp wild-type GBM. One such mechanism is TERTp hypermethylation, and the other is ATRX or SMARCAL1 gene mutation. TERTp hypermethylation can aberrantly activate telomerase in cancer,[30] and the ATRX or SMARCAL1 gene mutations are strongly associated with the maintenance of telomere length, referred to as alternative lengthening of telomeres.[31] Indeed, our results indicated the frequent loss of ATRX expression in TERTp wild-type GBM. The other explanation is potential inclusion of other IDH wild-type high grade gliomas such as anaplastic astrocytoma with piloid features.[32] Although our cases were histologically confirmed as GBM, further molecular testing may be required to classify into novel entities. The prognostic significance of the TERTp mutation remains controversial in patients with GBM.[3,33-35] In the present study, univariate and multivariate analyses showed that the TERTp mutation was significantly associated with both PFS and OS. In accordance with previous reports, we also found that unmethylated GBM with TERTp mutations presented a poor prognosis.[3,8] However, among patients with TERTp wild type, there was no significant difference of PFS and OS between patients with and without MGMT promotor methylation. The reason may be that GBM tumors with the TERTp mutation form multifocal/distant lesions by invading various directions. Nevertheless, those with methylated MGMT were sensitive to treatment with alkylating agents, such as temozolomide. Therefore, TERTp mutated GBM patients with methylated MGMT may survive longer than those with unmethylated MGMT. Recently, GBMs were divided into 2 groups according to the IDH mutation status. Although IDH mutation is frequently found in lower-grade diffuse glioma, only 5%–10% of patients with GBM had this mutation.[36,37] In addition, GBM patients with the IDH mutation are usually young and diagnosed with progression from a lower grade of diffuse astrocytoma. Thus, TERTp mutation, frequently found in GBM is more useful for predicting survival and clinical behavior, such as the pattern of invasion. Our data showed that TERTp mutations were significantly associated with EGFR amp/gain, CDKN2A deletion, and PTEN deletion and were typically found in IDH wild-type GBM; conversely, the TERTp wild type was associated with PDGFR amp/gain, CDK4 gain, and TP53 deletion. Recently, Williams et al. reported TERTp wild-type GBMs showed frequent PI3K pathway and BAF complex gene family (ATRX, SMARCA4, SMARCB1, and ARID1A) mutations.[38] Our data also suggest that TERTp wild-type GBMs are genetically distinct from TERTp-mutant GBMs. The present study had some limitations. First, since this was a retrospective study, patients were not treated in the same manner. Although we performed a multivariate analysis, differences in treatment may have affected the pattern of recurrence. Second, we demonstrated the malignant features of GBM with the TERTp mutation based on clinicopathological characteristics, but patients with oligodendroglioma (the most benign diffuse glioma) also had the TERTp mutation.[6] Third, it has been reported that PTEN, PI3K3A mutation and the expression of CD133 are associated with distant recurrence in patients with GBM.[16,17,39,40] In the present study, there was no significant association between CD133 expression and the TERTp mutation, but PTEN deletion was significantly correlated with TERTp mutations and multifocal/distant lesions. The mechanism of invasiveness based on the TERTp mutation warrants further investigation.

Conclusion

We retrospectively investigated whether the TERTp mutation was associated with multifocal/distant lesions in GBM. The results suggested that the TERTp mutations strongly correlated with the multifocal phenotype and poor prognosis in patients with IDH wild-type GBM. We further demonstrated that TERTp mutations were significantly associated with EGFR amp/gain, CDKN2A deletion, and PTEN deletion, whereas the TERTp wild type was correlated with PDGFR amp/gain, CDK4 gain, and TP53 deletion. The IDH wild-type GBM with and without TERTp mutations may be a distinct clinical and molecular subtype. Click here for additional data file. Click here for additional data file.
  39 in total

1.  The expression status of CD133 is associated with the pattern and timing of primary glioblastoma recurrence.

Authors:  Ichiyo Shibahara; Yukihiko Sonoda; Ryuta Saito; Masayuki Kanamori; Yoji Yamashita; Toshihiro Kumabe; Mika Watanabe; Hiroyoshi Suzuki; Takashi Watanabe; Chikashi Ishioka; Teiji Tominaga
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2013-05-07       Impact factor: 12.300

2.  Radiographic patterns of progression with associated outcomes after bevacizumab therapy in glioblastoma patients.

Authors:  David Cachia; Nabil A Elshafeey; Carlos Kamiya-Matsuoka; Masumeh Hatami; Kristin D Alfaro-Munoz; Jacob J Mandel; Rivka Colen; John F DeGroot
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-07-12       Impact factor: 4.130

3.  Molecular characteristics and clinical outcomes of elderly patients with IDH-wildtype glioblastomas: comparative study of older and younger cases in Kansai Network cohort.

Authors:  Junya Fukai; Hideyuki Arita; Toru Umehara; Ema Yoshioka; Tomoko Shofuda; Daisuke Kanematsu; Yoshinori Kodama; Masayuki Mano; Manabu Kinoshita; Yoshiko Okita; Masahiro Nonaka; Takehiro Uda; Naohiro Tsuyuguchi; Daisuke Sakamoto; Yuji Uematsu; Naoyuki Nakao; Kanji Mori; Yonehiro Kanemura
Journal:  Brain Tumor Pathol       Date:  2020-05-02       Impact factor: 3.298

4.  Predicting TERT promoter mutation using MR images in patients with wild-type IDH1 glioblastoma.

Authors:  K Yamashita; R Hatae; A Hiwatashi; O Togao; K Kikuchi; D Momosaka; Y Yamashita; D Kuga; N Hata; K Yoshimoto; S O Suzuki; T Iwaki; K Iihara; H Honda
Journal:  Diagn Interv Imaging       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.026

5.  TERT promoter mutations in primary and secondary glioblastomas.

Authors:  Naosuke Nonoguchi; Takashi Ohta; Ji-Eun Oh; Young-Ho Kim; Paul Kleihues; Hiroko Ohgaki
Journal:  Acta Neuropathol       Date:  2013-08-17       Impact factor: 17.088

6.  Coexistence of TERT promoter and BRAF mutations in cutaneous melanoma is associated with more clinicopathological features of aggressiveness.

Authors:  Elisabetta Macerola; Barbara Loggini; Riccardo Giannini; Giulia Garavello; Mirella Giordano; Agnese Proietti; Cristina Niccoli; Fulvio Basolo; Gabriella Fontanini
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 4.064

7.  Relationship of glioblastoma multiforme to neural stem cell regions predicts invasive and multifocal tumor phenotype.

Authors:  Daniel A Lim; Soonmee Cha; Mary C Mayo; Mei-Hsiu Chen; Evren Keles; Scott VandenBerg; Mitchel S Berger
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2007-07-10       Impact factor: 12.300

8.  TERT promoter mutations and rs2853669 polymorphism: prognostic impact and interactions with common alterations in glioblastomas.

Authors:  Umberto Nencha; Amithys Rahimian; Marine Giry; Andrea Sechi; Karima Mokhtari; Marc Polivka; Yohann Schmitt; Anna-Luisa Di Stefano; Agusti Alentorn; Marianne Labussière; Marc Sanson
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 4.130

9.  The genomic landscape of TERT promoter wildtype-IDH wildtype glioblastoma.

Authors:  Bill H Diplas; Xujun He; Jacqueline A Brosnan-Cashman; Heng Liu; Lee H Chen; Zhaohui Wang; Casey J Moure; Patrick J Killela; Daniel B Loriaux; Eric S Lipp; Paula K Greer; Rui Yang; Anthony J Rizzo; Fausto J Rodriguez; Allan H Friedman; Henry S Friedman; Sizhen Wang; Yiping He; Roger E McLendon; Darell D Bigner; Yuchen Jiao; Matthew S Waitkus; Alan K Meeker; Hai Yan
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  PIK3CA activating mutations are associated with more disseminated disease at presentation and earlier recurrence in glioblastoma.

Authors:  Shota Tanaka; Tracy T Batchelor; A John Iafrate; Dora Dias-Santagata; Darrell R Borger; Leif W Ellisen; Daniel Yang; David N Louis; Daniel P Cahill; Andrew S Chi
Journal:  Acta Neuropathol Commun       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 7.801

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Prognostic significance of TERT promoter mutations in adult-type diffuse gliomas.

Authors:  Hideyuki Arita; Koichi Ichimura
Journal:  Brain Tumor Pathol       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 3.298

2.  Molecular Genetic Profile of 300 Japanese Patients with Diffuse Gliomas Using a Glioma-tailored Gene Panel.

Authors:  Nayuta Higa; Toshiaki Akahane; Seiya Yokoyama; Hajime Yonezawa; Hiroyuki Uchida; Shingo Fujio; Mari Kirishima; Kosuke Takigawa; Nobuhiro Hata; Keita Toh; Junkoh Yamamoto; Ryosuke Hanaya; Akihide Tanimoto; Koji Yoshimoto
Journal:  Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo)       Date:  2022-08-27       Impact factor: 2.036

3.  Molecular analyses of rosette-forming glioneuronal tumor of the midbrain tegmentum: A report of two cases and a review of the FGFR1 status in unusual tumor locations.

Authors:  Hajime Handa; Ichiyo Shibahara; Yoshiko Nakano; Madoka Inukai; Sumito Sato; Takuichiro Hide; Junko Hirato; Takako Yoshioka; Koichi Ichimura; Toshihiro Kumabe
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2022-05-20

Review 4.  Telomerase as a therapeutic target in glioblastoma.

Authors:  Elisa Aquilanti; Lauren Kageler; Patrick Y Wen; Matthew Meyerson
Journal:  Neuro Oncol       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 13.029

Review 5.  Epidemiology of Anthropometric Factors in Glioblastoma Multiforme-Literature Review.

Authors:  Donata Simińska; Jan Korbecki; Klaudyna Kojder; Patrycja Kapczuk; Marta Fabiańska; Izabela Gutowska; Anna Machoy-Mokrzyńska; Dariusz Chlubek; Irena Baranowska-Bosiacka
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2021-01-16

Review 6.  Looking Beyond the Glioblastoma Mask: Is Genomics the Right Path?

Authors:  Liliana Montella; Nunzio Del Gaudio; Guglielmo Bove; Mariella Cuomo; Michela Buonaiuto; Davide Costabile; Roberta Visconti; Gaetano Facchini; Lucia Altucci; Lorenzo Chiariotti; Rosa Della Monica
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 5.738

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.