| Literature DB >> 34885237 |
Giuseppe Lombardi1, Alessandro Della Puppa2, Marco Pizzi3, Giulia Cerretti1, Camilla Bonaudo2, Marina Paola Gardiman3, Angelo Dipasquale4,5, Fabiana Gregucci6, Alice Esposito2, Debora De Bartolo3, Vittorina Zagonel1, Matteo Simonelli4,5, Alba Fiorentino6, Francois Ducray7,8,9.
Abstract
Ependymomas are rare primary central nervous system tumors. They can form anywhere along the neuraxis, but in adults, these tumors predominantly occur in the spine and less frequently intracranially. Ependymal tumors represent a heterogenous group of gliomas, and the WHO 2016 classification is based essentially on a grading system, with ependymomas classified as grade I, II (classic), or III (anaplastic). In adults, surgery is the primary initial treatment, while radiotherapy is employed as an adjuvant treatment in some cases of grade II and in all cases of anaplastic ependymoma; chemotherapy is reserved for recurrent cases. In recent years, important and interesting advances in the molecular characterization of ependymomas have been made, allowing for the identification of nine molecular subgroups of ependymal tumors and moving toward subgroup-specific patients with improved risk stratification for treatment-decisions and future prospective trials. New targeted agents or immunotherapies for ependymoma patients are being explored for recurrent disease. This review summarizes recent molecular advances in the diagnosis and treatment of intracranial ependymomas including surgery, radiation therapy and systemic therapies.Entities:
Keywords: brain tumors; chemotherapy; ependymoma; glioma; radiotherapy
Year: 2021 PMID: 34885237 PMCID: PMC8656831 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13236128
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Figure 1Histological features of ependymal tumors. (A) Classic ependymomas are well-circumscribed neoplasms with clear-cut vascular pseudorosettes. Immunohistochemically, the neoplastic cells show variable expression for GFAP with characteristic para-nuclear dot-like positivity for EMA. OLIG2 is weak to negative (B) Anaplastic ependymomas are hypercellular tumors with brisk mitotic activity, frequent micro-vascular proliferation, and palisading necrosis. (C) Myxopapillary ependymomas feature well-differentiated cuboidal to elongated tumor cells that are radially oriented around vascularized myxoid cores with a papillary architecture. Endothelial proliferation and cellular atypia are typically absent. (D) Subependymomas consist of small clusters of cells with isomorphic nuclei, scattered throughout a finely fibrillary background with microcysts (H and E and immunoperoxidase stains; original magnification, 10×, 20× and 40×).
Clinical and molecular characteristics of ependymomas based on tumor location.
| Anatomical Location | Molecular Subgroup | Genetic Characteristics | Histopathology (WHO Grade) | Age | Gender | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Supratentorial (ST) | SE | Balanced | Sub-ependymoma (WHO I) | Adulthood | >M | Good |
| EPN-YAP1 | Aberr. 11q | Classic/Anaplastic (WHO II-III) | Infancy to childhood | >F | Good | |
| EPN-RELA | Aberr. 11q | Classic/Anaplastic (WHO II-III) | Infancy to childhood | >M | Poor | |
| Posterior fossa (PF) | SE | Balanced | Sub-ependymoma (WHO I) | Adulthood | >M | Good |
| EPN-A | Balanced | Classic/Anaplastic (WHO II-III) | Infancy | >M | Poor | |
| EPN-B | CIN | Classic/Anaplastic (WHO II-III) | Childhood to Adulthood | >F | Good | |
| Spinal (SP) | SE | 6q del. | Sub-ependymoma (WHO I) | Childhood to Adulthood | M = F | Good |
| MPE | CIN | Mixopapillary Ependymoma (WHO I) | Adulthood | M = F | Good | |
| EPN | CIN | Classic/Anaplastic (WHO II-III) | Adulthood | >M | Good |
SE = subependymoma; EPN = ependymoma; MPE = mixopapilalry ependymoma; M = males; F = females.
Important studies evaluating the role of surgery in ependymoma patients. IT: infratentorial; ST: supratentorial. GTR: gross total resection; STR: subtotal resection; y = years; NA = not available.
| Study | N. | Location | Grading | EOR | OS | PFS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Varma, 2018 [ | 13 | IT 61.5% | I | GTR 92% STR 8% | NA | NA |
| Song, 2017 [ | 53 | IT 64.2% | II 66% | GTR 54.7% STR 45.3% | 5 y 82.5%, | NA |
| Dutzmann 2013 [ | 64 | IT 35.6% | I 28.1% | GTR 76.6% | NA | NA |
| Metellus, 2010 [ | 114 | IT 80.7% | II | GTR 58.7%, STR 41.3% | 5 y 86% | 5 y 74.6% |
| Vitanovics, 2009 [ | 61 | IT 51% | II 65.5% | GTR 60% STR 40% | NA | NA |
| Figarella-Branger, 2007 [ | 216 | IT 66% | II 73% | NA | NA | NA |
| Metellus, 2007 [ | 152 | IT 70% | II 72% | GTR 58.6% STR 41.4%, | 5 y 84.8% | 5 y 63.5% |
| Metellus, 2007 [ | 121 | IT 66% | II 72.7% | GTR 63% STR 37% | 5 y 85% | NA |
| Reni, 2003 [ | 70 | IT 44% | II 77% | GTR grade II 63% | 5 y 67% | NA |
| Donahue, 1998 [ | 10 | IT 80% | not specified | GTR 10% STR 90% | NA | NA |
Figure 2Supratentorial (case 1) and infratentorial (case 2) ependymomas. Case 1: a 50-year-old female patient with a lesion in the frontal horn of the right lateral ventricle: a right fronto-parietal transcortical approach was used to remove the tumor whose histology, based on the WHO classification, was A grade I ependymoma). From left to right: pre-operative CT scan; intraoperative image of the tumor under white light microscope illumination; blue light illumination using 5-ALA: in this case the tumor was not fluorescent; and finally, the post-operative CT scan. Case 2: a 29-year-old female patient with an intraventricular lesion in the IV ventricle, with moderate contrast enhancement in T1-weighted MRI scan. The histological diagnosis revealed a grade III ependymoma (WHO 2016).
Most relevant studies investigating the role of RT in ependymal tumors. RT = radiation therapy; PFS = progression-free survival; OS = overall survival; NA = not available; pts = patients.
| Study | Trial Design | N° of pts | Median Age (Range) | Grading and Tumor Site | N. of pts Treated with RT | Efficacy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Metellus P et al., 2010 [ | Retrospective | 114 | 48 | WHO grade II intracranial ependymoma | 35 | 5-year OS: |
| Nuño M et al., 2016 [ | Retrospective; USA National Cancer Database | 1055 Grade II | 44 | WHO grade II/III supratentorial and posterior fossa ependymoma | 662 | RT does not seem to have an impact on overall survival |
| Deng X et al., 2020 [ | Retrospective; | 560 Grade II | Range | Intracranial WHO grade II/III ependymoma | 422 | RT does not seem to have an impact on overall survival |
| Prabhu RS, et al., 2020 [ | Retrospective; SEER database | 1787 | 45–50 | WHO grade II/III ependymoma | 856 | 3- and 5-year OS with adjuvant RT was 83.4% and 79.3% versus 86.4% and 81.8% with observation. |
| Woo Wee et al., 2020 [ | Retrospective; | 172 | NA | WHO grade II/III ependymoma | 110 | 5- and 10-year OS rates were 76.6%/71.0%, respectively. PORT significantly elevated the rates of PFS ( |
Summary of studies and case reports analyzing the impact of chemotherapy in recurrent adult intracranial and spinal ependymomas. PFS = progression-free survival; OS = overall survival; ST = supratentorial; IF = infratentorial; SP = spinal; CR = complete response; PR = partial response; MR = minimal response; RT = radiation therapy; TMZ = temozolomide; PCV = procarbazine, carmustine, vincristine; MPE = myxo-papillary ependymoma.
| N | Year | Study Type | Age | Chemotherapy | Grade (%) | Tumor Location (%) | Response Rate (%) | Median PFS (Months) | Median OS (Months) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recurrent intracranial ependymomas | ||||||||||
| Gilbert [ | 50 | 2021 | Phase II | 43.5 | Dose-dense TMZ + lapatinib | I (16%) | ST (30%) | CR (4%) | 7.8 | 27 |
| Gramatzki [ | 17 | 2016 | Retrospective | 28 | TMZ, PCV, platinum-based, epirubicine plus ifosfamide | II (23%) | ST (65%) | CR (6%) | 6 | 41 |
| Ruda [ | 18 | 2016 | Retrospective | 42 | TMZ | II (45%) | ST (61%) | CR (5%) | 9.7 | 30.5 |
| Lombardi [ | 1 | 2013 | Case report | 45 | Cisplatin + TMZ | III | ST | PR | 9 | 11 |
| Freyschlag [ | 1 | 2011 | Case report | 25 | TMZ | III | ST | PR | 5+ | 5+ |
| Green [ | 8 | 2009 | Retrospective | 40 | Bevacizumab alone or in combination | II (38%) | ST (75%) | PR (75%) | 6.4 | 9.4 |
| Chamberlain [ | 25 | 2009 | Retrospective | 49 | TMZ in platinum-refractory tumors | II (100%) | ST (100%) | CR (0%) | 2 | 3 |
| Rehman [ | 1 | 2006 | Case report | 24 | TMZ | I | IT | CR | 120 | 120 |
| Brandes [ | 28 | 2005 | Retrospective | 44 | Cisplatin-based (46%) | II (61%) | ST (54%) | CR (7%) | 9.9 | 40.7 |
| Gornet [ | 14 | 1999 | Retrospective | 31 | Platinum-based | II (50%) | ST (37%) | PR (12%) | 3–10 | - |
| Recurrent spinal cord ependymomas | ||||||||||
| Gilbert [ | 50 | 2021 | Prospective | 43.5 | Dose-dense TMZ + lapatinib | I (16%) | ST (30%) | CR (4%) | 7.8 | 27 |
| Tapia Rico [ | 1 | 2020 | Case report | 25 | Tislelizumab (anti-PD1) | Metastatic MPE | SP | Stable disease | 18 | 28+ |
| Fujiwara [ | 1 | 2018 | Case report | 26 | TMZ | Metastatic MPE | Spinal | CR | 72+ | 72+ |
| Lorgis [ | 2 | 2012 | Retrospective | 45 | Cisplatin, cyclophosphamide, bevacizumab | III (100%) | SP (100%) | PR (100%) | 12+ | 12+ |
| Kim [ | 2 | 2011 | Case report | 26 | RT + TMZ | III (50%) | SP (100%) | - | 3–36+ | 12–39+ |
| Chamberlain [ | 10 | 2002 | Prospective pilot study | 30 | Etoposide | Low-grade (100%) | SP (100%) | PR (20%) | 15 | 17.5 |