In response to major changes in diagnostic algorithms and the publication of mature results from various large clinical trials, the European Association of Neuro-Oncology (EANO) recognized the need to provide updated guidelines for the diagnosis and management of adult patients with diffuse gliomas. Through these evidence-based guidelines, a task force of EANO provides recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of adult patients with diffuse gliomas. The diagnostic component is based on the 2016 update of the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System and the subsequent recommendations of the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumour Taxonomy — Not Officially WHO (cIMPACT-NOW). With regard to therapy, we formulated recommendations based on the results from the latest practice-changing clinical trials and also provide guidance for neuropathological and neuroradiological assessment. In these guidelines, we define the role of the major treatment modalities of surgery, radiotherapy and systemic pharmacotherapy, covering current advances and cognizant that unnecessary interventions and expenses should be avoided. This document is intended to be a source of reference for professionals involved in the management of adult patients with diffuse gliomas, for patients and caregivers, and for health-care providers.

Association for NeuroOncology (EANO) (2017). European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) guideline on the diagnosis and treatment of adult astrocytic and oligodendroglial gliomas. Lancet Oncology, 18(6):e315-e329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ S1470-2045(17) Implementing this guideline requires multidisciplinary and multiprofessional structures of care and defined processes of diagnosis and treatment.

This guideline provides recommendations for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for patients with malignant gliomas. We differentiate evidence-based standards from reasonable options or non-evidence-based measures that should no longer be considered. The recommendations herein should provide a framework and assurance for the choice of diagnostic procedures and therapeutic measures and aim to reduce complications from unnecessary treatment and cost. The guideline contributes to a critical appreciation of concurrent drugs with a focus on the controlled use of anticonvulsants and steroids. It should serve as a guideline for all professionals involved in the diagnostics and care of glioma patients and also as a source of knowledge for insurance companies and other institutions involved in the cost regulation of cancer care in Europe. Implementation of the recommendations summarised here will need interdisciplinary structures of care for patients with brain tumours and structured processes of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. AF and DF report no conflicts of interest. FundingThe preparation of this guideline was not funded. The members of the task force did not receive compensation for their participation. 5 SummaryThis guideline provides recommendations for the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures for patients with malignant gliomas. It differentiates evidence-based standards from reasonable options or non-evidence-based measures that should no longer be considered. The recommendations herein shall provide a framework and assurance for the choice of diagnostic procedures and therapeutic measures and aim to reduce complications from unnecessary treatment and cost. The guideline will contribute to a critical appreciation of concurrent medications with a focus on the controlled use of anticonvulsants and steroids. It shall serve as a guideline for all professionals involved in the diagnostics and care of glioma patients and also as a source of knowledge for insurance companies and other institutions involved in the cost regulation of cancer care in Europe. Implementation of the recommendations summarized here will require interdisciplinary structures of care for brain tumor patients and structured processes of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. Key wordsAnaplastic, glioma, glioblastoma, surgery, radiotherapy, temozolomide, bevacizumab Search strategy and selection criteriaThis guideline was prepared by a task force assembled by the Executive Committee of the European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) in 2013. The task force was designed to represent the different disciplines involved in the diagnosis and care of malignant glioma patients as well as to reflect the multinational composition of EANO.References for this review were identified through searches of PubMed with the search terms "glioma", "anaplastic", "glioblastoma", "trial", "clinical", "radiotherapy" 6 and "chemotherapy" from January 2005 to January 2013. Articles were also identified through searches of the authors` own files. Onl...

Purpose The prognostic value of genetic alterations characteristic of glioblastoma in patients treated according to present standards of care is unclear. Patients and Methods Three hundred one patients with glioblastoma were prospectively recruited between October 2004 and December 2006 at the clinical centers of the German Glioma Network. Two hundred fifty-eight patients had radiotherapy, 199 patients had temozolomide, 189 had both, and seven had another chemotherapy as the initial treatment. The tumors were investigated for TP53 mutation, p53 immunoreactivity, epidermal growth factor receptor, cyclin-dependent kinase CDK 4 or murine double minute 2 amplification, CDKN2A homozygous deletion, allelic losses on chromosome arms 1p, 9p, 10q, and 19q, O6-methylguanine methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation, and isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations. Results Median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 6.8 and 12.5 months. Multivariate analysis revealed younger age, higher performance score, MGMT promoter methylation, and temozolomide radiochemotherapy as independent factors associated with longer OS. MGMT promoter methylation was associated with longer PFS (relative risk [RR], 0.5; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.68; P < .001) and OS (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.54; P < .001) in patients receiving temozolomide. IDH1 mutations were associated with prolonged PFS (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.91; P = .028) and a trend for prolonged OS (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.15 to 1.19; P = .10). No other molecular factor was associated with outcome. Conclusion Molecular changes associated with gliomagenesis do not predict response to therapy in glioblastoma patients managed according to current standards of care. MGMT promoter methylation and IDH1 mutational status allow for stratification into prognostically distinct subgroups.

No abstract

These joint practice guidelines, or procedure standards, were developed collaboratively by the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI), the European Association of Neurooncology (EANO), and the working group for Response Assessment in Neurooncology with PET (PET-RANO). Brain PET imaging is being increasingly used to supplement MRI in the clinical management of glioma. The aim of these standards/guidelines is to assist nuclear medicine practitioners in recommending, performing, interpreting and reporting the results of brain PET imaging in patients with glioma to achieve a high-quality imaging standard for PET using FDG and the radiolabelled amino acids MET, FET and FDOPA. This will help promote the appropriate use of PET imaging and contribute to evidence-based medicine that may improve the diagnostic impact of this technique in neurooncological practice. The present document replaces a former version of the guidelines published in 2006 (Vander Borght et al. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 33:1374–80, 2006), and supplements a recent evidence-based recommendation by the PET-RANO working group and EANO on the clinical use of PET imaging in patients with glioma (Albert et al. Neuro Oncol. 18:1199–208, 2016). The information provided should be taken in the context of local conditions and regulations.

Based on the ratio-based method, a statistically significant difference was found between LG and HG gliomas. Due to the interindividual variability, however, no reliable individual grading was possible. In contrast, dynamic evaluation allowed LG and HG gliomas to be differentiated with high diagnostic power and, thus, should supplement the conventional method.

Cerebral gliomas of World Health Organization (WHO) grade II and III represent a major challenge in terms of histological classification and clinical management. Here, we asked whether largescale genomic and transcriptomic profiling improves the definition of prognostically distinct entities. We performed microarray-based genome-and transcriptome-wide analyses of primary tumor samples from a prospective German Glioma Network cohort of 137 patients with cerebral gliomas, including 61 WHO grade II and 76 WHO grade III tumors. Integrative bioinformatic analyses were employed to define molecular subgroups, which were then related to histology, molecular biomarkers, including isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 or 2 (IDH1/2) mutation, 1p/19q co-deletion and telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) promoter mutations, and patient outcome. Genomic profiling identified five distinct glioma groups, including three IDH1/2 mutant and two IDH1/2 wild-type groups. Expression profiling revealed evidence for eight transcriptionally different groups (five IDH1/2 mutant, three IDH1/2 wild type), which were only partially linked to the genomic groups. Correlation of DNA-based molecular stratification with clinical outcome allowed to define three major prognostic groups with characteristic genomic aberrations. The best prognosis was found in patients with IDH1/2 mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted tumors. Patients with IDH1/2 wild-type gliomas and glioblastoma-like genomic alterations, including gain on chromosome arm 7q (+7q), loss on chromosome arm 10q (-10q), TERT promoter mutation and oncogene amplification, displayed the worst outcome. Intermediate survival was seen in patients with IDH1/2 mutant, but 1p/19q intact, mostly astrocytic gliomas, and in patients with IDH1/2 wild-type gliomas lacking the +7q/-10q genotype and TERT promoter mutation. This molecular subgrouping stratified patients into prognostically distinct groups better than histological classification. Addition of gene expression data to this genomic classifier did not further improve prognostic stratification. In summary, DNA-based molecular profiling of WHO grade II and III gliomas distinguishes biologically distinct tumor groups and provides prognostically relevant information beyond histological classification as well as IDH1/2 mutation and 1p/19q co-deletion status.