Adult medulloblastomas are clinically and molecularly understudied due to their rarity. We performed molecular grouping, targeted sequencing, and TERT promoter Sanger sequencing on a cohort of 99 adult medulloblastomas. SHH made up 50% of the cohort, whereas Group 3 (13%) was present in comparable proportion to WNT (19%) and Group 4 (18%). In contrast to paediatric medulloblastomas, molecular groups had no prognostic impact in our adult cohort (p = 0.877). Most frequently mutated genes were TERT (including promoter mutations, mutated in 36% cases), chromatin modifiers KMT2D (31%) and KMT2C (30%), TCF4 (31%), PTCH1 (27%) and DDX3X (24%). Adult WNT patients showed enrichment of TP53 mutations (6/15 WNT cases), and 3/6 TP53-mutant WNT tumours were of large cell/anaplastic histology. Adult SHH medulloblastomas had frequent upstream pathway alterations (PTCH1 and SMO mutations) and few downstream alterations (SUFU mutations, MYCN amplifications). TERT promoter mutations were found in 72% of adult SHH patients, and were restricted to this group. Adult Group 3 tumours lacked hallmark MYC amplifications, but had recurrent mutations in KBTBD4 and NOTCH1. Adult Group 4 tumours harboured recurrent mutations in TCF4 and chromatin modifier genes. Overall, amplifications of MYC and MYCN were rare (3%). Since molecular groups were not prognostic, alternative prognostic markers are needed for adult medulloblastoma. KMT2C mutations were frequently found across molecular groups and were associated with poor survival (p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis identified histological type (p = 0.026), metastasis (p = 0.031) and KMT2C mutational status (p = 0.046) as independent prognosticators in our cohort. In summary, we identified distinct clinical and mutational characteristics of adult medulloblastomas that will inform their risk stratification and treatment.
There have only been rare studies of IDH-mutant primary glioblastomas (IDH-mutant astrocytoma IV); there were one or two studies on secondary glioblastomas. In a cohort of 70 cases, we conducted clinical analysis, methylation profiling, RNA sequencing, targeted sequencing, and TERTp seqeuncing on available FFPE tissues. Median follow-up was 58.2 months (n= 60). IDH-mutant primary glioblastomas had longer median OS (30.4 months) and median PFS (25.9 months) than IDH-mutant secondary glioblastomas as in the literature or established databases. MGMTp methylated cases had better OS (p= 0.001) and it was an independent prognosticator. We previously showed G-CIMP to be an independent prognostic marker for IDH-mutant glioblastomas (NOA 2019). Although CDKN2A deletion was an independent prognostic marker for poorer OS (p= 0.036) and PFS (p= 0.005), MGMTp methylation had a trend of superseding CDKN2A deletion (p= 0.055) for prognostication and G-CIMP subgroups could similarly partially supersede CDKN2A deletion (p= 0.582). Hence, CDKN2A deletion should be supplemented with these two biomarkers for finer prognostication. Targeted sequencing (n= 55) showed that there were more ATRX (35/55, 64%), TP53 (31/55, 56%), KMT2D (18/55, 33%), POLE (11/55, 20%) and MSH6 (7/55, 13%) mutations, but fewer TERTp (3/69, 4%) and PTEN (1/55, 2%) mutations than IDH-wildtype glioblastomas as from literature and databases. CNVs revealed by methylomes (n= 53) and mutations (n= 55) showed that there were more PDGFRA (amplification: 9/53, 17%, mutation: 10/55, 18%) alterations, but fewer MET (amplification: 3/53, 6%, mutation: 4/55, 7%) alterations and hypermutated (6/55, 11%) cases than IDH-mutant secondary glioblastomas from literature. GISTIC analysis revealed amplifications of CCND2, CDK4, MYC, and PDGFRA, deletions of CDKN2A, RB1, and chromosome 10q to be significant CNVs (q< 0.05). There were few EGFR amplifications (2/53, 4%), which was different from regular glioblastomas. RNA sequencing (n= 42) showed few fusions (4/42, 10%), which was different from IDH-mutant secondary glioblastomas.
Objective We aimed to characterise glioblastomas of adolescents and young adults (AYAs) that were isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild type (wt) and H3wt. Materials and Methods Fifty such patients (aged 16–32) were studied by methylation profiling, targeted sequencing and targeted RNA‐seq. Results Tumours predominantly clustered into three methylation classes according to the terminology of Capper et al. (2018): (anaplastic) pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma (PXA) (21 cases), GBM_midline (15 cases) and glioblastoma RTK/mesenchymal (seven cases). Two cases clustered with ANA_PA, four cases with LGG classes and one with GBM_MYCN. Only fifteen cases reached a calibrated score >0.84 when the cases were uploaded to DKFZ Classifier. GBM_midline‐clustered tumours had a poorer overall survival (OS) compared with the PXA‐clustered tumours (p = 0.030). LGG‐clustered cases had a significantly better survival than GBM_midline‐clustered tumours and glioblastoma RTK/mesenchymal‐clustered tumours. Only 13/21 (62%) of PXA‐clustered cases were BRAF V600E mutated. Most GBM_midline‐clustered cases were not located in the midline. GBM_midline‐clustered cases were characterised by PDGFRA amplification/mutation (73.3%), mutations of mismatch repair genes (40.0%), and all showed H3K27me3 and EZH1P loss, and an unmethylated MGMT promoter. Across the whole cohort, MGMT promoter methylation and wt TERT promoter were favourable prognosticators. Mismatch repair gene mutations were poor prognosticators and together with methylation class and MGMT methylation, maintained their significance in multivariate analyses. BRAF mutation was a good prognosticator in the PXA‐clustered tumours. Conclusion Methylation profiling is a useful tool in the diagnosis and prognostication of AYA glioblastomas, and the methylation classes have distinct molecular characteristics. The usual molecular diagnostic criteria for adult IDHwt glioblastoma should be applied with caution within the AYA age group.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.