2021
DOI: 10.1186/s13148-021-01085-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DNA methylation profiling for molecular classification of adult diffuse lower-grade gliomas

Abstract: Background DNA methylation profiling has facilitated and improved the classification of a wide variety of tumors of the central nervous system. In this study, we investigated the potential utility of DNA methylation profiling to achieve molecular diagnosis in adult primary diffuse lower-grade glioma (dLGG) according to WHO 2016 classification system. We also evaluated whether methylation profiling could provide improved molecular characterization and identify prognostic differences beyond the c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
28
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

6
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
1
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our cohort, the methylation profiles of only a small percentage of cases (30%) when uploaded to the DKFZ Classifier reached a calibration score of >0.84. The use of methylation profiling in diagnostic situations can be tumour‐type dependent, but it has been shown to be a very useful tool in diagnostic practice for brain tumours in many studies [57–62]. In our cohort, the tSNE assignment of clusters was useful, and the other genetic findings did not differ much between tumours with high (>0.84) and without high (<0.84) calibrated scores.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…In our cohort, the methylation profiles of only a small percentage of cases (30%) when uploaded to the DKFZ Classifier reached a calibration score of >0.84. The use of methylation profiling in diagnostic situations can be tumour‐type dependent, but it has been shown to be a very useful tool in diagnostic practice for brain tumours in many studies [57–62]. In our cohort, the tSNE assignment of clusters was useful, and the other genetic findings did not differ much between tumours with high (>0.84) and without high (<0.84) calibrated scores.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 70%
“…The histopathological evaluation was made in accordance with the WHO criteria valid at the time of surgery and reclassified according to the WHO classification of 2021. Molecular analysis of IDH -mutation, 1p/19q codeletion, and homozygous deletion of CDKN2A/B were performed as previously described ( 22 ). Immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded sections with antibodies against Ki67 to detect the fraction of proliferating cells in the tumor was performed as described earlier ( 23 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tumors that were previously classified according to WHO 2007 were reclassified according to the WHO 2016 criteria for the purpose of the study. Reclassification according to the WHO 2016 CNS classification system, based on IDH mutation and 1p/19q codeletion status, was performed as previously described by Ferreyra Vega et al 38 The new classification system from 2021 did not change the nomenclature further. 39 …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%