Advertisement

Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports

, Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 302–307 | Cite as

Clinical Implications of Molecular Neuropathology and Biomarkers for Malignant Glioma

  • Ghazaleh TabatabaiEmail author
  • Monika Hegi
  • Roger Stupp
  • Michael Weller
Neuro-Oncology (LE Abrey, Section Editor)

Abstract

Malignant gliomas are currently diagnosed based on morphological criteria and graded according to the World Health Organization classification of primary brain tumors. This algorithm of diagnosis and classification provides clinicians with an estimated prognosis of the natural course of the disease. It does not reflect the expected response to specific treatments beyond surgery (eg, radiotherapy or alkylating chemotherapy). Clinical experience has revealed that gliomas sharing similar histomorphological criteria might indeed have different clinical courses and exhibit highly heterogenous responses to treatments. This was very impressively demonstrated first for oligodendrogliomas. The presence or lack of combined deletions of the chromosomal segments 1p/19q was associated with different benefit from radiotherapy and chemotherapy. We review current molecular markers for malignant gliomas and discuss their current and future impact on clinical neuro-oncology.

Keywords

Glioma Molecular diagnostics Biomarker 

Notes

Disclosure

Conflicts of interest: G. Tabatabai: has received honoraria for advisory boards from MSD and Roche.; M. Hegi: is a consultant for Merck Serono, MDxHealth, and MSD; has received honoraria for lectures or advisory boards from Merck Serono, MDxHealth, Shering Plough/MSD, and Roche; and has received grant support from AstraZeneca; R. Stupp: has served on and received honoraria for advisory boards to Merck Serono (EMD), MSD (Merck & Co), Roche, and MDxHealth; M. Weller: has received research grants from Merck Serono and Roche and honoraria for lectures or advisory boards from Magforce, MSD, Merck Serono, and Roche.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Louis DN, Ohgaki H, Wiestler OD, et al. The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system. Acta Neuropathol. 2007;114:97–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Batchelor TT, Duda DG, di Tomaso E, et al. Phase II study of cediranib, an oral pan-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2817–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Preusser M, Charles Janzer R, Felsberg J, et al. Anti-O6-methylguanine-methyltransferase (MGMT) immunohistochemistry in glioblastoma multiforme: observer variability and lack of association with patient survival impede its use as clinical biomarker. Brain Pathol. 2008;18:520–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sciuscio D, Diserens AC, van Dommelen K, et al. Extent and patterns of MGMT promoter methylation in glioblastoma- and respective glioblastoma-derived spheres. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:255–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weller M, Stupp R, Reifenberger G, et al. MGMT promoter methylation in malignant gliomas: ready for personalized medicine? Nat Rev Neurol. 2010;6:39–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:987–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hegi ME, Diserens AC, Gorlia T, et al. MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:997–1003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gilbert MR, Wang M, Aldape KD, et al. RTOG 0525: A randomized phase III trial comparing standard adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ) with a dose-dense (dd) schedule in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM). ASCO Meeting Abstracts. 2011;29:2006.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    • Reifenberger G, Hentschel B, Felsberg J et al. Predictive impact of MGMT promoter methylation in glioblastoma of the elderly. Int J Canc. Journal international du cancer 2011. This study indicates a predictive role of MGMT methylation in elderly patients with glioblastomas. Currently, the role of MGMT in this glioblastoma patient population is further characterized in randomized clinical trials. Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    • Felsberg J, Thon N, Eigenbrod S et al. Promoter methylation and expression of MGMT and the DNA mismatch repair genes MLH1, MSH2, MSH6 and PMS2 in paired primary and recurrent glioblastomas. Int J Canc. Journal international du cancer 2011; 129: 659–670. This study demonstrates that the MGMT status is preserved in recurrent glioblastomas. Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    McLendon R, Friedman A, Bigner D et al. Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways. Nature 2008; 455: 1061–8.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    • Yip S, Miao J, Cahill DP et al. MSH6 mutations arise in glioblastomas during temozolomide therapy and mediate temozolomide resistance. Clin Cancer Res. 2009; 15: 4622–9. Overcoming resistance to temozolomide therapy is a critical question. This study defines a role for the mismatch repair gene MSH6. Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wick W, Hartmann C, Engel C, et al. NOA-04 randomized phase III trial of sequential radiochemotherapy of anaplastic glioma with procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine or temozolomide. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5874–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van den Bent MJ, Dubbink HJ, Sanson M, et al. MGMT promoter methylation is prognostic but not predictive for outcome to adjuvant PCV chemotherapy in anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors: a report from EORTC Brain Tumor Group Study 26951. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5881–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van den Bent MJ, Gravendeel LA, Gorlia T, et al. A hypermethylated phenotype is a better predictor of survival than MGMT methylation in anaplastic oligodendroglial brain tumors: a report from EORTC study 26951. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:7148–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Noushmehr H, Weisenberger DJ, Diefes K, et al. Identification of a CpG island methylator phenotype that defines a distinct subgroup of glioma. Cancer Cell. 2010;17:510–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reifenberger J, Reifenberger G, Liu L, et al. Molecular genetic analysis of oligodendroglial tumors shows preferential allelic deletions on 19q and 1p. Am J Pathol. 1994;145:1175–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Labussiere M, Idbaih A, Wang XW, et al. All the 1p19q codeleted gliomas are mutated on IDH1 or IDH2. Neurology. 2010;74:1886–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jenkins RB, Blair H, Ballman KV, et al. A t(1;19)(q10;p10) mediates the combined deletions of 1p and 19q and predicts a better prognosis of patients with oligodendroglioma. Cancer Res. 2006;66:9852–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weller M, Felsberg J, Hartmann C, et al. Molecular predictors of progression-free and overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a prospective translational study of the German Glioma Network. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5743–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bettegowda C, Agrawal N, Jiao Y, et al. Mutations in CIC and FUBP1 contribute to human oligodendroglioma. Science. 2011;333:1453–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Parsons DW, Jones S, Zhang X, et al. An integrated genomic analysis of human glioblastoma multiforme. Science. 2008;321:1807–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yan H, Bigner DD, Velculescu V, Parsons DW. Mutant metabolic enzymes are at the origin of gliomas. Cancer Res. 2009;69:9157–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nobusawa S, Watanabe T, Kleihues P, Ohgaki H. IDH1 mutations as molecular signature and predictive factor of secondary glioblastomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:6002–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cairncross G, Berkey B, Shaw E, et al. Phase III trial of chemotherapy plus radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone for pure and mixed anaplastic oligodendroglioma: Intergroup Radiation Therapy Oncology Group Trial 9402. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2707–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    van den Bent MJ, Carpentier AF, Brandes AA, et al. Adjuvant procarbazine, lomustine, and vincristine improves progression-free survival but not overall survival in newly diagnosed anaplastic oligodendrogliomas and oligoastrocytomas: a randomized European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2715–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Dang L, White DW, Gross S, et al. Cancer-associated IDH1 mutations produce 2-hydroxyglutarate. Nature. 2009;462:739–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    •• Figueroa ME, Abdel-Wahab O, Lu C et al. Leukemic IDH1 and IDH2 mutations result in a hypermethylation phenotype, disrupt TET2 function, and impair hematopoietic differentiation. Cancer cell 2010; 18: 553–67. This is a very important study demonstrating a connection between metabolics and epigenetics (ie, linking the presence of IDH mutations with hypermethylation). Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Prensner JR, Chinnaiyan AM. Metabolism unhinged: IDH mutations in cancer. Nat Med. 2011;17:291–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Capper D, Simon M, Langhans CD et al. 2-Hydroxyglutarate concentration in serum from patients with gliomas does not correlate with IDH1/2 mutation status or tumor size. Int J Canc. Journal international du cancer 2011.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pope WB, Prins RM, Albert Thomas M et al. Non-invasive detection of 2-hydroxyglutarate and other metabolites in IDH1 mutant glioma patients using magnetic resonance spectroscopy. J Neuro Oncol 2011.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Capper D, Weissert S, Balss J, et al. Characterization of R132H mutation-specific IDH1 antibody binding in brain tumors. Brain Pathol. 2010;20:245–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hartmann C, Hentschel B, Wick W, et al. Patients with IDH1 wild type anaplastic astrocytomas exhibit worse prognosis than IDH1-mutated glioblastomas, and IDH1 mutation status accounts for the unfavorable prognostic effect of higher age: implications for classification of gliomas. Acta Neuropathol. 2010;120:707–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yan H, Parsons DW, Jin G, et al. IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in gliomas. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:765–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    •• Sanson M, Marie Y, Paris S et al. Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 codon 132 mutation is an important prognostic biomarker in gliomas. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 4150–4. This is a very important study indicating that IDH1 codon 132 mutation is closely linked to the genomic profile of the tumor and constitutes an important prognostic marker in gliomas of different WHO grades. Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dubbink HJ, Taal W, van Marion R, et al. IDH1 mutations in low-grade astrocytomas predict survival but not response to temozolomide. Neurology. 2009;73:1792–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Taal W, Dubbink HJ, Zonnenberg CB, et al. First-line temozolomide chemotherapy in progressive low-grade astrocytomas after radiotherapy: molecular characteristics in relation to response. Neuro Oncol. 2011;13:235–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hartmann C, Hentschel B, Tatagiba M, et al. Molecular markers in low-grade gliomas: predictive or prognostic? Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:4588–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    • Hegi ME, Diserens AC, Bady P et al. Pathway analysis of glioblastoma tissue after preoperative treatment with the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor gefitinib--a phase II trial. Mol Canc Therapeut 2011; 10: 1102–12. Preoperative treatment with targeted therapies enables the assessment of target modulation as demonstrated here for gefitinib. Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    van den Bent MJ, Brandes AA, Rampling R, et al. Randomized phase II trial of erlotinib versus temozolomide or carmustine in recurrent glioblastoma: EORTC brain tumor group study 26034. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1268–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Eisenstat DD, Nabors LB, Mason WP, et al. A phase II study of daily afatinib (BIBW 2992) with or without temozolomide (21/28 days) in the treatment of patients with recurrent glioblastoma. ASCO Meeting Abstracts. 2011;29:2010.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sampson JH, Heimberger AB, Archer GE, et al. Immunologic escape after prolonged progression-free survival with epidermal growth factor receptor variant III peptide vaccination in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4722–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ghazaleh Tabatabai
    • 1
    Email author
  • Monika Hegi
    • 2
  • Roger Stupp
    • 2
  • Michael Weller
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of NeurologyUniversity Hospital ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Neurosurgery and Clinical NeurosciencesCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois and University of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations