Cargando…

The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series

INTRODUCTION: Meningiomas are the most common primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor. They are most often benign, but a subset of these can behave aggressively. Current World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines classify meningiomas into three grades based on the histologic findings and presence...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roehrkasse, Amanda M., Peterson, Jo Elle G., Fung, Kar-Ming, Pelargos, Panayiotis E., Dunn, Ian F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8921552/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35299730
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.846232
_version_ 1784669347248078848
author Roehrkasse, Amanda M.
Peterson, Jo Elle G.
Fung, Kar-Ming
Pelargos, Panayiotis E.
Dunn, Ian F.
author_facet Roehrkasse, Amanda M.
Peterson, Jo Elle G.
Fung, Kar-Ming
Pelargos, Panayiotis E.
Dunn, Ian F.
author_sort Roehrkasse, Amanda M.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Meningiomas are the most common primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor. They are most often benign, but a subset of these can behave aggressively. Current World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines classify meningiomas into three grades based on the histologic findings and presence or absence of brain invasion. These grades are intended to guide treatment, but meningiomas can behave inconsistently with regard to their assigned histopathological grade, influencing patient expectations and management. Advanced molecular profiling of meningiomas has led to the proposal of alternative molecular grading schemes that have shown superior predictive power. These include methylation patterns, copy number alterations, and mutually exclusive driver mutations affecting oncogenes, including BAP1, CDKN2A/B, and the TERT promoter, which are associated with particularly aggressive tumor biology. Despite the evident clinical value, advanced molecular profiling methods are not widely incorporated in routine clinical practice for meningiomas. OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree of concordance between the molecular profile of meningiomas and the histopathologic WHO classification, the current method of predicting meningioma behavior. METHODS: In a two-year single-institution experience, we used commercially available resources to determine molecular profiles of all resected meningiomas. Copy number aberrations and oncogenic driver mutations were identified and compared with the histopathologic grade. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one total meningioma cases were included for analysis (85.4% WHO grade 1, 13.3% WHO grade 2, and 1.3% grade 3). Chromosomal analysis of 124 of these samples showed that 29% of WHO grade 1 tumor featured copy number profiles consistent with higher grade meningioma, and 25% of WHO grade 2 meningiomas had copy number profiles consistent with less aggressive tumors. Furthermore, 8% harbored mutations in TERT, CDKN2A/B, or BAP1 of which 6% occurred in grade 1 meningiomas. CONCLUSIONS: Routine advanced molecular profiling of all resected meningiomas using commercially available resources allowed for identification of a significant number of meningiomas whose molecular profiles were inconsistent with WHO grade. Our work shows the clinical value of integrating routine molecular profiling with histopathologic grading to guide clinical decision making.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8921552
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89215522022-03-16 The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series Roehrkasse, Amanda M. Peterson, Jo Elle G. Fung, Kar-Ming Pelargos, Panayiotis E. Dunn, Ian F. Front Oncol Oncology INTRODUCTION: Meningiomas are the most common primary central nervous system (CNS) tumor. They are most often benign, but a subset of these can behave aggressively. Current World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines classify meningiomas into three grades based on the histologic findings and presence or absence of brain invasion. These grades are intended to guide treatment, but meningiomas can behave inconsistently with regard to their assigned histopathological grade, influencing patient expectations and management. Advanced molecular profiling of meningiomas has led to the proposal of alternative molecular grading schemes that have shown superior predictive power. These include methylation patterns, copy number alterations, and mutually exclusive driver mutations affecting oncogenes, including BAP1, CDKN2A/B, and the TERT promoter, which are associated with particularly aggressive tumor biology. Despite the evident clinical value, advanced molecular profiling methods are not widely incorporated in routine clinical practice for meningiomas. OBJECTIVE: To assess the degree of concordance between the molecular profile of meningiomas and the histopathologic WHO classification, the current method of predicting meningioma behavior. METHODS: In a two-year single-institution experience, we used commercially available resources to determine molecular profiles of all resected meningiomas. Copy number aberrations and oncogenic driver mutations were identified and compared with the histopathologic grade. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-one total meningioma cases were included for analysis (85.4% WHO grade 1, 13.3% WHO grade 2, and 1.3% grade 3). Chromosomal analysis of 124 of these samples showed that 29% of WHO grade 1 tumor featured copy number profiles consistent with higher grade meningioma, and 25% of WHO grade 2 meningiomas had copy number profiles consistent with less aggressive tumors. Furthermore, 8% harbored mutations in TERT, CDKN2A/B, or BAP1 of which 6% occurred in grade 1 meningiomas. CONCLUSIONS: Routine advanced molecular profiling of all resected meningiomas using commercially available resources allowed for identification of a significant number of meningiomas whose molecular profiles were inconsistent with WHO grade. Our work shows the clinical value of integrating routine molecular profiling with histopathologic grading to guide clinical decision making. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8921552/ /pubmed/35299730 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.846232 Text en Copyright © 2022 Roehrkasse, Peterson, Fung, Pelargos and Dunn https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Oncology
Roehrkasse, Amanda M.
Peterson, Jo Elle G.
Fung, Kar-Ming
Pelargos, Panayiotis E.
Dunn, Ian F.
The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series
title The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series
title_full The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series
title_fullStr The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series
title_full_unstemmed The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series
title_short The Discrepancy Between Standard Histologic WHO Grading of Meningioma and Molecular Profile: A Single Institution Series
title_sort discrepancy between standard histologic who grading of meningioma and molecular profile: a single institution series
topic Oncology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8921552/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35299730
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.846232
work_keys_str_mv AT roehrkasseamandam thediscrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT petersonjoelleg thediscrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT fungkarming thediscrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT pelargospanayiotise thediscrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT dunnianf thediscrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT roehrkasseamandam discrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT petersonjoelleg discrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT fungkarming discrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT pelargospanayiotise discrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries
AT dunnianf discrepancybetweenstandardhistologicwhogradingofmeningiomaandmolecularprofileasingleinstitutionseries