Cargando…

EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication

The identification and validation of prognostic and diagnostic biomarkers is a key element of The SIOP Ependymoma II trial, realised through the Biomarkers of Ependymoma in Children and Adolescents study (BIOMECA). BIOMECA aims to identify and validate biomarkers for prediction of outcome whilst enh...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chapman, Rebecca, Ghasemi, David R, LeBlond, Pierre, Witt, Hendrik, Grill, Jacques, Kilday, John-Paul, Modena, Piergiorgio, Varlet, Pascale, Tauziede-Espariat, Arnault, Haberler, Christine, Buttarelli, Francesca, Giangaspero, Felice, Paine, Simon M L, Jacques, Thomas S, Scott, Ian, Andreiuolo, Felipe, Pietsch, Torsten, Massimino, Maura, Grundy, Richard, Pajtler, Kristian W, Ritzmann, Timothy A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9164839/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noac079.160
_version_ 1784720238223294464
author Chapman, Rebecca
Ghasemi, David R
LeBlond, Pierre
Witt, Hendrik
Grill, Jacques
Kilday, John-Paul
Modena, Piergiorgio
Varlet, Pascale
Tauziede-Espariat, Arnault
Haberler, Christine
Buttarelli, Francesca
Giangaspero, Felice
Paine, Simon M L
Jacques, Thomas S
Scott, Ian
Andreiuolo, Felipe
Pietsch, Torsten
Massimino, Maura
Grundy, Richard
Pajtler, Kristian W
Ritzmann, Timothy A
author_facet Chapman, Rebecca
Ghasemi, David R
LeBlond, Pierre
Witt, Hendrik
Grill, Jacques
Kilday, John-Paul
Modena, Piergiorgio
Varlet, Pascale
Tauziede-Espariat, Arnault
Haberler, Christine
Buttarelli, Francesca
Giangaspero, Felice
Paine, Simon M L
Jacques, Thomas S
Scott, Ian
Andreiuolo, Felipe
Pietsch, Torsten
Massimino, Maura
Grundy, Richard
Pajtler, Kristian W
Ritzmann, Timothy A
author_sort Chapman, Rebecca
collection PubMed
description The identification and validation of prognostic and diagnostic biomarkers is a key element of The SIOP Ependymoma II trial, realised through the Biomarkers of Ependymoma in Children and Adolescents study (BIOMECA). BIOMECA aims to identify and validate biomarkers for prediction of outcome whilst enhancing stratification for the next generation of ependymoma trials. We outline our findings from the first 147 consecutive BIOMECA cases (posterior fossa, PF=111; supratentorial, ST=32; spinal, SP=4). We compared various methods for biomarker assessment, across six European laboratories to determine key analysis methods. Methods included: methylation-based classification (EPIC 850K DNA methylation array) (n=141); immunohistochemistry (IHC) for nuclear p65-RELA (n=32), H3K27me3 (n=115), and Tenascin-C (TNC) (n=147); copy number (CN) analysis by FISH, MLPA (1q, CDKN2A) (n=147), and MIP (molecular inversion probe) and DNA methylation array (1q, CDKN2A, 6q, 11q, 13q, 22q) (n=141); analysis of ZFTA- and YAP1-fusions by RT-PCR, sequencing, Nanostring assays and break-apart FISH (n=32). Using DNA methylation-based classification, 91% (n=101/111) of PF cases classified as PF ependymoma group A (PFA) and 69% (n=22/32) of ST cases as ST ependymoma, ZFTA fusion-positive (ZFTA). Most PFAs demonstrated inter-centre agreement for loss of H3K27me3, and were TNC positive, representing surrogate markers for PFA identification. Combinations of p65-RELA IHC, FISH analysis, and RNA-based methods were suitable to identify ZFTA- and YAP1- fused ST ependymomas. Predictive CN alterations were identified by high-resolution, quantitative MIP technology.The integration of histopathology assessment and molecular typing is now critical as the updated 2021 WHO CNS5 classification of ependymomas lists seven molecularly distinct entities. This study highlights the importance of evaluating different methods in a prospective trial cohort. Here, advanced molecular techniques represent powerful tools for the classification of ependymoma entities (DNA methylation array) and for the detection of CN alterations (MIP) and specific fusions, enabling the correct classification and identification of prognostic markers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9164839
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91648392022-06-05 EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication Chapman, Rebecca Ghasemi, David R LeBlond, Pierre Witt, Hendrik Grill, Jacques Kilday, John-Paul Modena, Piergiorgio Varlet, Pascale Tauziede-Espariat, Arnault Haberler, Christine Buttarelli, Francesca Giangaspero, Felice Paine, Simon M L Jacques, Thomas S Scott, Ian Andreiuolo, Felipe Pietsch, Torsten Massimino, Maura Grundy, Richard Pajtler, Kristian W Ritzmann, Timothy A Neuro Oncol Ependymoma The identification and validation of prognostic and diagnostic biomarkers is a key element of The SIOP Ependymoma II trial, realised through the Biomarkers of Ependymoma in Children and Adolescents study (BIOMECA). BIOMECA aims to identify and validate biomarkers for prediction of outcome whilst enhancing stratification for the next generation of ependymoma trials. We outline our findings from the first 147 consecutive BIOMECA cases (posterior fossa, PF=111; supratentorial, ST=32; spinal, SP=4). We compared various methods for biomarker assessment, across six European laboratories to determine key analysis methods. Methods included: methylation-based classification (EPIC 850K DNA methylation array) (n=141); immunohistochemistry (IHC) for nuclear p65-RELA (n=32), H3K27me3 (n=115), and Tenascin-C (TNC) (n=147); copy number (CN) analysis by FISH, MLPA (1q, CDKN2A) (n=147), and MIP (molecular inversion probe) and DNA methylation array (1q, CDKN2A, 6q, 11q, 13q, 22q) (n=141); analysis of ZFTA- and YAP1-fusions by RT-PCR, sequencing, Nanostring assays and break-apart FISH (n=32). Using DNA methylation-based classification, 91% (n=101/111) of PF cases classified as PF ependymoma group A (PFA) and 69% (n=22/32) of ST cases as ST ependymoma, ZFTA fusion-positive (ZFTA). Most PFAs demonstrated inter-centre agreement for loss of H3K27me3, and were TNC positive, representing surrogate markers for PFA identification. Combinations of p65-RELA IHC, FISH analysis, and RNA-based methods were suitable to identify ZFTA- and YAP1- fused ST ependymomas. Predictive CN alterations were identified by high-resolution, quantitative MIP technology.The integration of histopathology assessment and molecular typing is now critical as the updated 2021 WHO CNS5 classification of ependymomas lists seven molecularly distinct entities. This study highlights the importance of evaluating different methods in a prospective trial cohort. Here, advanced molecular techniques represent powerful tools for the classification of ependymoma entities (DNA methylation array) and for the detection of CN alterations (MIP) and specific fusions, enabling the correct classification and identification of prognostic markers. Oxford University Press 2022-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9164839/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noac079.160 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Ependymoma
Chapman, Rebecca
Ghasemi, David R
LeBlond, Pierre
Witt, Hendrik
Grill, Jacques
Kilday, John-Paul
Modena, Piergiorgio
Varlet, Pascale
Tauziede-Espariat, Arnault
Haberler, Christine
Buttarelli, Francesca
Giangaspero, Felice
Paine, Simon M L
Jacques, Thomas S
Scott, Ian
Andreiuolo, Felipe
Pietsch, Torsten
Massimino, Maura
Grundy, Richard
Pajtler, Kristian W
Ritzmann, Timothy A
EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication
title EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication
title_full EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication
title_fullStr EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication
title_full_unstemmed EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication
title_short EPEN-24. Biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (BIOMECA): Systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication
title_sort epen-24. biological markers of ependymoma in children and adolescents (biomeca): systematic comparison of methods for the precise evaluation of biomarkers for ependymoma diagnosis and prognostication
topic Ependymoma
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9164839/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noac079.160
work_keys_str_mv AT chapmanrebecca epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT ghasemidavidr epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT leblondpierre epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT witthendrik epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT grilljacques epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT kildayjohnpaul epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT modenapiergiorgio epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT varletpascale epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT tauziedeespariatarnault epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT haberlerchristine epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT buttarellifrancesca epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT giangasperofelice epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT painesimonml epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT jacquesthomass epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT scottian epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT andreiuolofelipe epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT pietschtorsten epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT massiminomaura epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT grundyrichard epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT pajtlerkristianw epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication
AT ritzmanntimothya epen24biologicalmarkersofependymomainchildrenandadolescentsbiomecasystematiccomparisonofmethodsforthepreciseevaluationofbiomarkersforependymomadiagnosisandprognostication