TERT promoter mutations and polymorphisms as prognostic factors in primary glioblastoma TERT promoter mutations and polymorphisms as prognostic factors in primary glioblastoma

Glioma O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation status informs clinical decision making. Worldwide different methods and cutoff levels are used, which can lead to discordant methylation results. We conducted an international survey to clarify which methods are regularly used and why. We also explored opinions regarding international consensus on methods and cutoff. The survey had 152 respondents from 25 countries. MGMT methylation status is determined for all glioblastomas in 37% of laboratories. The most common methods are methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (msPCR) (37%) and pyrosequencing (34%). A method is selected for simplicity (56%), cost-effectiveness (50%), and reproducibility of results (52%). For sequencing, the number of CpG sites analyzed varies from 1–3 up to more than 16. For 50% of laboratories, the company producing the kit determines which CpG sites are examined, whereas 33% select the sites themselves. Selection of cutoff is equally distributed among a cutoff defined in the literature, by the local laboratory, or by the outside laboratory performing the analysis. This cutoff varies, reported from 1% to 30%, and in 1 laboratory tumor is determined as methylated in case of 1 methylated CpG site of 17 analyzed. Some report tumors as unmethylated or weakly vs highly methylated. An international consensus on MGMT methylation method and cutoff is warranted by 66% and 76% of respondents, respectively. The method preferred would be msPCR (45%) or pyrosequencing (42%), whereas 18% suggest next-generation sequencing. Although analysis of MGMT methylation status is routine, there is controversy regarding laboratory methods and cutoff level. Most respondents favor development of international consensus guidelines.

Introduction: Pheochromocytomas are neuroendocrine tumors of the adrenal glands. Up to 40% of the cases are caused by germline mutations in one of at least 15 susceptibility genes, making them the human neoplasms with the highest degree of heritability. Recurrent somatic alterations are found in about 50% of the more common sporadic tumors with NF1 being the most common mutated gene (20–25%). In many sporadic tumors, however, a genetic explanation is still lacking.Materials and methods: We investigated the genomic landscape of sporadic pheochromocytomas with whole‐exome sequencing of 16 paired tumor and normal DNA samples and extended confirmation analysis in 2 additional cohorts comprising a total of 80 sporadic pheochromocytomas.Results: We discovered on average 33 non‐silent somatic variants per tumor. One of the recurrently mutated genes was FGFR1, encoding the fibroblast growth factor receptor 1, which was recently revealed as an oncogene in pediatric brain tumors. Including a subsequent analysis of a larger cohort, activating FGFR1 mutations were detected in three of 80 sporadic pheochromocytomas (3.8%). Gene expression microarray profiling showed that these tumors clustered with NF1‐, RET,‐ and HRAS‐mutated pheochromocytomas, indicating activation of the MAPK and PI3K‐AKT signal transduction pathways.Conclusion: Besides RET and HRAS, FGFR1 is only the third protooncogene found to be recurrently mutated in pheochromocytomas. The results advance our biological understanding of pheochromocytoma and suggest that somatic FGFR1 activation is an important event in a subset of sporadic pheochromocytomas.

Introduction: A pilot study of temozolomide (TMZ) given before radiotherapy (RT) for anaplastic astrocytoma (AA) and glioblastoma (GBM) resulted in prolonged survival compared to historical controls receiving RT alone. We therefore investigated neoadjuvant TMZ (NeoTMZ) in a randomized trial. During enrollment, concomitant and adjuvant radio-chemotherapy with TMZ became standard treatment. The trial was amended to include concurrent TMZ. Patients and methods: Patients, after surgery for GBM or AA, age ≤60 years and performance status (PS) 0–2, were randomized to either 2–3 cycles of TMZ, 200 mg/m² days 1–5 every 28 days, followed by RT 60 Gy in 30 fractions or RT only. Patients without progressive disease after two TMZ cycles, received the third cycle. From March 2005, TMZ 75 mg/m² was administered daily concomitant with RT. TMZ was recommended first-line treatment at progression. Primary endpoint was overall survival and secondary safety. Results: The study closed prematurely after enrolling 144 patients, 103 with GBM and 41 with AA. Median age was 53 years (range 24–60) and 89 (62%) were male. PS was 0–1 for 133 (92%) patients, 53 (37%) had complete surgical resection and 18 (12%) biopsy. Ninety-two (64%) received TMZ concomitant with RT. Seventy-two (50%) were randomized to neoadjuvant treatment. For the overall study population survival was 20.3 months for RT and 17.7 months for NeoTMZ (p = .76), this not reaching the primary objective. For the preplanned subgroup analysis, we found that NeoTMZ AA patients had a median survival of 95.1 months compared to 35.2 months for RT (p = .022). For patients with GBM, no difference in survival was observed (p = .10). MGMT and IDH status affected outcome. Conclusions: No advantage of NeoTMZ was noted for the overall study population or subgroup of GBM, while NeoTMZ resulted in 5 years longer median survival for patients diagnosed as AA.

Introduction: Recent studies suggest an overrepresentation of MGMT promoter methylated tumors in females with IDHwt glioblastoma (GBM) compared to males, with a subsequent better response to alkylating treatment. Methods: To reveal sex-bound associations that may have gone unnoticed in the original analysis, we re-analyzed two previously published clinical cohorts. One was the multicenter Nordic trial of elderly patients with GBM, randomizing patients into three different treatment arms, including 203 cases with known MGMT promoter methylation status. The other was a population-based study of 179 patients with IDHwt GBM, receiving concomittant radiotherapy and chemotherapy with temozolomide. Cohorts were stratified by sex to test the hypothesis that female sex in combination with MGMT promoter methylation constitutes a subgroup with more favorable outcome. Results: There was a significantly larger proportion of MGMT promoter methylation and better outcome for female patients with MGMT promoter methylated tumors. Results were confirmed in 257 TCGA-derived IDHwt GBM with known sex and MGMT status. Conclusions: These results confirm that patient sex in combination with MGMT promoter methylation is a key determinant in GBM to be considered prior to treatment decisions. Our study also illustrates the need for stratification to identify such sex-bound associations.