Genomic predictors of patterns of progression in glioblastoma and possible influences on radiation field design

We present a retrospective investigation of the role of genomics in the prediction of central versus marginal disease progression patterns for glioblastoma (GBM). Between August 2000 and May 2010, 41 patients with GBM and gene expression and methylation data available were treated with radiotherapy with or without concurrent temozolomide. Location of disease progression was categorized as within the high dose (60 Gy) or low dose (46 Gy) volume. Samples were grouped into previously described TCGA genomic groupings: Mesenchymal (m), classical (c), proneural (pn), and neural (n); and were also classified by MGMT-Methylation status and G-Cimp methylation phenotype. Genomic groupings and methylation status were investigated as a possible predictor of disease progression in the high dose region, progression in the low dose region, and time to progression. Based on TCGA category there was no difference in OS (p = 0.26), 60 Gy progression (PN: 71 %, N: 60 %, M: 89 %, C: 83 %, p = 0.19), 46 Gy progression (PN: 57 %, N: 40 %, M: 61 %,C: 50 %, p = 0.8) or time to progression (PN: 9 months, N:15 months, M: 9 months, C: 7 months, p = 0.58). MGMT methylation predicted for improved OS (median 25 vs. 13 months, p = 0.01), improved DFS (median 13 vs. 8 months, p = 0.007) and decreased 60 Gy (p = 0.003) and 46 Gy (p = 0.006) progression. There was a cohort of MGMT methylated patients with late marginal disease progression (4/22 patients, 18 %). TCGA groups demonstrated no difference in survival or progression patterns. MGMT methylation predicted for a statistically significant decrease in in-field and marginal disease progression. There was a cohort of MGMT methylated patients with late marginal progression. Validations of these findings would have implications that could affect radiation field size.

[1]  E. Shaw,et al.  Neuroanatomical target theory as a predictive model for radiation-induced cognitive decline , 2013, Neurology.

[2]  Pan Du,et al.  lumi: a pipeline for processing Illumina microarray , 2008, Bioinform..

[3]  K. Aldape,et al.  IDH1 mutant malignant astrocytomas are more amenable to surgical resection and have a survival benefit associated with maximal surgical resection. , 2014, Neuro-oncology.

[4]  R. Wilson,et al.  Identification of a CpG island methylator phenotype that defines a distinct subgroup of glioma. , 2010, Cancer cell.

[5]  A. Brandes,et al.  MGMT promoter methylation status can predict the incidence and outcome of pseudoprogression after concomitant radiochemotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  L. Miller,et al.  Comparison of clinical outcomes and genomic characteristics of single focus and multifocal glioblastoma , 2014, Journal of Neuro-Oncology.

[7]  A. Brandes,et al.  Recurrence pattern after temozolomide concomitant with and adjuvant to radiotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with glioblastoma: correlation With MGMT promoter methylation status. , 2009, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  M. Walker,et al.  An analysis of dose-effect relationship in the radiotherapy of malignant gliomas. , 1979, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  D. Haussler,et al.  The Somatic Genomic Landscape of Glioblastoma , 2013, Cell.

[10]  S. Qi,et al.  Isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation is associated with tumor location and magnetic resonance imaging characteristics in astrocytic neoplasms , 2014, Oncology letters.

[11]  J. Lindberg,et al.  Identification of New Differentially Methylated Genes That Have Potential Functional Consequences in Prostate Cancer , 2012, PloS one.

[12]  Fred H. Hochberg,et al.  Assumptions in the radiotherapy of glioblastoma , 1980, Neurology.

[13]  S. Gabriel,et al.  Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. , 2010, Cancer cell.

[14]  W. Curran,et al.  Pattern of failure after limited margin radiotherapy and temozolomide for glioblastoma. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[15]  Thomas D. Wu,et al.  Molecular subclasses of high-grade glioma predict prognosis, delineate a pattern of disease progression, and resemble stages in neurogenesis. , 2006, Cancer cell.

[16]  J. Lindberg,et al.  Identification of novel CHD1-associated collaborative alterations of genomic structure and functional assessment of CHD1 in prostate cancer , 2012, Oncogene.

[17]  William H Hinson,et al.  Limited Margins Using Modern Radiotherapy Techniques Does Not Increase Marginal Failure Rate of Glioblastoma , 2014, American journal of clinical oncology.

[18]  E. Shaw,et al.  Radiation oncology in brain tumors: current approaches and clinical trials in progress. , 2010, Neuroimaging clinics of North America.

[19]  M. Delorenzi,et al.  MGMT methylation analysis of glioblastoma on the Infinium methylation BeadChip identifies two distinct CpG regions associated with gene silencing and outcome, yielding a prediction model for comparisons across datasets, tumor grades, and CIMP-status , 2012, Acta Neuropathologica.

[20]  C. Hess,et al.  Malignant glioma: patterns of failure following individually tailored limited volume irradiation. , 1994, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[21]  K. Wallner,et al.  Patterns of failure following treatment for glioblastoma multiforme and anaplastic astrocytoma. , 1989, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.