J Neurooncol. 2021 Dec 13; doi: 10.1007/s11060-021-03912-6. Epub 2021 Dec 13.

Extent, pattern, and prognostic value of MGMT promotor methylation: does it differ between glioblastoma and IDH-wildtype/TERT-mutated astrocytoma?.

Journal of neuro-oncology

Nico Teske, Philipp Karschnia, Jonathan Weller, Sebastian Siller, Mario M Dorostkar, Jochen Herms, Louisa von Baumgarten, Joerg Christian Tonn, Niklas Thon

PMID: 34902093 DOI: 10.1007/s11060-021-03912-6

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The cIMPACT-NOW update 6 first introduced glioblastoma diagnosis based on the combination of IDH-wildtype (IDHwt) status and TERT promotor mutation (pTERTmut). In glioblastoma as defined by histopathology according to the WHO 2016 classification, MGMT promotor status is associated with outcome. Whether this is also true in glioblastoma defined by molecular markers is yet unclear.

METHODS: We searched the institutional database for patients with: (1) glioblastoma defined by histopathology; and (2) IDHwt astrocytoma with pTERTmut. MGMT promotor methylation was analysed using methylation-specific PCR and Sanger sequencing of CpG sites within the MGMT promotor region.

RESULTS: We identified 224 patients with glioblastoma diagnosed based on histopathology, and 54 patients with IDHwt astrocytoma with pTERTmut (19 astrocytomas WHO grade II and 38 astrocytomas WHO grade III). There was no difference in the number of MGMT methylated tumors between the two cohorts as determined per PCR, and also neither the number nor the pattern of methylated CpG sites differed as determined per Sanger sequencing. Progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was similar between the two cohorts when treated with radio- or chemotherapy. In both cohorts, higher numbers of methylated CpG sites were associated with favourable outcome.

CONCLUSIONS: Extent and pattern of methylated CpG sites are similar in glioblastoma and IDHwt astrocytoma with pTERTmut. In both tumor entities, higher numbers of methylated CpG sites appear associated with more favourable outcome. Evaluation in larger prospective cohorts is warranted.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Keywords: Glioma; IDH wildtype; TERT; WHO CNS 2021; cIMPACT

References

1. Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G et al (2016) The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 131:803–820 - PubMed
2. Louis DN, Wesseling P, Aldape K et al (2020) cIMPACT-NOW update 6: new entity and diagnostic principle recommendations of the cIMPACT-utrecht meeting on future CNS tumor classification and grading. Brain Pathol 30(4):844–856 - PubMed
3. Tesileanu CMS, Dirven L, Wijnenga MMJ et al (2020) Survival of diffuse astrocytic glioma, IDH1/2 wildtype, with molecular features of glioblastoma, WHO grade IV: a confirmation of the cIMPACT-NOW criteria. Neuro Oncol 22:515–523 - PubMed
4. Louis DN, Perry A, Wesseling P et al (2021) The 2021 WHO classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Neuro Oncol 23:1231–1251 - PubMed
5. Hegi ME, Diserens AC, Gorlia T et al (2005) MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 352:997–1003 - PubMed
6. Wick W, Meisner C, Hentschel B et al (2013) Prognostic or predictive value of MGMT promoter methylation in gliomas depends on IDH1 mutation. Neurology 81:1515–1522 - PubMed
7. van den Bent MJ, Tesileanu CMS, Wick W et al (2021) Adjuvant and concurrent temozolomide for 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma (CATNON; EORTC study 26053–22054): second interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol 22:813–823 - PubMed
8. Karschnia P, Teske N, Dorostkar MM et al (2020) Extent and prognostic value of MGMT promotor methylation in glioma WHO grade II. Sci Rep 10:19758 - PubMed
9. Weller M, van den Bent M, Tonn JC et al (2017) European Association for Neuro-Oncology (EANO) guideline on the diagnosis and treatment of adult astrocytic and oligodendroglial gliomas. Lancet Oncol 18:e315–e329 - PubMed
10. Karschnia P, Vogelbaum MA, van den Bent M et al (2021) Evidence-based recommendations on categories for extent of resection in diffuse glioma. Eur J Cancer 149:23–33 - PubMed
11. Mollemann M, Wolter M, Felsberg J, Collins VP, Reifenberger G (2005) Frequent promoter hypermethylation and low expression of the MGMT gene in oligodendroglial tumors. Int J Cancer 113:379–385 - PubMed
12. Estival A, Sanz C, Ramirez JL et al (2019) Pyrosequencing versus methylation-specific PCR for assessment of MGMT methylation in tumor and blood samples of glioblastoma patients. Sci Rep 9:11125 - PubMed
13. Neumann JE, Dorostkar MM, Korshunov A et al (2016) Distinct histomorphology in molecular subgroups of glioblastomas in young patients. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 75:408–414 - PubMed
14. Biczok A, Kraus T, Suchorska B et al (2018) TERT promoter mutation is associated with worse prognosis in WHO grade II and III meningiomas. J Neurooncol 139:671–678 - PubMed
15. Weller M, Felsberg J, Hartmann C et al (2009) 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 27:5743–5750 - PubMed
16. Arita H, Yamasaki K, Matsushita Y et al (2016) A combination of TERT promoter mutation and MGMT methylation status predicts clinically relevant subgroups of newly diagnosed glioblastomas. Acta Neuropathol Commun 4:79 - PubMed
17. Nguyen HN, Lie A, Li T et al (2017) Human TERT promoter mutation enables survival advantage from MGMT promoter methylation in IDH1 wild-type primary glioblastoma treated by standard chemoradiotherapy. Neuro Oncol 19:394–404 - PubMed
18. Vuong HG, Nguyen TQ, Ngo TNM, Nguyen HC, Fung K-M, Dunn IF (2020) The interaction between TERT promoter mutation and MGMT promoter methylation on overall survival of glioma patients: a meta-analysis. BMC Cancer 20:897 - PubMed
19. Wick W, Weller M, van den Bent M et al (2014) MGMT testing–the challenges for biomarker-based glioma treatment. Nat Rev Neurol 10:372–385 - PubMed
20. Siller S, Lauseker M, Karschnia P et al (2021) The number of methylated CpG sites within the MGMT promoter region linearly correlates with outcome in glioblastoma receiving alkylating agents. Acta Neuropathol Commun 9:35 - PubMed
21. Ramakrishnan V, Kushwaha D, Koay DC et al (2011) Post-transcriptional regulation of O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase MGMT in glioblastomas. Cancer Biomark 10:185–193 - PubMed
22. Bady P, Sciuscio D, Diserens AC et al (2012) 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. Acta Neuropathol 124:547–560 - PubMed
23. Brigliadori G, Foca F, Dall’Agata M et al (2016) Defining the cutoff value of MGMT gene promoter methylation and its predictive capacity in glioblastoma. J Neurooncol 128:333–339 - PubMed
24. Mansouri A, Hachem LD, Mansouri S et al (2019) MGMT promoter methylation status testing to guide therapy for glioblastoma: refining the approach based on emerging evidence and current challenges. Neuro Oncol 21:167–178 - PubMed
25. Brandner S, McAleenan A, Kelly C et al (2021) MGMT promoter methylation testing to predict overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide: a comprehensive meta-analysis based on a cochrane review. Neuro Oncol 23(9):1457–1469 - PubMed
26. Eckel-Passow JE, Lachance DH, Molinaro AM et al (2015) Glioma groups based on 1p/19q, IDH, and TERT promoter mutations in tumors. N Engl J Med 372:2499–2508 - PubMed
27. Yan H, Parsons DW, Jin G et al (2009) IDH1 and IDH2 mutations in gliomas. N Engl J Med 360:765–773 - PubMed

Publication Types

• Journal Article