4.6 Article

The Predictive but Not Prognostic Value of MGMT Promoter Methylation Status in Elderly Glioblastoma Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0085102

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81171087]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The clinical implication of O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter status is ill-defined in elderly glioblastoma patients. Here we report a meta-analysis to seek valid evidence for its clinical relevance in this subpopulation. Methods: Literature were searched and reviewed in a systematic manner using the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases. Studies investigating the association between MGMT promoter status and survival data of elderly patients (>= 65 years) were eligible for inclusion. Results: Totally 16 studies were identified, with 13 studies included in the final analyses. The aggregate proportion of MGMT promoter methylation in elderly patients was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 42-52%), which was similar to the value for younger patients. The analyses showed differential effects of MGMT status on overall survival (OS) of elderly patients according to assigned treatments: methylated vs. unmethylated: (1) temozolomide (TMZ)-containing therapies: hazard ratio [HR] 0.49, 95% CI 0.41-0.58; (2) TMZ-free therapies: HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.77-1.21. More importantly, a useful predictive value was observed by an interaction analysis: TMZ-containing therapies vs. RT alone: (1) methylated tumors: HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.65; (2) unmethylated tumors: HR 1.14; 95% CI 0.90-1.44. Conclusion: The meta-analysis reports an age-independent presence of MGMT promoter methylation. More importantly, the study encouraged routine testing of MGMT promoter status especially in elderly glioblastoma patients by indicating a direct linkage between biomarker test and individual treatment decision. Future studies are needed to justify the mandatory testing in younger patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available