4.7 Article

Ventricular-Subventricular Zone Contact by Glioblastoma is Not Associated with Molecular Signatures in Bulk Tumor Data

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-37734-w

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Research Update in Neuroscience for Neurosurgeons Award from the Society of Neurological Surgeons
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01 NS096238, U01 CA215845-01, R01 CA186193, F32 CA224962]
  3. U.S. Department of Defense [W81XWH-16-1-0171]
  4. VICC Ambassadors awards
  5. Southeastern Brain Tumor Foundation
  6. American Cancer Society Institutional Research Grant [15-169-56]
  7. Michael David Greene Brain Cancer Fund

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Whether patients with glioblastoma that contacts the ventricular-subventricular zone stem cell niche (VSVZ + GBM) have a distinct survival profile from VSVZ - GBM patients independent of other known predictors or molecular profiles is unclear. Using multivariate Cox analysis to adjust survival for widely-accepted predictors, hazard ratios (HRs) for overall (OS) and progression free (PFS) survival between VSVZ + GBM and VSVZ - GBM patients were calculated in 170 single-institution patients and 254 patients included in both The Cancer Genome (TCGA) and Imaging (TCIA) atlases. An adjusted, multivariable analysis revealed that VSVZ contact was independently associated with decreased survival in both datasets. TCGA molecular data analyses revealed that VSVZ contact by GBM was independent of mutational, DNA methylation, gene expression, and protein expression signatures in the bulk tumor. Therefore, while survival of GBM patients is independently stratified by VSVZ contact, with VSVZ + GBM patients displaying a poor prognosis, the VSVZ + GBMs do not possess a distinct molecular signature at the bulk sample level. Focused examination of the interplay between the VSVZ microenvironment and subsets of GBM cells proximal to this region is warranted.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available