4.8 Article

The age of adult pilocytic astrocytoma cells

Journal

ONCOGENE
Volume 40, Issue 16, Pages 2830-2841

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/s41388-021-01738-0

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Else Kroner-Fresenius Foundation
  2. Fritz Thyssen Foundation
  3. Wilhelm Sander Foundation
  4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) [75D30119C06056]
  5. American Brain Tumor Association
  6. Sontag Foundation
  7. Musella Foundation
  8. National Brain Tumor Society
  9. Children's Brain Tumor Foundation
  10. Uncle Kory Foundation
  11. Zelda Dorin Tetenbaum Memorial Fund
  12. Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) [RP160097T]
  13. Novocure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Adult and pediatric pilocytic astrocytomas show similarities in terms of genome-wide expression and methylation patterns, potentially originating from early life. There may be differences in PAs of different anatomic locations.
Adult pilocytic astrocytomas (PAs) have been regarded as indistinguishable from pediatric PAs in terms of genome-wide expression and methylation patterns. It has been unclear whether adult PAs arise early in life and remain asymptomatic until adulthood, or whether they develop during adulthood. We sought to determine the age and origin of adult human PAs using two types of marks in the genomic DNA. First, we analyzed the DNA methylation patterns of adult and pediatric PAs to distinguish between PAs of different anatomic locations (n = 257 PA and control brain tissues). Second, we measured the concentration of nuclear bomb test-derived C-14 in genomic DNA (n = 14 cases), which indicates the time point of the formation of human cell populations. Our data suggest that adult and pediatric PAs developing in the infratentorial brain are closely related and potentially develop from precursor cells early in life, whereas supratentorial PAs might show age and location-specific differences.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available