4.2 Article

Predicting BRAF V600E mutation in glioblastoma: utility of radiographic features

期刊

BRAIN TUMOR PATHOLOGY
卷 38, 期 3, 页码 228-233

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s10014-021-00407-0

关键词

BRAF V600E; Glioblastoma; Radigraphic features; Pathologic features

资金

  1. Niigata Brain Research Institute Global Collaborative Research Project
  2. Japan Society for Promotion of Science (JSPS) [19K09476]
  3. American Academy of Neurology Clinical Research Training Scholarship
  4. Maryland Cigarette Restitution Fund award
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [19K09476] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Detecting BRAF V600E mutation in GBMs is crucial due to potential treatment implications, however, the scarcity of these mutations poses challenges for molecular testing in all GBMs. Analyzing clinical, radiographic, and pathologic features of BRAF V600E-mutant GBM compared to controls revealed specific MRI characteristics, higher likelihood of total resection, and distinctive epithelioid features, emphasizing the importance of testing for BRAF V600E in IDH-wildtype GBM.
Detection of BRAF V600E mutation in glioblastomas (GBMs) is important because of potential therapeutic implications. Still, the relative paucity of these mutations makes molecular detection in all GBMs controversial. In the present study, we analyzed clinical, radiographic and pathologic features of 12 BRAF V600E-mutant GBMs and 12 matched controls from 2 institutions. We found that a majority of BRAF V600E-mutant GBMs displayed a combination of well-circumscribed lesions, large cystic components with thin walls and solid cortical component on MRI, but with some overlap with matched BRAF wildtype controls (p = 0.069). BRAF V600E-mutant GBMs were also apt to gross total resection (83% vs 17%, p = 0.016) and morphologically displayed epithelioid features (83% vs 0%, p < 0.0001). Identification of these clinical, radiographic, and pathologic characteristics should prompt testing for BRAF V600E in IDH-wildtype GBM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据