4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Clinical and molecular characteristics of malignant transformation of low-grade glioma in children

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 25, 期 6, 页码 682-689

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.06.8213

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P30 CA21765, R25 CA023944, P01 CA096832] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To analyze the clinical and molecular characteristics of malignant transformation (MT) of low-grade glioma (LGG) in children. Patients and Methods The clinical, radiologic, and histologic characteristics of children treated at our institution who experienced MT of LGG were reviewed. Molecular alterations in these tumors were analyzed by fluorescent in situ hybridization, immunohistochemistry, and TP53 sequencing. Cumulative incidence estimate and risk factors for MT were determined for 65 patients with grade 2 astrocytoma treated at our institution during the study interval. Results Eleven patients who experienced MT were identified ( median age at diagnosis of LGG, 13.3 years). Initial diagnoses were grade 2 astrocytoma ( n = 6) and other grade 1/2 gliomas ( n = 5). The median latency of MT was 5.1 years. Histologic diagnoses after MT were glioblastoma ( n = 7) and other high-grade gliomas ( n = 4). The 15-year cumulative incidence estimate of MT among 65 patients with grade 2 astrocytoma was 6.7% +/- 3.9%; no risk factor analyzed, including radiotherapy, was associated with MT. Tissue was available for molecular analysis in all patients, including nine with samples obtained before and after MT. TP53 overexpression was more common after MT. Deletions of RB1 and/or CDKN2A were observed in 71% of LGGs and in 90% of tumors after MT. PTEN pathway abnormalities occurred in 76% of patients. One of five oncogenes analyzed (PDGFRA) was amplified in one patient. Conclusion The molecular abnormalities that occur during MT of LGG in children are similar to those observed in primary and secondary glioblastoma in adults.

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

4.7
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