A Systematic Review of High Impact CpG Sites and Regions for MGMT Methylation in Glioblastoma [A Systematic Review of MGMT Methylation in GBM]

Abstract

Abstract Background MGMT (O 6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase) promoter methylation is a commonly assessed prognostic marker in glioblastoma (GBM). Epigenetic silencing of the MGMT gene by promoter methylation is associated with greater overall and progression free survival with alkylating agent regimens. To date, there is marked heterogeneity in how MGMT promoter methylation is tested and which CpG sites are interrogated. Methods To further elucidate which MGMT promoter CpG sites are of greatest interest, we performed comprehensive searches in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase and reviewed 2,365 article abstracts. We followed the GRADE scoring system to Assess risk of bias and the quality of the studies we included. Results We included articles on adult glioblastoma that examined significant sites or regions within MGMT promoter for the outcomes: overall survival, progression free survival, and/or MGMT expression. We excluded systemic reviews and articles on lower grade glioma. Nine articles met inclusion criteria with variable overlap in laboratory and statistical methods employed, as well as CpG sites interrogated. Pyrosequencing or BeadChip arrays were the most popular methods utilized, and CpG sites between CpG’s 70–90 were most frequently investigated. Overall, there was moderate concordance between the CpG sites that the studies reported to be highly predictive of prognosis. Combinations or means of sites between CpG’s 73–89 were associated with improved OS and PFS. Four studies identified CpG sites associated with prognosis that were closer to the transcription start site: CpG’s 8, 19, 22, 25, 27, 32, and 38. Conclusion The following systematic review details a comprehensive investigation of the current literature and highlights several potential key CpG sites that demonstrate significant association with OS, PFS, and MGMT expression. However, there were several limitations within the studies such as smaller sample sizes, variance between methylation testing methods, and differences in the various statistical methods to test for association to outcome.