Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results
-
Published:2023-11-02
Issue:1
Volume:11
Page:
-
ISSN:2051-5960
-
Container-title:Acta Neuropathologica Communications
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:acta neuropathol commun
Author:
McCord Matthew, Jamshidi Pouya, Thirunavu Vineeth, Santana-Santos Lucas, Vormittag-Nocito Erica, Dittman David, Parker Stephanie, Baczkowski Joseph, Jennings Lawrence, Walshon Jordain, McCortney Kathleen, Galbraith Kristyn, Zhang Hui, Lukas Rimas V., Stupp Roger, Dixit Karan, Kumthekar Priya, Heimberger Amy B., Snuderl Matija, Horbinski CraigORCID
Abstract
AbstractMGMT promoter methylation testing is required for prognosis and predicting temozolomide response in gliomas. Accurate results depend on sufficient tumor cellularity, but histologic estimates of cellularity are subjective. We sought to determine whether driver mutation variant allelic frequency (VAF) could serve as a more objective metric for cellularity and identify possible false-negative MGMT samples. Among 691 adult-type diffuse gliomas, MGMT promoter methylation was assessed by pyrosequencing (N = 445) or DNA methylation array (N = 246); VAFs of TERT and IDH driver mutations were assessed by next generation sequencing. MGMT results were analyzed in relation to VAF. By pyrosequencing, 56% of all gliomas with driver mutation VAF ≥ 0.325 had MGMT promoter methylation, versus only 37% with VAF < 0.325 (p < 0.0001). The mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score was 19.3% for samples with VAF VAF ≥ 0.325, versus 12.7% for samples with VAF < 0.325 (p < 0.0001). Optimal VAF cutoffs differed among glioma subtypes (IDH wildtype glioblastoma: 0.12–0.18, IDH mutant astrocytoma: ~0.33, IDH mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma: 0.3–0.4). Methylation array was more sensitive for MGMT promoter methylation at lower VAFs than pyrosequencing. Microscopic examination tended to overestimate tumor cellularity when VAF was low. Re-testing low-VAF cases with methylation array and droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) confirmed that a subset of them had originally been false-negative. We conclude that driver mutation VAF is a useful quality assurance metric when evaluating MGMT promoter methylation tests, as it can help identify possible false-negative cases.
Funder
National Cancer Institute National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience,Neurology (clinical),Pathology and Forensic Medicine
Reference58 articles.
1. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, Belanger K, Brandes AA, Marosi C, Bogdahn Uet al et al (2005) Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med 352:987–996. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa043330 2. SongTao Q, Lei Y, Si G, YanQing D, HuiXia H, XueLin Z, LanXiao W, Fei Y (2012) IDH mutations predict longer survival and response to temozolomide in secondary glioblastoma. Cancer Sci 103:269–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.2011.02134.x 3. van den Bent MJ, Baumert B, Erridge SC, Vogelbaum MA, Nowak AK, Sanson M, Brandes AA, Clement PM, Baurain JF, Mason WP al (2017) Interim results from the CATNON trial (EORTC study 26053 – 22054) of treatment with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide for 1p/19q non-co-deleted anaplastic glioma: a phase 3, randomised, open-label intergroup study. Lancet 390:1645–1653. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31442-3 4. Weller M, van den Bent M, Preusser M, Le Rhun E, Tonn JC, Minniti G, Bendszus M, Balana C, Chinot O, Dirven Let al et al (2021) EANO guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diffuse gliomas of adulthood. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 18:170–186. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-020-00447-z 5. Friedman HS, Kerby T, Calvert H (2000) Temozolomide and treatment of malignant glioma. Clin Cancer Res 6:2585–2597
|
|