TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative analysis of molecular and histological glioblastomas
T2 - insights into prognostic variance
AU - Lee, Myunghwan
AU - Karschnia, Philipp
AU - Park, Yae Won
AU - Choi, Kaeum
AU - Han, Kyunghwa
AU - Choi, Seo Hee
AU - Yoon, Hong In
AU - Shin, Na Young
AU - Ahn, Sung Soo
AU - Tonn, Joerg Christian
AU - Chang, Jong Hee
AU - Kim, Se Hoon
AU - Lee, Seung Koo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2024.
PY - 2024/9
Y1 - 2024/9
N2 - Purpose: Whether molecular glioblastomas (GBMs) identify with a similar dismal prognosis as a “classical” histological GBM is controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical, molecular, imaging, surgical factors, and prognosis between molecular GBMs and histological GBMs. Methods: Retrospective chart and imaging review was performed in 983 IDH-wildtype GBM patients (52 molecular GBMs and 931 histological GBMs) from a single institution between 2005 and 2023. Propensity score-matched analysis was additionally performed to adjust for differences in baseline variables between molecular GBMs and histological GBMs. Results: Molecular GBM patients were substantially younger (58.1 vs. 62.4, P = 0.014) with higher rate of TERTp mutation (84.6% vs. 50.3%, P < 0.001) compared with histological GBM patients. Imaging showed higher incidence of gliomatosis cerebri pattern (32.7% vs. 9.2%, P < 0.001) in molecular GBM compared with histological GBM, which resulted in lesser extent of resection (P < 0.001) in these patients. The survival was significantly better in molecular GBM compared to histological GBM (median OS 30.2 vs. 18.4 months, P = 0.001). The superior outcome was confirmed in propensity score analyses by matching histological GBM to molecular GBM (P < 0.001). Conclusion: There are distinct clinical, molecular, and imaging differences between molecular GBMs and histological GBMs. Our results suggest that molecular GBMs have a more favorable prognosis than histological GBMs.
AB - Purpose: Whether molecular glioblastomas (GBMs) identify with a similar dismal prognosis as a “classical” histological GBM is controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical, molecular, imaging, surgical factors, and prognosis between molecular GBMs and histological GBMs. Methods: Retrospective chart and imaging review was performed in 983 IDH-wildtype GBM patients (52 molecular GBMs and 931 histological GBMs) from a single institution between 2005 and 2023. Propensity score-matched analysis was additionally performed to adjust for differences in baseline variables between molecular GBMs and histological GBMs. Results: Molecular GBM patients were substantially younger (58.1 vs. 62.4, P = 0.014) with higher rate of TERTp mutation (84.6% vs. 50.3%, P < 0.001) compared with histological GBM patients. Imaging showed higher incidence of gliomatosis cerebri pattern (32.7% vs. 9.2%, P < 0.001) in molecular GBM compared with histological GBM, which resulted in lesser extent of resection (P < 0.001) in these patients. The survival was significantly better in molecular GBM compared to histological GBM (median OS 30.2 vs. 18.4 months, P = 0.001). The superior outcome was confirmed in propensity score analyses by matching histological GBM to molecular GBM (P < 0.001). Conclusion: There are distinct clinical, molecular, and imaging differences between molecular GBMs and histological GBMs. Our results suggest that molecular GBMs have a more favorable prognosis than histological GBMs.
KW - Glioblastoma
KW - Glioma
KW - Survival
KW - World health organization
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85201006263&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85201006263&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11060-024-04737-9
DO - 10.1007/s11060-024-04737-9
M3 - Article
C2 - 39115615
AN - SCOPUS:85201006263
SN - 0167-594X
VL - 169
SP - 531
EP - 541
JO - Journal of Neuro-Oncology
JF - Journal of Neuro-Oncology
IS - 3
ER -
