Surgical management of lower-grade glioma in the spotlight of the 2016 WHO classification system
According to the 2016 WHO classification lower-grade gliomas consist of three groups: IDH-mutated and 1p/19q co-deleted, IDH-mutated and IDH-wildtype tumors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of surgical therapy for lower-grade gliomas with a particular focus on the molecular subgroups.
This is a bi-centric retrospective analysis including 299 patients, who underwent treatment for lower-grade glioma between 1990 and 2016. All tumors were re-classified according to the 2016 WHO classification. Data concerning baseline and tumor characteristics, overall survival, different treatment modalities and functional outcome were analyzed.
A total of 112 (37.5%) patients with IDH-mutation and 1p/19q co-deletetion, 86 (28.8%) patients with IDH-mutation and 101 (33.8%) patients with IDH-wildtype tumors were identified. The median overall survival (mOS) differed significantly between the groups (p < 0.001). Surgical resection was performed in 226 patients and showed significantly improved mOS compared to the biopsy group (p = 0.001). Gross total resection (GTR) was associated with better survival (p = 0.007) in the whole cohort as well as in the IDH-mutated and IDH-wildtype groups compared to partial resection or biopsy. IDH-wildtype patients presented a significant survival benefit after combined radio-chemotherapy compared to radio- or chemotherapy alone (p = 0.02). Good clinical status (NANO) was associated with longer OS (p = 0.001).
The impact of surgical treatment on the outcome of lower-grade gliomas depends to a great extent on the molecular subtype of the tumors. Patients with more aggressive tumors (IDH-wildtype) seem to profit from more intensive treatment like GTR, multiple resections and combined radio-/chemotherapy.
KeywordsLower-grade gliomas Oligodendroglioma Astrocytoma WHO-classification IDH-mutation 1p/19q Gross total resection
This research did not receive any financial or material support from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materials or methods used in this study or the findings specified in this paper.
- 4.Weller M, Weber RG, Willscher E et al (2015) Molecular classification of diffuse cerebral WHO grade II/III gliomas using genome- and transcriptome-wide profiling improves stratification of prognostically distinct patient groups. Acta Neuropathol 129:679–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-015-1409-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Weller M, Felsberg J, Hartmann C et al (2009) Molecular predictors of progression-free and overall survival in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a prospective translational study of the German Glioma Network. J Clin Oncol 27:5743–5750. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.23.0805 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Buckner J, Giannini C, Eckel-Passow J et al (2017) Management of diffuse low-grade gliomas in adults—use of molecular diagnostics. Nat Publ Group 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2017.54
- 12.Englot DJ, Chang EF, Vecht CJ (2016) Epilepsy and brain tumors. Handb Clin Neurol 134:267–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802997-8.00016-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Sanai N, Berger MS (2008) Glioma extent of resection and its impact on patient outcome. Neurosurgery 62:753–764. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000318159.21731.cf (discussion 264–6).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Nayak L, DeAngelis LM, Brandes AA et al (2017) The Neurologic Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (NANO) scale: a tool to assess neurologic function for integration into the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (RANO) criteria. Neurooncology 19:625–635. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nox029 Google Scholar
- 31.van den Bent MDPMJ, MD BB, MD SCE et 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31442-3 Google Scholar