Neuro-oncology · 2025
Distinct relapse pattern across molecular ependymoma types.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Obrecht-Sturm Denise, Schoof Melanie, Eckhardt Alicia, Mynarek Martin, Gilbert Mark R, Aldape Kenneth, Armstrong Terri S, Ramaswamy Vijay, Bockmayr Michael, von Hoff Katja, Fleischhack Gudrun, Adolph Jonas E, Tippelt Stephan, Pfister Stefan M, Pajtler Kristian, Sturm Dominik, Drexler Richard, Ricklefs Franz L, Stepien Natalia, Gojo Johannes, Pietsch Torsten, Warmuth-Metz Monika, Kortmann Rolf, Timmermann Beate, Haberler Christine, Rutkowski Stefan, Schüller Ulrich
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Ependymoma (EPN) is not a uniform disease but represents different disease types with biological and clinical heterogeneity. However, the pattern of when and where different types of EPN relapse is not yet comprehensively described.
METHODS: We assembled 269 relapsed intracranial EPN from pediatric (n = 233) and adult (n = 36) patients from European and Northern American cohorts and correlated DNA methylation patterns and copy-number alterations with clinical information.
RESULTS: The cohort comprised the following molecular EPN types: PF-EPN-A (n = 177), ST-EPN-ZFTA (n = 45), PF-EPN-B (n = 31), PF-EPN-SE (n = 12), and ST-EPN-YAP (n = 4). First relapses of PF-EPN-B (PF: posterior-fossa) and PF-EPN-SE (SE: subependymoma) occurred later than of PF-EPN-A, ST-EPN-YAP (ST: supratentorial), or ST-EPN-ZFTA (median time to relapse: 4.3 and 6.0 years vs. 1.9/1.0/2.4 years; P < .01). Metastatic or combined recurrences in PF-EPN-B and -A more often involved the spinal cord than in ST-EPN-ZFTA (72.7% and 40.0 vs. 12.5%; P < .01). No distant relapses were observed in ST-EPN-YAP (n = 4) or PF-EPN-SE (n = 12). Post-relapse survival (PRS) was poor for PF-EPN-A and ST-EPN-ZFTA (5-year PRS: 44.5% ± 4.4%/47.8% ± 9.1%), whereas PF-EPN-B and PF-EPN-SE displayed a 5-year PRS of 89.5% ± 7.1%/90.0% ± 9.5% (P = .03). However, 10-year PRS for PF-EPN-B dropped to 45.8% ± 17.3%. Neither between the radiation field and relapse pattern nor between the radiation field and spinal involvement at relapse an impact was identified. Notably, all patients with relapsed ST-EPN-YAP did not receive upfront radiotherapy but were successfully salvaged using irradiation at relapse.
CONCLUSIONS: Relapse patterns of specific EPN types are different. Future clinical trials, treatment adaptions, duration of surveillance, and diagnostics should be planned to incorporate entity-specific relapse information.
METHODS: We assembled 269 relapsed intracranial EPN from pediatric (n = 233) and adult (n = 36) patients from European and Northern American cohorts and correlated DNA methylation patterns and copy-number alterations with clinical information.
RESULTS: The cohort comprised the following molecular EPN types: PF-EPN-A (n = 177), ST-EPN-ZFTA (n = 45), PF-EPN-B (n = 31), PF-EPN-SE (n = 12), and ST-EPN-YAP (n = 4). First relapses of PF-EPN-B (PF: posterior-fossa) and PF-EPN-SE (SE: subependymoma) occurred later than of PF-EPN-A, ST-EPN-YAP (ST: supratentorial), or ST-EPN-ZFTA (median time to relapse: 4.3 and 6.0 years vs. 1.9/1.0/2.4 years; P < .01). Metastatic or combined recurrences in PF-EPN-B and -A more often involved the spinal cord than in ST-EPN-ZFTA (72.7% and 40.0 vs. 12.5%; P < .01). No distant relapses were observed in ST-EPN-YAP (n = 4) or PF-EPN-SE (n = 12). Post-relapse survival (PRS) was poor for PF-EPN-A and ST-EPN-ZFTA (5-year PRS: 44.5% ± 4.4%/47.8% ± 9.1%), whereas PF-EPN-B and PF-EPN-SE displayed a 5-year PRS of 89.5% ± 7.1%/90.0% ± 9.5% (P = .03). However, 10-year PRS for PF-EPN-B dropped to 45.8% ± 17.3%. Neither between the radiation field and relapse pattern nor between the radiation field and spinal involvement at relapse an impact was identified. Notably, all patients with relapsed ST-EPN-YAP did not receive upfront radiotherapy but were successfully salvaged using irradiation at relapse.
CONCLUSIONS: Relapse patterns of specific EPN types are different. Future clinical trials, treatment adaptions, duration of surveillance, and diagnostics should be planned to incorporate entity-specific relapse information.