Abstract

It is found that molecular characteristics in lower grade gliomas (LrGGs) such as codeletion of 1p/19q and IDH mutation was found to be more accurate to predict the patient`s clinical outcome compared to morphological diagnoses alone. Since the revision WHO2016 classification of LrGGs, molecular characteristics were implemented as diagnostic standard for LrGGs diagnoses. In the other hand, morphological diagnostic standard before WHO2016 classification era was determined by different considerations and therapeutic strategies. The malignancy grades were also majorly determined by morphological diagnoses only. This study re-evaluated 20 years of LrGG cases in single institution based on WHO2007 morphological criteria and compared them to the original institutional diagnoses from each era. The study samples were originally grade II-III diffuse glioma-diagnosed cases resected from 1990 to 2016. Biopsy cases were excluded. IDH mutation was analyzed by Sanger sequence and 1p/19 codeletion status was analyzed by Comparative Genome Hybridization (CGH). As the result 93 cases were collected and based on original diagnoses, more than 50% cases are astrocytomas. Compared to re-assessment by morphological diagnoses (WHO 2007), case numbers of astrocytoma diagnoses are decreased whereas oligodendroglioma and oligoastrocytoma case numbers are increased. But, based on WHO2016 criteria, the case number of astrocytomas is again found to be increased. From comparison between original institutional diagnoses and re-assessment results, it is found that there is a shift of trend from astrocytoma to oligodendroglioma and from grade II to grade III. Comparison between morphological diagnoses (WHO2007) and molecular (WHO2016) found that astrocytoma diagnoses remain unchanged meanwhile 45% of oligodendroglioma diagnoses were shifted into astrocytomas. There is a probability that there are high frequency of morphologically diagnosed oligodendroglioma tumors which are having molecular characteristics of astrocytoma. There is a trend that diagnosed grade II LrGGs are actually grade III based on re-assessment diagnosis.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.