Radiology Profile as a Potential Instrument to Differentiate Between Posterior Fossa Ependymoma (PF-EPN) Group A and B

Imaging features to distinguish posterior fossa ependymoma subgroups

OBJECTIVES

Posterior fossa ependymoma group A (EPN_PFA) and group B (EPN_PFB) can be distinguished by their DNA methylation and give rise to different prognoses. We compared the MRI characteristics of EPN_PFA and EPN_PFB at presentation.

METHODS

Preoperative imaging of 68 patients with posterior fossa ependymoma from two centers was reviewed by three independent readers, blinded for histomolecular grouping. Location, tumor extension, tumor volume, hydrocephalus, calcifications, tissue component, enhancement or diffusion signal, and histopathological data (cellular density, calcifications, necrosis, mitoses, vascularization, and microvascular proliferation) were compared between the groups. Categorical data were compared between groups using Fisher's exact tests, and quantitative data using Mann-Whitney tests. We performed a Benjamini-Hochberg correction of the p values to account for multiple tests.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were categorized as EPN_PFA and 12 as EPN_PFB, with median ages of 2 and 20 years, respectively (p = 0.0008). The median EPN_PFA tumoral volume was larger (57 vs 29 cm3, p = 0.003), with more pronounced hydrocephalus (p = 0.002). EPN_PFA showed an exclusive central position within the 4th ventricle in 61% of patients vs 92% for EPN_PFB (p = 0.01). Intratumor calcifications were found in 93% of EPN_PFA vs 40% of EPN_PFB (p = 0.001). Invasion of the posterior fossa foramina was mostly found for EPN_PFA, particularly the foramina of Luschka (p = 0.0008). EPN_PFA showed whole and homogeneous tumor enhancement in 5% vs 75% of EPN_PFB (p = 0.0008). All mainly cystic tumors were EPN_PFB (p = 0.002). The minimal and maximal relative ADC was slightly lower in EPN_PFA (p = 0.02 and p = 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Morphological characteristics from imaging differ between posterior fossa ependymoma subtypes and may help to distinguish them preoperatively.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

This study provides a tool to differentiate between group A and group B ependymomas, which will ultimately allow the therapeutic strategy to be adapted in the early stages of patient management.

KEY POINTS

• Posterior fossa ependymoma subtypes often have different imaging characteristics. • Posterior fossa ependymomas group A are commonly median or lateral tissular calcified masses, with incomplete enhancement, affecting young children and responsible for pronounced hydrocephalus and invasion of the posterior fossa foramina. • Posterior fossa ependymomas group B are commonly median non-calcified masses of adolescents and adults, predominantly cystic, and minimally invasive, with total and homogeneous enhancement.

Brain Tumor Imaging in Adolescents and Young Adults: 2021 WHO Updates for Molecular-based Tumor Types

Published in 2021, the fifth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of tumors of the central nervous system (CNS) introduced new molecular criteria for tumor types that commonly occur in either pediatric or adult age groups. Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) are at the intersection of adult and pediatric care, and both pediatric-type and adult-type CNS tumors occur at that age. Mortality rates for AYAs with CNS tumors have increased by 0.6% per year for males and 1% per year for females from 2007 to 2016. To best serve patients, it is crucial that both pediatric and adult radiologists who interpret neuroimages are familiar with the various pediatric- and adult-type brain tumors and their typical imaging morphologic characteristics. Gliomas account for approximately 80% of all malignant CNS tumors in the AYA age group, with the most common types observed being diffuse astrocytic and glioneuronal tumors. Ependymomas and medulloblastomas also occur in the AYA population but are seen less frequently. Importantly, biologic behavior and progression of distinct molecular subgroups of brain tumors differ across ages. This review discusses newly added or revised gliomas in the fifth edition of the CNS WHO classification, as well as other CNS tumor types common in the AYA population.

"Soap bubble" sign as an imaging marker for posterior fossa ependymoma Group B

PURPOSE

To investigate the predictive value of the "soap bubble" sign on molecular subtypes (Group A [PFA] and Group B [PFB]) of posterior fossa ependymomas (PF-EPNs).

METHODS

MRI scans of 227 PF-EPNs (internal retrospective discovery set) were evaluated by two independent neuroradiologists to assess the "soap bubble" sign, which was defined as clusters of cysts of various sizes that look like "soap bubbles" on T2-weighted images. Two independent cohorts (external validation set [n = 31] and prospective validation set [n = 27]) were collected to validate the "soap bubble" sign.

RESULTS

Across three datasets, the "soap bubble" sign was observed in 21 PFB cases (7.4% [21/285] of PF-EPNs and 12.9% [21/163] of PFB); none in PFA. Analysis of the internal retrospective discovery set demonstrated substantial interrater agreement (1st Rating: κ = 0.71 [0.53-0.90], 2nd Rating: κ = 0.83 [0.68-0.98]) and intrarater agreement (Rater 1: κ = 0.73 [0.55-0.91], Rater 2: κ = 0.74 [0.55-0.92]) for the "soap bubble" sign; all 13 cases positive for the "soap bubble" sign were PFB (p = 0.002; positive predictive value [PPV] = 100%, negative predictive value [NPV] = 44%, sensitivity = 10%, specificity = 100%). The findings from the external validation set and the prospective validation set were similar, all cases positive for the "soap bubble" sign were PFB (p < 0.001; PPV = 100%).

CONCLUSION

The "soap bubble" sign represents a highly specific imaging marker for the PFB molecular subtype of PF-EPNs.

Classification and neuroimaging of ependymal tumors

Ependymal tumors arise from the ependymal cell remnants of the cerebral ventricles, the central canal of the spinal cord, or the filum terminale or conus medullaris, although most pediatric supratentorial ependymomas do not exhibit clear communication or abutment of the ventricles. In this article, we discuss the classification, imaging characteristics, and clinical settings of these tumors. The WHO 2021 classification system has categorized ependymal tumors based on histopathologic and molecular features and location, in which they are grouped as supratentorial, posterior fossa (PF), and spinal. The supratentorial tumors are defined by either the ZFTA (formerly RELA) fusion or the YAP1 fusion. Posterior fossa tumors are divided into group A and group B based on methylation. On imaging, supratentorial and infratentorial ependymomas may arise from the ventricles and commonly contain calcifications and cystic components, with variable hemorrhage and heterogeneous enhancement. Spinal ependymomas are defined by MYCN amplification. These tumors are less commonly calcified and may present with the "cap sign," with T2 hypointensity due to hemosiderin deposition. Myxopapillary ependymoma and subependymoma remain tumor subtypes, with no change related to molecular classification as this does not provide additional clinical utility. Myxopapillary ependymomas are intradural and extramedullary tumors at the filum terminale and/or conus medullaris and may also present the cap sign. Subependymomas are homogeneous when small and may be heterogeneous and contain calcifications when larger. These tumors typically do not demonstrate enhancement. Clinical presentation and prognosis vary depending on tumor location and type. Knowledge of the updated WHO classification of the central nervous system in conjunction with imaging features is critical for accurate diagnosis and treatment.

Newly Recognized CNS Tumors in the 2021 World Health Organization Classification: Imaging Overview with Histopathologic and Genetic Correlation

In 2021, the World Health Organization released an updated classification of CNS tumors. This update reflects the growing understanding of the importance of genetic alterations related to tumor pathogenesis, prognosis, and potential targeted treatments and introduces 22 newly recognized tumor types. Herein, we review these 22 newly recognized entities and emphasize their imaging appearance with correlation to histologic and genetic features.

Major Changes in 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Central Nervous System Tumors

The World Health Organization (WHO) published the fifth edition of the WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System (WHO CNS5) in 2021, as an update of the WHO central nervous system (CNS) classification system published in 2016. WHO CNS5 was drafted on the basis of recommendations from the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumor Taxonomy (cIMPACT-NOW) and expounds the classification scheme of the previous edition, which emphasized the importance of genetic and molecular changes in the characteristics of CNS tumors. Multiple newly recognized tumor types, including those for which there is limited knowledge regarding neuroimaging features, are detailed in WHO CNS5. The authors describe the major changes introduced in WHO CNS5, including revisions to tumor nomenclature. For example, WHO grade IV tumors in the fourth edition are equivalent to CNS WHO grade 4 tumors in the fifth edition, and diffuse midline glioma, H3 K27M-mutant, is equivalent to midline glioma, H3 K27-altered. With regard to tumor typing, isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant glioblastoma has been modified to IDH-mutant astrocytoma. In tumor grading, IDH-mutant astrocytomas are now graded according to the presence or absence of homozygous CDKN2A/B deletion. Moreover, the molecular mechanisms of tumorigenesis, as well as the clinical characteristics and imaging features of the tumor types newly recognized in WHO CNS5, are summarized. Given that WHO CNS5 has become the foundation for daily practice, radiologists need to be familiar with this new edition of the WHO CNS tumor classification system. Online supplemental material and the slide presentation from the RSNA Annual Meeting are available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Molecular Classification and Therapeutic Targets in Ependymoma

Ependymoma is a biologically diverse tumor wherein molecular classification has superseded traditional histological grading based on its superior ability to characterize behavior, prognosis, and possible targeted therapies. The current, updated molecular classification of ependymoma consists of ten distinct subgroups spread evenly among the spinal, infratentorial, and supratentorial compartments, each with its own distinct clinical and molecular characteristics. In this review, the history, histopathology, standard of care, prognosis, oncogenic drivers, and hypothesized molecular targets for all subgroups of ependymoma are explored. This review emphasizes that despite the varied behavior of the ependymoma subgroups, it remains clear that research must be performed to further elucidate molecular targets for these tumors. Although not all ependymoma subgroups are oncologically aggressive, development of targeted therapies is essential, particularly for cases where surgical resection is not an option without causing significant morbidity. The development of molecular therapies must rely on building upon our current understanding of ependymoma oncogenesis, as well as cultivating transfer of knowledge based on malignancies with similar genomic alterations.

Anatomic Neuroimaging Characteristics of Posterior Fossa Type A Ependymoma Subgroups

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Posterior fossa type A (PFA) ependymomas have 2 molecular subgroups (PFA-1 and PFA-2) and 9 subtypes. Gene expression profiling suggests that PFA-1 and PFA-2 tumors have distinct developmental origins at different rostrocaudal levels of the brainstem. We, therefore, tested the hypothesis that PFA-1 and PFA-2 ependymomas have different anatomic MR imaging characteristics at presentation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two neuroradiologists reviewed the preoperative MR imaging examinations of 122 patients with PFA ependymomas and identified several anatomic characteristics, including extension through the fourth ventricular foramina and encasement of major arteries and tumor type (midfloor, roof, or lateral). Deoxyribonucleic acid methylation profiling assigned ependymomas to PFA-1 or PFA-2. Information on PFA subtype from an earlier study was also available for a subset of tumors. Associations between imaging variables and subgroup or subtype were evaluated.

RESULTS

No anatomic imaging variable was significantly associated with the PFA subgroup, but 5 PFA-2c subtype ependymomas in the cohort had a more circumscribed appearance and showed less tendency to extend through the fourth ventricular foramina or encase blood vessels, compared with other PFA subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

PFA-1 and PFA-2 ependymomas did not have different anatomic MR imaging characteristics, and these results do not support the hypothesis that they have distinct anatomic origins. PFA-2c ependymomas appear to have a more anatomically circumscribed MR imaging appearance than the other PFA subtypes; however, this needs to be confirmed in a larger study.