Gliomatosis Cerebri Among Children and Adolescents: An Individual-Patient Data Meta-analysis of 182 Patients

Revisiting prognostic factors of gliomatosis cerebri in adult-type diffuse gliomas

PURPOSE

There is lack of comprehensive analysis evaluating the impact of clinical, molecular, imaging, and surgical data on survival of patients with gliomatosis cerebri (GC). This study aimed to investigate prognostic factors of GC in adult-type diffuse glioma patients.

METHODS

Retrospective chart and imaging review was performed in 99 GC patients from adult-type diffuse glioma (among 1,211 patients; 6 oligodendroglioma, 16 IDH-mutant astrocytoma, and 77 IDH-wildtype glioblastoma) from a single institution between 2005 and 2021. Predictors of overall survival (OS) of entire patients and IDH-wildtype glioblastoma patients were determined.

RESULTS

The median OS was 16.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 14.2-22.2) in entire patients and 14.3 months (95% CI 12.2-61.9) in IDH-wildtype glioblastoma patients. In entire patients, KPS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.98, P = 0.004), no 1p/19q codeletion (HR = 10.75, P = 0.019), MGMTp methylation (HR = 0.54, P = 0.028), and hemorrhage (HR = 3.45, P = 0.001) were independent prognostic factors on multivariable analysis. In IDH-wildtype glioblastoma patients, KPS (HR = 2.24, P = 0.075) was the only independent prognostic factor on multivariable analysis. In subgroup of IDH-wildtype glioblastoma with CE tumors, total resection of CE tumor did not remain as a significant prognostic factor (HR = 1.13, P = 0.685).

CONCLUSIONS

The prognosis of GC patients is determined by its underlying molecular type and patient performance status. Compared with diffuse glioma without GC, aggressive surgery of CE tumor in GC patients does not improve survival.

An enduring debate on gliomatosis cerebri

Gliomatosis cerebri (GC) is a unique glial tumor that extensively invades the cerebral white matter and has been recognized as an entity of neuroepithelial tumors since the first edition of the WHO classification of brain tumors in 1979. Thereafter, in the fourth edition of the WHO classification in 2007, it was clearly defined as a specific type of astrocytic tumor. However, in the WHO 2016 classification, which was based on the concept of integrated diagnosis using molecular genetics, GC was deleted as it was considered to be only one growth pattern of diffuse glioma and not a specific pathological entity. Since then, there has been criticism by many neuro-oncologists and the establishment of the GC working group at the NIH, and many activities in the world arguing that GC should not be deleted from the clinical discussion of brain tumors. In Japan, positive activities toward multicenter research on GC pathology should be performed, and molecular pathological evidence that can contribute to the WHO classification in the future should be developed. In this article, the author outlined the pathological characteristics of GC, which has been repeated changing since its conception, and also describes his opinion on GC as a neuro-oncologist.

Role of susceptibility-weighted imaging and intratumoral susceptibility signals in grading and differentiating pediatric brain tumors at 1.5 T: a preliminary study

PURPOSE

Susceptibility-weighted imaging (SWI) is useful for glioma grading and discriminating between brain tumor categories in adults, but its diagnostic value for pediatric brain tumors is unclear. Here we evaluated the usefulness of SWI for pediatric tumor grading and differentiation by assessing intratumoral susceptibility signal intensity (ITSS).

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 96 children with histopathologically diagnosed brain tumors, who underwent routine brain MRI exam with SWI (1.5 T scanner). Each tumor was assigned an ITSS score by a radiology resident and an experienced neuroradiologist, and subsequently by consensus. Statistical analyses were performed to differentiate between low-grade (LG) and high-grade (HG) tumors, histological categories, and tumor locations. Inter-reader agreement was assessed using Cohen's kappa (κ).

RESULTS

The interobserver agreement was 0.844 (0.953 between first reader and consensus, and 0.890 between second reader and consensus). Among all tumors, we found a statistically significant difference between LG and HG for ITSS scores of 0 and 2 (p = 0.002). This correlation was weaker among astrocytomas alone, and became significant when considering only off-midline astrocytomas (p = 0.05). Scores of 0 and 2 were a strong discriminating factor (p = 0.001) for astrocytomas (score 0) and for embryonal, choroid plexus, germ-cell, pineal, and ependymoma tumors (score 2). No medulloblastoma showed a score of 0.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary ITTS results in pediatric brain tumors somewhat differed from those obtained in adult populations. These findings highlight the potential valuable role of ITSS for tumor grading and discriminating between some tumor categories in the pediatric population.