4.5 Article

High rate of deletion of chromosomes 1p and 19q in insular oligodendroglial tumors

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURO-ONCOLOGY
卷 99, 期 1, 页码 57-64

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11060-009-0100-5

关键词

1p/19q co-deletion; Insula; Glioma; Oligodendroglioma

资金

  1. NIH/NCI [R01 CA115729, P50 CA127001]
  2. National Brain Tumor Foundation
  3. Elias Family Fund for Brain Tumor Research
  4. Gene Pennebaker Brain Cancer Research Fund
  5. Brian McCulloch Research Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been reported recently that oligodendroglial tumors arising in the insula rarely harbor co-deletions of chromosomes 1p and 19q, a molecular signature which is associated with a good prognosis and increased responsiveness to radiation and chemotherapy compared with tumors in which 1p and/or 19q is intact. In the context of this claim, we analyzed a series of insular oligodendroglial tumors in order to determine the frequency of 1p/19q co-deletion in tumors arising in this region. We identified 14 insular cases operated on after 2003 in which testing for losses of 1p and 19q was performed. Of these cases, co-deletion of 1p and 19q occurred in eight (57%). Four (50%) of eight oligodendrogliomas and four (67%) of six oligoastrocytomas demonstrated 1p/19q co-deletions. Seven of the eight tumors with co-deletion of 1p/19q were WHO grade II gliomas. There were no statistical differences between tumors with 1p/19q co-deletion compared to those with 1p and/or 19q intact in terms of age, preoperative KPS, presenting symptoms, left versus right lateralization, tumor location (purely insular versus extension into frontal or temporal lobe), preoperative tumor size. There was a preponderance of females in the co-deletion group, and a greater average extent of resection. In contradistinction to previous reports, loss of 1p/19q occurs commonly in insular oligodendroglial tumors. With respect to 1p/19q, insular gliomas do not appear to be distinct from gliomas arising elsewhere in the brain.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据