Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers in Gliomas
Rattachement africain : pl. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Gliomas are the most common central nervous system tumors. New technologies, including genetic research and advanced statistical methods, revolutionize the therapeutic approach to the patient and reveal new points of treatment options. Moreover, the 2021 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System has fundamentally changed the classification of gliomas and incorporated many molecular biomarkers. Given the rapid progress in neuro-oncology, here we compile the latest research on prognostic and predictive biomarkers in gliomas. In adult patients, IDH mutations are positive prognostic markers and have the greatest prognostic significance. However, CDKN2A deletion, in IDH-mutant astrocytomas, is a marker of the highest malignancy grade. Moreover, the presence of TERT promoter mutations, EGFR alterations, or a combination of chromosome 7 gain and 10 loss upgrade IDH-wildtype astrocytoma to glioblastoma. In pediatric patients, H3F3A alterations are the most important markers which predict the worse outcome. MGMT promoter methylation has the greatest clinical significance in predicting responses to temozolomide (TMZ). Conversely, mismatch repair defects cause hypermutation phenotype predicting poor response to TMZ. Finally, we discussed liquid biopsies, which are promising diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive techniques, but further work is needed to implement these novel technologies in clinical practice.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers in Gliomas
- Date Crossref
- 26/09/2021
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.