Search

cIMPACT-NOW (the Consortium to Inform Molecular and Practical Approaches to CNS Tumor Taxonomy) was established to evaluate and make practical recommendations on recent advances in the field of CNS tumor classification, particularly in light of the rapid progress in molecular insights into these neoplasms. For Round 2 of its deliberations, cIMPACT-NOW Working Committee 3 was reconstituted and convened in Utrecht, The Netherlands, for a meeting designed to review putative new CNS tumor types in advance of any future World Health Organization meeting on CNS tumor classification. In preparatory activities for the meeting and at the actual meeting, a list of possible entities was assembled and each type and subtype debated. Working Committee 3 recommended that a substantial number of newly recognized types and subtypes should be considered for inclusion in future CNS tumor classifications. In addition, the group endorsed a number of principles-relating to classification categories, approaches to classification, nomenclature, and grading-that the group hopes will also inform the future classification of CNS neoplasms.

Major discoveries in the biology of nervous system tumors have raised the question of how non-histological data such as molecular information can be incorporated into the next World Health Organization (WHO) classification of central nervous system tumors. To address this question, a meeting of neuropathologists with expertise in molecular diagnosis was held in Haarlem, the Netherlands, under the sponsorship of the International Society of Neuropathology (ISN). Prior to the meeting, participants solicited input from clinical colleagues in diverse neuro-oncological specialties. The present "white paper" catalogs the recommendations of the meeting, at which a consensus was reached that incorporation of molecular information into the next WHO classification should follow a set of provided "ISN-Haarlem" guidelines. Salient recommendations include that (i) diagnostic entities should be defined as narrowly as possible to optimize interobserver reproducibility, clinicopathological predictions and therapeutic planning; (ii) diagnoses should be "layered" with histologic classification, WHO grade and molecular information listed below an "integrated diagnosis"; (iii) determinations should be made for each tumor entity as to whether molecular information is required, suggested or not needed for its definition; (iv) some pediatric entities should be separated from their adult counterparts; (v) input for guiding decisions regarding tumor classification should be solicited from experts in complementary disciplines of neuro-oncology; and (iv) entity-specific molecular testing and reporting formats should be followed in diagnostic reports. It is hoped that these guidelines will facilitate the forthcoming update of the fourth edition of the WHO classification of central nervous system tumors.

We performed genome‐wide methylation analysis on 136 pediatric low‐grade gliomas, identifying a unique cluster consisting of three tumors with oligodendroglioma‐like histology, BRAF p.V600E mutations and recurrent whole chromosome gains of 7 and loss of 10. Morphologically, all showed similar features, including a diffusely infiltrative glioma composed of round nuclei with perinuclear halos, a chicken‐wire pattern of branching capillaries and microcalcification. None showed astrocytic features or characteristics suggestive of high‐grade tumors including necrosis or mitotic figures. All tumors harbored multiple chromosomal copy number abnormalities (>10 chromosomes altered), but none showed 1p/19q co‐deletion or IDH1 p.R132H mutation. Hierarchical clustering and t‐stochastic neighbor embedding analyses from DNA methylation data cluster them more closely to previously described pediatric‐type low‐grade gliomas and separate from adult gliomas. These tumors exhibit distinct clinical features; they are temporal lobe lesions occurring in adolescents and young adults with a prolonged history of seizures and all are alive with no recurrence (follow‐up 3.2 to 13.2 years). We encountered another young adult case with quite similar pathological appearance and molecular status except for TERT promoter mutation. Although the series is small, these may represent a new category of IDH wild‐type low‐grade gliomas which may be confused with "molecular GBM." Further, they highlight the heterogeneity of IDH wild‐type gliomas and the relatively indolent behavior of "pediatric‐type" gliomas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rhabdoid phenotype and loss of SMARCB1 expression in a brain tumor are characteristic features of atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumors (ATRT). Rare non-rhabdoid brain tumors showing cribriform growth pattern and SMARCB1 loss have been designated cribriform neuroepithelial tumor (CRINET). Small case series suggest that CRINETs may have a relatively favorable prognosis. However, the long-term outcome is unclear and it remains uncertain whether CRINET represents a distinct entity or a variant of ATRT. Therefore, 10 CRINETs were clinically and molecularly characterized and compared with 10 ATRTs of each of three recently described molecular subgroups (i.e. ATRT-TYR, ATRT-SHH and ATRT-MYC) using Illumina Infinium HumanMethylation450 arrays, FISH, MLPA, and sequencing. Furthermore, outcome was compared to a larger cohort of 27 children with ATRT-TYR. Median age of the 6 boys and 4 girls harboring a CRINET was 20 months. On histopathological examination, all CRINETs demonstrated a cribriform growth pattern and distinct tyrosinase staining. On unsupervised cluster analysis of methylation data, all CRINETs examined exclusively clustered within the ATRT-TYR molecular subgroup. As ATRT-TYR, CRINETs mainly showed large heterozygous 22q deletions (9/10) and SMARCB1 mutations of the other allele. In two patients, SMARCB1 mutations were also present in the germline. Estimated mean overall survival in patients with CRINETs was 125 months (95% confidence interval 100-151 months) as compared to only 53 (33-74) months in patients with ATRTs of the ATRT-TYR subgroup (Log-Rank P < 0.05). In conclusion, CRINET represents a SMARCB1-deficient non-rhabdoid tumor, which shares molecular similarities with the ATRT-TYR subgroup but has distinct histopathological features and favorable long-term outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]