DIAPH3 predicts survival of patients with MGMT -methylated glioblastoma.

Background: Glioblastoma is one of the most aggressive primary brain tumors, with a poor outcome despite multimodal treatment. Methylation of the MGMT promoter, which predicts the response to temozolomide, is a well-established prognostic marker for glioblastoma. However, a difference in survival can still be detected within the MGMT methylated group, with some patients exhibiting a shorter survival than others, emphasizing the need for additional predictive factors.
Methods: We analyzed DIAPH3 expression in glioblastoma samples from the cancer genome atlas (TCGA). We also retrospectively analyzed one hundred seventeen histological glioblastomas from patients operated on at Saint-Luc University Hospital between May 2013 and August 2019. We analyzed the DIAPH3 expression, explored the relationship between mRNA levels and Patient's survival after the surgical resection. Finally, we assessed the methylation pattern of the DIAPH3 promoter using a targeted deep bisulfite sequencing approach.
Results: We found that 36% and 1% of the TCGA glioblastoma samples exhibit copy number alterations and mutations in DIAPH3 , respectively. We scrutinized the expression of DIAPH3 at single cell level and detected an overlap with MKI67 expression in glioblastoma proliferating cells, including neural progenitor-like, oligodendrocyte progenitor-like and astrocyte-like states. We quantitatively analyzed DIAPH3 expression in our cohort and uncovered a positive correlation between DIAPH3 mRNA level and patient's survival. The effect of DIAPH3 was prominent in MGMT -methylated glioblastoma. Finally, we report that the expression of DIAPH3 is at least partially regulated by the methylation of three CpG sites in the promoter region.
Conclusion: We propose that combining the DIAPH3 expression with MGMT methylation could offer a better prediction of survival and more adapted postsurgical treatment for patients with MGMT -methylated glioblastoma.
Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
(Copyright © 2024 Chehade, El Hajj, Aittaleb, Alkailani, Bejaoui, Mahdi, Aldaalis, Verbiest, Lelotte, Ruiz-Reig, Durá, Raftopoulos, Tajeddine and Tissir.)