Identification of prognostic gene signatures of glioblastoma: A study based on TCGA data analysis

Cancer Research Institute of Medical Science, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea, (Y.-W.K.), Brain Tumor Center, Department of Neuro-Oncology (D.K., S.H.K., A.K.L.-E., J.Y., K.A., W.K.A.Y.), and Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (P.R.F., J.W., J.S.A.), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Neuro-Oncology (Impact Factor: 5.56). 03/2013; 15(7). DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/not024
Source: PubMed


The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project is a large-scale effort with the goal of identifying novel molecular aberrations in glioblastoma (GBM).Methods
Here, we describe an in-depth analysis of gene expression data and copy number aberration (CNA) data to classify GBMs into prognostic groups to determine correlates of subtypes that may be biologically significant.ResultsTo identify predictive survival models, we searched TCGA in 173 patients and identified 42 probe sets (P = .0005) that could be used to divide the tumor samples into 3 groups and showed a significantly (P = .0006) improved overall survival. Kaplan-Meier plots showed that the median survival of group 3 was markedly longer (127 weeks) than that of groups 1 and 2 (47 and 52 weeks, respectively). We then validated the 42 probe sets to stratify the patients according to survival in other public GBM gene expression datasets (eg, GSE4290 dataset). An overall analysis of the gene expression and copy number aberration using a multivariate Cox regression model showed that the 42 probe sets had a significant (P < .018) prognostic value independent of other variables.Conclusions
By integrating multidimensional genomic data from TCGA, we identified a specific survival model in a new prognostic group of GBM and suggest that molecular stratification of patients with GBM into homogeneous subgroups may provide opportunities for the development of new treatment modalities.

Download full-text


Available from: Jing Wang
  • Source
    • "While astrocytoma grade IV or glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a defined histopathologic diagnosis,[4] molecular oncologic evidence now strongly indicates that a GBM diagnosis includes a heterogeneous group of tumors.[26] Efforts to identify molecular markers that more clearly define an individual patient's prognosis and treatment susceptibility are ongoing.[14] Batteries of molecular tests are now available and are reported along with the routine histopathologic analysis of malignant glial tumors. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Diagnosis of glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) includes a heterogeneous group of tumors. We describe two cases with histopathologically and molecularly similar tumors, but very different outcomes. We attempt to illustrate the need for improved prognostic markers for GBM. Case Description: Two patients with similar molecular profiles were retrospectively identified. The following markers were assessed: O6-methylguanine DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) methylation, isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1 and 2 status, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) amplification, phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) status, Ki-67, p53, and 1p/19q status. Each patient was assigned a Karnofsky performance score at presentation. Case 1 (62-year-old male) was a right temporal lobe glioblastoma with a molecular profile of amplified EGFR, normal PTEN, no IDH1/2 mutation, 28.7% MGMT promoter methylation, 5-20% Ki-67, 1p deletion, and 19q intact. The patient underwent resection followed by radiation therapy and 2 years of chemotherapy, and was asymptomatic and tumor free 5 years post diagnosis. Tumor eventually recurred and the patient expired 72 months after initial diagnosis. Case 2 (63-year-old male) was a right frontal white matter mass consistent with glioblastoma with a molecular profile of amplified EGFR, absent PTEN, no IDH1/2 mutation, 9.9% MGMT promoter methylation, 5-10% Ki-67, and 1p/19q status inconclusive. A radical subtotal resection was performed; however, 2 weeks later symptoms had returned. Subsequent imaging revealed a tumor larger than at diagnosis. The patient expired 3 months after initial diagnosis. Conclusion: The need for formulating more robust means to classify GBM tumor subtypes is paramount. Standard histopathologic and molecular analyses are costly and did not provide either of these patients with a realistic appraisal of their prognosis. Individualized whole genome testing similar to that being reported for medulloblastoma and other tumors may be preferable to the array of tests as currently utilized.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2014 · Surgical Neurology International

  • No preview · Article · Jul 2014 · Surgical Neurology International
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Antineoplastons are peptide and amino acid derivatives that occur naturally in the human body. They inhibit the growth of neoplastic cells without growth inhibition of normal cells. Phenylace-tylglutaminate (PG) is an active ingredient of antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 (ANP) and is also a metabolic by-product of phenylbutyrate (PB). The formulation of antineoplaston AS2-1 is a 4:1 mixture of phenylacetate (PN) and PG. Antineoplaston A10 is a 4:1 mixture of PG and isoPG. This study investigates the molecular mechanism of action of PG and PN. The Human U87 glioblastoma (GBM) cell line was used as the model system in this study. A total human gene array screen using the Affymetrix Human Genome plus 2.0 oligonucleotide arrays was performed using mRNA de-rived from U87 cells exposed to PG and PN. Pathway analysis was performed to allow the visuali-zation of effect on metabolic pathways and gene interaction networks. Our preliminary results in-dicate that PG and PN interrupt signal transduction in RAS/MAPK/ERK and PI3K/AKT/PTEN pathways, interfere with cell cycle, decrease metabolism and promote apoptosis in human U87 GBM cells. The effect on multiple cellular pathways and targets, suggests that ANP and PB are pro-mising candidates for clinical studies in GBM.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2014 · Journal of Cancer Therapy
Show more