Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 May;16(5):735-47.
doi: 10.1093/neuonc/not325. Epub 2014 Feb 16.

Proposal for a new risk stratification classification for meningioma based on patient age, WHO tumor grade, size, localization, and karyotype

Patrícia Henriques Domingues  1 , Pablo Sousa, Álvaro Otero, Jesus Maria Gonçalves, Laura Ruiz, Catarina de Oliveira, Maria Celeste Lopes, Alberto Orfao, Maria Dolores Tabernero
Affiliations

Proposal for a new risk stratification classification for meningioma based on patient age, WHO tumor grade, size, localization, and karyotype

Patrícia Henriques Domingues et al. Neuro Oncol. 2014 May.

Abstract

Background: Tumor recurrence remains the major clinical complication of meningiomas, the majority of recurrences occurring among WHO grade I/benign tumors. In the present study, we propose a new scoring system for the prognostic stratification of meningioma patients based on analysis of a large series of meningiomas followed for a median of >5 years.

Methods: Tumor cytogenetics were systematically investigated by interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization in 302 meningioma samples, and the proposed classification was further validated in an independent series of cases (n = 132) analyzed by high-density (500K) single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays.

Results: Overall, we found an adverse impact on patient relapse-free survival (RFS) for males, presence of brain edema, younger patients (<55 years), tumor size >50 mm, tumor localization at intraventricular and anterior cranial base areas, WHO grade II/III meningiomas, and complex karyotypes; the latter 5 variables showed an independent predictive value in multivariate analysis. Based on these parameters, a prognostic score was established for each individual case, and patients were stratified into 4 risk categories with significantly different (P < .001) outcomes. These included a good prognosis group, consisting of approximately 20% of cases, that showed a RFS of 100% ± 0% at 10 years and a very poor-prognosis group with a RFS rate of 0% ± 0% at 10 years. The prognostic impact of the scoring system proposed here was also retained when WHO grade I cases were considered separately (P < .001).

Conclusions: Based on this risk-stratification classification, different strategies may be adopted for follow-up, and eventually also for treatment, of meningioma patients at different risks for relapse.

Keywords: SNP arrays; iFISH; meningioma; recurrence; risk stratification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Clinical, biological, and genetic features of meningiomas that showed a significant impact on patient relapse-free survival (RFS; n = 261). Relapse-free survival curves of meningioma cases according to patient age (A), sex (B), tumor localization (C), and size (D), presence versus absence of edema (E), tumor histology (F), WHO grade (G), and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (iFISH) cytogenetic profile (H). The last 2 panels (I and J) show patients' RFS curves according to the new prognostic scoring system here proposed (I) and that previously reported by Maillo et al (J).
Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Clinical, biological, and genetic features of meningiomas that showed a significant impact on patient relapse-free survival (RFS; n = 261). Relapse-free survival curves of meningioma cases according to patient age (A), sex (B), tumor localization (C), and size (D), presence versus absence of edema (E), tumor histology (F), WHO grade (G), and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (iFISH) cytogenetic profile (H). The last 2 panels (I and J) show patients' RFS curves according to the new prognostic scoring system here proposed (I) and that previously reported by Maillo et al (J).
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Clinical, biological, and genetic features of WHO grade I meningiomas with a significant impact on patient relapse-free survival (RFS; n = 227). RFS curves of WHO grade I meningioma cases grouped according to patient age (A), tumor localization (B), size (C), and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (iFISH) cytogenetic profile (D). RFS curves are shown for the same cases grouped according to the new prognostic scoring system proposed here (E) and that previously reported by Maillo et al (F).
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Impact of tumor karyotype, defined by the chromosomal copy number profile, as analyzed by SNP arrays on relapse-free survival (RFS) of meningioma cases. (A) RFS curves of meningioma cases classified according to the copy number patterns (diploid, isolated alteration of a single chromosome, and complex karyotypes) for the 2 series of cases analyzed by single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays (n = 132) published so far in the literature. Only cases with follow-up data (n = 108) were considered for RFS analysis. (B) RFS curves of the same cases grouped according to the new prognostic scoring system proposed here. (C) RFS curves of the same cases grouped according to the prognostic scoring system previously reported by Maillo et al. In both panels B and C the cases from the Lee series were adjusted for the information available (data on tumor localization and size were not available).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

  • Genetic/molecular alterations of meningiomas and the signaling pathways targeted.
    Domingues P, González-Tablas M, Otero Á, Pascual D, Ruiz L, Miranda D, Sousa P, Gonçalves JM, Lopes MC, Orfao A, Tabernero MD. Domingues P, et al. Oncotarget. 2015 May 10;6(13):10671-88. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.3870. Oncotarget. 2015. PMID: 25965831 Free PMC article. Review.
  • Case-Based Review: meningioma.
    Fogh SE, Johnson DR, Barker FG 2nd, Brastianos PK, Clarke JL, Kaufmann TJ, Oberndorfer S, Preusser M, Raghunathan A, Santagata S, Theodosopoulos PV. Fogh SE, et al. Neurooncol Pract. 2016 Jun;3(2):120-134. doi: 10.1093/nop/npv063. Epub 2016 Jan 13. Neurooncol Pract. 2016. PMID: 31386096 Free PMC article.
  • A gene expression signature predicts recurrence-free survival in meningioma.
    Olar A, Goodman LD, Wani KM, Boehling NS, Sharma DS, Mody RR, Gumin J, Claus EB, Lang FF, Cloughesy TF, Lai A, Aldape KD, DeMonte F, Sulman EP. Olar A, et al. Oncotarget. 2018 Feb 15;9(22):16087-16098. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.24498. eCollection 2018 Mar 23. Oncotarget. 2018. PMID: 29662628 Free PMC article.
  • [Retrocochlear diagnostics for acute hearing loss and successful therapy].
    Hey M, Dambon J, Synowitz M, Ambrosch P. Hey M, et al. HNO. 2024 Jan;72(1):44-50. doi: 10.1007/s00106-023-01351-5. Epub 2023 Aug 24. HNO. 2024. PMID: 37615685 Free PMC article. German.
  • TERT Promoter Mutations and Risk of Recurrence in Meningioma.
    Sahm F, Schrimpf D, Olar A, Koelsche C, Reuss D, Bissel J, Kratz A, Capper D, Schefzyk S, Hielscher T, Wang Q, Sulman EP, Adeberg S, Koch A, Okuducu AF, Brehmer S, Schittenhelm J, Becker A, Brokinkel B, Schmidt M, Ull T, Gousias K, Kessler AF, Lamszus K, Debus J, Mawrin C, Kim YJ, Simon M, Ketter R, Paulus W, Aldape KD, Herold-Mende C, von Deimling A. Sahm F, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015 Dec 13;108(5):djv377. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djv377. Print 2016 May. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015. PMID: 26668184 Free PMC article.
See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Mawrin C, Perry A. Pathological classification and molecular genetics of meningiomas. J Neurooncol. 2010;99:379–391. - PubMed
    1. Saraf S, McCarthy BJ, Villano JL. Update on meningiomas. Oncologist. 2011;16:1604–1613. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marosi C, Hassler M, Roessler K, et al. Meningioma. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2008;67:153–171. - PubMed
    1. Yew A, Trang A, Nagasawa DT, et al. Chromosomal alterations, prognostic factors, and targeted molecular therapies for malignant meningiomas. J Clin Neurosci. 2013;20:17–22. - PubMed
    1. Stafford SL, Perry A, Suman VJ, et al. Primarily resected meningiomas: outcome and prognostic factors in 581 Mayo Clinic patients, 1978 through 1988. Mayo Clin Proc. 1998;73:936–942. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms