Prognostic value of test(s) for O6 -methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation for predicting overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide

Modernizing Neuro-Oncology: The Impact of Imaging, Liquid Biopsies, and AI on Diagnosis and Treatment

Advances in neuro-oncology have transformed the diagnosis and management of brain tumors, which are among the most challenging malignancies due to their high mortality rates and complex neurological effects. Despite advancements in surgery and chemoradiotherapy, the prognosis for glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) and brain metastases remains poor, underscoring the need for innovative diagnostic strategies. This review highlights recent advancements in imaging techniques, liquid biopsies, and artificial intelligence (AI) applications addressing current diagnostic challenges. Advanced imaging techniques, including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), improve the differentiation of tumor progression from treatment-related changes. Additionally, novel positron emission tomography (PET) radiotracers, such as 18F-fluoropivalate, 18F-fluoroethyltyrosine, and 18F-fluluciclovine, facilitate metabolic profiling of high-grade gliomas. Liquid biopsy, a minimally invasive technique, enables real-time monitoring of biomarkers such as circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), extracellular vesicles (EVs), circulating tumor cells (CTCs), and tumor-educated platelets (TEPs), enhancing diagnostic precision. AI-driven algorithms, such as convolutional neural networks, integrate diagnostic tools to improve accuracy, reduce interobserver variability, and accelerate clinical decision-making. These innovations advance personalized neuro-oncological care, offering new opportunities to improve outcomes for patients with central nervous system tumors. We advocate for future research integrating these tools into clinical workflows, addressing accessibility challenges, and standardizing methodologies to ensure broad applicability in neuro-oncology.

Definition of the Prognostic Role of MGMT Promoter Methylation Value by Pyrosequencing in Newly Diagnosed IDH Wild-Type Glioblastoma Patients Treated with Radiochemotherapy: A Large Multicenter Study

Background. O6-methylguanine (O6-MeG)-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) methylation status is a predictive factor for alkylating treatment efficacy in glioblastoma patients, but its prognostic role is still unclear. We performed a large, multicenter study to evaluate the association between MGMT methylation value and survival. Methods. We evaluated glioblastoma patients with an assessment of MGMT methylation status by pyrosequencing from nine Italian centers. The inclusion criteria were histological diagnosis of IDH wild-type glioblastoma, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) ≤2, and radio-chemotherapy treatment with temozolomide. The relationship between OS and MGMT was investigated with a time-dependent Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve and Cox regression models. Results. In total, 591 newly diagnosed glioblastoma patients were analyzed. The median OS was 16.2 months. The ROC analysis suggested a cut-off of 15% for MGMT methylation. The 2-year Overall Survival (OS) was 18.3% and 51.8% for MGMT methylation <15% and ≥15% (p < 0.0001). In the multivariable analysis, MGMT methylation <15% was associated with impaired survival (p < 0.00001). However, we also found a non-linear association between MGMT methylation and OS (p = 0.002): median OS was 14.8 months for MGMT in 0−4%, 18.9 months for MGMT in 4−40%, and 29.9 months for MGMT in 40−100%. Conclusions. Our findings suggested a non-linear relationship between OS and MGMT promoter methylation, which implies a varying magnitude of prognostic effect across values of MGMT promoter methylation by pyrosequencing in newly diagnosed IDH wild-type glioblastoma patients treated with chemoradiotherapy.

Prognostic value of test(s) for O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation for predicting overall survival in people with glioblastoma treated with temozolomide

BACKGROUND

Glioblastoma is an aggressive form of brain cancer. Approximately five in 100 people with glioblastoma survive for five years past diagnosis. Glioblastomas that have a particular modification to their DNA (called methylation) in a particular region (the O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter) respond better to treatment with chemotherapy using a drug called temozolomide.

OBJECTIVES

To determine which method for assessing MGMT methylation status best predicts overall survival in people diagnosed with glioblastoma who are treated with temozolomide.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index to December 2018, and examined reference lists. For economic evaluation studies, we additionally searched NHS Economic Evaluation Database (EED) up to December 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were longitudinal (cohort) studies of adults with diagnosed glioblastoma treated with temozolomide with/without radiotherapy/surgery. Studies had to have related MGMT status in tumour tissue (assessed by one or more method) with overall survival and presented results as hazard ratios or with sufficient information (e.g. Kaplan-Meier curves) for us to estimate hazard ratios. We focused mainly on studies comparing two or more methods, and listed brief details of articles that examined a single method of measuring MGMT promoter methylation. We also sought economic evaluations conducted alongside trials, modelling studies and cost analysis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently undertook all steps of the identification and data extraction process for multiple-method studies. We assessed risk of bias and applicability using our own modified and extended version of the QUality In Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. We compared different techniques, exact promoter regions (5'-cytosine-phosphate-guanine-3' (CpG) sites) and thresholds for interpretation within studies by examining hazard ratios. We performed meta-analyses for comparisons of the three most commonly examined methods (immunohistochemistry (IHC), methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (MSP) and pyrosequencing (PSQ)), with ratios of hazard ratios (RHR), using an imputed value of the correlation between results based on the same individuals.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 independent cohorts involving 3474 people that compared two or more methods. We found evidence that MSP (CpG sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87) is more prognostic than IHC for MGMT protein at varying thresholds (RHR 1.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.71). We also found evidence that PSQ is more prognostic than IHC for MGMT protein at various thresholds (RHR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.84). The data suggest that PSQ (mainly at CpG sites 74 to 78, using various thresholds) is slightly more prognostic than MSP at sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87 (RHR 1.14, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.48). Many variants of PSQ have been compared, although we did not see any strong and consistent messages from the results. Targeting multiple CpG sites is likely to be more prognostic than targeting just one. In addition, we identified and summarised 190 articles describing a single method for measuring MGMT promoter methylation status.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PSQ and MSP appear more prognostic for overall survival than IHC. Strong evidence is not available to draw conclusions with confidence about the best CpG sites or thresholds for quantitative methods. MSP has been studied mainly for CpG sites 76 to 80 and 84 to 87 and PSQ at CpG sites ranging from 72 to 95. A threshold of 9% for CpG sites 74 to 78 performed better than higher thresholds of 28% or 29% in two of three good-quality studies making such comparisons.