Congress of Neurological Surgeons systematic review and evidence based guideline on neuropathology for WHO grade II diffuse glioma: update.

Journal: Journal Of Neuro-Oncology
Published:
Abstract

: QUESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PRIOR VERSION OF THESE GUIDELINES WITHOUT CHANGE: TARGET POPULATION: Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) who have suspected low-grade diffuse glioma.

Objective: What are the optimal neuropathological techniques to diagnose low-grade diffuse glioma in the adult? Conclusions: Level I Histopathological analysis of a representative surgical sample of the lesion should be used to provide the diagnosis of low-grade diffuse glioma. Level III Both frozen section and cytopathologic/smear evaluation should be used to aid the intra-operative assessment of low-grade diffuse glioma diagnosis. A resection specimen is preferred over a biopsy specimen, to minimize the potential for sampling error issues.

Methods: Patients with histologically-proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma. Objective: In adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with histologically-proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma, is testing for IDH1 mutation (R132H and/or others) warranted? If so, is there a preferred method?

Conclusions: Level II IDH gene mutation assessment, via IDH1 R132H antibody and/or IDH1/2 mutation hotspot sequencing, is highly-specific for low-grade diffuse glioma, and is recommended as an additional test for classification and prognosis. Methods: Patients with histologically-proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma. Objective: In adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with histologically-proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma, is testing for 1p/19q loss warranted? If so, is there a preferred method? Conclusions: Level III 1p/19q loss-of-heterozygosity testing, by FISH, array-CGH or PCR, is recommended as an additional test in oligodendroglial cases for prognosis and potential treatment planning. Methods: Patients with histologically proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma. Objective: In adult patients (age > 18 years) with histologically-proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma, is methyl-guanine methyl-transferase (MGMT) promoter methylation testing warranted? If so, is there a preferred method? Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to recommend MGMT promoter methylation testing as a routine for low-grade diffuse gliomas. It is recommended that patients be enrolled in properly designed clinical trials to assess the value of this and related markers for this target population. Methods: Patients with histologically-proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma. Objective: In adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with histologically proven WHO grade II diffuse glioma, is Ki-67/MIB1 immunohistochemistry warranted? If so, is there a preferred method to quantitate results? Conclusions: Level III Ki67/MIB1 immunohistochemistry is recommended as an option for prognostic assessment. Conclusions: TARGET POPULATION: Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) who have suspected WHO grade II diffuse glioma. Objective: Is testing for ATRX mutations helpful for predicting survival and making treatment recommendations? Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to recommend ATRX mutation testing as a means of predicting survival or making treatment recommendations. Methods: Adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) who have suspected WHO grade II diffuse glioma. Objective: Does the addition of intraoperative optical histologic methods provide accuracy beyond the use of conventional histologic methods in diagnosis and management? Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence at this time to suggest that intraoperative optical histologic methods offer increased diagnostic accuracy when compared to conventional techniques.