Published in

MDPI, Cancers, 9(16), p. 1743, 2024

DOI: 10.3390/cancers16091743

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Quantitative Assessment of Tumor Contact with Neurogenic Zones and Its Effects on Survival: Insights beyond Traditional Predictors

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

So far, the cellular origin of glioblastoma (GBM) needs to be determined, with prevalent theories suggesting emergence from transformed endogenous stem cells. Adult neurogenesis primarily occurs in two brain regions: the subventricular zone (SVZ) and the subgranular zone (SGZ) of the hippocampal dentate gyrus. Whether the proximity of GBM to these neurogenic niches affects patient outcome remains uncertain. Previous studies often rely on subjective assessments, limiting the reliability of those results. In this study, we assessed the impact of GBM’s relationship with the cortex, SVZ and SGZ on clinical variables using fully automated segmentation methods. In 177 glioblastoma patients, we calculated optimal cutpoints of minimal distances to the SVZ and SGZ to distinguish poor from favorable survival. The impact of tumor contact with neurogenic zones on clinical parameters, such as overall survival, multifocality, MGMT promotor methylation, Ki-67 and KPS score was also examined by multivariable regression analysis, chi-square test and Mann–Whitney-U. The analysis confirmed shorter survival in tumors contacting the SVZ with an optimal cutpoint of 14 mm distance to the SVZ, separating poor from more favorable survival. In contrast, tumor contact with the SGZ did not negatively affect survival. We did not find significant correlations with multifocality or MGMT promotor methylation in tumors contacting the SVZ, as previous studies discussed. These findings suggest that the spatial relationship between GBM and neurogenic niches needs to be assessed differently. Objective measurements disprove prior assumptions, warranting further research on this topic.