BackgroundThe current World Health Organization (WHO) classification of brain tumors distinguishes 3 malignancy grades in meningiomas, with increasing risk of recurrence from CNS WHO grades 1 to 3.... Show moreBackgroundThe current World Health Organization (WHO) classification of brain tumors distinguishes 3 malignancy grades in meningiomas, with increasing risk of recurrence from CNS WHO grades 1 to 3. Radiotherapy is recommended by current EANO guidelines for patients not safely amenable to surgery or after incomplete resection in higher grades. Despite adequately predicting recurrence probability for the majority of CNS WHO grade 2 meningioma patients, a considerable subset of patients demonstrates an unexpectedly early tumor recurrence following radiotherapy.MethodsA retrospective cohort of 44 patients with CNS WHO grade 2 meningiomas were stratified into 3 risk groups (low, intermediate, and high) using an integrated morphological, CNV- and methylation family-based classification. Local progression-free survival (lPFS) following radiotherapy (RT) was analyzed and total dose of radiation was correlated with survival outcome. Radiotherapy treatment plans were correlated with follow-up images to characterize the pattern of relapse. Treatment toxicities were further assessed.ResultsRisk stratification of CNS WHO grade 2 meningioma into integrated risk groups demonstrated a significant difference in 3-year lPFS following radiotherapy between the molecular low- and high-risk groups. Recurrence pattern analysis revealed that 87.5 % of initial relapses occurred within the RT planning target volume or resection cavity.ConclusionsIntegrated risk scoring can identify CNS WHO grade 2 meningioma patients at risk or relapse and dissemination following radiotherapy. Therapeutic management of CNS WHO grade 2 meningiomas and future clinical trials should be adjusted according to the molecular risk-groups, and not rely on conventional CNS WHO grading alone. Show less
Quach, K.T.; Dirven, L.; Vingerhoed, A.M.; Bresser, J. de; Dammers, R.; Bos, E.M.; ... ; Furth, W.R. van 2023
Background Fatigue is a commonly reported and severe symptom in primary brain tumor patients, but the exact occurrence in meningioma patients is unknown. This study aimed to determine the frequency... Show moreBackground Fatigue is a commonly reported and severe symptom in primary brain tumor patients, but the exact occurrence in meningioma patients is unknown. This study aimed to determine the frequency and severity of fatigue in meningioma patients as well as associations between the level of fatigue and patient-, tumor-, and treatment-related factors. Methods In this multicenter cross-sectional study, meningioma patients completed questionnaires on fatigue (MFI-20), sleep (PSQI), anxiety and depression (HADS), tumor-related symptoms (MDASI-BT), and cognitive functioning (MOS-CFS). Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate the independent association between fatigue and each patient-, tumor-, and treatment-related factor separately, corrected for relevant confounders. Results Based on predetermined in- and exclusion criteria, 275 patients, on average 5.3 (SD = 2.0) year since diagnosis, were recruited. Most patients had undergone resection (92%). Meningioma patients reported higher scores on all fatigue subscales compared to normative data and 26% were classified as fatigued. Having experienced a complication due to resection (OR 3.6, 95% CI: 1.8-7.0), having received radiotherapy (OR 2.4, 95% CI: 1.2-4.8), a higher number of comorbidities (OR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.3-1.9) and lower educational level (low level as reference; high level OR 0.3, 95% CI: 0.2-0.7) were independently associated with more fatigue. Conclusions Fatigue is a frequent problem in meningioma patients even many years after treatment. Both patient- and treatment-related factors were determinants of fatigue, with the treatment-related factors being the most likely target for intervention in this patient population. Show less
Risk prediction for meningioma tumors was until recently almost exclusively based on morphological features of the tumor. To improve risk prediction, multiple models have been established that... Show moreRisk prediction for meningioma tumors was until recently almost exclusively based on morphological features of the tumor. To improve risk prediction, multiple models have been established that incorporate morphological and molecular features for an integrated risk prediction score. One such model is the integrated molecular-morphologic meningioma integrated score (IntS), which allocates points to the histological grade, epigenetic methylation family and specific copy-number variations. After publication of the IntS, questions arose in the neuropathological community about the practical and clinical implementation of the IntS, specifically regarding the calling of CNVs, the applicability of the newly available version (v12.5) of the brain tumor classifier and the need for incorporation of TERT-promoter and CDKN2A/B status analysis in the IntS calculation. To investigate and validate these questions additional analyses of the discovery (n = 514), retrospective validation (n = 184) and prospective validation (n = 287) cohorts used for IntS discovery and validation were performed. Our findings suggest that any loss over 5% of the chromosomal arm suffices for the calling of a CNV, that input from the v12.5 classifier is as good or better than the dedicated meningioma classifier (v2.4) and that there is most likely no need for additional testing for TERT-promoter mutations and/or homozygous losses of CDKN2A/B when defining the IntS for an individual patient. The findings from this study help facilitate the clinical implementation of IntS-based risk prediction for meningioma patients. Show less
Background: Meningiomas, the most common primary intracranial tumors, can be separated into 3 DNA methylation groups with distinct biological drivers, clinical outcomes, and therapeutic... Show moreBackground: Meningiomas, the most common primary intracranial tumors, can be separated into 3 DNA methylation groups with distinct biological drivers, clinical outcomes, and therapeutic vulnerabilities. Alternative meningioma grouping schemes using copy number variants, gene expression profiles, somatic short variants, or integrated molecular models have been proposed. These data suggest meningioma DNA methylation groups may harbor subgroups unifying contrasting theories of meningioma biology. Methods: A total of 565 meningioma DNA methylation profiles from patients with comprehensive clinical follow-up at independent discovery (n = 200) or validation (n = 365) institutions were reanalyzed and classified into Merlin-intact, Immune-enriched, or Hypermitotic DNA methylation groups. RNA sequencing from the discovery (n = 200) or validation (n = 302) cohort were analyzed in the context of DNA methylation groups to identify subgroups. Biological features and clinical outcomes were analyzed across meningioma grouping schemes. Results: RNA sequencing revealed differential enrichment of FOXM1 target genes across two subgroups of Hypermitotic meningiomas. Differential expression and ontology analyses showed the subgroup of Hypermitotic meningiomas without FOXM1 target gene enrichment was distinguished by gene expression programs driving macromolecular metabolism. Analysis of genetic, epigenetic, gene expression, or cellular features revealed Hypermitotic meningioma subgroups were concordant with Proliferative or Hypermetabolic meningiomas, which were previously reported alongside Merlin-intact and Immune-enriched tumors using an integrated molecular model. The addition of DNA methylation subgroups to clinical models refined the prediction of postoperative outcomes compared to the addition of DNA methylation groups. Conclusions: Meningiomas can be separated into three DNA methylation groups and Hypermitotic meningiomas can be subdivided into Proliferative and Hypermetabolic subgroups, each with distinct biological and clinical features. Show less
Introduction: Meningioma is the most common primary intracranial tumour in adults. The majority are non-malignant, but a proportion behave more aggressively. Incidental/minimally symptomatic... Show moreIntroduction: Meningioma is the most common primary intracranial tumour in adults. The majority are non-malignant, but a proportion behave more aggressively. Incidental/minimally symptomatic meningioma are often managed by serial imaging. Symptomatic meningioma, those that threaten neurovascular structures, or demonstrate radiological growth, are usually resected as first-line management strategy. For patients in poor clinical condition, or with inoperable, residual or recurrent disease, radiotherapy is often used as primary or adjuvant treatment. Effective pharmacotherapy treatments do not currently exist. There is heterogeneity in the outcomes measured and reported in meningioma clinical studies. Two 'Core Outcome Sets' (COS) will be developed: (COSMIC: Intervention) for use in meningioma clinical effectiveness trials and (COSMIC: Observation) for use in clinical studies of incidental/untreated meningioma. Methods and analysis: Two systematic literature reviews and trial registry searches will identify outcomes measured and reported in published and ongoing (1) meningioma clinical effectiveness trials, and (2) clinical studies of incidental/untreated meningioma. Outcomes include those that are clinician reported, patient reported, caregiver reported and based on objective tests (eg, neurocognitive tests), as well as measures of progression and survival. Outcomes will be deduplicated and categorised to generate two long lists. The two long lists will be prioritised through two, two-round, international, modified eDelphi surveys including patients with meningioma, healthcare professionals, researchers and those in caring/supporting roles. The two final COS will be ratified through two 1-day online consensus meetings, with representation from all stakeholder groups. Ethics and dissemination: Institutional review board (University of Liverpool) approval was obtained for the conduct of this study. Participant eConsent will be obtained prior to participation in the eDelphi surveys and consensus meetings. The two systematic literature reviews and two final COS will be published and freely available. Show less
Core Outcome Sets (COS) define minimum outcomes to be measured and reported in clinical effectiveness trials for a particular health condition/health area. Despite recognition as critical to... Show moreCore Outcome Sets (COS) define minimum outcomes to be measured and reported in clinical effectiveness trials for a particular health condition/health area. Despite recognition as critical to clinical research design for other health areas, none have been developed for neuro-oncology. COS development projects should carefully consider: scope (how the COS should be used), stakeholders involved in development (including patients as both research partners and participants), and consensus methodologies used (typically a Delphi survey and consensus meeting), as well as dissemination plans. Developing COS for neuro-oncology is potentially challenging due to extensive tumor subclassification (including molecular stratification), different symptoms related to anatomical tumor location, and variation in treatment options. Development of a COS specific to tumor subtype, in a specific location, for a particular intervention may be too narrow and would be unlikely to be used. Equally, a COS that is applicable across a wider area of neuro-oncology may be too broad and therefore lack specificity. This review describes why and how a COS may be developed, and discusses challenges for their development, specific to neuro-oncology. The COS under development are briefly described, including: adult glioma, incidental/untreated meningioma, meningioma requiring intervention, and adverse events from surgical intervention for pediatric brain tumors. Show less
Purpose The effectiveness and safety of surgery for spheno-orbital meningiomas remains subject of debate, as studies often describe different surgical approaches and reconstruction techniques with... Show morePurpose The effectiveness and safety of surgery for spheno-orbital meningiomas remains subject of debate, as studies often describe different surgical approaches and reconstruction techniques with very heterogeneous outcomes. We aimed to systematically summarize and analyse the literature on spheno-orbital meningiomas regarding presenting symptoms, surgical techniques, outcomes and complications. Methods Studies were retrieved from eight databases. Original articles were included if in >= 5 patients presenting symptoms, surgical treatment and outcomes were described. Fixed- and random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate weighted percentages with 95%CIs of presenting symptoms, outcomes and complications. Results Thirty-eight articles were included describing 1486 patients. Proptosis was the most common presenting symptom (84%; 95%CI 76-91%), followed by unilateral visual acuity deficits (46%; 95%CI 40-51%) and visual field deficits (31%; 95%CI 20-43%). In 35/38 studies (92%), a pterional craniotomy was used. Decompression of the optic canal (82%) and the superior orbital fissure (66%) was most often performed, and usually dural (47%) and bony defects (76%) were reconstructed. In almost all patients, visual acuity (91%; 95%CI 86-96%), visual fields (87%; 95%CI 70-99%) and proptosis (96%; 95%CI 90-100%) improved. Furthermore, surgery showed improvement in 96% (95%CI 78-100%) for both diplopia and ophthalmoplegia. The most common surgical complications were hypesthesia (19%; 95%CI 10-30%), ptosis and diplopia (both 17%; 95%CI, respectively, 10-26% and 5-33%) and ophthalmoplegia (16%; 95%CI 10-24). Conclusion Patients with spheno-orbital meningioma usually present with proptosis or unilateral decreased visual acuity. Surgery shows to be effective in improving visual acuity and visual field deficits with mostly minor and well-tolerated complications. Show less
Najafabadi, A.H.Z.; Mortel, J.P.M. van de; Lobatto, D.J.; Brandsma, D.R.; Peul, W.C.; Biermasz, N.; ... ; Furth, W.R. van 2020
Background. It has been suggested that lack of ongoing registration of patient-centered outcomes has resulted in existing care trajectories that have not been optimized for sequelae experienced by... Show moreBackground. It has been suggested that lack of ongoing registration of patient-centered outcomes has resulted in existing care trajectories that have not been optimized for sequelae experienced by meningioma patients. This study aimed to evaluate the structure of current meningioma care and identify issues and potential high-impact improvement initiatives.Methods. Using the grounded theory approach, a thematic framework was constructed based on the Dutch Comprehensive Cancer Organisation survey about issues in meningioma care trajectories. This framework was used during 3 semistructured interviews and 2 focus groups with patient-partner dyads (n = 16 participants), and 2 focus groups with health care providers (n = 11 participants) to assess issues in current meningioma care trajectories and possible solutions, including barriers to and facilitators for implementation.Results. Identified issues (n = 18 issues) were categorized into 3 themes: availability and provision of information, care and support, and screening for (neurocognitive) rehabilitation. A lack of information about the intervention and possible outcomes or complications, lack of support after treatment focusing on bodily and psychological functions, and reintegration into society were considered most important. Sixteen solutions were suggested, such as appointment of case managers (solution for 11/18 issues, 61%), assessment and treatment by physiatrists (22%), and routine use of patient-reported outcome measures for patient monitoring (17%). Barriers for these solutions were lack of budget, capacity, technology infrastructure, and qualified personnel with knowledge about issues experienced by meningioma patients.Conclusions. This study identified issues in current multidisciplinary meningioma care that are considered unmet needs by patients, partners, and health care providers and could guide innovation of care. Show less
Vries, F. de; Lobatto, D.J.; Najafabadi, A.H.Z.; Kleijwegt, M.C.; Verstegen, M.J.T.; Schutte, P.J.; ... ; Furth, W.R. van 2019
We report a case of a 75-year-old patient with hypopituitarism, bitemporal visual field deficits and a parasellar mass on pituitary MRI. During surgery, suspicion was raised that a non-functioning... Show moreWe report a case of a 75-year-old patient with hypopituitarism, bitemporal visual field deficits and a parasellar mass on pituitary MRI. During surgery, suspicion was raised that a non-functioning pituitary adenoma was accompanied by an abutting diaphragm sellae meningioma, which was confirmed at pathological examination. In retrospect, the initial MRI suggested two separate tumours on the basis of differing densities but this distinction was not seen on the last preoperative MRI. Show less
Kok, J.L.; Teepen, J.C.; Leeuwen, F.E. van; Tissing, W.J.E.; Neggers, S.J.C.M.M.; Pal, H.J. van der; ... ; DCOG-LATER Study Group 2019
