loss of heterozygosity at 1p-19q induces a global change in oligodendroglial tumor gene expression

12
LABORATORY INVESTIGATION - HUMAN/ANIMAL TISSUE Loss of heterozygosity at 1p-19q induces a global change in oligodendroglial tumor gene expression Rube ´n Ferrer-Luna Manuel Mata Lina Nu ´n ˜ez Jorge Calvar Francisco Dası ´ Eugenia Arias Jose ´ Piquer Miguel Cerda ´-Nicola ´s Ana Lı ´a Taratuto Gustavo Sevlever Bernardo Celda Horacio Martinetto Received: 7 April 2009 / Accepted: 15 June 2009 / Published online: 12 July 2009 Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2009 Abstract Oligodendroglial tumors presenting loss of het- erozygosity (LOH) at 1p and 19q have been shown to be sensitive to chemotherapy, thus making 1p-19q status test- ing a key aspect in oligodendroglioma diagnosis and prog- nosis. Twenty-nine tumor samples (19 oligodendrogliomas, 10 oligoastrocytomas) were analyzed in order to obtain a molecular profile identifying those bearing 1p-19q LOH. Other genomic anomalies usually present in gliomas, such as EGFR amplification, CDKN2A/ARF deletion, 10q LOH and TP53 mutation, were also studied. Tumors with 1p-19q LOH overexpressed genes related to neurogenesis. Genes linked to immune response, proliferation and inflammation were overexpressed in the group with intact 1p-19q; this group could in turn be further divided in two subgroups: one overexpressing genes involved in immune response and inflammation that did not show major genetic aberrations other than the TP53 mutation and EGFR trisomy in a few cases, and another overexpressing genes related to immune response and proliferation that had a predominance of samples carrying several anomalies and presenting worse outcomes. This molecular signature was validated by ana- lyzing a set of ten tumor samples (three oligodendrogliomas, seven oligoastrocytomas); all ten samples were correctly assigned. LOH at 1p-19q results in haploinsufficiency and copy number reduction of several genes, including NOTCH 2; this phenomenon produces a global change in gene expression inducing a pro-neural status that results in restrictions to cell migration and proliferation. Tumors without LOH at 1p-19q exhibit the opposite characteristics, explaining their more aggressive behavior. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11060-009-9944-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. R. Ferrer-Luna B. Celda (&) Department of Physical Chemistry, Universitat de Valencia, Dr. Moliner sn., 46100 Burjassot, Valencia, Spain e-mail: [email protected] M. Mata Research Foundation, Hospital General Universitario de Valencia, Valencia, Spain L. Nu ´n ˜ez E. Arias A. L. Taratuto G. Sevlever H. Martinetto (&) Department of Neuropathology, FLENI, Montan ˜eses 2325 (C1428AQK), Buenos Aires, Argentina e-mail: hmartinetto@fleni.org.ar J. Calvar Department of Neuroimaging, FLENI, Buenos Aires, Argentina F. Dası ´ Research Foundation, Hospital Clı ´nico Universitario, Valencia, Spain J. Piquer Neurosurgery Service, Hospital de la Ribera-Alzira, Valencia, Spain M. Cerda ´-Nicola ´s Department of Pathology, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain B. Celda CIBER BBN, ISC-III, Valencia, Spain 123 J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354 DOI 10.1007/s11060-009-9944-y

Upload: independent

Post on 12-Nov-2023

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

LABORATORY INVESTIGATION - HUMAN/ANIMAL TISSUE

Loss of heterozygosity at 1p-19q induces a global changein oligodendroglial tumor gene expression

Ruben Ferrer-Luna Æ Manuel Mata Æ Lina Nunez Æ Jorge Calvar ÆFrancisco Dası Æ Eugenia Arias Æ Jose Piquer Æ Miguel Cerda-Nicolas ÆAna Lıa Taratuto Æ Gustavo Sevlever Æ Bernardo Celda Æ Horacio Martinetto

Received: 7 April 2009 / Accepted: 15 June 2009 / Published online: 12 July 2009

� Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2009

Abstract Oligodendroglial tumors presenting loss of het-

erozygosity (LOH) at 1p and 19q have been shown to be

sensitive to chemotherapy, thus making 1p-19q status test-

ing a key aspect in oligodendroglioma diagnosis and prog-

nosis. Twenty-nine tumor samples (19 oligodendrogliomas,

10 oligoastrocytomas) were analyzed in order to obtain a

molecular profile identifying those bearing 1p-19q LOH.

Other genomic anomalies usually present in gliomas, such as

EGFR amplification, CDKN2A/ARF deletion, 10q LOH and

TP53 mutation, were also studied. Tumors with 1p-19q LOH

overexpressed genes related to neurogenesis. Genes linked

to immune response, proliferation and inflammation were

overexpressed in the group with intact 1p-19q; this group

could in turn be further divided in two subgroups: one

overexpressing genes involved in immune response and

inflammation that did not show major genetic aberrations

other than the TP53 mutation and EGFR trisomy in a few

cases, and another overexpressing genes related to immune

response and proliferation that had a predominance of

samples carrying several anomalies and presenting worse

outcomes. This molecular signature was validated by ana-

lyzing a set of ten tumor samples (three oligodendrogliomas,

seven oligoastrocytomas); all ten samples were correctly

assigned. LOH at 1p-19q results in haploinsufficiency and

copy number reduction of several genes, including NOTCH

2; this phenomenon produces a global change in gene

expression inducing a pro-neural status that results in

restrictions to cell migration and proliferation. Tumors

without LOH at 1p-19q exhibit the opposite characteristics,

explaining their more aggressive behavior.

Electronic supplementary material The online version of thisarticle (doi:10.1007/s11060-009-9944-y) contains supplementarymaterial, which is available to authorized users.

R. Ferrer-Luna � B. Celda (&)

Department of Physical Chemistry, Universitat de Valencia,

Dr. Moliner sn., 46100 Burjassot, Valencia, Spain

e-mail: [email protected]

M. Mata

Research Foundation, Hospital General Universitario

de Valencia, Valencia, Spain

L. Nunez � E. Arias � A. L. Taratuto � G. Sevlever �H. Martinetto (&)

Department of Neuropathology, FLENI, Montaneses

2325 (C1428AQK), Buenos Aires, Argentina

e-mail: [email protected]

J. Calvar

Department of Neuroimaging, FLENI, Buenos Aires, Argentina

F. Dası

Research Foundation, Hospital Clınico Universitario,

Valencia, Spain

J. Piquer

Neurosurgery Service, Hospital de la Ribera-Alzira,

Valencia, Spain

M. Cerda-Nicolas

Department of Pathology, University of Valencia,

Valencia, Spain

B. Celda

CIBER BBN, ISC-III, Valencia, Spain

123

J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354

DOI 10.1007/s11060-009-9944-y

Keywords Oligodendroglial tumors � Loss of

heterozygosity � Microarray � Genomic alterations

Introduction

Malignant gliomas are the most common subtype of pri-

mary central nervous system (CNS) tumors. They are

aggressive, highly invasive and destructive, and have been

defined as tumors presenting histological, immunohisto-

chemical and ultrastructural features of glial differentiation

[1]. They are classified into three groups according to their

hypothetical differentiation line and population predomi-

nance. The cellular origin of these tumors is unknown;

however, it has been postulated that they derive from stem

cells or from differentiated cells that suffer dedifferentia-

tion and later acquire features resembling those of astro-

cytes, oligodendrocytes or ependymal cells [1].

The World Health Organization (WHO) has established

classification criteria, grouping these tumors into four

classes of increasing clinical malignancy [1].

Oligodendrogliomas are believed to represent about 5%

of CNS primary tumors, but this is just an estimation; ever

increasing accuracy in diagnosis methods is generating a

greater incidence than previously reported. There is a well-

known variation in oligodendroglioma diagnosis [2], even

among experts. The lack of reliable immunohistochemical

markers for oligodendroglial lineage and the absence of

universally accepted morphological delineators contribute

to this ambiguity. WHO has established two histological

degrees for oligodendroglioma classification: grade II,

which presents differentiated cells, and grade III, which

presents anaplatic cells as well as histological features

indicating increased malignancy, such as high cellularity,

cellular pleomorphism, prominent mitotic activity, micro-

vascular proliferation and necrosis [1].

Oligodendrogliomas have been shown to be very sen-

sitive to radio- and chemotherapeutic treatments [3, 4].

This feature is the opposite of what has been observed in

astrocytic tumors, making it a most meaningful clinical

difference [5].

Because of these differences in chemosensitivity, differ-

ential diagnosis becomes crucial in order to decide the proper

oncologic strategy. Unfortunately, current anatomopatho-

logical and immunohistochemical methods do not allow an

absolutely reliable distinction between oligodendrogliomas,

mixed gliomas and astrocytomas; this was the reason that led

many researchers to search for genetic markers to complete

the diagnosis and to establish prognostic correlations.

The most common genetic anomaly detected in oligo-

dendrogliomas is the allelic loss of chromosomes 1p and

19q [6, 7]; many reports have shown that about 80% of

grade II oligodendrogliomas present combined loss of

heterocigozity (LOH) in 1p and 19q, while 50–70% of

grade III oligodendrogliomas have this alteration. It has

been shown that concurrent loss of 1p and 19q results from

the balanced translocation between chromosomes 1 and 19,

rendering two derivative chromosomes, one of which, the

der(1;19)(p10;q10), is subsequently lost [8]. It is still not

known which genes lost in these regions are important for

tumor development, but what has been well documented is

that combined LOH at 1p and 19q has a strong predictive

value for chemosensitivity [5].

Grade II oligodendrogliomas may carry, although to a

lesser extent, other genetic alterations, such as growth

factor receptor (EGFR, PDGFRa, PDGFRb) overexpres-

sion and CDKN2A/ARF gene (encoding for tumor sup-

pressor p16) inactivation by promoter hypermethylation.

Histological progression to grade III is due to further

accumulation of genetic anomalies linked to tumor sup-

pressor inactivation or mitogen hyperactivation, including:

CDKN2A/ARF gene homozygous deletion, LOH at 10q

(associated to PTEN and DMBT-1 inactivation), TP53 gene

mutations and EGFR gene amplification [1].

By using high-throughput expression arrays, it was pos-

sible to distinguish WHO grades in oligodendrogliomas [9].

Supervised learning approaches were applied on glioblas-

tomas and anaplastic oligodendrogliomas with classic his-

tology; this model provided a more accurate prognosis

prediction in non-classic lesions when compared to patho-

logical classification, suggesting that class prediction models

based on expression profiling correlate better with survival

than histological classification [10]. In oligodendrogliomas,

the gene expression profile has been correlated both with

chromosomal aberrations, with treatment response and with

survival; 1p and 19q deletions decisively determined the

gene expression profile, and transcripts found identified

patients with higher likelihood to respond to treatment and

defined patient subgroups with favorable prognosis [11]. In

another study several genes located in these regions showed

significantly lower expression levels, supporting the notion

that these genes could contribute to oligodendroglioma ini-

tiation and glioma progression [12]. On the other hand,

tumors with 1pLOH have similar expression profiles to

normal brain, and many overexpressed genes are presumed

to have functions in nervous tissues [13]. Most of the genes

located at 1p and 19q have an expression level dependent on

allele number. Loss of one allele on 1p and 19q reduces

expression levels by 50%, showing a haplo-insufficiency

state that may play an important role in oligodendroglial

tumor pathogenesis and explain the attenuated phenotype

observed in 1p/19q LOH oligodendroglial tumors.

The heterogeneous nature of these tumors along with the

complexity of the signaling network that generates them

has prevented researchers from finding a global set of

markers to establish a clear classification, thus precluding

344 J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354

123

targeted therapy development. As a first step towards the

development of molecular classification, we have

employed expression profiling as a means to distinguish

between tumors carrying 1p-19q LOH from those retaining

heterozygosity (ROH). We have identified a set of tran-

scripts that may be considered as potential markers for

these particular traits. Moreover, our results suggest that

LOH at 1p-19q results in a global change in gene expres-

sion, explaining the differences observed between tumors

carrying the alteration from those without it.

Materials and methods

Tissue samples

Tissue samples were collected at La Ribera-Alzira Hospital

(Valencia, Spain) and FLENI (Buenos Aires, Argentina).

Samples were collected immediately after surgical resection,

snap frozen and stored at -808 C. Samples were visually

inspected on H&E frozen sections by experienced neuro-

pathologists (ALT, GS); these sections were diagnosed and

graded according to WHO criteria. Tissue adjacent to the

inspected sections was used for nucleic acid isolation.

Twenty-nine samples from oligodendroglial tumors were

selected for the training set, including 16 oligodendroglio-

mas (OD), 3 anaplastic oligodendrogliomas (AOD), 7 oli-

goastrocytomas (OA) and 3 anaplastic oligoastrocytomas

(AOA) (Table 1). Ten samples (three OD, one OA and six

AOA) were included in the validation independent test set.

This investigation was previously approved by both

institutional ethics committees and by the European Project

e-TUMOUR. Subjects gave written informed consent.

Nucleic acid isolation

For total RNA extraction, 15–25 mg of frozen tumor

sample was homogenized with Ultraturrax, and total RNA

was isolated employing the mirVANA kit (Ambion Inc.,

Austin, TX) following the manufacturer’s instructions.

Purified RNA was quantified by UV absorbance at 260

and 280 nm, and RNA quality was assessed on a spectro-

photometer and Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent Tech-

nologies, Palo Alto, CA). Samples with a 28S/18S ratio of

[1.1 and no evidence of ribosomal peak degradation were

included.

Microarray experiments

Total RNA (1–15 lg) was used to generate double-stranded

cDNA. cDNA synthesis and cRNA labeling were per-

formed using the protocol for one-cycle cDNA synthesis.

Biotin-labeled cRNA (20 lg) was fragmented and

hybridized overnight to the Affymetrix HU133plus2.0

genechip. Protocols were performed as recommended by

Affymetrix (Santa Clara, CA). Arrays were washed, stained

with streptavidin phycoerythrin and scanned to generate an

image file. Scan quality was assessed by the inspection of

visible microarrays artifacts, grid placement, background

intensity and housekeeping gene expression. GeneChip

operating software (GCOS) was used to define ‘‘Absent’’ or

‘‘Present’’ calls and generate CEL files. Arrays with\35%

‘‘Present’’ calls for the 47,000 probe sets and signal 30/50

ratio of GDAPH control B0.5 ratio B4.5 were omitted.

Data analysis

CEL files were imported into the dCHIP program [14] to

compute the model based on the expression index for each

gene. The arrays were normalized against the array with

median overall intensity employing the invariant set

method. Differentially expressed probe sets were identified

using a threshold approach. Probe sets with a P value

B0.01, lower bound of fold change (FC) C1.5 and presence

(P) in at least [20% of samples of each group were

selected. The resulting gene group showed a false discov-

ery rate (FDR)\1.6%. Differentially expressed genes were

evaluated in unsupervised approaches such as hierarchical

clustering and principal component analysis.

Hierarchical clustering is an approach that allowed us to

group samples and genes based on their score similarity.

Before this analysis, gene expression values were stan-

dardized (linearly scaled) to have mean 0 and standard

deviation 1. Standardized values were used as the basis to

merge nodes. One-Correlation was used as metric distance,

and the linkage method was the average, where the dis-

tance between two gene clusters (super-gene) was the

average of all pair-wise distances between two genes not

belonging to the same gene cluster. Finally, the gene

ordering was stated by cluster tightness.

To reduce the dimensionality we employed a mathe-

matical procedure known as PCA. This procedure converts

high-dimension data containing a number of correlated

variables into a new data set containing fewer uncorrelated

variables called principal components. To perform the

PCA, differentially expressed genes were imported into the

Spotfire Decision Site (Spotfire, Somerville, MA).

A supervised learning approach, linear discriminant

analysis (LDA) [15], was used in order to classify ten

samples with a priori unknown molecular status in a system

based on a differential gene expression profile established

among 1p/19q oligodendroglial tumor train groups.

In order to identify critical biological functions of genes

differentially expressed between tumors with LOH or ROH

at 1p-19q, we performed an analysis with the Babelomics

suite [16].

J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354 345

123

Genomic analysis

Genomic DNA was extracted from 1 to 5 mg frozen tissue

using Promega’s Wizard kit following the manufacturer’s

instructions. Samples were quantified spectrophotometri-

cally, and 5 ng DNA was used in each determination. LOH

was assessed by the QuMA method [17] using Applied

Biosystems 7500 Real-Time PCR system; the following

Table 1 Summary of histological diagnosis and clinical data used in this analysis

Sample ID Age Diagnostic Location Contrast enhanced Ki67 (%) Progression

1 Ho-1 65 AOA T ? 40 Dead

2 Ho-4 2 OD T ? 4 No

3 Ho-13 49 OD F - 3 No

4 Ho-17 33 AOA F ? 10 No

5 Ho-20 44 OA F - 13 No

6 Ho-31 15 OA T ? 4 No

7 Ho-32 42 OD FT - 2 No

8 Ho-35 34 OD FT - 9 Yes

9 Ho-36 15 OD F - 1 No

10 Ho-37 42 OD F - 2 No

11 Ho-40 29 OD FT - 4 No

12 Ho-52 65 AOD F ? 8 Dead

13 Ho-53 39 OD F - 7 No

14 Ho-54 43 OD F - 11 Yes

15 Ho-56 39 OD F - 12 No

16 T-58 43 OA P - N/A No

17 T-63 38 OA F N/A N/A No

18 Ho-74 30 OD F - 5 No

19 T-87 66 OA F - N/A No

20 Ho-89 48 OD FT - 3 No

21 Ho-108 38 OD T ? 1 Yes

22 Ho-109 40 OD F - 2 No

23 Ho-110 43 OA T - 6 Dead

24 Ho-113 42 AOD F ? 9 No

25 Ho-118 5 AOA P ? 29 Dead

26 Ho-120 62 OD F - 3 No

27 Ho-124 54 OD F - 3 No

28 Ho-129 53 OA F - 9 Yes

29 T-472 31 AOD FT - N/A No

30 Ho-160 27 OD T - 5 No

31 Ho-161 63 AOA T ? 5 Dead

32 Ho-167 41 OD P - 1 No

33 Ho-194 66 AOA P ? 28 Dead

34 Ho-196 35 AOA F ? 8 Yes

35 Ho-202 49 OD T - 1 Yes

36 Ho-203 39 AOA T ? 20 Yes

37 Ho-206 40 OA F - 4 No

38 Ho-207 28 AOA PT - 6 No

39 Ho-210 66 AOD F ? 1 Yes

Diagnosis: anaplastic oligodendroglioma (AOD), anaplastic oligoastrocitoma (AOA), oligodendroglioma (OD), oligoastrocytoma (OA)

Anatomic location: temporal lobe (T), frontal temporal (FT), frontal lobe (T), parietal lobe (P), parietal temporal lobe (PT). Progression

determined after 2-year follow-up

N/A Not assessed

346 J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354

123

markers were studied: D1S468, D1S214 and D1S199 for 1p

loss and D19S596, D19S408 and D19S867 for 19q loss.

Markers for LOH at 10q were D10S536 (located near the

PTEN gene) and D10S1683 (mapping close to DMBT-1

gene).

Homozygous deletions in the CDKN2A/ARF gene were

detected following a published protocol [18].

EGFR gene amplifications were assessed in a multiplex

real-time reaction employing the same conditions described

for CDKN2A, including GAPDH as reference gene. Primers

for the EGFR gene have the following sequences: forward

50-GAAGCTTGCTGGTAGCACTTG-30 and reverse 50-GT

GGAAGCCTTGAAGCAGAAC-30; the probe has the fol-

lowing sequence: 50-6FAMCCCAACTGTGAGCAAGGA

GCACATAMRA-30.TP53 gene mutations were scanned by SSCP-PCR as

described [19] and confirmed by direct sequencing.

Quantitative RT-PCR analysis: SYBR

Green assay

Quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) was performed on 27

samples used for microarray analysis. cDNA was syn-

thesized from 1 lg total RNA using random primers

employing the High Capacity cDNA Archive kit (Applied

Biosystems; P/N 4322171). Thermal cycler conditions for

reverse transcription were 25�C for 10 m, 37�C for

120 m and 85�C for 5 s. Quantitative real-time PCR

(qPCR) was carried out using SYBR Green PCR master

mix (Applied Biosystems) according to the manufac-

turer’s instructions. cDNA aliquots (1 ll) were used as

template for real-time PCR containing primers of control

and target genes. Each cDNA sample was analyzed in

triplicate. Expression levels were evaluated relative to

GAPDH housekeeping gene control. Primers were

obtained from QuantiTect Primer assay (Qiagen, Ger-

many) (Table 1S, Supplementary Material). PCR condi-

tions were as follows: 50�C 2 min, 95�C 10 min and 40

cycles of 95�C, 15 s and 60�C, 1 min. Cycling was done

on an ABI 7900 HT Fast Real-Time PCR System

(Applied Biosystem; Foster, CA). Relative expression

was assessed by the 2-DDCt method.

Statistical analysis

Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the significant asso-

ciation between 1p and 19q, 10q allelic losses versus tumor

type (mixed or pure) and gene expression profile versus

tumor location. Statistical test significance was determined

at P-value B0.05.

Results

Genomic alterations in oligodendroglial tumors:

train set

We performed genomic and transcriptomic studies on 29

oligodendroglial tumors. Tables 1 and 2 show the histo-

pathological diagnoses and chromosomal and genetic

alterations found.

LOH at 1p was found in 48% of the samples, while 41%

of them carried LOH at 19q. In most cases (38%) both

alterations were detected simultaneously.

When tumor grade was considered, these alterations

were more frequent, either alone or in combination, in

high-grade tumors; namely, 83% of grade III oligoden-

droglial tumors carried 1p or 19q loss, while combined loss

was detected in 50% of the high-grade samples. In grade II

tumors, these alterations were present in 43% of the sam-

ples with 35% showing the combined alteration. On the

other hand, combined LOH at 1p-19q was more common in

mixed oligodendrogliomas, but no significant association

was found between 1p/19q status and tumor morphology or

class (P value = 0.08).

LOH at 10q was detected in 45% of the samples and was

more prevalent in high-grade (66%) than low-grade (39%)

tumors. Similarly, this alteration commonly affected mixed

(70%) rather than pure (32%) oligodendrogliomas. We

detected a statistically significant association between 10q

deletion and mixed morphology (P-value B 0.05). Inter-

estingly, simultaneous deletions at both loci analyzed

(D10S536 and D10S1683) were detected only in 24% of

the samples, corresponding mostly to high-grade tumors;

the remaining 21% of samples only showed loss at

D10S1683 (neighboring DMBT-1 gene location) and were

low-grade tumors.

EGFR gene amplification was detected in 14% of the

samples, and positive cases were equally distributed

between low- and high-grade tumors, although high-grade

samples always presented a higher copy number. This

alteration was predominant in mixed tumors. We found a

positive association between EGFR gene amplification and

LOH at 10q (P = 0.03).

CDKN2A/ARF gene homozygous deletion was present

in 17% of cases, mostly affecting low-grade tumors. When

the type of tumor was considered, 16% of pure and 20% of

mixed oligodendrogliomas carried this anomaly. One AOA

presented LOH at this locus. This alteration was predom-

inant in the group of samples without 1p-19q LOH. One

sample bearing interstitial losses at 1p-19q presented

CDKN2A/ARF homozygous deletion together with EGFR

amplification and 10q loss.

J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354 347

123

Finally, two samples (7%) were shown to carry muta-

tions at exon 5 of the TP53 gene. Sample Ho-124 carried

C489 T[C (changing tyrosine for hystidine at position

163), while sample Ho-37 carried C418delA, which

introduces a stop codon at position 169.

Supervised clustering for tumors with 1p-19q LOH

versus 1p-19q ROH

In order to identify genes associated with chromosomal

alterations in 1p and 19q, we carried out three supervised

Table 2 Summary of molecular data used in this analysis

Group Sample D1S 468 D1S 214 D1S 199 D19S 867 D19S 596 D19S 408 D10S 536 D10S 1683 P16/p14del EGFR

amp.

P53 mut.

A Ho-109 LOH LOH LOH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH No No No

A Ho-56 LOH LOH LOH ROH LOH ROH ROH ROH No No No

A T-87 LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH ROH ROH No No No

A T-58 LOH LOH LOH ROH LOH ROH ROH ROH No No No

A Ho-32 LOH LOH LOH ROH LOH ROH ROH ROH No No No

A T-472 LOH LOH LOH ROH LOH LOH LOH LOH No No No

A Ho-113 LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH ROH ROH No No No

A Ho-13 LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH ROH ROH No No No

A* Ho-167 LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH ROH LOH ROH No No No

A T-63 LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH ROH LOH No No No

A Ho-17 LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH ROH ROH No No No

A Ho-20 LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH LOH No No No

A* Ho-206 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH ROH LOH LOH No No

A* Ho-160 LOH LOH LOH ROH ROH ROH LOH ROH No No No

A* Ho-202 ROH ROH ROH LOH ROH LOH LOH LOH No No No

B1 Ho-124 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH No No Yes

B1 Ho-37 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH No No Yes

B1 Ho-54 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH Yes No No

B1 Ho-36 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH No No No

B1 Ho-35 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH No No No

B1* Ho-207 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH No Trisomy No

B1 Ho-120 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH No No No

B1 Ho-40 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH No Trisomy No

B2 Ho-118 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH No No No

B2* Ho-210 ROH LOH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH Yes Yes (124) No

B2* Ho-161 LOH LOH LOH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH Yes Yes (165) No

B2* Ho-194 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH LOH Yes (164) No

B2* Ho-196 ROH LOH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH Yes Yes (29) No

B2 Ho-1 ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH ROH LOH LOH Yes Yes (59) No

B2 Ho-129 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH Yes Yes (24) No

B2 Ho-89 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH Yes No No

B2 Ho-31 ROH LOH LOH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH No No No

B2 Ho-4 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH No No No

B2 Ho-52 LOH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH Yes No No

B2 Ho-110 ROH LOH ROH ROH LOH ROH LOH LOH Yes Yes (5) No

B2* Ho-203 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH LOH No Yes (197) No

B2 Ho-108 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH No No No

B2 Ho-53 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH No No No

B2 Ho-74 ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH ROH LOH No No No

Samples marked with * were those used in the validation experiment. Allelic status: Loss of heterozygosity (LOH); retention (ROH). EGFR

amplification: numbers in brackets indicate copy number

348 J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354

123

analyses comparing expression patterns from samples car-

rying LOH (n = 14) against ROH (n = 15) at 1p, LOH

(n = 12) and ROH (n = 17) at 19q and finally combined

LOH (n = 11) versus ROH (n = 18) at 1p-19q. The fol-

lowing parameters were selected to perform the compari-

sons: P-value B 0.01, lower bound of FC [ 1.5, P C 20%

and FDR B 1.6%. Statistical analysis identified 309, 748

and 702 probe sets corresponding to 260, 689 and 622 genes

that were differentially expressed between categories.

Among the 260 genes differentially expressed between

tumors with LOH and ROH at 1p, 217 genes were over-

expressed in samples carrying LOH, while 43 were over-

expressed in tumors with ROH at 1p; 37% of the latter

genes were located within the deleted region (Fig. 1S,

Table 2S). When the same analysis was performed for

LOH versus ROH at 19q, we found 359 genes overex-

pressed in ROH samples, of which 11% were located in the

deleted region (Fig. 2S, Table 3S).

Tumors presenting combined loss at 1p-19q presented

251 genes overexpressed (Table 4S) when compared to

tumors with ROH at both chromosomal arms; of the 371

genes overexpressed in the ROH group, 71 mapped to the

deleted regions, resulting in a known location of 26% of

genes (Fig. 3S, Tables 5S, 6S and 7S).

The ROH/LOH ratio was 2.28 ± 0.26 for genes located

in 1p, 2.50 ± 0.58 for 19q and 2.31 ± 0.29 for combined

alterations, suggesting that the loss of one allele leads to a

gene expression reduction by about one half. Genes located

in the affected regions showed lower expression, thus

highlighting the probable link between allelic copy number

and expression dosage. This haploinsufficiency state

acquires special relevance in genes such as NOTCH2.

Figure 1 shows the hierarchical clustering and PCA

analysis corresponding to the 234 more differentially

expressed genes in tumors bearing combined LOH versus

ROH at 1p-19q. To reduce analysis dimensionality, we

selected those genes presenting differences greater than

100 between media. Tumors with combined LOH at 1p-

19q (group A) were grouped with the exception of one

sample (Ho-110); of note, this sample carried interstitial

deletions in both regions. Main features in this group were

frontal localization, lack of progression 24 months after

surgery, low percentage of samples (29%) showing con-

trast enhancement and lack of other genomic aberrations

except for three samples carrying LOH at 10q.

The main cluster branch included tumors with ROH at

both regions; inside this branch, two groups with different

molecular and histological profiles were identified. The

first group (group B1) contained seven pure low-grade ol-

igodendrogliomas; TP53 gene mutations were distinctive

in this group. Tumors in this group did not show contrast

enhancement and had frontal localization, and two patients

(29%) progressed in the first 24 months.

Group B2 showed a higher content of samples displaying

contrast enhancement and progression (or death) in the first

24 months; samples within this group carried LOH at 10q

associated with EGFR gene amplification and/or CDKN2A/

ARF homozygous deletion. This group was the only one

presenting samples with temporal localization.

Next, we performed a functional study employing the

Babelomics suite. Of 409 probe sets and the corresponding

371 genes overexpressed in the ROH group, 268 presented

correspondence in the Ensembl database, and 211 of them

had annotations for biological process functions. The LOH

group, with 293 probe sets and 251 corresponding genes,

presented 173 genes with correspondence in the Ensembl

database, and 126 of them had annotations for biological

processes (Fig. 2).

Functional annotation for biological processes, based on

different levels of gene ontology (GO), is shown in

Tables 8S, 9S and 10S for the differentially expressed genes

that presented significant differences and no redundancies

in the different GO levels. Tumors with ROH showed a

predominance of genes implicated in immune and inflam-

matory responses and proliferation, while the LOH group

was enriched with genes linked to neurogenesis. A 21-gene

set allowed us to distinguish between subgroups B1 and B2

in the ROH group, (Fig. 1, Table 11S), although we could

not find any functional enrichment. From the inspection of

the entire data set, we conclude that subgroup B2 expressed

higher levels of genes involved in proliferation when

compared to subgroup B1. Tumors presenting LOH at 1p-

19q and a neurogenic expression profile occurred most

frequently on frontal lobes (P value = 0.05).

Real-time RT-PCR quantitation

Genes displaying the most significant differences between

samples with and without LOH and located in the affected

regions (1p36 and 19q13.3) were selected to perform val-

idation by real-time RT-PCR quantitation. For 1p loss we

tested CCNL2, NOTCH2, ADORA3 and ARHGEF10L,

while SNRP70, ZNF404, EGLN2 were assayed for 19q and

MKNK2 for 19p, which surprisingly was the region more

represented in samples with 19q loss. RT-PCR quantitation

confirmed microarray results (Fig. 3). ARHGEF10L,

NOTCH2, ADORA3, ZNF404, EGLN2 and MKNK2 gave

similar expression patterns when analyzed by either

method. SNRP70 displayed higher levels when measured

by quantitative RT-PCR, while CCNL2 was the only

marker that showed a lower level of induction compared to

microarray results (the difference between both groups was

0.84-fold for this gene, Table 12S). These markers could

thus be considered as good candidates for 1p-19q LOH

detection by alternative means such as quantitative RT-

PCR or immunohistochemistry.

J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354 349

123

Overexpressedin group A vsB1 and B2.

Overexpressedin group B1 vsA and B2

Overexpressedin group B1 andB2 vs A

A B

C

Fig. 1 PCA and hierarchical clustering analysis based on expression

of 262 probe sets is significantly different between 1p-19q LOH and

ROH tumors. Probe sets were selected according to a limit approach

among groups (P-value B 0.01; lower bound of fold change [1.5;

presence C20% in each group; differences among means[100; FDR

of 0.8%). PCA and hierarchical clustering identify two main clusters:

tumors with LOH on 1p-19q (blue) and tumors with ROH on 1p-19q

(yellow). a Relative expression levels of 262 probe sets corresponding

to 234 genes are plotted against tumor samples. Normalized intensity

value of each gene was standardized to have a mean of 0 and SD of 1

before clustering. Red is relatively higher expression, and green is

relatively lower expression. A total of 94 genes were overexpressed in

tumors with LOH1p-19q, whereas 140 genes showed overexpression

on tumors with ROH. b Dendrogram enlargement of clustered

samples shown in A. The colorgram displays type: Oligodendrogli-

oma (OD, light green), oligoastrocytoma (OA, light red), anaplastic

oligodendoglioma (AOD, green), anaplastic oligoastrocytoma (AOA,

red). Location: Frontal lobe (F, light blue), front temporal (FT, lightyellow), temporal (T, orange). Grade: Low grade (2, purple) and high

grade (3, red). Contrast enhancement: Positive (P, red), negative (B,

blue). Diagnostic: Mixed (M, orange), pure (P, green). Age: Young

(Y, blue B16 years), adult (A, blue light). Chromosomal status for 1p,

19q, simultaneous 1p-19q, 10q: Loss of heterozygosity (L, blue),

retention (R, yellow). Molecular status: CDK2NA deletion (D, lightblue), EGFR amplification (A, red), TP53 mutation (M, red), no

alterations (N, yellow). Note that chromosomal aberrations showed a

decisive role in gene expression profile clustered by histological type.

c Principal component analysis based on expression of the 262 most

significant probe sets, demonstrating that 1p-19q LOH tumors (blue)

and 1p-19q ROH tumors (yellow) have a distinct global gene

expression profile. Additionally, PCA identifies two 1p-19q ROH

tumor subgroups, group B1 (circled in yellow) and group B2 (circledin blue)

Fig. 2 Functional annotation for biological processes according to

GO. Tumors presenting ROH at 1p-19q are shown in red, while those

presenting LOH at 1p-19q are shown in green. Non-adjusted P value

is shown in the left column, while the right column shows the P-value

after FDR correction. An adjusted P value\0.05 was considered to be

statistically significant

350 J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354

123

Gene expression profile and genetic validation:

independent sample test

To validate the classifier, we analyzed a ten-sample set of

tumors that did not play any role in gene or feature

selection of tumors by microarrays in a blinded test. Four

samples were classified as bearing alterations at 1p-19q and

six as carrying 1p-19q ROH. In this latter group, one

sample was assigned to group B1, while five to group B2

(Fig. 4). We then carried out the genetic testing (Table 2)

and found that all ten samples were correctly classified

(Table 13S).

When the complete set of samples is considered, the

main features of each group can be depicted. Partial LOH

at 10q (usually marker D10S1683) is similar in all groups

(26.5% group A, 37.5% group B1 and 25% group B2),

while complete 10q LOH predominates in group B2 (62.5%

comparing to 20% in group A and none in group B1).

Alterations in CDKN2A/ARF are also predominant in

group B2 (56%, while 7% in group A and 12.5% in group

B1). TP53 mutations were only detected in group B1 (25%).

We detected two different alterations in EGFR: trisomy,

which was exclusively found in group B1 (25% of sam-

ples), and amplifications with high copy number tandems

in group B2 (50% of samples). Alterations in CDKN2A/

ARF and EGFR co-occurred with complete LOH at 10q in

group B2 tumors. Partial LOH at 1p was only detected in

group B2 (31% of samples). Progression was also

characteristic of group B2: 69% (including all patients that

died in the first 2 years) against 7% in group A and 25% in

group B1. Samples with temporal localization and contrast

enhancement were also typical in group B2; temporal

localization was found in 13% of group A samples and

50% of group B2, while it was not detected in group B1.

Similarly, contrast enhancement was determined in 23% of

group A samples and 69% group B2, while group B1 did

not contain contrast-enhancing tumors. Finally, Ki67 was

also higher in group B2: group A contained 33% of samples

with values higher than 5%, while group B1 contained 38%

and group B2 63%.

Interestingly, samples bearing LOH at 1p or 19q but not

the combined loss grouped together, suggesting that they

may belong to a subgroup within group A. Unfortunately,

the number of samples is too low to confirm this hypoth-

esis. Nevertheless, this potential subgroup contained the

only samples in group A carrying alterations in the

CDKN2A/ARF gene, presenting temporal localization and

showing progression in the first 2 years. When LOH at 1p

was combined with complete LOH at 10q, CDKN2A/ARF

deletion and EGFR amplification, the sample (Ho-161) was

assigned to group B2.

Group A contained 60% of pure tumors and 40% of

mixed tumors, while group B1 contained 87.5% pure and

12.5% mixed; group B2 had the higher proportion of mixed

tumors (62.5% against 37.5% pure tumors).

Discussion

Loss of heterozygozity at 1p-19q is a genetic hallmark for

oligodendroglial tumors. By using a DNA microarray

approach we identified genes differentially expressed

between oligodendrogliomas displaying LOH or ROH at

those loci. We also detected genes located in the deleted

regions of both chromosomes that showed strong differ-

ences in their expression levels and could therefore be

employed as markers for this genomic alteration. Further-

more, when complementary genetic aberrations were

included in the analysis, the hierarchical clustering allowed

us to distinguish three subtypes of oligodendroglial tumors.

Group A was composed of samples bearing 1p-19 LOH,

while group B1 was composed of low-grade tumors with

ROH at 1p-19q, most of them showing no genomic

anomalies other than TP53 gene mutations or EGFR tri-

somy, and group B2, also bearing 1p-19q ROH, was more

heterogeneous; its main molecular signature was LOH at

10q combined with EGFR gene amplifications and/or

CDKN2A/ARF gene deletions. This clustering is similar to

one obtained by studying exclusively the genetic signature

of oligodendrogliomas [20]. Interestingly, partial LOH at

1p was exclusively detected in group B2, which is in

Fig. 3 Comparison of RNA assays by microarray hybridization and

by real-time quantitative RT-PCR (SYBER-Green) for eight genes

selected by location and relevant biological function. GAPDHhousekeeping gene was used as inner reference. Fold change FC1

represents normalized control group value in RT-PCR assays. For the

test group NOTCH2, ADORA3, ARHGEF10L, CCNL2 were overex-

pressed in 1p ROH tumors and SNPRP70, ZNF404, EGLN2 in 19q

ROH tumors

J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354 351

123

agreement with the notion that partial 1p losses may have a

worse prognosis than 1p ROH [21]. Several samples in this

subgroup closely resemble glioblastoma multiforme

(GBM) both in molecular signature and clinical course.

The observed differences in tumor location between groups

go in parallel with previous reports [22].

The heterogeneity of samples (most of them are low

grade in train set, while high grade in test set) could be a

weakness in a histopathological study. However, our study

has been designed using objective molecular biomarkers

independently of their subjective histopathological features

in order to identify differential gene expression profiles

among molecular classes. Taking into account these

aspects, validation of the gene expression profile was

consistent with our initial genetic findings.

Genes defining tumors within group A were mainly

associated with neurogenesis (Table 8S). This significant

functional enrichment was concordant with other analyses

where many genes showing higher expression in tumors

with 1p LOH were presumed to exert functions in nervous

tissues [13].

This result may reflect an origin from precursor cells

rather than from mature oligodendrocytes; in this regard, a

common developmental pathway for both oligodendrocytes

and motor neurons has been reported [23]. Among the most

significant genes identified in this group, many of them

play important roles in several cellular functions, such as

extracellular signaling (BMP2, BMPR2, CELSR3, APP,

THY1), cell cycle inhibition (CCNG2, E2F5, CDK5R1),

cAMP pathway inhibition (PK1A, PRKAR2B), cytoskele-

ton organization (MCF2, DCX, PAFAH1B1, CDK5R1,

SLITRK2, SLITRK5) and cell membrane composition

(ACSL6, SMPD3).

The most significant genes identified in the group with

1p-19q ROH, many of them related to inflammatory and

immune responses and proliferation (Tables 9S and 10S),

also participate in diverse cellular functions such as cyto-

skeleton organization, cell motility and invasiveness (IQ-

GAP1, VCL, ITGB2, ARPC1B, DOCK4, WASF2,

ARHGEF10L, ADORA3), proliferation (SALL1, GLIS3,

PLCE1, EMP1, CSF1R, TLR2, TLR5, AKT2, ITPKC,

NOTCH2), cell cycle progression (CCNL2), stress response

(HMOX1, MT2A), translation efficiency (MKNK2,

MKNK1, RPS6KA1) and complement system (CF1,

C3AR1, C1S, C1QB, C1QC, C2, C1QA, SERPING1). This

result suggests that samples with 1p-19q ROH overexpress

genes that induce cell proliferation and cell motility. Glial

tumor cells are known to express components of the

complement pathway; astrocytes and glial precursors also

express these proteins, playing a role in cell protection

[24]. Inflammation plays a significant role in neural stem

cell self-renewal and migration and can be considered as an

innate immune response. It has been reported that inflam-

matory signals induce stem cells to switch from slow

asymmetrical divisions to rapid symmetrical divisions [25].

We were not able to find differences in inflammatory fea-

tures between tumors with LOH and ROH at 1p-19q on

histopathological analysis. However, the possibility exists

Fig. 4 PCA and hierarchical

clustering analysis including

test set samples. See Fig. 2 for

details. Test set samples are

distinguished from train set by

shadowing in the clustering and

by grey spots in PCA

352 J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354

123

that gliomagenic mutations may induce the expression of a

set of genes involved in that response, taking advantage of

their ability to induce cell proliferation and migration, but

without triggering it. For a more detailed discussion about

genes identified in this study, see the supplementary text.

When 1p-19q LOH was first identified as a marker for

good prognosis and chemo-sensitivity, it was suggested

that these alterations could lead to the loss of a tumor

suppressor and of a group of genes involved in chemo-

resistance. The picture emerging from our study seems to

be more complex than the initial explanation. The hedge-

hog (Shh) pathway has been shown to stimulate stemness

and self-renewal of glioma stem cells [26], while pathways

regulated by EGFR, PI3 K/AKT, WNT and NOTCH stim-

ulate tumor cell and glial precursor proliferation [27]. The

loss of 1p and 19q seems to de-repress the expression of a

set of genes counteracting these pathways. A recent study

reported that the translocation t(1;19) does not lead to an

abnormal NOTCH2 structure, because the gene was not

physically rearranged by translocation, and furthermore no

mutations were found in gene sequence analysis [28].

These results show that NOTCH2 does not present classic

tumor suppressor gene characteristics. It is well known that

the Notch family plays a dual role in tumorogenesis [29].

On the other hand, Notch signaling has been shown to

inhibit neuronal differentiation and instruct glial differen-

tiation [30]. In this study we detected differential expres-

sion in BMP2 and NOTCH2, two key partners in this

mechanism, making it possible that NOTCH2 haploinsufi-

ciency could be responsible for the neurogenic gene

expression profile observed in tumors with 1p-19q dele-

tions. The pro-neural expression signature could help to

explain why oligodendroglial tumors with classic mor-

phology more often had a combined loss of 1p-19q.

As a concluding remark, we postulate that LOH at 1p-

19q confers on the cell a global change in gene expression

inducing a pro-neural status that results in a phenotype

presenting restriction to cell migration and proliferation,

reflecting their contribution as prognostic (rather than

predictive) biomarkers. In this line, many authors [31] have

reported longer survival for patients with oligodendroglial

tumors with 1p LOH who did not receive adjuvant therapy

after surgery compared with 1p ROH; in the same way, in a

low-grade glioma series a favorable prognostic effect for

1p-19q losses has been reported in patients never treated

with chemotherapy [32]. Tumors with ROH at 1p-19q

exhibit the opposite characteristics, namely increased cell

migration and proliferation, together with increased trans-

lation efficiency and cell survival.

After initial gliomagenic mutations, tumor cells may be

exposed to competition between two opposing ‘‘forces’’:

one of them inducing the pro-neural differentiation-like

status and the other one inducing proliferation and

migration. When further genetic aberrations occur, the

balance may be shifted. TP53 mutations and EGFR trisomy

will render an intermediate phenotype, which might reflect

that competition. LOH at 1p-19q shifts the equilibrium to

the pro-neural status, while mutations in the EGFR-PI3K-

AKT pathway shift the equilibrium to one with features

resembling GBM (Fig. 5).

Acknowledgements This study was supported in part by grants

from European projects: eTUMOUR (contract FP6-2002-LIFESCI-

HEALTH 503094), HEALTHAGENTS (IST-2004-027214), Minis-

terio de Educacion y Ciencia del Gobierno de Espana (SAF2007-

6547) and Project 49/06 FLENI.

Financial support eTUMOUR (FP6-2002-Lifesciehealth 503094).

HEALTHAGENTS (IST-2004-027214), Ministerio de Educacion y

Ciencia del Gobierno de Espana (SAF2007-6547) and Project 49/06

FLENI. Internet address: http://www.etumour.net.

References

1. Louis D, Ohgaki H, Wiestler O, Cavenee W (eds) (2007) World

Health Organization classification of tumors of the nervous sys-

tem. IARC/WHO, Lyon, pp 13–67

2. Coons S, Johnson P, Scheithauer B, Yates A, Pearl D (1997)

Improving diagnostic accuracy and interobserver concordance in

the classification and grading of primary gliomas. Cancer

79:1381–1393

3. Cairncross J, Macdonald D (1988) Successful chemotherapy for

recurrent malignat oligodendroglioma. Ann Neurol 23:360–364

4. Macdonald D, Gaspar L, Cairncross J (1990) Successful che-

motherapy for newly diagnosed aggressive oligodendroglioma.

Ann Neurol 27:573–574

5. Reifenberger G, Louis D (2003) Oligodendroglioma: toward

molecular definitions in diagnostic neuro-oncology. J Neuropa-

thol Exp Neurol 62:111–126

6. Cairncross J, Ueki K, Zlatescu M, Lisle D, Finkelstein D,

Hammond R, Silver J, Stark P, Macdonald D, Ramsay D, Louis D

(1998) Specific genetic predictors of chemoterapeutic response

and survival in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas. J

Natl Cancer Inst (Bethesda) 90:1473–1478

Fig. 5 Oligodendroglial tumor development ording to transcriptomic

and genetic profiles

J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354 353

123

7. Smith J, Perry A, Borel T, Lee H, O’Fallon J, Hosek S, Kimmel

D, Yates A, Burger P, Scheithauer B, Jenkins R (2000) Altera-

tions of chromosome arms 1p and 19q as predictors of survival in

oligodendrogliomas, astrocytomas, and mixed oligosatrocytomas.

J Clin Oncol 18:636–645

8. Griffin C, Burger P, Morsberger L, Yonescu R, Swierczynski S,

Weingart J, Murphy K (2006) Identification of der(1;19)

(q10;p10) in five oligodendrogliomas suggests mechanism of

concurrent 1p and 19q loss. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 65:988–

994

9. Watson M, Perry A, Budhjara V, Hicks C, Shannon W, Rich K

(2001) Gene expression profiling with oligonucleotides micro-

arrays distinguish WHO grade of oligodendrogliomas. Cancer

Res 61:1825–1829

10. Nutt C, Mani D, Betensky R, Tamayo P, Cairncross J, Ladd C,

Pohl U, Hatmann C, McLauglin M, Batchelor T, Black P, von

Deimling A, Pomeroy S, Golub T, Louis D (2003) Gene

expression based classification of malignant gliomas correlates

better with survival than histological classification. Cancer Res

63:1602–1607

11. French P, Swagemakers S, Nagel J, Kouwenhoven M, Brouwer

E, van der Spek P, Luider T, Kros J, van den Bent M, Sillevis

Smitt P (2005) Gene expression profiles associated with treatment

response in oligodendrogliomas. Cancer Res 65:11335–11344

12. Tews B, Felsberg J, Hartmann C, Kunitz A, Hahn M, Toedt G,

Neben K, Hummerich L, von Deimling A, Reifenberger G,

Lichter P (2006) Identification of novel oligodendroglioma-

associated candidate tumor supressor genes in 1p36 and 19q13

using microarrays-based expression profiling. Int J Cancer

119:792–800

13. Mukasa A, Ueki K, Matsumoto S, Tsutsumi S, Nishikawa R,

Fujimaki T, Asai A, Kirino T, Aburatani H (2002) Distinction in

gene expression profile of oligodendrogliomas with and without

allelic loss of 1p. Oncogene 21:3961–3968

14. Li C, Wong W (2001) Model based analysis of oligonucleotide

arrays: expression index computation and outlier detection. Proc

Natl Acad Sci 98:31–36

15. Dudoit S, Fridlyand J, Speed T (2002) Comparision of discrim-

ination methods for the classification of tumours using gene

expression data. J Am Stat Assoc 97:457

16. Al-Shahrour F, Minguez P, Tarraga J, Montaner D, Alloza E,

Vaquerizas J, Conde L, Blaschke C, Vera J, Dopazo J (2006)

BABELOMICS: a systems biology perspective in the functional

annotation of genome-scale experiments. Nucleic Acids Res

(Web Server issue) 34:W472–W476

17. Nigro J, Takahashi M, Ginzinger D, Law M, Passe S, Jenkins R,

Aldape K (2001) Detection of 1p and 19q loss in oligodendro-

glioma by quantitative microsatellite analysis, a real-time quan-

titative polymerase chain reaction assay. Am J Pathol 158:1253–

1262

18. Berggren P, Kumar R, Sakano S, Hemminki L, Wada T, Steineck

G, Adolfsson J, Larsson P, Norming U, Wijkstrom H, Hemminki

K (2003) Detecting homozygous deletions in the CDKN2A(-

p16(INK4a))/ARF(p14(ARF)) gene in urinary bladder cancer

using real-time quantitative PCR. Clin Cancer Res 9:235–242

19. Soong R, Iacopetta B (1997) A rapid and nonisotopic method for

the screening and sequencing of p53 gene mutations in formalin-

fixed, paraffin-embedded tumors. Mod Pathol 10:252–258

20. Ino Y, Betensky R, Zlatescu M, Sasaki H, Macdonald D, Stem-

mer-Rachamimov A, Ramsay D, Cairncross J, Louis D (2001)

Molecular subtypes of anaplastic oligodendroglioma: implica-

tions for patient management at diagnosis. Clin Cancer Res

7:839–845

21. Idbaih A, Marie Y, Pierron G, Brennetot C, Hoang-Xuan K,

Kujas M, Mokhtari K, Sanson M, Lejeune J, Aurias A, Delattre

O, Delattre J (2005) Two types of chromosme 1p losses with

opposite significance in gliomas. Ann Neurol 58:483–487

22. Zlatescu M, Yazdi A, Sasaki H, Megyesi J, Betensky R, Louis D,

Cairncross J (2001) Tumor location and growth pattern correlate

with genetic signature in oligodendroglial neoplasms. Cancer Res

61:6713–6715

23. Lu Q, Sun T, Zhu Z, Ma N, Garcıa M, Stiles C, Rowitch D (2002)

Common developmental requirement for Olig function indicates

a motor neuron/oligodendrocyte connection. Cell 109:75–86

24. Farina C, Aloisi F, Meini E (2007) Astrocytes are active players

in cerebral innate immunity. Trends Immunol 28:138–145

25. Widera D, Kaus A, Kaltschmidt C, Kaltschmidt B (2007) Neural

stem cells, inflammation and NF-kappaB: basic principle of

maintenance and repair or origin of brain tumours? J Cell Mol

Med 12:459–470

26. Clement V, Sanchez P, de Tribolet N, Radovanovic I, Ruiz i

Altaba A (2007) HEDGEHOG-GLI1 signaling regulates human

glioma growth, cancer stem cell self-renewal, and tumorigenicity.

Curr Biol 17:165–172

27. Dressen O, Brivanlou A (2007) Signaling pathways in cancer and

embryonic stem cells. Stem Cell Rev 3:7–17

28. Benetkiewicz M, Idbaih A, Cousin P, Boisselier B, Marie Y,

Criniere E, Hoang-Xuan K, Delattre J, Sanson M, Delattre O

(2009) NOTCH2 is neither rearranged nor mutated in t(1;19)

positive oligodendrogliomas. PLoS ONE 4:e4107

29. Radtke F, Kenneth R (2003) The role of notch in tumorigenesis:

oncogene or tumour suppressor. Nat Rev Cancer 3:756–767

30. Morrison S, Perez S, Qiao Z, Verdi J, Hicks C, Weinmaster G,

Anderson D (2000) Transient Notch activation initiates an irre-

versible switch from neurogenesis to gliogenesis by neural crest

stem cells. Cell 101:499–510

31. Kanner A, Staugaitis S, Castilla E, Chernova O, Prayson R,

Vogelbaum M, Stevens G, Peereboom D, Suh J, Lee S, Tubbs R,

Barnett G (2006) The impact of genotype on outcome in oligo-

dendroglioma: validation of the loss of chromosome arm 1p as an

important factor in clinical decision making. J Neurosurg

104:542–550

32. Mariani L, Deiana G, Vassella E, Fathi A, Arnold M, Murtin,

Vijtai I, Weis J, Siegenthaler P, Schobesberger M, Reinert M

(2006) Loss of heterozygosity 1p36 and 19q13 is a prognostic

factor for overall survival in patients with diffuse WHO grade 2

gliomas treated without chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 24:4758–

4763

354 J Neurooncol (2009) 95:343–354

123