.png)
Clinical Factors Related to Histopathologic Grade in Meningioma
Abstract
Background: Meningiomas are the most common intracranial tumor of central nervous system tumors. Although the prevalence is lower, the WHO grade II and III meningiomas are more aggressive, with higher mitosis rates, are more likely to recur after surgery, and have lower survival rates. The ability to differentiate between WHO I and WHO II/ III meningiomas before surgery can contribute to a significant clinical benefit in helping the neurosurgeon doing the best management planning.
Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of meningioma patients in Siloam Hospital Lippo Village between 2014 – 2018. The sample will be recruited using consecutive sampling. The relationship between analyzed variables and meningioma grades will be investigated using a chi-square test if the data was eligible; otherwise, the Fisher-exact test will be performed.
Result: Ninety eight (69%) patients diagnosed as low grade meningioma, and 44 (31%) as high grade meningioma. Tumor location, size, edema, necrosis, age, and gender had significant results with p £0.05. Multivariate results also show that all six variables have a significant relationship with each other.
Conclusions: Tumor location, size, edema, necrosis, age, and gender have a significant relationship to histopathological meningioma grade in patients at Siloam Hospital Lippo Village in 2014-2018.
Keywords
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.19166/med.v10i2.7011
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Zhou P, Ma W, Yin S, Li Y, Jiang S. Three risk factors for WHO grade II and III meningiomas: A study of 1737 cases from a single center. Neurology India. 2013; 61: 40-4. https://doi.org/10.4103/0028-3886.107928
2. Khampalikit I, Cheunsuchon P, Sitthinamsuwan B. Clinical Predictors of WHO Grades, Subtypes, and Atypical Histopathological Features of Meningiomas. J Med Assoc Thai. 2017; 100: 122-32.
3. Palaniandy K, Haspani MSM, Zain NRM. Prediction of histological grade and completeness of resection of intracranial meningiomas: role of peritumoural brain Edema. Malays J Med Sci. 2017; 24: 33-43. https://doi.org/10.21315/mjms2017.24.3.5
4. Li H, Zhao M, Jiao Y, et al. Prediction of High-Grade Pediatric Meningiomas: Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features Based on T1-Weighted, T2-Weighted, and Contrast- Enhanced T1 Weighted Images. World Neurosurgery. 2016; 91: 89-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.03.079.
5. Magill ST, Young JS, Chae R, Aghi MK, Theodosopoulos PV, McDermott MW. Relationship between tumor location, size, and WHO grade in meningioma. Neurosurg Focus. 2018; 44: E4. https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.1.FOCUS17752
6. Coroller TP, Bi WL, Hyunh E, et al. Radiographic prediction of meningioma grade by semantic and radiomic features. PLoS ONE. 2017; 12: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187908
7. Hale AT, Wang L, Strother MK, Chambless LB. Differentiating meningioma grade by imaging features on magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Neurosci. 2018; 48: 71-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2017.11.013
8. Kane AJ, Sughrue ME, Rutkowski MJ, et al. Anatomic Location Is a Risk Factor for Atypical and Malignant Meningiomas. Cancer. 2011; 117: 1272-8. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25591
9. Clark VE, Erson-Omay EZ, Serin A, et al. Genomic analysis of non-NF2 meningiomas reveals mutations in TRAF7, KLF4, AKT1, and SMO. Science. 2013; 339: 1077-80. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1233009
10. Hashimoto N, Rabo CS, Okita Y, et al. Slower growth of skull base meningiomas compared with non–skull base meningiomas based on volumetric and biological studies. J Neurosurg. 2012; 116: 574-80. https://doi.org/10.3171/2011.11.JNS11999
11. Hwang WL, Marciscano AE, Niemierko A, et al. Imaging and extent of surgical resection predict risk of meningioma recurrence better than WHO histopathological grade. Neuro- Oncology. 2016; 18: 863-72. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nov285
12. Liu Y, Chotai S, Chen M, Jin S, Qi S-T, Pan J. Preoperative radiologic classification of convexity meningioma to predict the survival and aggressive meningioma behavior. Plos One. 2015;1: 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118908
13. Tan LA, Boco T, Johnson AK, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of typical and atypical/anaplastic meningiomas-case series and literature review. Br J Neurosurg. 2014;29:77-81. https://doi.org/10.3109/02688697.2014.957647
14. Tang Y, Dundamadappa SK, Thangasamy S, et al. Correlation of apparent diffusion coefficient with Ki-67 proliferation index in grading meningioma. Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202:1303-8. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.11637
15. Toh CH, Castillo M, Wong aMC, et al. Differentiation between classic and atypical meningiomas with use of diffusion tensor imaging. Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29:1630-5. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1170
16. Watanabe Y, Yamasaki F, Kajiwara Y, et al. Preoperative histological grading of meningiomas using apparent diffusion coefficient at 3T MRI. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:658-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.11.037
17. Hale AT, Wang L, Strother MK, Chambless LB. Differentiating meningioma grade by imaging features on magnetic resonance imaging. J Clin Neurosci. 2018; 48: 71-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2017.11.013
18. Huang RY, Bi WL, Griffith B, et al. Imaging and diagnostic advances for intracranial meningiomas. J Neurooncol. 2019; 21: 44-61. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noy143
19. Hou J, Kshettry VR, Selman WR, Bambakids NC. Peritumoral brain edema in intracranial meningiomas: the emergence of vascular endothelial growth factor–directed therapy. Neurosurg Focus. 2013; 35: 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.8.FOCUS13301
20. Backer-Grøndahl T, Moen BH, Torp SH. The histopathological spectrum of human meningiomas. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2012; 5: 231-42.
21. Goes P, Santos BFO, Suzuki FS, et al. Necrosis is a consistent factor to recurrence of meningiomas: should it be a stand-alone grading criterion for grade II meningioma? J Neurooncol. 2018; 137: 331-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-017-2721-4
22. Lin BJ, Chour KN, Kao HW, et al. Correlation between magnetic resonance imaging grading and pathological grading in meningioma. J Neurosurg. 2014; 121: 1201-8. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.7.JNS132359
23. Abdelzaher E, El‑Gendi SM, Yehya A, Gowil AG. Recurrence of benign meningiomas: Predictive value of proliferative index, BCL2, p53, hormonal receptors and HER2 expression. Br J Neurosurg. 2011; 25: 707‑13. https://doi.org/10.3109/02688697.2010.522743
24. Tao Y, Liang G, Li Z, Wang Y, Wu A, Wang H, et al. Clinical features and immunohistochemical expression levels of androgen, estrogen, progesterone and Ki‑67 receptors in relationship with gross‑total resected meningiomas relapse. Br J Neurosurg. 2012; 26: 700‑4. https://doi.org/10.3109/02688697.2012.685780
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Erna Kristiani, Michelle Agelica, Sally Suharyani, Kevin Dharmawan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
MEDICINUS is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Copyright © Fakultas Kedokteran | Universitas Pelita Harapan | Lippo Karawaci, Tangerang, Indonesia, 15811 . All rights reserved. p-ISSN 1978-3094 | e-ISSN 2622-6995