ArticlePediatric blood & cancer2017
p16 Loss and E2F/cell cycle deregulation in infant posterior fossa ependymoma.
Article in Pediatric blood & cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aberrant histone modifications in pediatric brain tumors.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Drugging Hijacked Kinase Pathways in Pediatric Oncology: Opportunities and Current Scenario.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- The biology of ependymomas and emerging novel therapies.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2022Review
- Identification of a Distinct miRNA Regulatory Network in the Tumor Microenvironment of Transformed Mycosis Fungoides.Cancers · 2021Article
- A Phase I and Surgical Study of Ribociclib and Everolimus in Children with Recurrent or Refractory Malignant Brain Tumors: A Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium Study.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021Article
- Infantile Brain Tumors: A Review of Literature and Future Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPosterior fossa (PF) ependymomas (EPNs) in infants less than 1 year of age (iEPN-PF) have a poorer clinical outcome than EPNs in older children. While radiation therapy is the standard of care for the latter, it is withheld in infants to avoid neurotoxicity to immature brain. It is unknown whether the adverse outcome in iEPN-PFs is due to treatment differences or aggressive biology. We examined this question using molecular profiling.
methodsSix anaplastic iEPN-PFs were subjected to transcriptomic analysis and FISH for p16 loss and gains of 1q, and compared with anaplastic PF EPNs from older children. Results were validated by immunohistochemistry (IHC).
resultsAll six iEPN-PFs were grouped within EPN PF subgroup A (PFA). E2F targets and G2M checkpoint were identified as the most enriched gene sets in iEPN-PF, which was validated in a larger independent cohort. Accordingly, MIB-1 IHC demonstrated a higher mitotic rate in iEPN-PFs than noninfant anaplastic EPN PFA. Genetic and protein analyses demonstrated that p16 loss and low p16 protein expression is a hallmark of iEPN-PF, and that none harbored 1q gains. Kaplan-Meier analysis confirmed the poorer clinical outcome of the iEPN-PF cohort.
conclusionsBiological differences, characterized by loss of p16 expression without gains of 1q in iEPN-PFs, as well as deregulated E2F target gene transcription, are indicative of deregulated p16-CDK4/6-pRB-E2F pathway activity. This may underlie the poor clinical outcome seen in this group of iEPN-PFs, rather than the withholding of radiation therapy. Results suggest a potential actionable therapy for iEPN-PF, namely cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.