ArticleNeuro-oncology2023
Optimizing biomarkers for accurate ependymoma diagnosis, prognostication, and stratification within International Clinical Trials: A BIOMECA study.
Article in Neuro-oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Supratentorial ependymoma: a comprehensive review of molecular classification, management strategies, and clinical outcomes (Part II of pediatric ependymomas across compartments).Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Review
- Bridging pediatric and adult neuro-oncology: Insights into adolescents and young adults (AYA) central nervous system tumors.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2026Review
- ZFTA::YAP1-rearranged ependymoma: is still ZFTA or already YAP?Acta neuropathologica communications · 2026Article
- A brief history of ependymoma.Neuro-oncology · 2026Review
- Ependymoma group-specific blood-brain barrier differences uncovered by a multi-omics approach.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Optimizing outcomes in intracranial ependymoma: a contemporary review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- H3K27me3 Loss in Central Nervous System Tumors: Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Therapeutic Implications.Cancers · 2024Review
- Significant increase of high-risk chromosome 1q gain and 6q loss at recurrence in posterior fossa group A ependymoma: A multicenter study.Neuro-oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors at 13 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate identification of brain tumor molecular subgroups is increasingly important. We aimed to establish the most accurate and reproducible ependymoma subgroup biomarker detection techniques, across 147 cases from International Society of Pediatric Oncology (SIOP) Ependymoma II trial participants, enrolled in the pan-European "Biomarkers of Ependymoma in Children and Adolescents (BIOMECA)" study.
methodsAcross 6 European BIOMECA laboratories, we evaluated epigenetic profiling (DNA methylation array); immunohistochemistry (IHC) for nuclear p65-RELA, H3K27me3, and Tenascin-C; copy number analysis via fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and MLPA (1q, CDKN2A), and MIP and DNA methylation array (genome-wide copy number evaluation); analysis of ZFTA- and YAP1-fusions by RT-PCR and sequencing, Nanostring and break-apart FISH.
resultsDNA Methylation profiling classified 65.3% (n = 96/147) of cases as EPN-PFA and 15% (n = 22/147) as ST-ZFTA fusion-positive. Immunohistochemical loss of H3K27me3 was a reproducible and accurate surrogate marker for EPN-PFA (sensitivity 99%-100% across 3 centers). IHC for p65-RELA, FISH, and RNA-based analyses effectively identified ZFTA- and YAP-fused supratentorial ependymomas. Detection of 1q gain using FISH exhibited only 57% inter-center concordance and low sensitivity and specificity while MIP, MLPA, and DNA methylation-based approaches demonstrated greater accuracy.
conclusionsWe confirm, in a prospective trial cohort, that H3K27me3 immunohistochemistry is a robust EPN-PFA biomarker. Tenascin-C should be abandoned as a PFA marker. DNA methylation and MIP arrays are effective tools for copy number analysis of 1q gain, 6q, and CDKN2A loss while FISH is inadequate. Fusion detection was successful, but rare novel fusions need more extensive technologies. Finally, we propose test sets to guide future diagnostic approaches.
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.