ArticleNeuro-oncology2025
Nanopore sequencing as a cutting-edge technology for medulloblastoma classification.
Article in Neuro-oncology, 2025. 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.
- Surgical resection in medulloblastoma: a crossroads in the molecular era.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Review
- Review
- Long-read sequencing technologies and bioinformatics: a new perspective for decoding DNA methylation modifications.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- Long-read sequencing for cancer liquid biopsy: advancing precision oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- Strategies for the Molecular Classification of Medulloblastoma.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Enhancing medulloblastoma classification with nanopore sequencing of FFPE samples.Neuro-oncology advancesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
46 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMedulloblastoma (MB) is one of the most prevalent embryonal malignant brain tumors. Current classification organizes these tumors into 4 molecular subgroups (WNT, SHH, Group 3, and Group 4 MB). Recently, a comprehensive classification has been established, identifying numerous subtypes, some of which exhibit a poor prognosis. It is critical to establish effective subtyping methods for accurate diagnosis and patient's management that strikes a delicate balance between improving outcomes and minimizing the risk of comorbidities.
methodsWe evaluated the ability of Nanopore sequencing to provide clinically relevant methylation and copy number profiles of MB. Nanopore sequencing was applied to an EPIC cohort of 44 frozen MB, benchmarked against the gold standard EPIC array, and further evaluated on an integrated diagnosis cohort of 116 MB.
resultsMost MB of both cohorts (42/44; 95.5% and 106/116; 91.4%, respectively) were accurately subgrouped by Nanopore sequencing. Employing Flongle flow cells for 18 MB allowed a more rapid and cost-effective analysis, with 94.4% (17/18) being correctly classified. Nanopore sequencing enabled us to accurately subtype 28/30 (93.3%) MB.
conclusionThis study, conducted on the largest cohort of MB analyzed with Nanopore sequencing to date, establishes the proof of concept that this modern and innovative technology is well-suited for MB classification. Nanopore sequencing demonstrates a robust capacity for precise subtyping of MB, a critical advancement that holds significant potential for enhancing patient stratification in future clinical trials. Its ability to deliver quick and cost-effective results firmly establishes it as a game-changer in the field of MB classification.
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.