Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39881389›Full record

ArticleClinical epigenetics2025

Validating a clinically based MS-MLPA threshold through comparison with Sanger sequencing in glioblastoma patients.

Halka Lhotska, Karolina Janeckova, Hana Cechova, Jaromir Macoun, Tatiana Aghova, Libuse Lizcova, Karla Svobodova, Lucie Hodanova, Dora Konecna, Jiri Soukup and 3 more

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epigenetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Halka LhotskaCenter of Oncocytogenomics, Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Karolina JaneckovaCenter of Oncocytogenomics, Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Hana CechovaDepartment of HLA, Institute of Hematology and Blood Transfusion, U Nemocnice 2094/1, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Jaromir MacounThe Clinical Trials and Research Department, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Tatiana AghovaCenter of Oncocytogenomics, Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Libuse LizcovaCenter of Oncocytogenomics, Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Karla SvobodovaCenter of Oncocytogenomics, Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Lucie HodanovaCenter of Oncocytogenomics, Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Dora KonecnaDepartment of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and Military University Hospital Prague, U Vojenske Nemocnice 1200, 169 02, Prague, Czech Republic.
Jiri SoukupDepartment of Pathology, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and Military University Hospital Prague, U Vojenske Nemocnice 1200, 169 02, Prague, Czech Republic.
Filip KramarDepartment of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and Military University Hospital Prague, U Vojenske Nemocnice 1200, 169 02, Prague, Czech Republic.
David NetukaDepartment of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University and Military University Hospital Prague, U Vojenske Nemocnice 1200, 169 02, Prague, Czech Republic.
Zuzana ZemanovaCenter of Oncocytogenomics, Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Laboratory Diagnostics, General University Hospital and 1st Faculty of Medicine of Charles University in Prague, U Nemocnice 499/2, 128 00, Prague, Czech Republic. zuzana.zemanova@vfn.cz.

Funding

Agentura Pro Zdravotnický Výzkum České Republiky NU21-04-00100Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky MH CZ - DRO 0064165
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlioblastoma is the commonest malignant brain tumor and has a very poor prognosis. Reduced expression of the MGMT gene (10q26.3), influenced primarily by the methylation of two differentially methylated regions (DMR1 and DMR2), is associated with a good response to temozolomide treatment. However, suitable methods for detecting the methylation of the MGMT gene promoter and setting appropriate cutoff values are debated.

resultsA cohort of 108 patients with histologically and genetically defined glioblastoma was retrospectively examined with methylation-specific Sanger sequencing (sSeq) and methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MS-MLPA) methods. The DMR2 region was methylated in 29% of samples, whereas DMR1 was methylated in 12% of samples. Methylation detected with the MS-MLPA method using probes MGMT_215, MGMT_190, and MGMT_124 from the ME012-A1 kit (located in DMR1 and DMR2) correlated with the methylation of the corresponding CpG dinucleotides detected with sSeq (p = 0.005 for probe MGMT_215; p < 0.001 for probe MGMT_190; p = 0.016 for probe MGMT_124). The threshold for methylation detection with the MS-MLPA method was calculated with a ROC curve analysis and principal components analysis of the data obtained with the MS-MLPA and sSeq methods, yielding a weighted value of 0.362. Thus, methylation of the MGMT gene promoter was confirmed in 36% of samples. These patients had statistically significantly better overall survival (p = 0.003).

conclusionsOur results show that the threshold for methylation detection with the MS-MLPA method determined here is useful from a diagnostic perspective because it allows the stratification of patients who will benefit from specific treatment protocols, including temozolomide. Detailed analysis of the MGMT gene promoter enables the more-precise and personalized treatment of patients with glioblastoma.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsDNA MethylationDNA Repair EnzymesGlioblastomaMultiplex Polymerase Chain ReactionSequence Analysis, DNAAdultAgedDNA Modification MethylasesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPromoter Regions, GeneticRetrospective StudiesTemozolomideDNA Modification MethylasesDNA Repair EnzymesMGMT protein, humanTemozolomideTumor Suppressor ProteinsGlioblastomaMethylationMGMTMS-MLPASanger sequencingStupp protocol

Identifiers

PMID39881389
PMCPMC11776323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.