ArticleNeuro-oncology2026
cIMPACT-NOW Update 12: Refining pathology-based risk stratification and grading for IDH-mutant gliomas.
Article in Neuro-oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A 38-year-old female with seizures and a cortico-subcortical mass.Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Spatial analysis reveals the evolving organization of IDH-mutant glioma.Cancer cell · 2026Article
- Immunohistochemistry as a tool for identifying PDGFRA amplification in central nervous system tumors.Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The critical issue of grade 2 vs grade 3 in IDH-mutant gliomas.Neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- IDH-Mutant Diffuse Glioma: From Metabolic Origins to Targeted Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- DNA Methylation Profiling in IDH-Mutant Gliomas: Biological Evolution, Molecular Grading and Clinical Implementation.Neuropathology and applied neurobiology · 2026Review
- Validation of proposed cIMPACT-NOW update 12 molecular grading criteria for IDH-mutant astrocytoma.Acta neuropathologica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A working group of cIMPACT-NOW evaluated the literature on IDH-mutant gliomas for opportunities to improve pathology-based risk stratification and grading, especially at the interface of CNS WHO grades 2 and 3, since therapeutic decisions depend on risk assessment for clinical management. The group also evaluated newly described IDH-mutant glioma subgroups and considered multidisciplinary aspects of therapeutic decision-making. PDGFRA amplification was associated with highly aggressive clinical behavior of IDH-mutant astrocytomas, consistent with CNS WHO grade 4. Other genetic alterations associated with intermediate risk and most consistent with CNS WHO grade 3 included PIK3 mutations; EGFR alteration; MYCN amplification; and specific retinoblastoma pathway alterations, including CDK4, CDK6, and CCND2 amplification, RB1 homozygous deletion or mutation, and mutation of CDKN2A. DNA methylation signatures of G-CIMP-low or A_IDH_HG were consistent with CNS WHO grade 3 or 4, depending upon other grading criteria. We suggest a mitotic count of ≥3 per 2.4 mm2 could be considered as a CNS WHO grade 3 criterion. Our review did not uncover features to improve the grading of oligodendroglioma, IDH-mutant and 1p/19q-codeleted, although CNS WHO grade 3 tumors with elevated mitotic rates, yet lacking necrosis, microvascular proliferation, CDKN2A/B homozygous deletion, and MRI contrast enhancement, may be associated with extended survival. Implementing evidence-based criteria for risk stratification and grading will improve guidance for clinical decision-making.
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.