ArticleVirchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology2026
Methylation profiling in CNS tumor diagnostics: a single-centre real-world experience from Central Europe.
Article in Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome-wide DNA methylation profiling has transformed neuro-oncology by providing an objective, machine learning-based taxonomy that mitigates interobserver variability and refines the histo-molecular criteria of the current WHO classification. We evaluate the real-world diagnostic performance and clinical utility of this modality in a prospective, consecutively accrued three-year cohort of 291 central nervous system (CNS) tumors across a mixed adult-pediatric population. Successful profiling was completed in 95.9% of cases. Using the Epignostix classifier, a high-confidence diagnostic match (calibrated score [CS] ≥ 0.84) was achieved in 70.3% of analyzable samples, while 26.5% returned lower-confidence scores (≥ 0.3 to < 0.84) and only 3.2% remained completely unclassifiable (CS < 0.3). When integrated into a comprehensive diagnostic framework, methylation profiling provided clinically useful results in 81.1% of cases, establishing diagnoses in 70 cases submitted for molecular subclassification and resolving diagnostic uncertainty or prompting major revisions in 149 histologically challenging tumors. Within truly ambiguous lesions, integration of methylome data dictated tumor grade modifications in 38.8% of cases (upgrading in 29.4% and downgrading in 9.4%), shifting patient risk stratification. Crucially, over half (52.7%) of the lower-confidence cases yielded meaningful clinical integration when supported by histomorphology and ancillary genetic or immunohistochemical markers, demonstrating that rigid score cutoffs should not dictate assay failure. Discrepant or misleading classifications occurred in 1.9%. Updating bioinformatic pipelines from version 11b4 to 12.8 rescued multiple ambiguous entries, increasing overall clinical utility to 84.1%. These findings demonstrate that integrating computational epigenomics with classical neuropathology enhances diagnostic precision, while highlighting the ongoing need for careful clinical-pathological correlation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42709194What 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.