Brain Tumors: Clinical Updates and Perspectives

A special issue of Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383). This special issue belongs to the section "Clinical Neurology".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (20 July 2022) | Viewed by 6735

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Pharmaceutical Biochemistry, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland
Interests: brain tumors; glioblastoma; epigenetics; pharmacoepigenetics; biomarkers; Wnt/β-catenin pathway; phytocompounds
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
1. Intraoperative Imaging Unit, Chair and Department of Neurosurgery and Neurotraumatology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland
2. Department of Neurosurgery and Neurotraumatology, Heliodor Swiecicki Clinical Hospital, Poznań, Poland
Interests: brain tumors; glioblastoma; temozolomide; epigenetics; DNA methylation; miRNA; oxidative stress; biomarker; pain
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Neurosurgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Interests: glioma; neuro-oncology; clinical trials; next generation sequencing; targeted therapy; TTFields (Optune)

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

In the era of extensive knowledge on the molecular background of diseases, wide therapeutic approaches, and significant technological possibilities, brain tumors still remain a challenge in medicine. They are mostly diagnosed in advanced stages, highly malignant, recurring, and resistant to present modes of treatment. Therefore, novel biomarkers and therapeutic targets are urgently needed in order to improve the diagnosis and therapy outcomes of patients with brain tumors.

Thus, the aim of this Special Issue is to present the current modes and results of brain tumor diagnosis and treatment, as well as recent developments and perspectives to improve this area.

Original articles and review articles are warmly welcomed. Potential topics can include, but are not limited to:

  • Primary brain tumors;
  • Metastatic brain tumors;
  • Diagnostics;
  • Surgical approaches;
  • Radiotherapy;
  • Chemotherapy;
  • Biomarkers;
  • New therapeutic targets;
  • Experimental therapy.

Dr. Aleksandra Majchrzak-Celińska
Dr. Anna-Maria Barciszewska
Dr. Martin Misch
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Journal of Clinical Medicine is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Brain tumors
  • Epigenetics
  • DNA methylation
  • ncRNA
  • Histone modifications
  • Biomarkers
  • Therapeutic targets
  • Epigenetic priming
  • Epigenetic drugs
  • Epigenetic editing

Published Papers (4 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

12 pages, 4077 KiB  
Article
ABCB1 Is Frequently Methylated in Higher-Grade Gliomas and May Serve as a Diagnostic Biomarker of More Aggressive Tumors
by Aleksandra Majchrzak-Celińska, Arvinder Sidhu, Izabela Miechowicz, Witold Nowak and Anna-Maria Barciszewska
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(19), 5655; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11195655 - 26 Sep 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 1317
Abstract
ABCB1 belongs to a superfamily of membrane transporters that use ATP hydrolysis to efflux various endogenous compounds and drugs outside the cell. Cancer cells upregulate ABCB1 expression as an adaptive response to evade chemotherapy-mediated cell death. On the other hand, several reports highlight [...] Read more.
ABCB1 belongs to a superfamily of membrane transporters that use ATP hydrolysis to efflux various endogenous compounds and drugs outside the cell. Cancer cells upregulate ABCB1 expression as an adaptive response to evade chemotherapy-mediated cell death. On the other hand, several reports highlight the role of the epigenetic regulation of ABCB1 expression. In fact, the promoter methylation of ABCB1 was found to be methylated in several tumor types, including gliomas, but its role as a biomarker is not fully established yet. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze the methylation of the ABCB1 promoter in tumor tissues from 50 glioma patients to verify its incidence and to semi-quantitively detect ABCB1 methylation levels in order to establish its utility as a potential biomarker. The results of this study show a high interindividual variability in the ABCB1 methylation level of the samples derived from gliomas of different grades. Additionally, a positive correlation between ABCB1 methylation, the WHO tumor grade, and an IDH1 wild-type status has been observed. Thus, ABCB1 methylation can be regarded as a potential diagnostic or prognostic biomarker for glioma patients, indicating more aggressive tumors. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brain Tumors: Clinical Updates and Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 3588 KiB  
Article
Metabolism and Intracranial Epileptogenicity in Temporal Lobe Long-Term Epilepsy-Associated Tumor
by Jiajie Mo, Jianguo Zhang, Wenhan Hu, Lin Sang, Xiaoqiu Shao, Chao Zhang and Kai Zhang
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(18), 5309; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11185309 - 9 Sep 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1472
Abstract
Brain tumors are common in epilepsy surgery and frequently occur in the temporal lobe, but the optimal surgical strategies to remove the tumor and epileptogenic zone remain controversial. We aim at illustrating the positron emission tomography (PET) metabolism and the stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) epileptogenicity [...] Read more.
Brain tumors are common in epilepsy surgery and frequently occur in the temporal lobe, but the optimal surgical strategies to remove the tumor and epileptogenic zone remain controversial. We aim at illustrating the positron emission tomography (PET) metabolism and the stereoelectroencephalography (SEEG) epileptogenicity of temporal lobe long-term epilepsy-associated tumors (LEAT). In this study, 70 patients and 25 healthy controls were included. Our analysis leveraged group-level analysis to reveal the whole-brain metabolic pattern of temporal lobe LEATs. The SEEG-based epileptogenicity mapping was performed to verify the PET findings in the epileptic network. Compared to controls, patients with a temporal lobe LEAT showed a more widespread epileptic network based on 18FDG-PET in patients with a mesial temporal lobe LEAT than in those with a lateral temporal lobe LEAT. The significant brain clusters mainly involved the paracentral lobule (ANOVA F = 9.731, p < 0.001), caudate nucleus (ANOVA F = 20.749, p < 0.001), putamen (Kruskal–Wallis H = 19.258, p < 0.001), and thalamus (ANOVA F = 4.754, p = 0.011). Subgroup analysis and SEEG-based epileptogenicity mapping are similar to the metabolic pattern. Our findings demonstrate the metabolic and electrophysiological organization of the temporal lobe LEAT epileptic network, which may assist in a patient-specific surgical strategy. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brain Tumors: Clinical Updates and Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1473 KiB  
Article
Analysis of Key Clinical Variables and Radiological Manifestations Associated with the Treatment Response of Patients with Brain Metastases to Stereotactic Radiosurgery
by Peng Du, Hongyi Chen, Li Shen, Xiao Liu, Jiawei Chen, Xuefan Wu, Tonggang Yu and Daoying Geng
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(15), 4529; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11154529 - 3 Aug 2022
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1381
Abstract
Background: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is considered a promising treatment for brain metastases (BM) with better healing efficacy, relatively faster treatment time, and lower neurotoxicity, which can achieve local control rates above 70%. Although SRS improves the local control of BM, this may not [...] Read more.
Background: Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is considered a promising treatment for brain metastases (BM) with better healing efficacy, relatively faster treatment time, and lower neurotoxicity, which can achieve local control rates above 70%. Although SRS improves the local control of BM, this may not translate into improvements in survival time. Thus, screening out the key factors influencing the treatment response to SRS, instead of the survival time following SRS, might be of more significance. This may assist doctors when making adjustments to treatment strategies for patients with BM. Methods: This is a retrospective review of 696 patients with BM who were treated with SRS at Huashan Hospital, Fudan University between June 2015 and February 2020. According to the patients’ treatment response to SRS, the patients were divided into an improved group (IG) and a progressive group (PG). The clinical data and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed pre- and post-treatment were collected for the two groups. Five clinical variables (gender, age, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), primary tumor type, and extracranial lesion control) and seven radiological manifestations (location, number, volume, maximum diameter, edema index (EI), diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) sequence signal, and enhanced pattern) were selected and compared. A stepwise regression analysis was performed in order to obtain the best prediction effect of a group of variables and their regression coefficients, and finally to build an SRS treatment response scoring model based on the coefficients. The performance of the model was evaluated by calculating the AUC and performing the Hosmer–Lemeshow test. Results: A total of 323 patients were enrolled in the study based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, including 209 patients in the IG and 114 patients in the PG. In the Chi-square test and t-test analysis, the significant p values of KPS, extracranial lesion control, volume, and EI were less than 0.05. Moreover, the cut-off values for volume and EI were 1801.145 mm3 and 3.835, respectively. The scoring model that was based on multivariate logistic regression coefficients performed better, achieving AUCs of 0.755 ± 0.062 and 0.780 ± 0.061 for the internal validation and validation cohorts, with p values of 0.168 and 0.073 for the Hosmer–Lemeshow test. Conclusions: KPS, extracranial lesion control, tumor volume, and EI had a certain correlation with the treatment response to SRS. Scoring models that are based on these variables can accurately predict the treatment response of patients with BM to SRS, thereby assisting doctors to make an appropriate first treatment strategy for patients with BM to a certain degree. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brain Tumors: Clinical Updates and Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 2381 KiB  
Article
Classifying Pituitary Adenoma Invasiveness Based on Radiological, Surgical and Histological Features: A Retrospective Assessment of 903 Cases
by Liang Lu, Xueyan Wan, Yu Xu, Juan Chen, Kai Shu and Ting Lei
J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11(9), 2464; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11092464 - 27 Apr 2022
Cited by 13 | Viewed by 1725
Abstract
Invasiveness is a major predictor of surgical outcome and long-term prognosis in patients with pituitary adenomas (PAs). We assessed PA invasiveness via radiological, surgical and histological perspectives to establish a classification scheme for predicting invasive behavior and poor prognosis. We retrospectively analyzed 903 [...] Read more.
Invasiveness is a major predictor of surgical outcome and long-term prognosis in patients with pituitary adenomas (PAs). We assessed PA invasiveness via radiological, surgical and histological perspectives to establish a classification scheme for predicting invasive behavior and poor prognosis. We retrospectively analyzed 903 patients who underwent transnasal-transsphenoidal surgery between January 2013 and December 2019. Radiological (hazard ratio (HR) 5.11, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.98–6.57, p < 0.001) and surgical (HR 6.40, 95% CI: 5.09–8.06, p < 0.001) invasiveness better predicted gross-total resection (GTR) and recurrence/progression-free survival (RPFS) rates than did histological invasiveness (HR 1.44, 95% CI: 1.14–1.81, p = 0.003). Knosp grades 2 (HR 4.63, 95% CI: 2.13–10.06, p < 0.001) and 3 (HR 2.23, 95% CI: 1.39–3.59, p = 0.011) with surgical invasiveness were better predictors of prognosis than corresponding Knosp grades without surgical invasiveness. Classifications 1 and 2 were established based on radiological, surgical and histological invasiveness, and Knosp classification and surgical invasiveness, respectively. Classification 2 predicted RPFS better than Knosp classification and Classification 1. Overall, radiological and surgical invasiveness were clinically valuable as prognostic predictors. The convenience and good accuracy of Invasiveness in Classification 2 is useful for identifying invasive PAs and facilitating the development of treatment plans. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Brain Tumors: Clinical Updates and Perspectives)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop