Abstract
Spinal ganglioglioma is a rare low-grade, slow-growing tumor of the central nervous system affecting mostly children and young adults. After surgery, some patients show tumor recurrence and/or malignant transformation. Gangliogliomas harbor molecular deficiencies such as mutations in the B-rapidly accelerated fibrosarcoma (BRAF) gene, resulting in activation of a downstream signaling pathway and cancer development. Vemurafenib is a BRAF inhibitor used to treat patients with BRAF V600E-mutated cancer. Although a few studies have reported the clinical responses in gangliogliomas, the sequence and duration of treatment have not been established. We describe a case of an adult with a progressive BRAF V600E mutant spinal cord ganglioglioma 9 years after surgery who was treated with vemurafenib. This treatment resulted in a partial response within 2 months, which was sustained for more than a year. The patient then decided to stop treatment because of side effects. Despite this decision, the tumor showed no sign of progression 21 months after treatment discontinuation. This is the first reported case of a response to vemurafenib in an adult with progressive spinal cord BRAF V600E-mutated ganglioglioma which was sustained after treatment discontinuation.
Introduction
Ganglioglioma is a neuronal tumor representing 1% of all primary brain tumors and nearly 5% of pediatric and young adult central nervous system tumors. Histologically, ganglioglioma is composed of both neoplastic neuronal cells and neoplastic glial cells. The glial cells contingent includes astrocyte cells with atypia (). Most (>90%) gangliogliomas are classified as grade I according to the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification and are genetically defined by multiple alterations (). Ganglioglioma are typically located in the brain, most often in the temporal lobe and rarely in the spinal cord (). The cornerstone of curative treatment for ganglioglioma is total surgical resection. The prognosis depends on the quality of surgery (–). Complete resection is not always possible, frequently because of the proximity of eloquent structures or vessels. Moreover, even after imaging-confirmed complete resection, recurrence can occur ().
Treatment strategies are limited for recurrent disease. Radiotherapy has been indicated for high-grade or incompletely resected low-grade ganglioglioma, but these recommendations are not based on high scientific levels of evidence (, , –). Some cases of malignant transformation after radiotherapy have been reported (, ). Chemotherapy and systemic therapy are not recommended in the clinical routine and can be discussed on a case-by-case basis after the failure of local therapies (, ).
BRAF is located on chromosome 7 (7q34) and encodes B-raf, a serine/threonine protein kinase that mediates the cellular response to growth signals (). B-raf is a member of the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK/MAP kinase pathway, which is frequently activated in human cancers. More than 30 mutations have been detected in BRAF. One of the mutational hot spots of BRAF is at nucleotide 1799; mutations at this site lead to the exchange of valine with glutamate at amino acid position 600. The BRAF V600E mutant constitutively activates downstream signaling pathways. The BRAF V600E mutation occurs in 10–60% of gangliogliomas depending on the study and anatomic site, with lower frequency in the spinal cord (, –). This mutation appears to be associated with lower recurrence-free survival (). Therefore, MAPK pathway inhibition is an attractive treatment option for recurrent or high-grade ganglioglioma ().
Vemurafenib is a competitive small-molecule serine–threonine kinase inhibitor that functions by binding to the ATP-binding domain of mutant BRAF. Vemurafenib was first licensed for the treatment of advanced melanoma (). Its administration is now known to be safe and effective for melanoma brain metastases and can result in tumor regression (). Some case reports have shown an objective tumor response to BRAF inhibitor treatment alone or in combination with chemotherapy or targeted therapy in pediatric and young adult BRAF V600E gangliogliomas (–). However, there are no reports of a prolonged response to monotherapy with vemurafenib in an adult with progressive grade I ganglioglioma. There is a lack of data regarding the use of vemurafenib in gangliogliomas. Particularly, it is unknown how long this treatment should be administered in responding patients. Herein, we describe a case of successful treatment with vemurafenib in a patient with a BRAF V600E-mutated progressive cervical spinal cord ganglioglioma, with a stable disease 21 months after treatment discontinuation.
Case Report Presentation
Clinical History and Histological Findings
A 22-year-old male referred to the emergency department in July 2006 for fluctuating paresthesia with motor dysfunction of the left arm and leg associated with cervical pain, which had been evolving for 1 year. Otherwise, his medical clinical history was unremarkable. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the spine revealed a suspicious lesion within the left spinal cord at the levels of C3–C5. The patient underwent subtotal resection in August 2006. An MRI of the spine 1 month following surgery showed a residual tumor of 27 × 8 mm with strong patchy enhancement following gadolinium administration within the left spinal cord at the level of the bottom of C3 to the top of C5, isointense T1 signal, and heterogeneously hyperintense T2 signal. There was an associated syringomyelia at the rostral and caudal aspects of the enhancing tumor, mostly from C2 to C7. Moreover, T2 hyperintensity was observed in the spinal cord above and below the syringomyelia without associated enhancement (Figure 1).
Figure 1
The histological examination of the lesion showed a tissue with mixed glial and neuronal components (Figures 2A,B), the presence of fusiform cells with anisonucleosis, sustained by blood vessels with thickened wall surrounded by lymphocytic cuffs, with eosinophilic granular bodies, and Rosenthal fibers. Binucleated neurons were visualized by calretinine, neurofilament, and synaptophysin staining. Many glial cells showed S100 and CD34 immunoreactivity and diffuse glial fibrillary acidic protein. The Ki-67 labeling index was very low (<1%) and some parts of the tissue were positive for P53 in immunohistochemistry analysis. Molecular analysis revealed immunoreactivity to isocitrate deshydrogenase gene 1 (IDH1 R132H) and a loss of chromosome 9p. Despite the presence of an IDH mutation, central pathological review led to the diagnosis of WHO grade I ganglioglioma ().
Figure 2
Postoperatively, the patient maintained his neurological symptoms and had Brown-Sequard syndrome and micturition dysfunctions.
The patient was followed up with for 9 years until MRI demonstrated tumor progression. Tumor measurements were then 36 × 12 mm, corresponding to a 50% increase in size (Figure 1). At this time, a second resection was considered too risky and gross tumor resection was not possible. No other treatment was administered because of the lack of proof of chemotherapy and radiotherapy interest. This was consistent with increased arm and leg dysfunction.
Gene Testing
Molecular testing for evaluation of target therapy was implemented using tissue collected during surgery after obtaining written informed and signed consent. In July 2015, genomic DNA was extracted from the tumor tissue with a QIAamp® DNA mini Kit (QIAGEN, Hilden, Germany) for standard direct sequencing of exon 15 of BRAF, which was analyzed by using a SNaPshot® kit (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The results revealed a V600E BRAF mutation and no mutation in RAS.
Patient Management and Outcomes
Based on these results, in November 2015, the patient was started on vemurafenib 960 mg orally twice daily [100% of the recommended dose in adults for melanoma ()]. This treatment was determined as part of “AcSé,” a French program known as “Secure access to innovative targeted therapies” (). After 8 weeks of treatment, the patient was neurologically stable and brain MRI showed a >50% decrease in tumor size (Figure 1). A steady partial response was observed for more than 13 months. Toxicities were measured by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 and included grade I myalgia, arthralgia, and asthenia as well as grade I maculopapular rash (folliculitis with microcysts on legs and arms treated with topical retinoids). After 13 months of treatment, the patient decided to stop the treatment because of grade II photosensibility and other dermatological side effects (Figures 3A–C). To manage his rashes, folliculitis, and microcysts, the patient applied glycerol as a topical emollient, 30% pure urea cream, and Trétinoine (topical retinoid). His palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (hyperkeratosis) was treated with topical fluorouracil/salicylic acid and even curettage for some areas. Photoprotection was achieved by applying sun cream during treatment. No topical steroid was used. His Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status decreased to 2 because of grade II asthenia. Two months after stopping treatment, MRI revealed that the disease was stable and had not significantly progressed according to RANO criteria () (Figure 1). Six months after stopping vemurafenib, grade I dermatological side effects persisted but the patient had recovered to a normal Performance Status and MRI showed no signs of progression.
Figure 3
Twenty-one months after vemurafenib discontinuation in October 2018, MRI and neurological examination showed stable disease (Figure 1) and the patient had no side effects. Although the disease is incurable nature, his neurologic and cognitive functions and quality of life were preserved.
Discussion
To our knowledge, this is the first case of an adult with progressive BRAF V600E-mutated spinal ganglioglioma successfully treated with vemurafenib as a single agent and with ongoing and prolonged stable residual disease 21 months after vemurafenib discontinuation.
Epidemiology
The first description of ganglioglioma was detected in 1870 by Loretz and further studied in 1926 by Perkins. Ganglioglioma is a rare tumor of the central nervous system accounting for 1–1.5% of all spinal tumors (, , ). Gross total resection is the most reliable treatment (, ). While the larger part of this disease occurs in the temporal lobe, causing epilepsy () and showing a male preference, its spinal location makes treatment difficult, increasing the risk of recurrence (, ). Dudley et al. used the large Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database, which represents nearly one-third of North America's population, and identified 348 children with low-grade gangliogliomas to study their characteristics (). This was the largest study to evaluate the spinal location of this rare tumor. Spinal cord gangliogliomas represented 3.5% of cases, with nearly 100% of survival at 5 years and the highest percentage of gross total resection of more than 83%.
Imaging Findings
MRI findings for supratentorial ganglioglioma can be divided into three groups: cystic, cystic-solid and solid (). For intramedullary ganglioglioma, imaging manifestation varied considerably (). In a recent study of 142 cases, all gangliogliomas in the cervicomedullary junction and all BRAF mutation-positive ganglioglioma were contrast-positive (). Our case had a solid lesion with patchy enhancement and a cystic component, which was consistent with previous reports (). Furthermore, the rapid but not significant regrowth of the tumor after treatment discontinuation in our case may be associated with a “rebound effect,” as described previously (, ). This is analogous to pseudo-progression. Indeed, pseudo-progression is commonly observed in asymptomatic patients and occurs at weeks and up to 3 months after treatment. However, previous studies showed that pseudo-progression occurs because of radiotherapy and is characterized by transient T1 gadolinium enhancement resulting from breakdown of the blood brain barrier, which typically resolves spontaneously without treatment (). Pseudo-progression has also been described in patients treated with immunotherapy, but its incidence is unknown because of the lack of available data. In the two previous reports (, ), the therapeutic benefit was again achieved after vemurafenib re-introduction. Re-activation of the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK/MAP kinase pathway may occur, but the biological mechanism remains unclear.
Outcomes and Treatments
In a retrospective review of 58 patients (median age at diagnosis of 8.5 years) who underwent surgical resection, the 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were 89 and 83%, respectively. The spinal cord location was associated with a 3.5-fold increased risk of recurrence compared to cerebral gangliogliomas ().
The efficacy of chemotherapy for adjuvant or recurrent ganglioglioma is uncertain and remains controversial (), with a high risk of serious adverse events. Recommendations for the use of radiotherapy at progression are based on case reports and small cohorts, particularly in the spinal cord (). Radiotherapy may result in a better local control for subtotal resection in the supratentorial location, but does not improve overall survival (, , –). Some case reports even suggested that radiotherapy can result in malignant transformation (, ). Based on these reports, we did not treat our patient with radiotherapy or chemotherapy.
Histopathological and Molecular Features
The presence of the BRAF V600E mutation suggests that use of BRAF inhibitors are efficient for treating recurrent gangliogliomas. BRAF mutation appears in 8% of human cancers (). The BRAF V600E mutation was found more often in pediatric low-grade than in high-grade gliomas (, , ), likely because low-grade gliomas are the most frequent brain tumors in children (). Patients with BRAF V600E mutation exhibit shorter progression-free survival (, ). However, the prognostic value of this mutation in recent studies is controversial (). Thereby, Jones et al. suggested that caution should be used when interpreting the BRAF mutations status as an independent prognostic marker ().
BRAF V600E mutations were detected in nearly 20% of gangliogliomas in a screen of 1,320 nervous system tumors (). This was the second most frequently BRAF-mutated cerebral tumor entity after pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma. In another cohort, 50% gangliogliomas were mutated (). In a recent series, BRAF V600E mutations were detected in 38% of cases but all spinal cord gangliogliomas were wild-type (). Another group identified only two tumors among 19 (10%) intramedullary gangliogliomas harboring a BRAF V600E mutation ().
Young adult age, synaptophysin positive tumor, lymphocytic cuffs, and a high Ki67 level (mean 2.5%) have been shown to be associated with the BRAF V600E mutated status (57). However, the results of Ki67 analysis did not reach statistical significance. Moreover, the mutation appears to be present in the neuronal component or both the neuronal and glial components, but never in the glial component alone (, 57–59). IDH mutations were reported in 8% of cases in a series of 100 gangliogliomas (60). The presence of this mutation was correlated with a greater risk of recurrence and malignant transformation. In the 2016 WHO classification, detection of IDH1 mutation in a tumor resembling a ganglioglioma strongly supported the diagnosis of an infiltrating glioma with ensnared neurons (, 61). However, as observed in our patient, it has been increasingly recognized that some circumscribed gliomas can harbor mutations typically encountered in diffuse gliomas (such as IDH and histone mutations) (62–65). Occasionally, H3K27M mutations have been reported in midline gangliogliomas (66). In contrast to diffuse gliomas, H3K27M mutations do not appear to be associated with a poor prognosis in circumscribed gliomas. The H3K27M mutation status was not determined in our case.
Ganglioglioma Treated With BRAF Inhibitors: Review of Case Reports
There are some previous descriptions of the efficacy of vemurafenib and dabrafenib (another BRAF inhibitor) in low- and high-grade gliomas other than ganglioglioma (, 67–71). In a basket study with vemurafenib in BRAF V600E mutation-positive non-melanoma cancers (), the objective response rate in BRAF-mutant gliomas was 25%. Previously reported cases of gangliogliomas treated with a BRAF inhibitor are listed in Table 1 (–). The response to vemurafenib in our patient was consistent with the response to BRAF inhibitors observed in previously reported cases, including one case of spinal ganglioglioma in a 2-year-old child (). However, all cases except for one were located in the cerebrum or were brainstem gangliogliomas, with half of the cases being anaplastic gangliogliomas (9/19) (, –). In eight cases (8/19) (, , –, , ), the BRAF inhibitor was associated with another treatment or surgery, making the analysis of the response to the BRAF inhibitor difficult. Based on the analysis of the present case and previously reported cases, a complete response was obtained in 15% (3/20) and partial response in 50% (10/20) of cases at a median of 3.2 months after starting treatment and the estimated progression-free survival was 14 months. In 12 patients in whom a BRAF inhibitor was administered as a single agent, the response rate was 50% (6/12) (one complete response and partial response in all other patients). Additionally, 33% (4/12) showed stable disease and 17% (2/12) showed progressive disease. The estimated progression-free survival was 11 months. The median follow-up time after starting treatment was 14.5 months, while this time period was 36 months in our case, including 21 months of stable disease after discontinuation. The present case is remarkable because our patient had spinal ganglioglioma treated with vemurafenib alone and a long follow-up. Interestingly, 2 months after vemurafenib disruption for patient convenience, a moderate (<25%) increase in the size of the contrast enhancement was observed, after which the tumor remained stable in subsequent MRIs. This rapid but not significant regrowth was consistent with the previous report of a “rebound effect” following vemurafenib disruption after protracted exposure to this treatment (). In this situation, vemurafenib re-challenge may be effective (), but the present case suggests that close follow-up is another option, as further tumor progression may not systematically occur. In recent years, BRAF/MEK double blockade with vemurafenib and cobimetinib or dabrafenib and trametinib was shown to be a more effective strategy than targeting BRAF alone in patients with BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma (72). Dual BRAF/MEK inhibition has also been suggested as a promising activity in BRAF-mutant gliomas that may overcome (, 73) vemurafenib resistance. A prospective study is needed to assess the efficacy of this combination in gangliogliomas.
Table 1
| References | Age (year)/sex | Location | Symptoms/signs (clinical features) | MRI | Surgery | Treatment before BRAFi | Time to recurrence | BRAFi | Concomitant treatment to BRAFi | Side effects | Dose modification | Response | Follow up/recurrence post BRAFi |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rush et al. () | 13/F | Brainstem (cervicomedullary) | Paraparesis | Enhancement | Partial | Proton RT (PO) | 14 months | V | Vinblastine | Arthalgias, keratosis, telangiectasia | Yes (side effects) | PR at 6 weeks | 3 months/None |
| Shih et al. () | 21/M | Temporal lobe and posterior brainstem | Headaches, gait disturbance | Enhancement | GTR | Vincristin + Carboplatin (PO)/ RT + TMZ/IRI + BVZ | 11 years | D | Gemfibrozil | None | None | PR at 2 months | 3 months/ Yes |
| Bautista et al. () | 2 children/NM | Thalamus (n = 1) Peduncul (n = 1) | NM (n = 2) | NM(n = 2) | Debulking(n = 2) | IRI + BVZ then RT + TMZ (n = 1)/4 CT (n = 1) | 1 month (n = 1) on therapy (n = 1) | V (n = 2) | Surgery (n = 1) | Hepatotoxicity, skin photo toxicity (grade 1 and 2) | Yes (side effects) (n = 2) | SD (n = 1) PR at 4 months (n = 1) | 4 and 20 months/Yes (n = 1)* None (n = 1) |
| Del Bufalo et al. (, ) | 2/M | Cervical spinal cord to C5 | Respiratory insufficiency | Cystic component, syringomyelia | Debulking | CT (PO) then surgery | 3 months | V | RT at 24 months after the start | Skin rash (grade 3) | None | PR at 3 months | 54 months/Yes** |
| Del Bufalo et al. () | 3 children/NM | Vermis (n = 1) M.oblongata (n = 1) Midbrain (n = 1) | NM (n = 3) | NM (n = 3) | Partial (n = 3) | None (n = 3) | NM | V | None | Skin rash (grade1) (n = 2) | None (but 480 mg/day) | CR at 6 months (n = 1) SD (n = 1) NM (n = 1) | 2,13 and 40 months/None (n = 2) |
| Aguilera et al. () | 8/M | Brainstem | Sensory disturbance | Enhancement | STR | Proton RT (PO) then surgery | 6 months | V | None | Hypoalbuminemia, pruritus (grade 1), maculopapular rash (grade 2) | None | PR at 6 months | 12 months/None *** |
| Chamberlain () | 3 adults/NM | Frontal lobe (n = 2) Temporal lobe (n = 1) | NM | NM | STR (n = 1)GTR (n = 2) | RT (n = 3) then TMZ (n = 3) | NM (n = 3) | D | None | NM (n = 3) | None | SD (n = 2) PR (n = 1) | PFS 4, 7, 10 months |
| Meletath et al. () | 11/M | Parietal lobe | Hemiparesis, aphasia | Enhancement | STR then partial 9 years later | RT + TMZ (PO) | 4 months | D | TTFields | Febrile reaction | Yes (side effects) | CR at 2 months | 2 years/None |
| Marks et al. () | 16/F | Temporal lobe | seizure | Enhancement, cystic component | STR | RT + TMZ (PO) | 1 year | V then D | D + Trametinib | Allergic reaction (grade 4) to V | None | CR at 8 weeks | 6 months/None |
| Beland et al. () | 51/F | Temporal lobe | Brain hemorrhage | NM | Partial | None (progression post op) | PO | D | D + Trametinib + RT | Nausea, blurred vision, peripheral edema | None | PR at 3 months | 8 months/None |
| Kaley et al. () | 3 NM | Cerebral not specified (n = 3) | NM | NM | NM | RT (n = 3) TMZ (n = 2) | NM | V | None | NM | NM | PR at 4months (n = 1) PD at 2 months (n = 1) NM (n = 1) | 7.5 months/yes |
| Touat et al. () | 28/M | Temporal lobe | NM | Enhancement | Partial | RT | 27 weeks | V then V + MEKi | V + Cobimetinib | Photosensitivity | NM | PR at 4 months with V and CR at 3 months | 14 months/yes then16 months |
Comprehensive list of reported cases of ganglioglioma treated with BRAF inhibitor with reported outcomes.
reintroduction = PR 1 months then died 2 months
progression 24 months after the start of the treatment treated with RT
reintroduction 3 months after stopping = PR 14 months.
A, anaplastic ganglioglioma; NM, not mentioned; A, anaplastic; PO, post-operative; RT, radiotherapy; TMZ, temozolomide; IRI, irinotecan; BVZ, bevacizumab; V, vemurafenib; D, dabrafenib; CT, chemotherapy; PR, partial response; STR, subtotal resection; GTR, gross total resection; SD, stable disease; PD, progression disease; PFS, progression free survival.
In our case, the patient asked for treatment discontinuation because of dermatological toxicity. To avoid treatment discontinuation, intermittent dosing could have been used, which has been shown to result in persistent efficacy and improve tolerability as a means of managing BRAF inhibitor toxicity (74). Another possibility may have been switching the patient to another, better-tolerated BRAF inhibitor such as dabrafenib or combining the treatment with an MEK inhibitor which is paradoxically associated with fewer secondary effects than BRAF inhibitors alone ().
Conclusion
Treatments after surgery for recurrent or progressive spinal cord BRAF V600E-mutated ganglioglioma are scarce and the optimal treatment sequence is unknown. We present a case of a sustained and ongoing response to vemurafenib nearly 2 years after the patient interrupted treatment. In the absence of gold standard management in such cases, the present case suggests that vemurafenib should be considered in BRAF-mutant spinal gangliogliomas requiring treatment other than surgery. The BRAF mutation should be routinely detected in all gangliogliomas even in cases in which IDH mutation suggests diffuse astrocytoma. A safety and pilot efficacy clinical trial of vemurafenib as a single agent against BRAF V600E mutant recurrent or refractory low-grade ganglioglioma in children is ongoing (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01748149). Moreover, the association between the BRAF and MEK inhibitor should be studied in a large cohort, as this treatment may have survival benefits in melanoma (72), and enrollment is currently ongoing for a study of de novo low-grade and relapsed or refractory high-grade gliomas (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02684058 and NCT02124772). Second-generation BRAF and MEK inhibitors are also being evaluated (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02285439 and NCT03429803).
Statements
Ethics statement
Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication of this case report and any accompanying images.
Author contributions
LG participated in the treatment of the patient, did the literature search, and drafted the manuscript. EC and CV instructed and participated in the treatment of the patient. EC and FD provided critical revisions of the manuscript for important intellectual content. M-IM carefully reviewed the pathological findings. FC carefully reviewed the radiology findings. AP carefully reviewed the surgical findings. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Prof. François Aubin, Department of dermatology, University Hospital, Besançon, France, for the photos.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1.
LouisDNPerryAReifenbergerGvon DeimlingAFigarella-BrangerDCaveneeWKet al. The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous System: a summary. Acta Neuropathol. (2016) 131:803–20. 10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1
2.
PekmezciMVillanueva-MeyerJEGoodeBVan ZiffleJOnoderaCGrenertJPet al. The genetic landscape of ganglioglioma. Acta Neuropathol Commun. (2018) 6:47. 10.1186/s40478-018-0551-z
3.
GessiMDörnerEDreschmannVAntonelliMWahaAGiangasperoFet al. Intramedullary gangliogliomas: histopathologic and molecular features of 25 cases. Hum Pathol. (2016) 49:107–13. 10.1016/j.humpath.2015.09.041
4.
JalloGIFreedDEpsteinFJ. Spinal Cord Gangliogliomas: A Review of 56 patients. J Neurooncol. (2004) 68:71–7. 10.1023/B:NEON.0000024747.66993.26
5.
SoffiettiRRudàRReardonD. Rare glial tumors. In: BergerMSWellerM editors. Handbook of Clinical Neurology (Amsterdam; Oxford, UK; Cambridge, MA: Elsevier), 399–415. 10.1016/B978-0-12-802997-8.00024-4
6.
LuykenCBlümckeIFimmersRUrbachHWiestlerODSchrammJ. Supratentorial gangliogliomas: histopathologic grading and tumor recurrence in 184 patients with a median follow-up of 8 years: outcome and prognosis in gangliogliomas. Cancer. (2004) 101:146–55. 10.1002/cncr.20332
7.
ComptonJJIssa LaackNNEckelLJSchomasDAGianniniCMeyerFB. Long-term outcomes for low-grade intracranial ganglioglioma: 30-year experience from the Mayo Clinic: clinical article. J Neurosurg. (2012) 117:825–30. 10.3171/2012.7.JNS111260
8.
DudleyRWRTorokMRGallegosDRMulcahy-LevyJMHoffmanLMLiuAKet al. Pediatric Low-Grade Ganglioglioma: epidemiology, treatments, and outcome analysis on 348 children from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database. Neurosurgery. (2015) 76:313–20. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000619
9.
HaydonDHDahiyaSSmythMDLimbrickDDLeonardJR. Greater extent of resection improves ganglioglioma recurrence-free survival in children: a volumetric analysis. Neurosurgery. (2014) 75:37–42. 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000349
10.
KhashabMEGarganLMargrafLKoralKNejatFSwiftDet al. Predictors of tumor progression among children with gangliogliomas: clinical article. J Neurosurg Pediatr. (2009) 3:461–6. 10.3171/2009.2.PEDS0861
11.
LiauwSLByerJEYachnisATAmdurRJMendenhallWM. Radiotherapy after subtotally resected or recurrent ganglioglioma. Int J Radiat Oncol. (2007) 67:244–7. 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.08.029
12.
RadesDZwickLLeppertJBonsantoMMTronnierVDunstJet al. The role of postoperative radiotherapy for the treatment of gangliogliomas. Cancer. (2010) 116:432–42. 10.1002/cncr.24716
13.
Yust-KatzSAndersonMDLiuDWuJYuanYOlarAet al. Clinical and prognostic features of adult patients with gangliogliomas. Neuro Oncol. (2014) 16:409–13. 10.1093/neuonc/not169
14.
CelliPScarpinatiMNardacciBCervoniLCantoreGP. Gangliogliomas of the cerebral hemispheres. Report of 14 cases with long-term follow-up and review of the literature. Acta Neurochir. (1993) 125:52–7. 10.1007/BF01401828
15.
MajoresMvon LeheMFassunkeJSchrammJBeckerAJSimonM. Tumor recurrence and malignant progression of gangliogliomas. Cancer. (2008) 113:3355–63. 10.1002/cncr.23965
16.
MittelbronnMSchittenhelmJLemkeDRitzRNägeleTWellerMet al. Low grade ganglioglioma rapidly progressing to a WHO grade IV tumor showing malignant transformation in both astroglial and neuronal cell components: malignant progression in ganglioglioma. Neuropathology. (2007) 27:463–7. 10.1111/j.1440-1789.2007.00800.x
17.
TarnarisAO'BrienCRedfernRM. Ganglioglioma with anaplastic recurrence of the neuronal element following radiotherapy. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. (2006) 108:761–7. 10.1016/j.clineuro.2005.09.005
18.
BastoDTroviscoVLopesJMMartinsAPardalFSoaresPet al. Mutation analysis of B-RAF gene in human gliomas. Acta Neuropathol. (2005) 109:207–10. 10.1007/s00401-004-0936-x
19.
SchindlerGCapperDMeyerJJanzarikWOmranHHerold-MendeCet al. Analysis of BRAF V600E mutation in 1,320 nervous system tumors reveals high mutation frequencies in pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma, ganglioglioma and extra-cerebellar pilocytic astrocytoma. Acta Neuropathol. (2011) 121:397–405. 10.1007/s00401-011-0802-6
20.
DoughertyMJSantiMBroseMSMaCResnickACSievertAJet al. Activating mutations in BRAF characterize a spectrum of pediatric low-grade gliomas. Neuro Oncol. (2010) 12:621–30. 10.1093/neuonc/noq007
21.
JanjuaMBIvasykIPisapiaDJSouweidaneMM. Ganglioglioma of brain stem and cervicomedullary junction: a 50 years review of literature. J Clin Neurosci. (2017) 44:34–46. 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.021
22.
DahiyaSHaydonDHAlvaradoDGurnettCAGutmannDHLeonardJR. BRAFV600E mutation is a negative prognosticator in pediatric ganglioglioma. Acta Neuropathol. (2013) 125:901–10. 10.1007/s00401-013-1120-y
23.
PfisterSJanzarikWGRemkeMErnstAWerftWBeckerNet al. BRAF gene duplication constitutes a mechanism of MAPK pathway activation in low-grade astrocytomas. J Clin Invest. (2008) 118:1739–49. 10.1172/JCI33656
24.
ChapmanPBHauschildARobertCHaanenJBAsciertoPLarkinJet al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E Mutation. N Engl J Med. (2011) 364:2507–16. 10.1056/NEJMoa1103782
25.
DummerRGoldingerSMTurtschiCPEggmannNBMichielinOMitchellLet al. Vemurafenib in patients with BRAFV600 mutation-positive melanoma with symptomatic brain metastases: Final results of an open-label pilot study. Eur J Cancer. (2014) 50:611–21. 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.11.002
26.
RushSForemanNLiuA. Brainstem ganglioglioma successfully treated with vemurafenib. J Clin Oncol. (2013) 31:e159–e160. 10.1200/JCO.2012.44.1568
27.
ShihKCShastryMWilliamsJTJelsmaPFAbramSRAyyanarKet al. Successful Treatment With Dabrafenib (GSK2118436) in a Patient With Ganglioglioma. J Clin Oncol. (2014) 32:e98–100. 10.1200/JCO.2013.48.6852
28.
BautistaFPaciAMinard-ColinVDufourCGrillJLacroixLet al. Vemurafenib in pediatric patients with BRAFV 600E mutated high-grade gliomas: vemurafenib in pediatric high-grade gliomas. Pediatr Blood Cancer. (2014) 61:1101–3. 10.1002/pbc.24891
29.
del BufaloFCaraiAFigà-TalamancaLPettoriniBMallucciCGiangasperoFet al. Response of recurrent BRAFV600E mutated ganglioglioma to Vemurafenib as single agent. J Transl Med. (2014) 12:356. 10.1186/s12967-014-0356-1
30.
AguileraDJanssAMazewskiCCastellinoRCSchniederjanMHayesLet al. Successful retreatment of a child with a refractory brainstem ganglioglioma with vemurafenib: vemurafenib response in recurrent ganglioglioma. Pediatr Blood Cancer. (2016) 63:541–3. 10.1002/pbc.25787
31.
ChamberlainMC. Recurrent ganglioglioma in adults treated with BRAF inhibitors. CNS Oncol. (2016) 5:27–9. 10.2217/cns.15.40
32.
MeletathSKPavlickDBrennanTHamiltonRChmieleckiJElvinJAet al. Personalized treatment for a patient with a BRAF V600E mutation using dabrafenib and a tumor treatment fields device in a high-grade glioma arising from ganglioglioma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. (2016) 14:1345–50. 10.6004/jnccn.2016.0145
33.
MarksAMBindraRSDiLunaMLHuttnerAJairamVKahleKTet al. Response to the BRAF/MEK inhibitors dabrafenib/trametinib in an adolescent with a BRAF V600E mutated anaplastic ganglioglioma intolerant to vemurafenib. Pediatr Blood Cancer. (2018) 65:e26969. 10.1002/pbc.26969
34.
BelandBTsangRYSutherlandG. Unprecedented response to combination BRAF and MEK inhibitors in adult anaplastic ganglioglioma. J Neurooncol. (2018) 137:667–9. 10.1007/s11060-018-2760-5
35.
KaleyTTouatMSubbiahVHollebecqueARodonJLockhartACet al. BRAF Inhibition in BRAFV600-mutant gliomas: results from the VE-BASKET study. J Clin Oncol. (2018) 10:3477–484. 10.1200/JCO.2018.78.9990
36.
TouatMGratieuxJCondette AuliacSSejeanKAldeaSSavatovskyJet al. Vemurafenib and cobimetinib overcome resistance to vemurafenib in BRAF -mutant ganglioglioma. Neurology. (2018) 91:523–5. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006171
37.
Del BufaloFCeglieGCacchioneAAlessiIColafatiGSCaraiAet al. BRAF V600E inhibitor (Vemurafenib) for BRAF V600E mutated low grade gliomas. Front Oncol. (2018) 8:526. 10.3389/fonc.2018.00526
38.
AcSé Vemurafenib - Carte des Centres. Available online at: https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1_GaxU0IDJ5WrUacH4z2dxZ7r2CU (Accessed June 5, 2017).
39.
Van den BentMJWefelJSSchiffDTaphoornMJBJaeckleKJunckLet al. Response assessment in neuro-oncology (a report of the RANO group): assessment of outcome in trials of diffuse low-grade gliomas. Lancet Oncol. (2011) 12:583–593. 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70057-2
40.
SatyartheeGMehtaVVaishyaS. Ganglioglioma of the spinal cord: Report of two cases and review of literature. J Clin Neurosci. (2004) 11:199–202. 10.1016/S0967-5868(03)00124-3
41.
OppenheimerDJohnsonMJudkinsA. Ganglioglioma of the Spinal Cord. J Clin Imaging Sci. (2015) 5:53. 10.4103/2156-7514.166355
42.
ZakyWPatilSSParkMLiuDWangW-LWaniKMet al. Ganglioglioma in children and young adults: single institution experience and review of the literature. J Neurooncol. (2018) 139:739–47. 10.1007/s11060-018-2921-6
43.
ZhangDHenningTDZouL-GHuL-BWenLFengX-Yet al. Intracranial ganglioglioma: clinicopathological and MRI findings in 16 patients. Clin Radiol. (2008) 63:80–91. 10.1016/j.crad.2007.06.010
44.
PatelUPintoRSMillerDCHandlerMSRorkeLBEpsteinFJet al. MR of Spinal Cord Ganglioglioma. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. (1998) 19:879–87.
45.
YangCLiGFangJWuLYangTDengXet al. Intramedullary gangliogliomas: clinical features, surgical outcomes, and neuropathic scoliosis. J Neurooncol. (2014) 116:135–43. 10.1007/s11060-013-1267-3
46.
ThustSCvan den BentMJSmitsM. Pseudoprogression of brain tumors: pseudoprogression of Brain Tumors. J Magn Reson Imaging. (2018) 48:571–89. 10.1002/jmri.26171
47.
LangFFEpsteinFJRansohoffJAllenJCWisoffJAbbottIRet al. Central nervous system gangliogliomas: Part 2: clinical outcome. J Neurosurg. (1993) 79:867–73.
48.
VarshneyaKSarmientoJMNuñoMLagmanCMukherjeeDNuñoKet al. A national perspective of adult gangliogliomas. J Clin Neurosci. (2016) 30:65–70. 10.1016/j.jocn.2015.12.028
49.
LotfiniaIVahediP. Intramedullary cervical spinal cord ganglioglioma, review of the literature and therapeutic controversies. Spinal Cord. (2009) 47:87–90. 10.1038/sc.2008.69
50.
MillingtonGWM. Mutations of the BRAF gene in human cancer, by Davies et al. (Nature 2002; 417: 949-54). Clin Exp Dermatol. (2013) 38:222–3. 10.1111/ced.12015
51.
NicolaidesTPLiHSolomonDAHarionoSHashizumeRBarkovichKet al. Targeted Therapy for BRAFV600E Malignant Astrocytoma. Clin Cancer Res. (2011) 17:7595–04. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-1456
52.
LassalettaAZapotockyMMistryMRamaswamyVHonnoratMKrishnatryRet al. Therapeutic and prognostic implications of BRAF V600E in pediatric low-grade gliomas. J Clin Oncol. (2017) 35:2934–41. 10.1200/JCO.2016.71.8726
53.
ChenXPanCZhangPXuCSunYYuHet al. BRAF V600E mutation is a significant prognosticator of the tumour regrowth rate in brainstem gangliogliomas. J Clin Neurosci. (2017) 46:50–7. 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.09.014
54.
VuongHGAltibiAMADuongUNPNgoHTTPhamTQFungK-Met al. BRAF mutation is associated with an improved survival in glioma—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Mol Neurobiol. (2017) 55:3718–2410.1007/s12035-017-0599-y
55.
JonesDTWWittOPfisterSM. BRAF V600E status alone is not sufficient as a prognostic biomarker in pediatric low-grade glioma. J Clin Oncol. (2018) 36:96. 10.1200/JCO.2017.75.8987
56.
BretonQPlouhinecHPrunier-MirebeauDBoisselierBMichalakSMeneiPet al. BRAF-V600E immunohistochemistry in a large series of glial and glial-neuronal tumors. Brain Behav. (2017) 7:e00641. 10.1002/brb3.641
57.
KoelscheCWöhrerAJeibmannASchittenhelmJSchindlerGPreusserMet al. Mutant BRAF V600E protein in ganglioglioma is predominantly expressed by neuronal tumor cells. Acta Neuropathol. (2013) 125:891–900. 10.1007/s00401-013-1100-2
58.
ChappéCPadovaniLScavardaDForestFNanni-MetellusILoundouAet al. Dysembryoplastic neuroepithelial tumors share with pleomorphic xanthoastrocytomas and gangliogliomas BRAF V600E mutation and expression: BRAF V600E in glioneuronal tumors. Brain Pathol. (2013) 23:574–83. 10.1111/bpa.12048
59.
MomotaHShimoyamaY. Recurrent papillary glioneuronal tumor presenting as a ganglioglioma with the BRAF V600E mutation: Letter to the Editor. Neuropathology. (2015) 35:603–5. 10.1111/neup.12215
60.
HorbinskiCKoflerJYeaneyGCamelo-PiraguaSVennetiSLouisDNet al. Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 analysis differentiates gangliogliomas from infiltrative gliomas: IDH1 in gangliogliomas. Brain Pathol. (2011) 564–74. 10.1111/j.1750-3639.2011.00480.x
61.
TanCMcLendonR. Histological approach to neuronal and mixed neuronal-glial tumors of the central nervous system. Glioma. (2018) 1:89. 10.4103/glioma.glioma_24_18
62.
LouisDNGianniniCCapperDPaulusWFigarella-BrangerDLopesMet al. cIMPACT-NOW update 2 diagnostic clarifcations for difuse midline louis2018.pdf. Acta Neuropathol. (2018) 135:639–42. 10.1007/s00401-018-1826-y
63.
MoritaSNittaMMuragakiYKomoriTMasuiKMaruyamaT. Brainstem pilocytic astrocytoma with H3 K27M mutation: case report. J Neurosurg. (2018) 129:593–597. 10.3171/2017.4.JNS162443
64.
YamadaSKippBVossJGianniniCRaghunathanA. Combined “Infiltrating Astrocytoma/Pleomorphic Xanthoastrocytoma” Harboring IDH1 R132H and BRAF V600E Mutations. Am J Surg Pathol. (2016) 40:279–84. 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000515
65.
LópezGOberheim BushNABergerMSPerryASolomonDA. Diffuse non-midline glioma with H3F3A K27M mutation: a prognostic and treatment dilemma. Acta Neuropathol Commun. (2017) 5:38. 10.1186/s40478-017-0440-x
66.
Kleinschmidt-DeMastersBKLevyJMM. H3 K27M-mutant gliomas in adults vs. children share similar histological features and adverse prognosis. Clin Neuropathol. (2018) 37:53–63. 10.5414/NP301085
67.
BurgerMCRonellenfitschMWLorenzNIWagnerMVossMCapperDet al. Dabrafenib in patients with recurrent, BRAF V600E mutated malignant glioma and leptomeningeal disease. Oncol Rep. (2017) 38:3291–96. 10.3892/or.2017.6013
68.
WestESWilliamsVLMorelliJG. Vemurafenib-Induced Neutrophilic Panniculitis in a Child with a Brainstem Glioma. Pediatr Dermatol. (2015) 32:153–4. 10.1111/pde.12316
69.
ChamberlainMC. Salvage therapy with BRAF inhibitors for recurrent pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma: a retrospective case series. J Neurooncol. (2013) 114:237–40. 10.1007/s11060-013-1176-5
70.
SkrypekMForemanNGuillaumeDMoertelC. Pilomyxoid astrocytoma treated successfully with vemurafenib: pilomyxoid astrocytoma and vemurafenib. Pediatr Blood Cancer. (2014) 61:2099–100. 10.1002/pbc.25084
71.
RobinsonGWOrrBAGajjarA. Complete clinical regression of a BRAF V600E-mutant pediatric glioblastoma multiforme after BRAF inhibitor therapy. BMC Cancer. (2014) 14:258. 10.1186/1471-2407-14-258
72.
HauschildALarkinJRibasADrénoBFlahertyKTAsciertoPAet al. Modeled prognostic subgroups for survival and treatment outcomes in BRAF V600–mutated metastatic melanoma: pooled analysis of 4 randomized clinical Trials. JAMA Oncol. (2018) 4:1382–8. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2668
73.
MiglioriniDAguiarDVargasM-ILobrinusADietrichP-Y. BRAF/MEK double blockade in refractory anaplastic pleomorphic xanthoastrocytoma. Neurology. (2017) 88:1291–3. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000003767
74.
DooleyAJGuptaABhattacharyyaMMiddletonMR. Intermittent dosing with vemurafenib in BRAF V600E-mutant melanoma: review of a case series. Ther Adv Med Oncol. (2014) 6:262–6. 10.1177/1758834014548187
Summary
Keywords
central nervous system tumor, spinal cord, ganglioglioma, BRAF, vemurafenib, safety, tumor regression
Citation
Garnier L, Ducray F, Verlut C, Mihai M-I, Cattin F, Petit A and Curtit E (2019) Prolonged Response Induced by Single Agent Vemurafenib in a BRAF V600E Spinal Ganglioglioma: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. Front. Oncol. 9:177. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2019.00177
Received
07 December 2018
Accepted
04 March 2019
Published
26 March 2019
Volume
9 - 2019
Edited by
Gordon Li, Stanford University, United States
Reviewed by
Ofelia Cruz, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu Barcelona, Spain; Carsten Friedrich, University of Rostock, Germany; Kwong-Hon Kevin Chow, Stamford Hospital, United States
Updates
Copyright
© 2019 Garnier, Ducray, Verlut, Mihai, Cattin, Petit and Curtit.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Louis Garnier garnier-louis@hotmail.fr
This article was submitted to Neuro-Oncology and Neurosurgical Oncology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Oncology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.