Pathogenic germline variants in the DNA polymerase genes POLE and POLD1 cause polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis, a dominantly inherited disorder with increased risk of colorectal carcinomas and other tumors. POLE/POLD1 variants may result in high somatic mutation and neoantigen loads that confer susceptibility to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). To explore the role of POLE/POLD1 germline variants in glioma predisposition, whole-exome sequencing was applied to leukocyte DNA of glioma patients from 61 tumor families with at least one glioma case each. Rare heterozygous POLE/POLD1 missense variants predicted to be deleterious were identified in glioma patients from 10 (16%) families, co-segregating with the tumor phenotype in families with available DNA from several tumor patients. Glioblastoma patients carrying rare POLE variants had a mean overall survival of 21 months. Additionally, germline variants in POLD1, located at 19q13.33, were detected in 2/34 (6%) patients with 1p/19q-codeleted oligodendrogliomas, while POLE variants were identified in 2/4 (50%) glioblastoma patients with a spinal metastasis. In 13/15 (87%) gliomas from patients carrying POLE/POLD1 variants, features of defective polymerase proofreading, e.g. hypermutation, POLE/POLD1-associated mutational signatures, multinucleated cells, and increased intratumoral T cell response, were observed. In a CRISPR/Cas9-derived POLE-deficient LN-229 glioblastoma cell clone, a mutator phenotype and delayed S phase progression were detected compared to wildtype POLE cells. Our data provide evidence that rare POLE/POLD1 germline variants predispose to gliomas that may be susceptible to ICIs. Data compiled here suggest that glioma patients carrying POLE/POLD1 variants may be recognized by cutaneous manifestations, e.g. café-au-lait macules, and benefit from surveillance colonoscopy.

In this multi-institutional study we compiled a retrospective cohort of 86 posterior fossa tumors having received the diagnosis of cerebellar glioblastoma (cGBM). All tumors were reviewed histologically and subjected to array-based methylation analysis followed by algorithm-based classification into distinct methylation classes (MCs). The single MC containing the largest proportion of 25 tumors diagnosed as cGBM was MC anaplastic astrocytoma with piloid features representing a recently-described molecular tumor entity not yet included in the WHO Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System (WHO classification). Twenty-nine tumors molecularly corresponded to either of 6 methylation subclasses subsumed in the MC family GBM IDH wildtype. Further we identified 6 tumors belonging to the MC diffuse midline glioma H3 K27 M mutant and 6 tumors allotted to the MC IDH mutant glioma subclass astrocytoma. Two tumors were classified as MC pilocytic astrocytoma of the posterior fossa, one as MC CNS high grade neuroepithelial tumor with BCOR alteration and one as MC control tissue, inflammatory tumor microenvironment. The methylation profiles of 16 tumors could not clearly be assigned to one distinct MC. In comparison to supratentorial localization, the MC GBM IDH wildtype subclass midline was overrepresented, whereas the MCs GBM IDH wildtype subclass mesenchymal and subclass RTK II were underrepresented in the cerebellum. Based on the integration of molecular and histological findings all tumors received an integrated diagnosis in line with the WHO classification 2016. In conclusion, cGBM does not represent a molecularly uniform tumor entity, but rather comprises different brain tumor entities with diverse prognosis and therapeutic options. Distinction of these molecular tumor classes requires molecular analysis. More than 30% of tumors diagnosed as cGBM belong to the recently described molecular entity of anaplastic astrocytoma with piloid features.

The detection of IDH mutations in patients with diffusely infiltrating malignant astrocytomas resulted in substantial modifications in the concept of WHO classification of these tumors. An important underlying observation was that patients with anaplastic astrocytomas (AA) without IDH mutation had a clinical course similar to that of patients with glioblastomas (GBM). The underlying observations of the German Glioma Network and NOA-04, however, were based on mixed patient cohorts. While most GBM patients received combined radiochemotherapy, patients with AA usually had radiotherapy or chemotherapy only. This intrinsic shortcoming of the study raised the question of whether patients with AA, IDH wildtype, WHO grade III, might have better prognosis if treated with combined radiochemotherapy than patients with GBM receiving the same combination therapy. Thus, the question remains whether the established histopathological grading criteria for malignant astrocytomas in the absence of an IDH mutation are still important if neither vascular proliferation nor necrosis are detectable. All patients in the cohort investigated here with the diagnosis of AA or GBM were subjected to a combined radiochemotherapy according to the Stupp protocol independently of the histopathological diagnosis. Thus, the analysis of these patients allows to clarify whether patients with AA, IDH wildtype, WHO grade III have a prognosis similar to that of GBM, IDH wildtype, WHO grade IV, even under equivalent therapeutic conditions. We determined the IDH1 and IDH2 status by sequencing, the MGMT status by pyrosequencing after bisulfite treatment and the EGFR status of the patients by FISH. In fact, the patients with the histopathological diagnosis of an AA IDH wild-type under similar aggressive therapy showed a comparable and therefore no better prognosis (median overall survival (mOS) 16 months) than patients with a GBM (mOS 13 months). Instead, patients with an AA and an IDH mutation receiving the same therapy had a mOS of 54 months. Thus, it can be concluded that in the absence of an IDH mutation, the established histopathological grading criteria 'necrosis' and 'vascular proliferation' actually lose their prognostic significance. If, on the other hand, patients with malignant astrocytomas and an IDH mutation are examined, there is still a difference between patients with necrosis and/or vascular proliferation and those whose tumors do not show such characteristics. Accordingly, in patients with malignant astrocytomas with IDH mutation it can be concluded that a histological differentiation between AA IDH mutated and GBM IDH mutated remains beneficial from a prognostic perspective.