Ependymoma with RELA fusion has been defined as a novel entity of the revised World Health Organization 2016 classification of tumors of the central nervous system (CNS), characterized by fusion transcripts of the RELA gene and consequent pathological activation of the NFkB pathway. These tumors represent the majority of supratentorial ependymomas in children. The validation of diagnostic tools to identify this clinically relevant ependymoma entity is essential. Here, we have used interphase fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for C11orf95 and RELA, immunohistochemistry (IHC) for p65-RelA and the recently developed DNA methylation-based classification besides conventional histopathology, and compared the precision of the methods in 40 supratentorial pediatric brain tumors diagnosed as ependymomas in the past years. Reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and RNA sequencing were performed to explore discordant cases. Furthermore, we integrated imaging and clinical features as additional layers of information. The concordance between nuclear RelA expression by IHC and RELA FISH was 100%. Concordance between IHC and DNA methylation profiling, and between FISH and DNA methylation profiling was also high (96.4% and 95.2%, respectively). Thirty-four out of 40 (85%) cases were confirmed by integrated diagnoses as ependymal tumors, including 22 RELA-fused ependymomas (71% of ependymal tumors), two YAP1-fused ependymomas (6%), six non-RELA/non-YAP1 ependymomas (18%) and four ependymal/subependymal mixed tumors (12%). Ependymal/subependymal mixed tumors had an excellent clinical outcome despite the presence of histopathological signs of malignancy, suggesting that these tumors should not be diagnosed as classic ependymomas. DNA methylation profiling helped in the differential diagnosis of RELA-fused ependymomas. IHC and FISH, which are available in the majority of pathology laboratories, are valuable tools to identify RELA-fused ependymomas.

The molecular biology of ependymomas is not well understood and this is particularly true for ependymoma relapses. We aimed at finding out if and to which extent, relapses differ from their corresponding primary tumors on the morphological, chromosomal and epigenetic level. We investigated 24 matched ependymoma primary and relapsed tumor samples and, as a first step, compared cell density, necrosis, vessel proliferation, Ki67 proliferative index, trimethylation at H3K27 and expression of CXorf67. For the investigation of global methylation profiles, we used public data in order to analyze copy number variation profiles, differential methylation, methylation status and fractions of hypo- and hypermethylated CpGs in different epigenomic substructures. Morphologically, we found a significant increase with relapse in cell density and proliferation. H3K27 trimethylation and CXorf67 expression remained stable between primary and relapse tumor samples, and the analysis of DNA methylation profiles neither revealed significant differences in copy number variations nor differentially methylated regions. Significant differences in the methylation status were found for CpG islands, but also in N Shelves or S Shelves, depending on the molecular subgroup. The fraction of probes changing their methylation in the epigenomic substructures appeared subgroup-specific. Most changes occur in CpG islands, for which relapsed tumors demonstrate higher methylation values than primary tumors. The morphological differences reflect increased aggressiveness upon ependymoma relapse, but, despite slight changes, this observation does not appear to be sufficiently explained by epigenetic changes.