Review




Structured Review

Pyrosequencing Inc mgmt p pyrosequencing
Mgmt P Pyrosequencing, supplied by Pyrosequencing Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mgmt p pyrosequencing/product/Pyrosequencing Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mgmt p pyrosequencing - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars

Images



Similar Products

90
Pyrosequencing Inc mgmt p pyrosequencing
Mgmt P Pyrosequencing, supplied by Pyrosequencing Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mgmt p pyrosequencing/product/Pyrosequencing Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mgmt p pyrosequencing - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
Pyrosequencing Inc mgmt pyrosequencing
Mgmt Pyrosequencing, supplied by Pyrosequencing Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mgmt pyrosequencing/product/Pyrosequencing Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mgmt pyrosequencing - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
Pyrosequencing Inc mgmt methylation pyrosequencing
Mgmt Methylation Pyrosequencing, supplied by Pyrosequencing Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mgmt methylation pyrosequencing/product/Pyrosequencing Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mgmt methylation pyrosequencing - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
Pyrosequencing Inc mgmt pyrosequencing score
Analysis of differentially dissected tumor samples
Mgmt Pyrosequencing Score, supplied by Pyrosequencing Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mgmt pyrosequencing score/product/Pyrosequencing Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mgmt pyrosequencing score - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

90
Pyrosequencing Inc mgmt promoter pyrosequencing score
<t>MGMT</t> promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B <t>)</t> <t>Cumulative</t> mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325. Similar results are shown for each tumor subtype, including IDH-wildtype glioblastoma ( E - H ), IDH-mutant astrocytoma ( I - L ) and IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma ( M - P ). (Horizontal dashed black lines: mean values for cohort; Horizontal solid red lines: MGMT positivity cutoff of 10.0%; Vertical dashed black lines: cutoff values identified by Cutoff Finder; Vertical dashed red lines: cutoff values identified by multi-part linear regression; Panels A, E, I, M: Fisher’s exact test; Panels D, H, L, P: unpaired Student’s T-test; pyroseq: pyrosequencing; *p < 0.05; ****p < 0.0001)
Mgmt Promoter Pyrosequencing Score, supplied by Pyrosequencing Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/mgmt promoter pyrosequencing score/product/Pyrosequencing Inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
mgmt promoter pyrosequencing score - by Bioz Stars, 2026-04
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


Analysis of differentially dissected tumor samples

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Analysis of differentially dissected tumor samples

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: Mutagenesis

MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325. Similar results are shown for each tumor subtype, including IDH-wildtype glioblastoma ( E - H ), IDH-mutant astrocytoma ( I - L ) and IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma ( M - P ). (Horizontal dashed black lines: mean values for cohort; Horizontal solid red lines: MGMT positivity cutoff of 10.0%; Vertical dashed black lines: cutoff values identified by Cutoff Finder; Vertical dashed red lines: cutoff values identified by multi-part linear regression; Panels A, E, I, M: Fisher’s exact test; Panels D, H, L, P: unpaired Student’s T-test; pyroseq: pyrosequencing; *p < 0.05; ****p < 0.0001)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325. Similar results are shown for each tumor subtype, including IDH-wildtype glioblastoma ( E - H ), IDH-mutant astrocytoma ( I - L ) and IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma ( M - P ). (Horizontal dashed black lines: mean values for cohort; Horizontal solid red lines: MGMT positivity cutoff of 10.0%; Vertical dashed black lines: cutoff values identified by Cutoff Finder; Vertical dashed red lines: cutoff values identified by multi-part linear regression; Panels A, E, I, M: Fisher’s exact test; Panels D, H, L, P: unpaired Student’s T-test; pyroseq: pyrosequencing; *p < 0.05; ****p < 0.0001)

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: Methylation, Mutagenesis

MGMT promoter methylation trends in DNA methylation array samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples above and below the cutoff of VAF = 0.245. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples as a function of VAF. ( C ) Frequency of positive results for GBM array samples above and below the cutoff of TERT VAF = 0.325. ( D ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in GBM array samples as a function of TERT VAF. ( E ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 10.0% versus GBM array samples. ( F ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 7.28% versus GBM array samples. ( G ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF < 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF < 0.325. ( H ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.325. ( I ) Frequency of positive results for IDHmut astrocytoma above and below the cutoff of IDH VAF = 0.325 (left), by methylation class match (center), and above and below the cutoff of classifier score = 0.955 (right). ( J ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in IDHmut astrocytoma array samples as a function of IDH VAF (Fisher’s exact test for panels A, C, E, F, G, H, I; GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: MGMT promoter methylation trends in DNA methylation array samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples above and below the cutoff of VAF = 0.245. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples as a function of VAF. ( C ) Frequency of positive results for GBM array samples above and below the cutoff of TERT VAF = 0.325. ( D ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in GBM array samples as a function of TERT VAF. ( E ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 10.0% versus GBM array samples. ( F ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 7.28% versus GBM array samples. ( G ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF < 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF < 0.325. ( H ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.325. ( I ) Frequency of positive results for IDHmut astrocytoma above and below the cutoff of IDH VAF = 0.325 (left), by methylation class match (center), and above and below the cutoff of classifier score = 0.955 (right). ( J ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in IDHmut astrocytoma array samples as a function of IDH VAF (Fisher’s exact test for panels A, C, E, F, G, H, I; GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma)

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: Methylation, DNA Methylation Assay, Mutagenesis

Driver mutation VAF , MGMT promoter methylation scores, and tumor cellularity . ( A ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus driver mutation VAF for all glioma samples. ( B ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus TERT promoter mutation VAF for GBM. ( C ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut astrocytoma. ( D ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut oligodendroglioma. ( E ) Linear regression of microscopically estimated cellularity versus cellularity calculated from driver mutation VAF (2×VAF×100%) for all glioma samples. ( F ) Differences between microscopically estimated cellularity and cellularity calculated from VAF (Y-axis) plotted as a function of VAF (X-axis), for all glioma samples. ( G ) TERT promoter mutation VAF by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples. ( H ) MGMT promoter methylation score by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma, IDHmut oligodendroglioma: IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma, pyroseq: pyrosequencing, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Driver mutation VAF , MGMT promoter methylation scores, and tumor cellularity . ( A ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus driver mutation VAF for all glioma samples. ( B ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus TERT promoter mutation VAF for GBM. ( C ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut astrocytoma. ( D ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut oligodendroglioma. ( E ) Linear regression of microscopically estimated cellularity versus cellularity calculated from driver mutation VAF (2×VAF×100%) for all glioma samples. ( F ) Differences between microscopically estimated cellularity and cellularity calculated from VAF (Y-axis) plotted as a function of VAF (X-axis), for all glioma samples. ( G ) TERT promoter mutation VAF by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples. ( H ) MGMT promoter methylation score by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma, IDHmut oligodendroglioma: IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma, pyroseq: pyrosequencing, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: Mutagenesis, Methylation, Digital PCR

Re-testing pyrosequencing samples with DNA methylation array and droplet digital PCR

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Re-testing pyrosequencing samples with DNA methylation array and droplet digital PCR

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: DNA Methylation Assay

False negative results in IDH-wildtype glioblastoma with low TERT VAF . ( A ) MGMT promoter methylation results for 12 GBM samples (6 with TERT VAF ≤ 0.10, 6 with TERT VAF ≥ 0.25) comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation scores (left Y-axis, cutoff for positive = 10.0%, horizontal solid red line) to results on re-testing with DNA methylation array (right Y-axis). ( B ) MGMT promoter methylation results for the same 12 GBM samples comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation levels to results on re-testing with ddPCR. (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, pos: positive, equiv: equivocal, neg: negative, QNS: quality/quantity of DNA not sufficient for reliable test result, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: False negative results in IDH-wildtype glioblastoma with low TERT VAF . ( A ) MGMT promoter methylation results for 12 GBM samples (6 with TERT VAF ≤ 0.10, 6 with TERT VAF ≥ 0.25) comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation scores (left Y-axis, cutoff for positive = 10.0%, horizontal solid red line) to results on re-testing with DNA methylation array (right Y-axis). ( B ) MGMT promoter methylation results for the same 12 GBM samples comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation levels to results on re-testing with ddPCR. (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, pos: positive, equiv: equivocal, neg: negative, QNS: quality/quantity of DNA not sufficient for reliable test result, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: Methylation, DNA Methylation Assay, Digital PCR

Central hypothesis . MGMT promoter methylation is pathologic, and occurs only in tumor cells. Cellular glioma samples are rich in DNA from tumor cells, whereas paucicellular glioma samples contain a large fraction of DNA from non-tumor cells, which can “dilute” positive methylation signals from tumor cell DNA, leading to false-negative results

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Central hypothesis . MGMT promoter methylation is pathologic, and occurs only in tumor cells. Cellular glioma samples are rich in DNA from tumor cells, whereas paucicellular glioma samples contain a large fraction of DNA from non-tumor cells, which can “dilute” positive methylation signals from tumor cell DNA, leading to false-negative results

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: Methylation

Patient cohort characteristics

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Patient cohort characteristics

Article Snippet: Cumulative mean MGMT pyrosequencing score trends are shown for IDHwt GBM (Fig. G), IDHmut astrocytoma (Fig. K), and IDHmut oligodendroglioma (Fig. O).

Techniques: Pyrosequencing Assay, Methylation, Mutagenesis

MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325. Similar results are shown for each tumor subtype, including IDH-wildtype glioblastoma ( E - H ), IDH-mutant astrocytoma ( I - L ) and IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma ( M - P ). (Horizontal dashed black lines: mean values for cohort; Horizontal solid red lines: MGMT positivity cutoff of 10.0%; Vertical dashed black lines: cutoff values identified by Cutoff Finder; Vertical dashed red lines: cutoff values identified by multi-part linear regression; Panels A, E, I, M: Fisher’s exact test; Panels D, H, L, P: unpaired Student’s T-test; pyroseq: pyrosequencing; *p < 0.05; ****p < 0.0001)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325. Similar results are shown for each tumor subtype, including IDH-wildtype glioblastoma ( E - H ), IDH-mutant astrocytoma ( I - L ) and IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma ( M - P ). (Horizontal dashed black lines: mean values for cohort; Horizontal solid red lines: MGMT positivity cutoff of 10.0%; Vertical dashed black lines: cutoff values identified by Cutoff Finder; Vertical dashed red lines: cutoff values identified by multi-part linear regression; Panels A, E, I, M: Fisher’s exact test; Panels D, H, L, P: unpaired Student’s T-test; pyroseq: pyrosequencing; *p < 0.05; ****p < 0.0001)

Article Snippet: Fig. 2 MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325.

Techniques: Methylation, Mutagenesis

MGMT promoter methylation trends in DNA methylation array samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples above and below the cutoff of VAF = 0.245. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples as a function of VAF. ( C ) Frequency of positive results for GBM array samples above and below the cutoff of TERT VAF = 0.325. ( D ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in GBM array samples as a function of TERT VAF. ( E ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 10.0% versus GBM array samples. ( F ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 7.28% versus GBM array samples. ( G ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF < 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF < 0.325. ( H ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.325. ( I ) Frequency of positive results for IDHmut astrocytoma above and below the cutoff of IDH VAF = 0.325 (left), by methylation class match (center), and above and below the cutoff of classifier score = 0.955 (right). ( J ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in IDHmut astrocytoma array samples as a function of IDH VAF (Fisher’s exact test for panels A, C, E, F, G, H, I; GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: MGMT promoter methylation trends in DNA methylation array samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples above and below the cutoff of VAF = 0.245. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results for all glioma array samples as a function of VAF. ( C ) Frequency of positive results for GBM array samples above and below the cutoff of TERT VAF = 0.325. ( D ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in GBM array samples as a function of TERT VAF. ( E ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 10.0% versus GBM array samples. ( F ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples using MGMT cutoff of 7.28% versus GBM array samples. ( G ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF < 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF < 0.325. ( H ) Frequency of positive results in GBM pyrosequencing samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.115, using MGMT cutoff of 7.28%, versus GBM array samples with TERT VAF ≥ 0.325. ( I ) Frequency of positive results for IDHmut astrocytoma above and below the cutoff of IDH VAF = 0.325 (left), by methylation class match (center), and above and below the cutoff of classifier score = 0.955 (right). ( J ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive results in IDHmut astrocytoma array samples as a function of IDH VAF (Fisher’s exact test for panels A, C, E, F, G, H, I; GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma)

Article Snippet: Fig. 2 MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325.

Techniques: Methylation, DNA Methylation Assay, Mutagenesis

Driver mutation VAF , MGMT promoter methylation scores, and tumor cellularity . ( A ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus driver mutation VAF for all glioma samples. ( B ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus TERT promoter mutation VAF for GBM. ( C ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut astrocytoma. ( D ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut oligodendroglioma. ( E ) Linear regression of microscopically estimated cellularity versus cellularity calculated from driver mutation VAF (2×VAF×100%) for all glioma samples. ( F ) Differences between microscopically estimated cellularity and cellularity calculated from VAF (Y-axis) plotted as a function of VAF (X-axis), for all glioma samples. ( G ) TERT promoter mutation VAF by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples. ( H ) MGMT promoter methylation score by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma, IDHmut oligodendroglioma: IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma, pyroseq: pyrosequencing, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Driver mutation VAF , MGMT promoter methylation scores, and tumor cellularity . ( A ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus driver mutation VAF for all glioma samples. ( B ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus TERT promoter mutation VAF for GBM. ( C ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut astrocytoma. ( D ) Linear regression of MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score versus IDH mutation VAF for IDHmut oligodendroglioma. ( E ) Linear regression of microscopically estimated cellularity versus cellularity calculated from driver mutation VAF (2×VAF×100%) for all glioma samples. ( F ) Differences between microscopically estimated cellularity and cellularity calculated from VAF (Y-axis) plotted as a function of VAF (X-axis), for all glioma samples. ( G ) TERT promoter mutation VAF by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples. ( H ) MGMT promoter methylation score by ddPCR in high versus low cellularity areas of GBM tissue samples (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, IDHmut astrocytoma: IDH-mutant astrocytoma, IDHmut oligodendroglioma: IDH-mutant and 1p/19q co-deleted oligodendroglioma, pyroseq: pyrosequencing, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Article Snippet: Fig. 2 MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325.

Techniques: Mutagenesis, Methylation, Digital PCR

Re-testing  pyrosequencing  samples with DNA methylation array and droplet digital PCR

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Re-testing pyrosequencing samples with DNA methylation array and droplet digital PCR

Article Snippet: Fig. 2 MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325.

Techniques: DNA Methylation Assay

False negative results in IDH-wildtype glioblastoma with low TERT VAF . ( A ) MGMT promoter methylation results for 12 GBM samples (6 with TERT VAF ≤ 0.10, 6 with TERT VAF ≥ 0.25) comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation scores (left Y-axis, cutoff for positive = 10.0%, horizontal solid red line) to results on re-testing with DNA methylation array (right Y-axis). ( B ) MGMT promoter methylation results for the same 12 GBM samples comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation levels to results on re-testing with ddPCR. (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, pos: positive, equiv: equivocal, neg: negative, QNS: quality/quantity of DNA not sufficient for reliable test result, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: False negative results in IDH-wildtype glioblastoma with low TERT VAF . ( A ) MGMT promoter methylation results for 12 GBM samples (6 with TERT VAF ≤ 0.10, 6 with TERT VAF ≥ 0.25) comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation scores (left Y-axis, cutoff for positive = 10.0%, horizontal solid red line) to results on re-testing with DNA methylation array (right Y-axis). ( B ) MGMT promoter methylation results for the same 12 GBM samples comparing initial pyrosequencing methylation levels to results on re-testing with ddPCR. (GBM: IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, pos: positive, equiv: equivocal, neg: negative, QNS: quality/quantity of DNA not sufficient for reliable test result, ddPCR: droplet digital PCR)

Article Snippet: Fig. 2 MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325.

Techniques: Methylation, DNA Methylation Assay, Digital PCR

Central hypothesis . MGMT promoter methylation is pathologic, and occurs only in tumor cells. Cellular glioma samples are rich in DNA from tumor cells, whereas paucicellular glioma samples contain a large fraction of DNA from non-tumor cells, which can “dilute” positive methylation signals from tumor cell DNA, leading to false-negative results

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Central hypothesis . MGMT promoter methylation is pathologic, and occurs only in tumor cells. Cellular glioma samples are rich in DNA from tumor cells, whereas paucicellular glioma samples contain a large fraction of DNA from non-tumor cells, which can “dilute” positive methylation signals from tumor cell DNA, leading to false-negative results

Article Snippet: Fig. 2 MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325.

Techniques: Methylation

Patient cohort characteristics

Journal: Acta Neuropathologica Communications

Article Title: Variant allelic frequencies of driver mutations can identify gliomas with potentially false-negative MGMT promoter methylation results

doi: 10.1186/s40478-023-01680-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Patient cohort characteristics

Article Snippet: Fig. 2 MGMT promoter methylation trends in pyrosequencing samples . ( A ) Frequency of positive results for all glioma samples above and below the cutoff value of VAF = 0.325. ( B ) Cumulative mean frequency of positive test results as a function of VAF. ( C ) Trends in cumulative mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing score with increasing VAF. ( D ) Mean MGMT promoter pyrosequencing scores above and below VAF = 0.325.

Techniques: Pyrosequencing Assay, Methylation, Mutagenesis