Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate CNS tumor diagnosis can be challenging, and methylation profiling can serve as an adjunct to classify diagnostically difficult cases. METHODS: An integrated diagnostic approach was employed for a consecutive series of 1258 surgical neuropathology samples obtained primarily in a consultation practice over 2-year period. DNA methylation profiling and classification using the DKFZ/Heidelberg CNS tumor classifier was performed, as well as unsupervised analyses of methylation data. Ancillary testing, where relevant, was performed. RESULTS: Among the received cases in consultation, a high-confidence methylation classifier score (>0.84) was reached in 66.4% of cases. The classifier impacted the diagnosis in 46.7% of these high-confidence classifier score cases, including a substantially new diagnosis in 26.9% cases. Among the 289 cases received with only a descriptive diagnosis, methylation was able to resolve approximately half (144, 49.8%) with high-confidence scores. Additional methods were able to resolve diagnostic uncertainty in 41.6% of the low-score cases. Tumor purity was significantly associated with classifier score (P = 1.15e-11). Deconvolution demonstrated that suspected glioblastomas (GBMs) matching as control/inflammatory brain tissue could be resolved into GBM methylation profiles, which provided a proof-of-concept approach to resolve tumor classification in the setting of low tumor purity. CONCLUSIONS: This work assesses the impact of a methylation classifier and additional methods in a consultative practice by defining the proportions with concordant vs change in diagnosis in a set of diagnostically challenging CNS tumors. We address approaches to low-confidence scores and confounding issues of low tumor purity.