Complementary use of the DNA methylation-based tumor classification by the Bethesda v3 classifier in routine diagnostics: evaluation in a series of 516 cases

IF 10.3 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Charlotte Brandenburg, Tatjana Starzetz, Niklas Woltering, Akash Kumar, Marco Münzberg, Katharina J. Wenger, Karl H. Plate, Omkar Singh, Kenneth D. Aldape, Leonille Schweizer
{"title":"Complementary use of the DNA methylation-based tumor classification by the Bethesda v3 classifier in routine diagnostics: evaluation in a series of 516 cases","authors":"Charlotte Brandenburg,&nbsp;Tatjana Starzetz,&nbsp;Niklas Woltering,&nbsp;Akash Kumar,&nbsp;Marco Münzberg,&nbsp;Katharina J. Wenger,&nbsp;Karl H. Plate,&nbsp;Omkar Singh,&nbsp;Kenneth D. Aldape,&nbsp;Leonille Schweizer","doi":"10.1007/s00401-026-03079-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>DNA methylation-based tumor classification has become an essential tool in neuropathological diagnostics, yet a subset of central nervous system (CNS) tumors remains unclassifiable using current approaches. The performance of machine learning-based classifiers across varying case complexity is not fully defined. We evaluated the Bethesda Classifier v3 (Bv3) in both straightforward and diagnostically challenging CNS tumor specimens. We first applied Bv3 to 195 CNS tumor samples that were successfully classified using the Heidelberg Classifier v12.8 (Hv12.8; <i>n</i> = 195). We then compared Bv3 classifications in a retrospective cohort of diagnostically challenging, unclassifiable cases by Hv12.8 (<i>n</i> = 321). Both cohorts have been re-evaluated to identify the integrated histomolecular diagnoses according to the WHO CNS5 (2021) classification, hereafter referred to as the final WHO2021 diagnosis. Misclassification was defined as cases with Bv3 scores ≥ 0.9 that did not match the final WHO2021 diagnosis. In the straightforward cohort, Bv3 correctly classified 189/195 cases (97%). In the challenging cohort, Bv3 classified 180/321 previously unclassifiable cases (56%). 13/321 (4%) cases were misclassified by Bv3, of which 7/13 (54%) were labeled as ganglioglioma. Among glioblastomas, 79% were correctly identified, including tumors with lower DNA concentration and lower tumor purity. Bv3 assigned HGAP (High-Grade Astrocytoma with Piloid features) with a score ≥ 0.9 in three cases, which were not concordant with the final WHO2021 diagnosis. The Bethesda Classifier v3 demonstrates robust performance across both straightforward and diagnostically challenging CNS tumor specimens and represents a valuable complementary machine learning tool in routine neuropathological diagnostics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7012,"journal":{"name":"Acta Neuropathologica","volume":"152 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Neuropathologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00401-026-03079-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

DNA methylation-based tumor classification has become an essential tool in neuropathological diagnostics, yet a subset of central nervous system (CNS) tumors remains unclassifiable using current approaches. The performance of machine learning-based classifiers across varying case complexity is not fully defined. We evaluated the Bethesda Classifier v3 (Bv3) in both straightforward and diagnostically challenging CNS tumor specimens. We first applied Bv3 to 195 CNS tumor samples that were successfully classified using the Heidelberg Classifier v12.8 (Hv12.8; n = 195). We then compared Bv3 classifications in a retrospective cohort of diagnostically challenging, unclassifiable cases by Hv12.8 (n = 321). Both cohorts have been re-evaluated to identify the integrated histomolecular diagnoses according to the WHO CNS5 (2021) classification, hereafter referred to as the final WHO2021 diagnosis. Misclassification was defined as cases with Bv3 scores ≥ 0.9 that did not match the final WHO2021 diagnosis. In the straightforward cohort, Bv3 correctly classified 189/195 cases (97%). In the challenging cohort, Bv3 classified 180/321 previously unclassifiable cases (56%). 13/321 (4%) cases were misclassified by Bv3, of which 7/13 (54%) were labeled as ganglioglioma. Among glioblastomas, 79% were correctly identified, including tumors with lower DNA concentration and lower tumor purity. Bv3 assigned HGAP (High-Grade Astrocytoma with Piloid features) with a score ≥ 0.9 in three cases, which were not concordant with the final WHO2021 diagnosis. The Bethesda Classifier v3 demonstrates robust performance across both straightforward and diagnostically challenging CNS tumor specimens and represents a valuable complementary machine learning tool in routine neuropathological diagnostics.

Bethesda v3分类器在常规诊断中对基于DNA甲基化的肿瘤分类的补充应用:516例病例的评估
基于DNA甲基化的肿瘤分类已成为神经病理学诊断的重要工具,然而,使用现有方法仍无法对中枢神经系统(CNS)肿瘤进行分类。基于机器学习的分类器在不同情况复杂度下的性能还没有完全定义。我们评估了Bethesda分类器v3 (Bv3)在直接和诊断上具有挑战性的中枢神经系统肿瘤标本。我们首先将Bv3应用于195个CNS肿瘤样本,这些样本使用Heidelberg Classifier v12.8 (Hv12.8; n = 195)成功分类。然后,我们通过Hv12.8 (n = 321)比较了Bv3在诊断上具有挑战性、无法分类的病例中的回顾性队列。根据WHO CNS5(2021)分类(以下简称WHO2021最终诊断),对两个队列进行了重新评估,以确定综合组织分子诊断。误诊定义为Bv3评分≥0.9与WHO2021最终诊断不匹配的病例。在直接队列中,Bv3正确分类了189/195例(97%)。在具有挑战性的队列中,Bv3分类了180/321例以前无法分类的病例(56%)。13/321例(4%)被Bv3错误分类,其中7/13例(54%)被标记为神经节胶质瘤。在胶质母细胞瘤中,79%被正确识别,包括DNA浓度较低和肿瘤纯度较低的肿瘤。Bv3分级HGAP(高级别星形细胞瘤伴核样特征)评分≥0.9分3例,与WHO2021最终诊断不一致。Bethesda Classifier v3在简单的和具有诊断挑战性的中枢神经系统肿瘤标本上表现出强大的性能,代表了常规神经病理诊断中有价值的补充机器学习工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Acta Neuropathologica
Acta Neuropathologica 医学-病理学
CiteScore
23.70
自引率
3.90%
发文量
118
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Neuropathologica publishes top-quality papers on the pathology of neurological diseases and experimental studies on molecular and cellular mechanisms using in vitro and in vivo models, ideally validated by analysis of human tissues. The journal accepts Original Papers, Review Articles, Case Reports, and Scientific Correspondence (Letters). Manuscripts must adhere to ethical standards, including review by appropriate ethics committees for human studies and compliance with principles of laboratory animal care for animal experiments. Failure to comply may result in rejection of the manuscript, and authors are responsible for ensuring accuracy and adherence to these requirements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书