Understanding the difference in symptoms and outcomes between glioblastoma patients diagnosed based on histological or molecular criteria: a retrospective cohort analysis from the Histo-Mol GBM collaborative

Since the 2021 World Health Organisation (WHO) classification, glioblastoma could be diagnosed based on classical histological features (hGBM) or molecular criteria (mGBM). However, prior studies included patients who required reclassification as a mGBM, potentially biasing survival analyses. The Histo-Mol GBM collaborative performed an international multicentre retrospective real-world cohort study of glioblastoma patients diagnosed according to WHO CNS 5. We identified consecutive patients diagnosed in 2021 with IDH wildtype glioblastoma according to WHO CNS 5. Clinicopathological, treatment, and survival data were collected and compared between mGBM and hGBM. 1828 patients diagnosed with glioblastoma were included. 75 mGBM patients (8.4% of tested patients) were identified, with no difference in age (median 61 vs 64, p = 0.057), gender (p = 0.937), or proportion with performance status 0–1 (82.7% vs 68.3%, p = 0.052) compared to hGBM. mGBM patients had an extended interval from MRI to surgery (median 23 vs 14 days, p < 0.001) and more frequently underwent biopsy (69.3% vs 30.3%, p < 0.001), but equivalent proportions received oncological treatment (80.0% vs 78.7%, p = 0.784). Overall survival (OS) from surgery was not different (p = 0.063). However, OS from initial MRI, stratified by surgical extent, demonstrated improved OS for mGBM patients (hazard ratio (HR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43–0.73). Propensity score matching identified improved survival following resection (HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.24–0.95; median OS: 26.0 versus 14.0 months, p = 0.031) but not biopsy (HR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.71–1.72). In this large real-world cohort, mGBMs had longer OS than hGBMs following resection with implications for prognostication and clinical decision making.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Neuro-Oncology
Published
2026-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-025-05364-8
Primary Topic
Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Understanding the difference in symptoms and outcomes between glioblastoma patients diagnosed based on histological or molecular criteria: a retrospective cohort analysis from the Histo-Mol GBM collaborative

Sarah Kingdon, Giles Critchley, Ciaran Scott Hill, Stephen Robinson et al.
Journal of Neuro-Oncology
Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Understanding the difference in symptoms and outcomes between glioblastoma patients diagnosed based on histological or molecular criteria: a retrospective cohort analysis from the Histo-Mol GBM collaborative

Sarah Kingdon, Giles Critchley, Ciaran Scott Hill, Stephen Robinson, the Histo-Mol GBM collaborative, Matthew Williams, Edward Chandy, Sophie Therese Williams
article en

Abstract

Since the 2021 World Health Organisation (WHO) classification, glioblastoma could be diagnosed based on classical histological features (hGBM) or molecular criteria (mGBM). However, prior studies included patients who required reclassification as a mGBM, potentially biasing survival analyses. The Histo-Mol GBM collaborative performed an international multicentre retrospective real-world cohort study of glioblastoma patients diagnosed according to WHO CNS 5. We identified consecutive patients diagnosed in 2021 with IDH wildtype glioblastoma according to WHO CNS 5. Clinicopathological, treatment, and survival data were collected and compared between mGBM and hGBM. 1828 patients diagnosed with glioblastoma were included. 75 mGBM patients (8.4% of tested patients) were identified, with no difference in age (median 61 vs 64, p = 0.057), gender (p = 0.937), or proportion with performance status 0–1 (82.7% vs 68.3%, p = 0.052) compared to hGBM. mGBM patients had an extended interval from MRI to surgery (median 23 vs 14 days, p < 0.001) and more frequently underwent biopsy (69.3% vs 30.3%, p < 0.001), but equivalent proportions received oncological treatment (80.0% vs 78.7%, p = 0.784). Overall survival (OS) from surgery was not different (p = 0.063). However, OS from initial MRI, stratified by surgical extent, demonstrated improved OS for mGBM patients (hazard ratio (HR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43–0.73). Propensity score matching identified improved survival following resection (HR 0.48, 95% CI: 0.24–0.95; median OS: 26.0 versus 14.0 months, p = 0.031) but not biopsy (HR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.71–1.72). In this large real-world cohort, mGBMs had longer OS than hGBMs following resection with implications for prognostication and clinical decision making.

Journal of Neuro-OncologyVol. 176(2)
NHS Lothian (GB), Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (GB), University of Sussex (GB), Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre (GB), Cancer Research UK (GB), Charing Cross Hospital (GB), Brain Tumour Charity (GB), Dunedin Public Hospital (NZ), Weston Park Cancer Centre (GB), University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust (GB), National Hospital for Neurology and Neurosurgery (GB), University College London (GB), Imperial College London (GB), University of Otago (NZ), University of Sheffield (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 95%
Glioma Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.