Outcomes of BRAF V600E Pediatric Gliomas Treated With Targeted BRAF Inhibition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Children with pediatric gliomas harboring a BRAF V600E mutation have poor outcomes with current chemoradiotherapy strategies. Our aim was to study the role of targeted BRAF inhibition in these tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS We collected clinical, imaging, molecular, and outcome information from patients with BRAF V600E–mutated glioma treated with BRAF inhibition across 29 centers from multiple countries. RESULTS Sixty-seven patients were treated with BRAF inhibition (pediatric low-grade gliomas [PLGGs], n = 56; pediatric high-grade gliomas [PHGGs], n = 11) for up to 5.6 years. Objective responses were observed in 80% of PLGGs, compared with 28% observed with conventional chemotherapy ( P < .001). These responses were rapid (median, 4 months) and sustained in 86% of tumors up to 5 years while receiving therapy. After discontinuation of BRAF inhibition, 76.5% (13 of 17) of patients with PLGG experienced rapid progression (median, 2.3 months). However, upon rechallenge with BRAF inhibition, 90% achieved an objective response. Poor prognostic factors in conventional therapies, such as concomitant homozygous deletion of CDKN2A, were not associated with lack of response to BRAF inhibition. In contrast, only 36% of those with PHGG responded to BRAF inhibition, with all but one tumor progressing within 18 months. In PLGG, responses translated to 3-year progression-free survival of 49.6% (95% CI, 35.3% to 69.5%) versus 29.8% (95% CI, 20% to 44.4%) for BRAF inhibition versus chemotherapy, respectively ( P = .02). CONCLUSION Use of BRAF inhibition results in robust and durable responses in BRAF V600E–mutated PLGG. Prospective studies are required to determine long-term survival and functional outcomes with BRAF inhibitor therapy in childhood gliomas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".