Deciphering the Clinical Implications of Concurrent Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss in Glioblastoma: A Scoping Review
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Eligibility Criteria
2.2. Information Sources and Search Strategy
2.3. Selection of Sources of Evidence
2.4. Data Charting Process and Data Items
2.5. Synthesis of Results
3. Results
3.1. Selected Studies
3.2. Study Characteristics
3.3. Study Outcomes and Synthesis of Results
3.3.1. Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss, and OS
3.3.2. Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss, and Radiotherapy Response
4. Discussion
4.1. 7/10 Signature Prevalence and Its Relationship with GBM
4.2. Clinical Implications of the +7/−10 Signature
4.3. Future Perspectives
4.4. Limitations
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| GBM | Glioblastoma |
| Ch+7/−10 | Co-occurrence of chromosome 7 gain and chromosome 10 loss |
| FISH | Fluorescence in situ hybridization |
| OS | Overall survival |
| CNS | Central nervous system |
| IDHwt | Isocitrate dehydrogenase wildtype |
| TCGA | The cancer genome atlas |
| CNAs | Copy number alterations |
| SAC | Spindle assembly checkpoint |
| TERTp | Telomerase transcriptase reverse promoter |
References
- Delgado-Martín, B.; Medina, M.Á. Advances in the Knowledge of the Molecular Biology of Glioblastoma and Its Impact in Patient Diagnosis, Stratification, and Treatment. Adv. Sci. 2020, 7, 1902971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brandner, S. Molecular Diagnostics of Adult Gliomas in Neuropathological Practice. Acta Med. Acad. 2021, 50, 29–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Śledzińska, P.; Bebyn, M.G.; Furtak, J.; Kowalewski, J.; Lewandowska, M.A. Prognostic and Predictive Biomarkers in Gliomas. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 10373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sourty, B.; Dardaud, L.-M.; Bris, C.; Loussouarn, D.; Campion, L.; Mosser, J.; Vallette, F.M.; Cartron, P.-F. Mitochondrial DNA Copy Number as a Prognostic Marker Is Age-Dependent in Adult Glioblastoma. Neuro-Oncol. Adv. 2022, 4, vdab191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ferreyra Vega, S.; Wenger, A.; Kling, T.; Olsson Bontell, T.; Jakola, A.S.; Carén, H. Spatial Heterogeneity in DNA Methylation and Chromosomal Alterations in Diffuse Gliomas and Meningiomas. Mod. Pathol. 2022, 35, 1551–1561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nair, N.U.; Schäffer, A.A.; Gertz, E.M.; Sharma, S.; Raghunathan, A.; Tembe, W.D.; Pochampally, R.; Smith, C.; Tuttle, R.; Brown, A.; et al. Chromosome 7 Gain Compensates for Chromosome 10 Loss in Glioma. Cancer Res. 2024, 84, 3464–3477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arslantas, A.; Artan, S.; Oner, U.; Müslümanoglu, M.; Ozdemir, M.; Durmaz, R. The Importance of Genomic Copy Number Changes in the Prognosis of Glioblastoma Multiforme. Neurosurg. Rev. 2004, 27, 58–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stichel, D.; Ebrahimi, A.; Reuss, D.E.; Schrimpf, D.; Ono, T.; Shirahata, M.; Sahm, F.; Korshunov, A.; Wefers, A.K.; Reinhardt, A.; et al. Distribution of EGFR Amplification, Combined Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss, and TERT Promoter Mutation in Brain Tumors. Acta Neuropathol. 2018, 136, 793–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopez-Gines, C.; Cerda-Nicolas, M.; Gil-Benso, R.; Pellín, A.; López-Guerrero, J.A.; Callaghan, R.; Benito, R.; Roldán, P.; Piquer, J.; Llombart-Bosch, A. Association of Chromosome 7, Chromosome 10 and EGFR Gene Amplification in Glioblastoma Multiforme. Clin. Neuropathol. 2005, 24, 209–218. [Google Scholar]
- Huhn, S.L.; Mohapatra, G.; Bollen, A.; Lamborn, K.R.; Prados, M.D.; Feuerstein, B.G. Chromosomal Abnormalities in Glioblastoma Multiforme by Comparative Genomic Hybridization. Clin. Cancer Res. 1999, 5, 1435–1443. [Google Scholar]
- Mazzoleni, A.; Awuah, W.A.; Sanker, V.; Kearns, P.; McDonald, D.; Jones, C.; Pfister, S.M.; Kool, M.; Sturm, D.; Jones, D.T.W. Chromosomal Instability: A Key Driver in Glioma Pathogenesis and Progression. Eur. J. Med. Res. 2024, 29, 451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferguson, L.R.; Chen, H.; Collins, A.R.; Connell, M.; Damia, G.; Dasgupta, S.; Malhotra, M.; Meeker, A.K.; Amedei, A.; Amin, A.; et al. Genomic Instability in Human Cancer: Molecular Insights and Opportunities for Therapeutic Attack and Prevention through Diet and Nutrition. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2015, 35, S5–S24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Barra, V.; Fachinetti, D. The Dark Side of Centromeres: Types, Causes and Consequences of Structural Abnormalities Implicating Centromeric DNA. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 4340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Karami Fath, M.; Nazari, A.; Parsania, N.; Rahmati, M.; Karimi Dermani, F.; Alidadi, S.; Amini, M.; Mirzaei, H. Centromeres in Cancer: Unraveling the Link between Chromosomal Instability and Tumorigenesis. Med. Oncol. 2024, 41, 254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Krämer, A.; Maier, B.; Bartek, J. Centrosome Clustering and Chromosomal (In)Stability: A Matter of Life and Death. Mol. Oncol. 2011, 5, 324–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, F.; Jiang, Y.; Lu, L.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Li, J.; Liu, Y. Aurora-A Promotes the Establishment of the Spindle Assembly Checkpoint by Priming the Haspin–Aurora-B Feedback Loop in Late G2 Phase. Cell Discov. 2017, 3, 16049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krenn, V.; Musacchio, A. The Aurora B Kinase in Chromosome Bi-Orientation and Spindle Checkpoint Signaling. Front. Oncol. 2015, 5, 225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giladi, M.; Schneiderman, R.S.; Voloshin, T.; Porat, Y.; Munster, M.; Blat, R.; Sherbo, S.; Bomzon, Z.; Urman, N.; Palti, Y. Mitotic Spindle Disruption by Alternating Electric Fields Leads to Improper Chromosome Segregation and Mitotic Catastrophe in Cancer Cells. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 18046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoellerbauer, P.; Kufeld, M.; Arora, S.; Ramaswamy, V.; Weng, J.; LaPlant, Q.; Bhat, K.P.L.; Paddison, P.J. FBXO42 Activity Is Required to Prevent Mitotic Arrest, Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Activation and Lethality in Glioblastoma and Other Cancers. NAR Cancer 2024, 6, zcae021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Herman, J.; Zhu, J.; DeLuca, J.; Paddison, P.J. Kinetochore Misregulation in Glioblastoma and Other Cancers. Neuro-Oncology 2020, 22, ii20–ii21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Nardo, M.; Pallotta, M.M.; Musio, A. The Multifaceted Roles of Cohesin in Cancer. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2022, 41, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eckardt, J.-N.; Stasik, S.; Röllig, C.; Sauer, T.; Scholl, S.; Hochhaus, A.; Crysandt, M.; Brümmendorf, T.H.; Naumann, R.; Steffen, B.; et al. Alterations of Cohesin Complex Genes in Acute Myeloid Leukemia. Blood Cancer J. 2023, 13, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Körber, V.; Yang, J.; Barah, P.; Wu, Y.; Stichel, D.; Gu, Z.; Fletcher, M.N.C.; Jones, D.; Hentschel, B.; Lamszus, K.; et al. Evolutionary Trajectories of IDH Wild-Type Glioblastomas Reveal a Common Path of Early Tumorigenesis. Cancer Cell 2019, 35, 692–704.e12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanu, O.O.; Hughes, B.; Di, C.; Lin, N.; Fu, J.; Bigner, D.D.; Yan, H.; Adamson, C. Glioblastoma Multiforme Oncogenomics and Signaling Pathways. Clin. Med. Oncol. 2009, 3, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, Y.-R.; Chen, M.; Pandolfi, P.P. The Functions and Regulation of the PTEN Tumour Suppressor. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2018, 19, 547–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Leighton, X.; Eidelman, O.; Jozwik, C.; Pollard, H.B.; Srivastava, M. ANXA7-GTPase as Tumor Suppressor: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Opportunities. Methods Mol. Biol. 2017, 1513, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Syafruddin, S.E.; Mohtar, M.A.; Wan Mohamad Nazarie, W.F.; Low, T.Y. Two Sides of the Same Coin: The Roles of KLF6 in Physiology and Pathophysiology. Biomolecules 2020, 10, 1378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rodriguez, S.M.B.; Kamel, A.; Ciubotaru, G.V.; Thakur, A.; Mehta, A.; Singh, S.K.; Bhat, K.P.L. EGFR Mechanisms and Targeted Therapies for Glioblastoma. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 11110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, F.; Guo, D. MET in Glioma: Signaling Pathways and Targeted Therapies. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2019, 38, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Louis, D.N.; Perry, A.; Wesseling, P.; Brat, D.J.; Cree, I.A.; Figarella-Branger, D.; Hawkins, C.; Ng, H.K.; Pfister, S.M.; Reifenberger, G.; et al. The 2021 WHO Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System. Neuro-Oncology 2021, 23, 1231–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amalfitano, G.; Chatel, M.; Paquis, P.; Michiels, J.F. Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Study of Aneuploidy of Chromosomes 7, 10, X, and Y in Glioblastomas. Cancer Genet. Cytogenet. 2000, 116, 6–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fujimoto, K.; Arita, H.; Satomi, K.; Yamasaki, K.; Matsushita, Y.; Nakamura, T.; Miyakita, Y.; Umehara, T.; Kobayashi, K.; Tamura, K.; et al. TERT Promoter Mutation Status Is Necessary and Sufficient to Diagnose IDH-Wildtype Diffuse Astrocytic Glioma with Molecular Features of Glioblastoma. Acta Neuropathol. 2021, 142, 323–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reuss, D.E.; Kratz, A.; Sahm, F.; Capper, D.; Schrimpf, D.; Koelsche, C.; Hovestadt, V.; Bewerunge-Hudler, M.; Jones, D.T.; Schittenhelm, J.; et al. Adult IDH Wild-Type Astrocytomas Biologically and Clinically Resolve into Other Tumor Entities. Acta Neuropathol. 2015, 130, 407–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.; Zhang, W.; Chen, D.; Lv, Y.; Zheng, J.; Lilljebjörn, H.; Ran, L.; Bao, Z.; Soneson, C.; Sjögren, H.O.; et al. A Glioma Classification Scheme Based on Coexpression Modules of EGFR and PDGFRA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 3538–3543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suzuki, H.; Aoki, K.; Chiba, K.; Sato, Y.; Shiozawa, Y.; Shiraishi, Y.; Shimamura, T.; Niida, A.; Motomura, K.; Ohka, F.; et al. Mutational Landscape and Clonal Architecture in Grade II and III Gliomas. Nat. Genet. 2015, 47, 458–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brat, D.J.; Aldape, K.; Bridge, J.A.; Canoll, P.; Colman, H.; Hameed, M.R.; Harris, B.T.; Hattab, E.M.; Huse, J.T.; Jenkins, R.B.; et al. Molecular Biomarker Testing for the Diagnosis of Diffuse Gliomas. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2022, 146, 547–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crespo, I.; Vital, A.L.; Nieto, A.B.; Rebelo, O.; Tão, H.; Lopes, M.C.; Oliveira, C.; Gonçalves, C.S.; Taipa, R.; Reis, R.M. Detailed Characterization of Alterations of Chromosomes 7, 9, and 10 in Glioblastomas. J. Mol. Diagn. 2011, 13, 634–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tricco, A.C.; Lillie, E.; Zarin, W.; O’Brien, K.K.; Colquhoun, H.; Levac, D.; Moher, D.; Peters, M.D.J.; Horsley, T.; Weeks, L.; et al. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMAScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann. Intern. Med. 2018, 169, 467–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]



| Authors | Country and Year | Study Design | Sample Size | GBM Subtype | Method | Key Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arslantas et al. [7] | Turkey, 2004 | Observational study | 20 | Primary GBM | CGH | Loss of chromosome 10 and chromosome 7/7p amplification may serve as specific molecular markers associated with poor prognosis among patients with primary GBM. |
| Lopez-Gines C et al. [9] | Spain, 2005 | Observational study | 25 | Newly diagnosed GBM | FISH | Survival rate analysis demonstrated lower survival rates in patients with monosomy 10, trisomy 7, and monosomy associated with trisomy 7. EGFR gene amplification appears to be independent of this co-occurrence. |
| Stichel et al. [8] | Germany, 2018 | Observational study | 167 | Primary GB | DNA methylation | Chromosome +7/−10 signature associated with worse survival in IDH-wildtype gliomas. However, GB-like survival is also observed in patients without the signature, suggesting it is not essential for poor prognosis in molecularly defined GBM. |
| Nair NU et al. [6] | USA, 2024 | Observational study | 141 | Primary GB | CGH | Patients with both chromosome 7 gain and chromosome 10 loss had the shortest overall survival, while those with copy-number neutral profiles survived longer. |
| Huhn SL et al. [10] | USA, 1999 | Observational study | 30 | Primary GB | CGH | Radiation-resistant tumors showed more frequent CNAs, suggesting greater genomic instability, but the findings were not statistically significant. |
| Authors | Study Population | Management | Outcomes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample Size | Mean Age | EGFR Gene Status | Chromosomal Arrangement | KPS | |||
| Arslantas et al. [7] | 20 | 53.2 ± 10.8 | NR | (+7/−10) 5/20 | 80–100 11/20 ≤70 9/20 | Primary surgery 20/20 Reoperation 13/20 Chemotherapy NR Fractionated radiotherapy 14/20 | +7/−10 5.0 ± 3.1 months vs. −10 5.4 ± 3.3 months vs. Overall, 10.0 ± 5.6 months survival |
| Lopez-Gines C et al. [9] | 25 | 55.8 | EGFR amp 13/25 +7/−10 + EGFR amp 7/25 | (+7/−10) 14/25 (+7/−10) 5/25 (+7/−10) 3/25 (+7/−10) 3/25 | 80–100 21/25 ≤70 4/25 | Primary surgery (subtotal resection) 23/25 Biopsy only 2/25 Chemotherapy 20% of patients Radiotherapy 70% of patients | +7/−10 36 ± 3.7 weeks vs. No alteration 48 ± 4.7 weeks survival |
| Stichel et al. [8] | 167 | NR | NR | (+7/−10) 115/167 | NR | NR | Similar survival curves among GB with +7/−10 and those without |
| Nair NU et al. [6] | 141 | NR | NR | (+7/−10) 111/141 (+7/−10) 6/141 (+7/−10) 20/141 (+7/−10) 4/141 | NR | NR | +7/−10 ~70 weeks vs. No alteration ~170 weeks survival |
| Huhn SL et al. [10] | RR 20 RS 10 | RR 47 RS 45 | NR | (+7/−10) RR 9/20 (+7/−10) RS 1/10 | NR | Subtotal resection RR: 19/20 RS: 9/10 Gross total resection RR: 1/20 RS: 1/10 Radiotherapy RR: 18/20 Single Fraction total dose/day 5800–6100 cGy RS: 7/10 Single Fraction total dose 5800–6100 cGy RR: 2/20 Hyperfractionated total dose/day 7040–7240 cGy RS: 3/10 Hyperfractionated total dose/day 7040–7240 cGy Radiation sensitizers Hydroxyurea and/or Alfa-Difluoromethylornithine RR: 12/20 RS: 7/10 | RR group: more CNAs, shorter survival (384 vs. 462 days); no link between CGH findings, BrdUrd index, or survival |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Ordóñez-Rubiano, E.G.; Ramos-Márquez, A.; Vega-Alvear, R.F.; Ruiz-Forero, C.; Cadavid-Cobo, A.; Fuentes-Tapias, S.; Andrade-Andrade, P.; Cómbita, A.L.; Payán-Gómez, C.; Parra-Medina, R.; et al. Deciphering the Clinical Implications of Concurrent Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss in Glioblastoma: A Scoping Review. Brain Sci. 2026, 16, 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci16010060
Ordóñez-Rubiano EG, Ramos-Márquez A, Vega-Alvear RF, Ruiz-Forero C, Cadavid-Cobo A, Fuentes-Tapias S, Andrade-Andrade P, Cómbita AL, Payán-Gómez C, Parra-Medina R, et al. Deciphering the Clinical Implications of Concurrent Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss in Glioblastoma: A Scoping Review. Brain Sciences. 2026; 16(1):60. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci16010060
Chicago/Turabian StyleOrdóñez-Rubiano, Edgar G., Alexandra Ramos-Márquez, Raul F. Vega-Alvear, Clara Ruiz-Forero, Antonia Cadavid-Cobo, Santiago Fuentes-Tapias, Pedro Andrade-Andrade, Alba L. Cómbita, César Payán-Gómez, Rafael Parra-Medina, and et al. 2026. "Deciphering the Clinical Implications of Concurrent Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss in Glioblastoma: A Scoping Review" Brain Sciences 16, no. 1: 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci16010060
APA StyleOrdóñez-Rubiano, E. G., Ramos-Márquez, A., Vega-Alvear, R. F., Ruiz-Forero, C., Cadavid-Cobo, A., Fuentes-Tapias, S., Andrade-Andrade, P., Cómbita, A. L., Payán-Gómez, C., Parra-Medina, R., Gómez, D. F., Ramón, J. F., & Hakim, F. (2026). Deciphering the Clinical Implications of Concurrent Chromosome 7 Gain and Chromosome 10 Loss in Glioblastoma: A Scoping Review. Brain Sciences, 16(1), 60. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci16010060

