Table 5.

Prognostic factors in IDH-wildtype glioblastoma.

Factor	Details	Reference
IDH1/2 mutation	Incompatible with diagnosis	[4,5,7]
1p/19q co-deletion	Incompatible with diagnosis	[4]
MGMT	Promoter methylation predicts improved response to temozolomide, especially in the presence of TERTp mutation	[122,123,143,144,145,148]
Chromosomes 19 & 20	Co-gain correlates with better clinical outcome	[129,142]
Chromosomes 1 & 19	Isolated gain of either chromosome, in the absence of CDK4/MDM2 co- amplification correlates with better clinical outcome	[139]
BRAF (V600E)	Mutation is correlated with better outcome	[152,153]
EGFR amplification, 7+/10−, TERTp mutation	Alteration of any of these factors correlates with worse clinical outcome; GBM-C0 status correlates with better clinical outcome	[129]
Total copy number variation (CNV)	Elevated CNV correlates with worse clinical outcome than IDH-mutant lower- grade gliomas, however, no in-group effects	[52,129]
CDK4/MDM2	Co-amplification is correlated with worse clinical outcome	[120,121,139]
EGFR/PTEN/CDKN2A	Co-alterations of these three genes is correlated with worse clinical outcome	[141]
PIK3CA	Mutations are correlated with worse clinical outcome	[140]
H3K27M	Mutation in midline glioma correlates with worse clinical outcome; grade IV equivalent (cIMPACT-NOW update 2)	[169,173,174,175,177]

NOTE: Molecular alterations in white: Definitional; green: Overall positive effect on prognosis; red: Overall negative effect on prognosis.