Table 2.
Comparison of contemporary aggressive meningioma prognostication.
| Driver Classification (9) | Maas Classification (8) | RTOG 0539 (45) | WHO 2021 (2) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNV | ||||
| 1p | ||||
| 3p | ||||
| 4p/q | ||||
| 6p/q | ||||
| 10p/q | ||||
| 14q | ||||
| 18p/q | ||||
| 19p/q | ||||
| CDKN2A/B | ||||
| Mitoses | ||||
| 4 to 19 | ||||
| >20 | ||||
| EOR | ||||
| GTR | ||||
| STR | ||||
| Tumor Volume | ||||
| 0-25 cc | ||||
| >25cc | ||||
| Recurrence | ||||
| rimary | ||||
| Recurrent | ||||
| WHO Grade | ||||
| 1 | ||||
| 2 | ||||
| 3 | ||||
| Methylation Profile | ||||
| Ben | ||||
| Int | ||||
| Mal | ||||
| Genetic Alterations | ||||
| SMARCE1 | ||||
| BAP1 | ||||
| KLF/TRAF7 | ||||
| TERT | ||||
| Histology |
Key factors of four contemporary meningioma grading schemata, including genetic and epigenetic alterations, histologic characteristics, and clinical characteristics, are compared. Within each classification scheme, black shading indicates use of the factor in the prognostication score.