BMC Neurology· 2026Q2
Extraventricular neurocytomas stratified by tumor location and histological subtype: clinical features, radiology, pathology, and prognosis
- 0citations
- Q2SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Extraventricular neurocytomas (EVNs) in the brain parenchyma are diagnosed in younger patients (25 vs. 49 years) and present differently (headache/seizures vs. visual decline) and on MRI (cystic-solid vs. solid) compared to those in the sellar region. Despite distinct imaging and GFAP expression, neither tumor location nor histological subtype (typical vs. atypical) significantly impacted progression-free survival in this small cohort.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Parenchymal EVNs occur in younger patients (mean 25.3 years) than sellar EVNs (mean 49.1 years).
- Parenchymal EVNs present with headaches/seizures and cystic-solid MRI features, while sellar EVNs present with visual decline and solid MRI features.
- GFAP positivity was significantly higher in parenchymal EVNs (76.5%) compared to sellar EVNs (18.2%).
- Gross total resection was achieved in 100% of parenchymal EVNs but only 27.3% of sellar EVNs.
- Neither tumor location nor histological subtype significantly impacted progression-free survival in this cohort.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Objective To compare the differences in clinical manifestations, imaging features, histological characteristics, and prognostic outcomes of extraventricular neurocytomas (EVNs) based on tumor location (parenchymal vs. sellar) and histological subtype (typical vs. atypical). Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on 28 patients with pathologically confirmed EVNs from three hospitals between January 2010 and March 2025 (17 parenchymal, 11 sellar; 15 typical, 13 atypical). Clinical, radiological, histopathological, and follow‑up data were collected. Data analysis for this study began in January 2026. Atypical EVNs were defined by a Ki‑67 labeling index > 5% or the presence of any of the following histological features: brisk mitotic activity (> 5 per 10 HPF), necrosis, or microvascular proliferation. Continuous variables were compared using the t‑test or non‑parametric test, and categorical variables using the χ² test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method, and between‑group comparisons were performed using the log‑rank test. A two‑tailed P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Patients with parenchymal EVNs were significantly younger than those with sellar EVNs (25.29 ± 17.32 vs. 49.09 ± 10.25 years, P < 0.001). Parenchymal EVNs showed a larger tumor diameter compared with sellar EVNs(37 vs. 22 mm, P =0.043). Parenchymal EVNs commonly presented with headache and seizures, whereas sellar EVNs presented with visual decline. On MRI, parenchymal EVNs were predominantly cystic‑solid with septation, calcification, and peritumoral edema, while sellar EVNs were homogeneously solid, showed marked enhancement, and lacked edema. All tumors expressed synaptophysin. The glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) positivity rate was significantly higher in parenchymal than in sellar EVNs (76.5% vs. 18.2%, P = 0.006). Gross total resection (GTR) was achieved in all parenchymal EVNs (100%) but in only 27.3% of sellar EVNs. During follow-up, 7 of 28 patients experienced recurrence or progression(PFS event). Atypical EVNs showed a tendency toward earlier recurrence or progression (range 12–84 vs. 16–102 months), although the event rate was numerically lower in the atypical group than in the typical group (23.1% vs. 26.7%, P > 0.999). Atypical EVNs also received upfront adjuvant radiotherapy more frequently than typical EVNs (30.8% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.035).The 1-year and 2-year PFS rates for the entire cohort were 93.8% and 79.3%, respectively. The log-rank test revealed no significant difference in PFS between parenchymal and sellar EVNs ( P = 0.363) or between typical and atypical EVNs ( P = 0.682). Conclusions Parenchymal and sellar EVNs exhibit distinct profiles in age at onset, clinical presentation, and imaging features, with the striking GFAP expression difference further supporting this biological heterogeneity and aligning with the emerging glioneuronal tumour with neurocytic differentiation (GNTN) molecular framework. Sellar EVNs have a low GTR rate and warrant closer postoperative imaging surveillance. Atypical EVNs—defined by Ki‑67 > 5% or histologically aggressive features—show a tendency toward earlier recurrence/progression and more frequent upfront adjuvant radiotherapy use; however, the present results neither refute the established prognostic distinction between typical and atypical EVNs reported in previous studies, nor support the conclusion that the two subtypes have comparable outcomes.No significant effect of tumor location or histological subtype on PFS was observed; however, the small sample size limits interpretation of these negative findings. Future multicenter studies incorporating molecular profiling are needed to refine risk stratification.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. BMC Neurology, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Genetics (Medicine)
GeneticsMedicine