Metabolic and transcriptomic profiles of glioblastoma invasion revealed by comparisons between patients and corresponding orthotopic xenografts in mice

Table 1 Baseline information of patients and PDOX

Pat ID	Sex	Age	7 Tesla MVS	Diagn	IDHmt R132H	EGFR (IHC) Hirsch Score^b		No mice inj	No events	PDOX latency (median)		RNA-seq
						hu Tu	Xeno			Days	95 LCL^f	hu Tu	Xeno
P1	M	68	1	GBM	No	400	400	6	6	107.5	97	1	6
P4	M	55		GBM	No	< 100^c	300	3	3	141.0	138	1	nd
P6	F	76		AIII	No	0	0	4	4	71.5	63	1	nd
P7	M	67		AIII	No	400	400	5	2^d	75	75	1	5
P8	M	73		GBM	No	300	400	5	3^d	142.5	67	1	nd
P9	M	49		GBM	No	0	100	5	2^d	134.5	125	1	nd
P10	F	38		AIII IDHmt, 1p/19q non-codel	Yes	150	na	4	0^e	na		nd
P12	M	37	1^a	GBM	No	400	0	6	5	53.0	34	1	5
P14	M	65	1	GBM	No	0	nd	5	3	172.0	169	1	3

^aMVS, 6 months after tumor resection, during 3^rd temozolomide maintenance cycle; ^bHirsch score [10], range 0 to 400; ^cpatchy EGFR expression (0 to 400); ^dcensored mice died of non-tumor related experimental complications; ^eno tumor development, follow-up up to 241 days; ^flower 95% confidence latency
Abbrev: EGFR, epithelial growth factor receptor; hu Tu, human tumor; MVS, multi-voxel spectroscopy; na, not applicable; nd, not done; Xeno, tumor Xenograft in the mouse brain

ISSN: 2051-5960