Journal of Tumour Research & Reports

Genomic Comparisons and Treatment Perspectives in Central Neurocytoma and Medulloblastoma

Adrian Clarke^* Department of Neuroscience, Linton University, Linton, Australia
^*Correspondence: Adrian Clarke, Department of Neuroscience, Linton University, Linton, Australia, Email:

Received: 27-Aug-2025, Manuscript No. ACE-25-30172; Editor assigned: 29-Aug-2025, Pre QC No. ACE-25-30172 (PQ); Reviewed: 12-Sep-2025, QC No. ACE-25-30172; Revised: 19-Sep-2025, Manuscript No. ACE-25-30172 (R); Published: 26-Sep-2025, DOI: 10.35248/2684-1614.25.10.273

Description

Central neurocytoma and medulloblastoma are two distinct types of primary brain tumors, often presenting in younger patients but differing greatly in their biological behavior, treatment approaches, and prognosis. Both tumors originate within the central nervous system but arise from different regions and cellular origins. Comparative genomic profiling provides valuable insight into their molecular characteristics, enhancing our understanding of these tumors and influencing therapeutic strategies [1].

Central neurocytoma is a rare neuronal tumor typically located near the lateral ventricles. It generally affects young adults and is considered a low-grade tumor with relatively favorable outcomes following surgical resection. Conversely, medulloblastoma is a highly malignant embryonal tumor predominantly found in the cerebellum, mostly in children. It displays aggressive growth and a greater tendency to spread within the central nervous system.

Genomic analyses have demonstrated that central neurocytoma possesses a relatively simple mutational landscape compared to medulloblastoma. Studies reveal that central neurocytomas commonly harbour alterations in genes regulating neuronal differentiation and cell cycle control. For instance, mutations affecting the IDH1 gene are rare, distinguishing these tumors from other gliomas [2]. Chromosomal aberrations are less frequent, and when present, typically involve gains in chromosome 7 and losses in chromosome 10, though these are not consistent findings across all cases.

On the molecular level, central neurocytomas often express neuronal markers such as synaptophysin, reflecting their neuronal lineage. Genetic investigations show a relatively stable genome with fewer mutations, aligning with their less aggressive clinical course. However, occasional cases demonstrate atypical features, including increased mitotic activity or necrosis, correlating with more aggressive behaviour and poor prognosis [3].

Medulloblastomas, on the other hand, exhibit a complex genomic profile marked by significant heterogeneity. They have been classified into molecular subgroups with distinct genetic alterations and clinical outcomes. The main subtypes include WNT-activated, SHH-activated, Group 3, and Group 4 medulloblastomas, each defined by specific mutations and pathway dysregulations.

WNT-activated medulloblastomas are characterized by mutations in the CTNNB1 gene leading to activation of the Wnt signaling pathway [4]. This subgroup is associated with a relatively favourable prognosis. SHH-activated tumors feature alterations in genes such as PTCH1, SMO, or SUFU, which affect the sonic hedgehog signaling cascade, and tend to have variable outcomes depending on age and additional genetic factors.

Group 3 medulloblastomas often show amplification of the MYC oncogene and are linked to a poor clinical outcome. Group 4, the most common subtype, presents with chromosomal aberrations including isochromosome 17q, but its molecular drivers remain less well defined. These variations contribute to differences in tumor biology, response to treatment, and survival rates.

Epigenetic modifications also play an essential role in medulloblastoma pathogenesis. DNA methylation profiling has helped refine the classification of medulloblastoma subgroups and may predict therapeutic response. Aberrant methylation patterns can silence tumor suppressor genes or activate oncogenes, influencing tumor progression [5].

From a therapeutic perspective, central neurocytomas are mainly treated with maximal safe surgical removal. Complete excision is often curative, and adjuvant radiation therapy is reserved for recurrent or residual disease. Chemotherapy has limited application given the tumor’s generally indolent nature. Advances in surgical techniques and neuroimaging have improved the ability to achieve gross total resection while preserving neurological function.

In contrast, medulloblastomas require a multimodal treatment approach due to their aggressive character. Surgery aims to remove as much tumor as possible, followed by craniospinal irradiation to address potential leptomeningeal spread. Adjuvant chemotherapy is routinely employed to improve survival. Despite this aggressive regimen, recurrence remains a challenge, particularly in high-risk subgroups [6, 7].

Ongoing research focuses on targeted therapies that exploit the specific molecular alterations in medulloblastoma subtypes. For instance, inhibitors of the sonic hedgehog pathway have been tested in SHH-activated tumors, though resistance and toxicity limit their widespread use. Efforts are also underway to develop agents targeting MYC amplification or modulating epigenetic regulators.

Immunotherapy, including immune checkpoint inhibitors and vaccine-based approaches, is an emerging area of interest, although the immune microenvironment of brain tumors presents unique challenges. Clinical trials continue to explore the safety and efficacy of such treatments in medulloblastoma patients [8].

Understanding the genetic differences between central neurocytoma and medulloblastoma informs not only diagnosis but also therapeutic decisions. Molecular profiling can aid in distinguishing these tumors in ambiguous cases and provide prognostic information that influences follow-up and treatment intensity.

Further integration of genomic data with clinical findings is anticipated to refine risk stratification and identify novel targets for intervention. Personalized medicine approaches, although still evolving, aim to improve outcomes by matching patients with treatments most likely to be effective based on their tumor’s molecular characteristics [9].

Recent advancements in high-throughput sequencing technologies have further deepened our understanding of the molecular differences between central neurocytoma and medulloblastoma. These technologies have enabled researchers to identify novel genetic alterations and signaling pathways involved in tumor initiation and progression. For central neurocytoma, emerging data suggest potential involvement of chromatin remodeling genes, which may influence tumor cell differentiation and growth. In medulloblastoma, detailed genomic and transcriptomic analyses continue to reveal additional driver mutations and epigenetic regulators unique to each subgroup, offering opportunities to refine therapeutic targets [10]. These insights highlight the importance of continued molecular research to improve diagnostic precision and to develop more effective, less toxic treatments that account for the distinct biology of each tumor type.

Conclusion

In summary, central neurocytoma and medulloblastoma represent two brain tumors with distinct biological behaviors and genomic features. Central neurocytoma generally exhibits a stable genome aligned with a favorable prognosis following surgical treatment. Medulloblastoma displays significant genetic diversity across subtypes, contributing to varied clinical outcomes and necessitating comprehensive multimodal therapy. Advances in genomic profiling have enhanced understanding of these tumors, guiding both current management and future therapeutic development.

References

1. Almeida A, Nayfach S, Boland M, Strozzi F, Beracochea M, Shi ZJ, et al. A unified catalog of 204,938 reference genomes from the human gut microbiome. Nat Biotechnol. 2021 ;39(1):105-114.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

2. Landman F, Jamin C, de Haan A, Witteveen S, Bos J, van der Heide HG, et al. Genomic surveillance of multidrug-resistant organisms based on long-read sequencing. Genome Med. 2024 ;16(1):137.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

3. Lu D, Zhang Y, Zhang L, Wang H, Weng W, Li L, et al. Methods of privacy-preserving genomic sequencing data alignments. Brief Bioinform. 2021 ;22(6):bbab151.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

4. Gupta S, Kumar A, Kumari N, Rajwanshi A. Central Neurocytoma Diagnosis on Squash Cytology. J Cytol. 2024 ;41(3):181-182.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

5. Byun J, Kim M, Song SW, Kim YH, Hong CK, Kim JH. Extraventricular neurocytoma: Clinical investigation of heterogenous prognosis. Brain Tumor Res Treat. 2022 ;10(1):22-28.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

6. Steinsiepe VK, Frick H, Jochum W, Fournier JY. Differential diagnosis of central neurocytoma: two cases. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2021 ;82(6):599-603.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

7. Spina A, Garbin E, Albano L, Bisoglio A, Boari N, Mortini P. Gamma Knife radiosurgery for central neurocytoma: a quantitative systematic review and metanalysis. Neurosurg Rev. 2024 J ;47(1):64.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

8. Jackson K, Packer RJ. Recent advances in pediatric medulloblastoma. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2023 ;23(12):841-848.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

9. Cotter JA, Hawkins C. Medulloblastoma: WHO 2021 and beyond. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2022 ;25(1):23-33.

   [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]

10. Lago C, Gianesello M, Santomaso L, Leva G, Ballabio C, Anderle M, et al. Medulloblastoma and high-grade glioma organoids for drug screening, lineage tracing, co-culture and in vivo assay. Nat Protoc. 2023 ;18(7):2143-2180.

    [CrossRef][GoogleScholar][PubMed]