Historical risk stratification criteria for medulloblastoma rely primarily on clinicopathological variables pertaining to age, presence of metastases, extent of resection, histological subtypes and in some instances individual genetic aberrations such as MYC and MYCN amplification. In 2010, an international panel of experts established consensus defining four main subgroups of medulloblastoma (WNT, SHH, Group 3 and Group 4) delineated by transcriptional profiling. This has led to the current generation of biomarker-driven clinical trials assigning WNT tumors to a favorable prognosis group in addition to clinicopathological criteria including MYC and MYCN gene amplifications. However, outcome prediction of non-WNT subgroups is a challenge due to inconsistent survival reports. In 2015, a consensus conference was convened in Heidelberg with the objective to further refine the risk stratification in the context of subgroups and agree on a definition of risk groups of non-infant, childhood medulloblastoma (ages 3-17). Published and unpublished data over the past 5 years were reviewed, and a consensus was reached regarding the level of evidence for currently available biomarkers. The following risk groups were defined based on current survival rates: low risk (>90 % survival), average (standard) risk (75-90 % survival), high risk (50-75 % survival) and very high risk (<50 % survival) disease. The WNT subgroup and non-metastatic Group 4 tumors with whole chromosome 11 loss or whole chromosome 17 gain were recognized as low-risk tumors that may qualify for reduced therapy. High-risk strata were defined as patients with metastatic SHH or Group 4 tumors, or MYCN-amplified SHH medulloblastomas. Very high-risk patients are Group 3 with metastases or SHH with TP53 mutation. In addition, a number of consensus points were reached that should be standardized across future clinical trials. Although we anticipate new data will emerge from currently ongoing and recently completed clinical trials, this consensus can serve as an outline for prioritization of certain molecular subsets of tumors to define and validate risk groups as a basis for future clinical trials.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
12
2%
Other
45
8%
Unknown
198
36%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 November 2025.
All research outputs
#4,629,744
of 34,492,055 outputs
Outputs from Acta Neuropathologica
#1,120
of 3,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,901
of 338,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Neuropathologica
#21
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,492,055 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 338,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
