2011Iranian journal of pathologyRequires access

Hodgkin Lymphoma and Anaplastic Variants of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

Tabrizchee Hamid, Esmaili Armita, Cogliatti Sergio

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Classic Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL), anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) and some cases of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have overlapping morphologic features. Since they all represent distinct clinico-pathologic entities, we explored the differential diagnostic impact of immunophenotyping to discriminate between them. Materials and Methods: We included 61 cases diagnosed as CHL, ALCL, and anaplastic variant of DLBCL. We reviewed morphologic microscopic findings by conventional staining and immunohistochemistry (IHC) with antibodies against PAX-5, CD30, CD15, CD45, EMA, ALK-1, and LMP-1. Results: Fifty cases corresponded to CHL (81.97%), 4 cases to ALCL (6.56%), and 4 cases to DLBCL (6.56%) excluding 3 cases, which remained unclassifiable (4.92%). PAX-5 was expressed in 94% of CHL and 100% of DLBCL cases. LMP-1 was expressed in 52% of CHL and 25% of DLBCL cases. EMA was invariably expressed in all 4 cases of ALK + ALCL. It was expressed in 4/50 cases (8%) of CHL and in 2/4 cases (50%) of DLBCL. CD45 was expressed in all cases of ALCL and DLBCL but also in 3/50 cases (6%) of CHL. Conclusion: The differentiation between ALCL and CHL based on EMA and CD45 is not reliable. Utilization of PAX-5 in combination with other markers such as CD15 and LMP-1 is recommended. CD20 and PAX-5 are not too helpful in the differentiation of CHL and DLBCL, while CD15 and CD79a were found to be quite useful discriminative markers for this purpose.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Background and Objectives: Classic Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL), anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) and some cases of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have overlapping morphologic features. Since they all represent distinct clinico-pathologic entities, we explored the differential diagnostic impact of immunophenotyping to discriminate between them. Materials and Methods: We included 61 cases diagnosed as CHL, ALCL, and anaplastic variant of DLBCL. We reviewed morphologic microscopic findings by conventional staining and immunohistochemistry (IHC) with antibodies against PAX-5, CD30, CD15, CD45, EMA, ALK-1, and LMP-1. Results: Fifty cases corresponded to CHL (81.97%), 4 cases to ALCL (6.56%), and 4 cases to DLBCL (6.56%) excluding 3 cases, which remained unclassifiable (4.92%). PAX-5 was expressed in 94% of CHL and 100% of DLBCL cases. LMP-1 was expressed in 52% of CHL and 25% of DLBCL cases. EMA was invariably expressed in all 4 cases of ALK + ALCL. It was expressed in 4/50 cases (8%) of CHL and in 2/4 cases (50%) of DLBCL. CD45 was expressed in all cases of ALCL and DLBCL but also in 3/50 cases (6%) of CHL. Conclusion: The differentiation between ALCL and CHL based on EMA and CD45 is not reliable. Utilization of PAX-5 in combination with other markers such as CD15 and LMP-1 is recommended. CD20 and PAX-5 are not too helpful in the differentiation of CHL and DLBCL, while CD15 and CD79a were found to be quite useful discriminative markers for this purpose.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Background and Objectives: Classic Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL), anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) and some cases of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have overlapping morphologic features. Since they all represent distinct clinico-pathologic entities, we explored the differential diagnostic impact of immunophenotyping to discriminate between them. Materials and Methods: We included 61 cases diagnosed as CHL, ALCL, and anaplastic variant of DLBCL. We reviewed morphologic microscopic findings by conventional staining and immunohistochemistry (IHC) with antibodies against PAX-5, CD30, CD15, CD45, EMA, ALK-1, and LMP-1. Results: Fifty cases corresponded to CHL (81.97%), 4 cases to ALCL (6.56%), and 4 cases to DLBCL (6.56%) excluding 3 cases, which remained unclassifiable (4.92%). PAX-5 was expressed in 94% of CHL and 100% of DLBCL cases. LMP-1 was expressed in 52% of CHL and 25% of DLBCL cases. EMA was invariably expressed in all 4 cases of ALK + ALCL. It was expressed in 4/50 cases (8%) of CHL and in 2/4 cases (50%) of DLBCL. CD45 was expressed in all cases of ALCL and DLBCL but also in 3/50 cases (6%) of CHL. Conclusion: The differentiation between ALCL and CHL based on EMA and CD45 is not reliable. Utilization of PAX-5 in combination with other markers such as CD15 and LMP-1 is recommended. CD20 and PAX-5 are not too helpful in the differentiation of CHL and DLBCL, while CD15 and CD79a were found to be quite useful discriminative markers for this purpose.

Key concepts: CD15, Anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, CD30, Immunophenotyping, Lymphoma, Pathology, Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, CD20

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Hodgkin Lymphoma and Anaplastic Variants of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma — Research Paper | ScholarLens