Cell-of-origin classification using the Hans and Lymph2Cx algorithms in primary cutaneous large B-cell lymphomas

Anne M. R. Schrader,Ruben A. L. de Groen,Rein Willemze,Patty M. Jansen,Koen D. Quint,Tom van Wezel,Ronald van Eijk,Dina Ruano,Cornelis P. Tensen,Esther Hauben,F. J. S. H. Woei-A-Jin,Anne M. Busschots,Anke van den Berg,Arjan Diepstra,Maarten H. Vermeer,Joost S. P. Vermaat
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-021-03265-5
2022-01-14
Virchows Archiv
Abstract:Abstract Primary cutaneous diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, leg type (PCDLBCL-LT) and primary cutaneous follicle center lymphoma with a diffuse population of large cells (PCFCL-LC) are both primary cutaneous B-cell lymphomas with large-cell morphology (CLBCL) but with different clinical characteristics and behavior. In systemic diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified (DLBCL-NOS), gene-expression profiling (GEP) revealed two molecular subgroups based on their cell-of-origin (COO) with prognostic significance: the germinal center B-cell-like (GCB) subtype and the activated B-cell-like (ABC) subtype. This study investigated whether COO classification is a useful tool for classification of CLBCL. For this retrospective study, 51 patients with PCDLBCL-LT and 15 patients with PCFCL-LC were analyzed for their COO according to the immunohistochemistry-based Hans algorithm and the NanoString GEP-based Lymph2Cx algorithm. In PCFCL-LC, all cases (100%) classified as GCB by both Hans and Lymph2Cx. In contrast, COO classification in PCDLBCL-LT was heterogeneous. Using Hans, 75% of the PCDLBCL-LT patients classified as non-GCB and 25% as GCB, while Lymph2Cx classified only 18% as ABC, 43% as unclassified/intermediate, and 39% as GCB. These COO subgroups did not differ in the expression of BCL2 and IgM, mutations in MYD88 and/or CD79B , loss of CDKN2A , or survival. In conclusion, PCFCL-LC uniformly classified as GCB, while PCDLBCL-LT classified along the COO spectrum of DLBCL-NOS using the Hans and Lymph2Cx algorithms. In contrast to DLBCL-NOS, the clinical relevance of COO classification in CLBCL using these algorithms has limitations and cannot be used as an alternative for the current multiparameter approach in differentiation of PCDLBCL-LT and PCFCL-LC.
pathology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?