RESUMO
Lymphadenopathy is a common clinical finding and diagnostic challenge within general medicine and rheumatology practice. It may represent a primary manifestation of an underlying immune-mediated disease or indicate an infectious or neoplastic complication requiring differing management. Evaluating lymphadenopathy is of particular relevance in rheumatology, given that lymph node enlargement is a common finding within the clinical spectrum of several well-known rheumatologic disorders including RA, SLE and SS. In addition, lymphadenopathy represents a hallmark manifestation of rare immunological diseases such as Castleman disease and IgG4-related disease that must be considered in the differential diagnosis because effective targeted treatments can now impact the prognosis of these conditions. In this review we present an overview of the clinical significance of lymphadenopathy in common and rare rheumatologic diseases and propose a practical approach to lymphadenopathy in the rheumatology practice. Differential diagnosis of Castleman disease and therapeutic options for this condition of increasing rheumatologic interest will be discussed in detail.
Assuntos
Linfadenopatia , Doenças Reumáticas , Humanos , Linfadenopatia/etiologia , Doenças Reumáticas/diagnóstico , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Hiperplasia do Linfonodo Gigante/diagnóstico , ReumatologiaRESUMO
VEXAS syndrome is an acquired autoinflammatory disease characterized in most cases by cytopenias and macrocytic anemia. Dyshematopoiesis is a frequent finding in chronic inflammatory conditions and therefore, cytopenias are not easily classified in VEXAS patients. Here we report a series of 7 patients affected by VEXAS associated cytopenias, treated at our center. The use of NGS, together with morphological assays, integrated with the WHO 2022 criteria, allowed to identify three subsets of VEXAS associated cytopenias: ICUS (idiopathic cytopenia of uncertain significance), CCUS (clonal cytopenia of uncertain significance) at high risk of clonal evolution, and MDS. This approach could help to better understand the nature of VEXAS associated cytopenias and to guide the use of specific targeted treatments in order to achieve long lasting responses.
Assuntos
Citopenia , Síndromes Mielodisplásicas , Dermatopatias Genéticas , Humanos , Síndromes Mielodisplásicas/terapia , Evolução Clonal , Organização Mundial da SaúdeRESUMO
ABSTRACT: Large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) carrying MYC rearrangement, alone or together with BCL2 and/or BCL6 translocations, have shown a poor prognosis when treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) in the HIV population. Scanty data are available on the prevalence and prognostic impact of MYC rearrangements in HIV-associated LBCL. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the clinical effect of MYC rearrangement in HIV-associated LBCL. We evaluated clinical characteristics, treatment received, and outcome of LBCL in patients with HIV with MYC rearrangement (MYC+) and without MYC rearrangement (MYC-). A total of 155 patients with HIV who had received fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis for MYC were enrolled in 11 European centers: 43 with MYC+ and 112 MYC-. Among patients with MYC, 10 had double-/triple-hit lymphomas, and 33 had isolated MYC rearrangement (single-hit lymphoma). Patients with MYC+ had more frequently advanced stage, >2 extranodal site at presentation, and higher proliferative index. There were no significant differences in overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS) between the 2 groups. However, patients with MYC+ received more frequently intensive chemotherapy (iCT) (44%) than (R)CHOP alone (35%) or infusional treatment (DA-EPOCH-R and R-CDE) (19%). Among patients with MYC+, those who received iCT achieved a better outcome than patients who received nonintensive treatment (complete remission, 84% vs 52%; P = .028; 5-year PFS, 66% vs 36%; P = .021). Our retrospective results suggest that HIV-associated LBCL with MYC+ could be considered for an intensive therapeutic approach whenever possible, whereas (R)CHOP seems to give inferior results in this subset of patients in terms of complete remission and PFS.