Systemic, primary cutaneous, and breast implant-associated ALK-negative anaplastic large-cell lymphomas present similar biologic features despite distinct clinical behavior.

Despite distinct clinical presentation and outcome, systemic, primary cutaneous, and breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphomas (S-, PC-, BI-ALCL) ALK-negative (ALK-) show similar histopathological features including the presence of the "hallmark" cells with horseshoe-shaped nuclei and CD30 protein expression. The purpose was to better characterize these three entities using immunohistochemistry and FISH (Fluorescent in situ hybridization) to identify biomarkers differently expressed and that might be involved in their pathogenesis. Twenty-two S-ALCL ALK-, 13 PC-ALCL, and 2 BI-ALCL were included. Cases were tested for P53, P63, MUM1, MYC, GATA3, p-STAT3, PD1, and PDL1 protein expression and DUP22, TP53, TP63, MYC, and PDL1 chromosomal aberrations. As expected, S-ALCL ALK- patients had adverse outcome compare to PC and BI-ALCL. No difference was observed between the three groups concerning protein expression except for MUM1 that was significantly more frequently expressed in S-ALCL ALK- compared to PC-ALCL. In particular, constitutive activation of the STAT3 pathway and PDL1/PD1 immune-checkpoint expression was present in the three entities. TP53 deletion and PDL1 gene amplification were the commonest cytogenetic alterations and were present in the three entities. None of the studied biological parameters was associated with prognosis. Despite distinct clinical behavior, S-ALCL ALK-, PC-ALCL, and BI-ALCL share similar biological features. Larger series should be investigated with the current approach to determine more precisely the activity and the prognostic value of these biomarkers and pathways in each group.

Cutaneous localization of angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma may masquerade as B-cell lymphoma or classical Hodgkin lymphoma: A histologic diagnostic pitfall.

BACKGROUND: We report the cases of three patients presenting skin lesions whose biopsies showed nodular polymorphic infiltrates consisting of lymphocytes, plasma cells, histiocytes, eosinophils, B blasts, and Hodgkin Reed-Sternberg (HRS)-like cells. Two of them were initially diagnosed as classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), on the other hand, the last one as a B-cell lymphoma. All patients have been treated for angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL). METHODS: We performed a second review of the skin biopsies with further immunophenotypic molecular analyses. Scrupulous observation revealed, in the background of the three cases, atypical small to medium-sized lymphocytes carrying a CD3+, CD4+ T-cell phenotype and expressing PD1 and CXCL13 follicular helper T-cell markers. The two lesions initially diagnosed as cHL showed scattered HRS-like cells with CD30+, CD15+, PAX5+, CD20-, Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) + classical phenotype. The case initially diagnosed as B-cell lymphoma showed a diffuse B-cell proliferation associated with small B-cell and medium to large-sized B blasts that were positive for EBV. CONCLUSION: Those cases highlighted that atypical T-cells may be obscured by B-cell proliferation mimicking cHL or B-cell lymphoma in cutaneous localization of AITL and confirmed the requirement of collecting clinical information before performing a diagnosis.

Diagnostic value of STMN1, LMO2, HGAL, AID expression and 1p36 chromosomal abnormalities in primary cutaneous B cell lymphomas.

AIMS: Distinction between primary cutaneous follicular lymphoma (PCFL) and primary cutaneous marginal zone lymphoma (PCMZL) is challenging, as clear-cut immunophenotypical and cytogenetic criteria to segregate both entities are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: To characterize PCFL and PCMZL more clearly and to define criteria helpful for the differential diagnosis, we compared expression of immunohistochemical markers [LIM-only transcription factor 2 (LMO2), human germinal centre-associated lymphoma (HGAL), stathmin 1 (STMN1), activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID), myeloid cell nuclear differentiation antigen (MNDA)] and the presence of cytogenetic abnormalities described previously in nodal follicular lymphoma [B cell lymphoma 2 (BCL2) and BCL6 breaks, 1p36 chromosomal region deletion (del 1p36)] in a series of 48 cutaneous follicular and marginal zone lymphomas [cutaneous follicular lymphoma (CFL) and cutaneous marginal zone lymphoma (CMZL)]. Immunostaining for STMN1, LMO2, HGAL and AID allowed the distinction between CFL and CMZL, and STMN1 was the most sensitive marker (100% CFL, 0% CMZL). LMO2, HGAL and AID were positive in 93.2%, 82.1% and 86.2% CFL (all CMZL-negative). MNDA was expressed in both entities without significant difference (10.3% CFL, 30.8% CMZL, P = 0.18). BCL2, BCL6 breaks and the del 1p36 were present in 16.7%, 10.7% and 18.5% CFL and no CMZL. Finally, three and 29 CFL were reclassified as secondary cutaneous follicular lymphomas (SCFL) and PCFL without significant differences concerning phenotypical and cytogenetic features. BCL2, BCL6 breaks and the del 1p36 were present in 11.1%, 8% and 16.7% PCFL and did not impact the prognosis. CONCLUSION: LMO2, HGAL, STMN1 and AID, but not MNDA, are discriminant for the recognition between CFL and CMZL. BCL2, BCL6 rearrangements and the del 1p36 have a role in the pathogenesis of PCFL, the latest being the most common alteration.

PD1 and PDL1 expression in primary central nervous system diffuse large B-cell lymphoma are frequent and expression of PD1 predicts poor survival.

Primary central nervous system diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (PCNS-DLBCL) is a rare and aggressive type of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) whit poorly understood pathogenesis. Finding biomarkers associated with patient survival may be important for understanding its physiopathology and to develop new therapeutic approaches. We investigated 32 PCNS-DLBCL from immunocompetent patients for BCL2, CMYC, LMO2, and P53 expression and for cytogenetic aberrations of BCL2, BCL6, and MYC genes, all known for their prognostic value in systemic DLBCL (s-DLBCL). We analyzed PD1 and PDL1 protein expression in both tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and tumor cells. Finally, we searched for correlation between biological data and clinical course. The PCNS-DLBCL expressed BCL2, CMYC, LMO2, and P53 at similar frequency than s-DLBCL but without significant prognostic on survival. None cases harbored aberrations involving BCL2 and MYC gene whereas BCL6 abnormalities were present in 20.7% of cases but without value on survival. Expression of PD1 in TILs and PDL1 in tumor cells was observed at higher rates than in s-DLBCL (58% and 37%, respectively). The PD1 expression in TILs correlated with PDL1 expression in tumor cells (P = .001). Presence of PD1 positive TILs was associated with poorer overall survival (P = .011). Patients with PDL1 overexpression tended to better response to chemotherapy (P = .23). In conclusion PCNS-DLBCL pathogenesis differs from s-DLBCL without prognostic value of the phenotypic and cytogenetic parameters known for their pejorative impact in the latter. The PD1/PDL1 pathway plays a strong role in PCNS-DLBCL and represents an attractive target for this aggressive lymphoma.

Leukemic non-nodal mantle cell lymphomas have a distinct phenotype and are associated with deletion of PARP1 and 13q14.

Leukemic non-nodal mantle cell lymphoma (lMCL) is a particular subtype of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), characterized by leukemic non-nodal disease and slow progression. Recognition of this entity is relevant to avoid overtreatment. Despite indolent clinical behaviour, lMCL might transform to a more aggressive disease. The purpose of this study was to compare lMCL with classical MCL (cMCL) and aggressive MCL (aMCL) using immunohistochemistry, interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and array-based comparative genomic hybridization, in order to identify biomarkers for lMCL diagnosis and prognosis. Seven lMCL patients were included. All had bone marrow involvement without lymphadenopathy. An lMCL phenotype was distinct from that of cMCL and aMCL: SOX11-, ATM+, PARP1+/-, and low KI67 (average 2 %). Beyond the t(11;14) translocation, fewer secondary cytogenetic alterations were found in lMCL compared to cMCL and aMCL, including deletion of PARP1 and 13q14. At last follow-up, one patient with lMCL had died of disease and another had progressive disease. These patients were respectively 13q14 deletion- and PARP1-positive. One other case of lMCL harbored a 13q14 deletion associated with PARP1 deletion. This patient had indolent disease. lMCL has a particular phenotype and fewer secondary cytogenetic alterations than cMCL and aMCL. PARP1 protein expression and 13q14 deletion are associated with a progressive clinical course of lMCL and should be included in initial diagnostic studies as predictors of unfavorable outcome. PARP1 deletion is involved in lMCL pathogenesis and might confer advantage.

Cutaneous epithelial tumors induced by vemurafenib involve the MAPK and Pi3KCA pathways but not HPV nor HPyV viral infection.

The inhibitors of mutant BRAF that are used to treat metastatic melanoma induce squamoproliferative lesions. We conducted a prospective histopathological and molecular study on 27 skin lesions from 12 patients treated with vemurafenib. Mutation hot spots in HRAS, NRAS, KRAS, BRAF, and Pi3KCA were screened. HPV and HPyV infection status were also determined. The lesions consisted of 19 verrucal papillomas, 1 keratoacanthoma and 7 squamous cell carcinomas. No mutations were found within BRAF and NRAS. KRAS, HRAS, and Pi3KCA oncogenic mutations were found in 10 (83.3%), 7 (58.3%), and 4 (33.3%) patients respectively; however, these mutations were not consistent within all tumors of a given patient. Pi3KCA mutation was always associated with a mutation in HRAS. Finally, no correlation was found between the mutated gene or type of mutation and the type of cutaneous tumor or clinical response to vemurafenib. P16 protein level was not indicative of HPV infection. HPV was detected in only two lesions. Two cases had MCPyV, and one had HPyV7. In conclusion, neither HPV nor HPyV seem to be involved in the development of squamoproliferative lesions induced by verumafenib. By contrast, HRAS and KRAS play a predominant role in the physiopathology of these tumors.