黑料网

Lymphoma; Molecular subtypes; Diffuse large b-cell lymphoma (DLBCL); Follicular lymphoma (FL); Histopathology; Cytogenetics; Molecular genetics; Prognosis

Introduction

Lymphoma, a diverse group of cancers originating from lymphoid tissue, encompasses various molecular subtypes with distinct biological characteristics and clinical behaviors. Accurate diagnosis of these subtypes is crucial, as it guides treatment decisions and affects patient outcomes. Understanding the molecular subtypes of lymphoma and the diagnostic approaches used to identify them can significantly enhance the management of this complex disease [1].

Understanding molecular subtypes of lymphoma

Lymphomas are classified into two major categories: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). NHL is further divided into numerous subtypes based on histological, immunophenotypic, and molecular features. Molecular subtyping focuses on the genetic and molecular alterations within lymphoma cells, which can influence the disease's behavior and response to therapy [2].

Key molecular subtypes of NHL include

Diffuse large b-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): This is the most common type of NHL and is characterized by large, rapidly growing B cells. Molecular subtyping of DLBCL identifies distinct subgroups, such as the germinal center B-cell (GCB) and activated B-cell (ABC) subtypes, which have different prognoses and treatment responses.

Follicular lymphoma (FL): Often indolent, FL is characterized by follicle-like structures in lymph nodes. The presence of the t(14;18) chromosomal translocation involving the BCL2 gene is a hallmark of FL.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL): This subtype is associated with the t(11;14) translocation, which results in the overexpression of cyclin D1. MCL typically presents as a more aggressive form of lymphoma.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL): Although often considered a leukemia, CLL can also be classified under NHL. It is characterized by the accumulation of small, mature B cells in the blood, bone marrow, and lymphoid tissues [3].

Primary mediastinal large b-cell lymphoma (PMBL): A distinct subtype of DLBCL, PMBL has unique genetic alterations and clinical features that differentiate it from other large B-cell lymphomas.

Diagnostic approaches

Accurate diagnosis of lymphoma subtypes involves a combination of clinical, histological, and molecular techniques:

Histopathology: The initial diagnosis is often made through biopsy of affected lymph nodes or tissues. Histopathological examination provides information on the lymphoma’s cellular morphology and architecture.

Immunohistochemistry (IHC): IHC staining helps determine the expression of specific markers on lymphoma cells. For example, CD20 is a marker commonly expressed in B-cell lymphomas, while the expression of BCL2 can indicate follicular lymphoma.

Cytogenetics: Identifying chromosomal abnormalities, such as the t(14;18) translocation in follicular lymphoma or the t(11;14) in mantle cell lymphoma, is crucial for accurate diagnosis and classification [4].

Molecular genetics: Techniques like fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) are used to detect specific genetic alterations and mutations. These methods can identify key translocations, mutations, and gene amplifications that are critical for accurate subtype classification.

Next-generation sequencing (NGS): NGS allows for comprehensive genomic profiling of lymphoma samples, revealing a wide range of genetic mutations and alterations. This approach helps in identifying novel subtypes and predicting responses to targeted therapies.

Flow cytometry: This technique measures the expression of cell surface and intracellular markers on lymphoma cells. It is particularly useful for characterizing leukemias and lymphomas with abnormal cell surface marker profiles [5].

Implications for treatment and prognosis

The molecular subtype of lymphoma has significant implications for treatment decisions and prognosis:

Treatment tailoring: Molecular subtyping can guide the choice of therapies. For instance, the ABC subtype of DLBCL may benefit from different treatment regimens compared to the GCB subtype. Similarly, the presence of specific genetic mutations may make a patient eligible for targeted therapies or clinical trials.

Prognostic indicators: Certain molecular features are associated with prognosis. For example, the presence of the t (14;18) translocation in follicular lymphoma can indicate a more indolent course, while aggressive subtypes like MCL often require more intensive treatment.

Monitoring and follow-up: Molecular profiling can also aid in monitoring disease progression and response to therapy. Genetic mutations and alterations can be tracked to assess treatment efficacy and detect relapses early [6].

Discussion

Lymphoma, a malignancy originating from lymphoid tissue, presents in various molecular subtypes, each with distinct genetic, histological, and clinical characteristics. Accurate identification of these subtypes is essential for appropriate treatment and prognosis, as they can differ markedly in their behavior and response to therapy.

Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL), the most common type of NHL, is categorized into two primary molecular subtypes based on gene expression profiles: Germinal Center B-cell (GCB) and Activated B-cell (ABC). The GCB subtype generally has a better prognosis and responds better to standard treatments like R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone). Conversely, the ABC subtype often exhibits a poorer prognosis and may benefit from alternative therapies such as those targeting the B-cell receptor signaling pathway. This distinction underscores the importance of molecular subtyping in tailoring treatment plans [7].

Follicular Lymphoma (FL), characterized by follicle-like structures, frequently harbors the t(14;18) chromosomal translocation, which leads to the overexpression of the BCL2 oncogene. This genetic alteration is pivotal for the diagnosis and is associated with an indolent clinical course. However, despite its generally slow progression, FL can transform into a more aggressive form, necessitating vigilant monitoring and timely intervention.

Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) is distinguished by the t(11;14) translocation, which results in the overexpression of cyclin D1. MCL is typically more aggressive than FL, and its diagnosis often involves both cytogenetic and molecular testing to confirm the presence of this translocation. Given its aggressive nature, treatment strategies for MCL frequently include high-intensity regimens and, in some cases, stem cell transplantation [8].

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL), though often classified as a leukemia, shares many features with NHL and is marked by the accumulation of small, mature B-cells. Genetic markers such as mutations in the TP53 gene or deletions in chromosome 17p can significantly impact prognosis and treatment decisions. For instance, patients with high-risk genetic features may benefit from novel targeted therapies like Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors or BCL2 inhibitors.

Primary Mediastinal Large B-cell Lymphoma (PMBL), a distinct subtype of DLBCL, is characterized by unique genetic alterations, including amplifications in the 9p24.1 region, which leads to increased expression of PD-L1 and PD-L2. These alterations make PMBL particularly responsive to checkpoint inhibitors, highlighting the importance of precise molecular diagnosis for optimizing therapeutic strategies [9].

Diagnostic approaches play a critical role in identifying these subtypes. Histopathology provides initial insights into lymphoma morphology, but immunohistochemistry (IHC) is crucial for detecting specific biomarkers that characterize different subtypes. Techniques such as fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) are employed to identify genetic translocations and mutations. The advent of next-generation sequencing (NGS) offers comprehensive genomic profiling, revealing a broader spectrum of genetic alterations and enabling a more nuanced understanding of lymphoma biology. Flow cytometry further aids in characterizing cell surface markers and differentiating between various lymphoma types.

The integration of molecular diagnostics into clinical practice not only refines subtype classification but also enhances treatment personalization. By identifying specific genetic and molecular features, clinicians can select more targeted therapies, monitor disease progression more effectively, and improve overall patient outcomes. As research advances and new diagnostic technologies emerge, the ability to tailor lymphoma management to individual molecular profiles will continue to evolve, offering promising prospects for better disease management and patient care [10].

Conclusion

Molecular subtyping of lymphoma represents a significant advancement in the diagnosis and management of this diverse group of cancers. By integrating molecular genetic data with traditional diagnostic methods, clinicians can achieve a more precise diagnosis, tailor treatments to individual patients, and ultimately improve outcomes. Ongoing research and technological advancements in molecular diagnostics continue to enhance our understanding of lymphoma subtypes, promising even more personalized and effective approaches to treatment in the future.

References

1. Cheng L, Wang X, Gong F, Liu T, Liu Z, et al. (2020) . Adv Mater 32: e1902333.

, ,

2. Song F, Bai LC, Moysiadou A, Lee S, Hu C, et al. (2018) . J Am Chem Soc 140: 7748-7759.

, ,

3. Goh KH, Lim TT, Dong Z (2008) . Water Res 42: 1343-1368.

, ,

4. Sideris PJ, Nielsen UG, Gan ZH, Grey CP, et al. (2008) . Science 321: 113-117.

, ,

5. Gu Z, Atherton JJ, Xu ZP (2015) . Chem Commun 51: 3024-3036.

, ,

6. Hu T, Gu Z, Williams GR, Strimaite M, Zha J, et al. (2022) . Chem Soc Rev 51: 6126-6176.

, ,

7. Qin L, Wang M, Zhu R, You S, Zhou P (2013) . Int J Nanomedicine 8: 2053-64.

, ,

8. Goh KH, Lim, Dong ZL (2009) . Environ Sci Technol 43: 2537-2543.

, ,

9. Chao HP, Wang YC, Tran HN (2018) . Environ Pollut 243: 620-629.

, ,

10. Zhu F, He S, Liu T (2018) . Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 163: 544-550.

, ,