BACKGROUND: T-cell lymphomas (TCLs) are uncommon in the United States. The accurate diagnosis of TCL is challenging and requires morphologic interpretation, immunophenotyping, and molecular techniques. The authors compared pathologic diagnoses at referring centers with diagnoses from expert hematopathology review to determine concordance rates and to characterize the usefulness of second-opinion pathology review for TCL. METHODS: Patients in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network non-Hodgkin lymphoma database with peripheral TCL, not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS), angioimmunoblastic TCL (AITL), and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive and ALK-negative anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) were eligible if they had prior tissue specimens examined at a referring institution. Pathologic concordance was evaluated using available pathology and diagnostic testing reports and provider progress notes. The etiology of discordance and the potential impact on treatment were examined. RESULTS: Among 131 eligible patients, 57 (44%) had concordant results, totaling 64% of the 89 patients who were referred with a final diagnosis. Thirty-two patients (24%) had discordant results, representing 36% of those who were referred with a final diagnosis. The rates of discordance among patients with of PTCL-NOS, AITL, ALK-negative ALCL, and ALK-positive ALCL were 19%, 33%, 34%, and 6%, respectively. In 14 patients (44% of discordant results), pathologic reclassification could have resulted in a different therapeutic strategy. Forty-two patients (32%) were referred for classification with a provisional diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with TCL who were referred to National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers, the likelihood of a concordant final diagnosis at a referring institution was low. As current and future therapies target TCL subsets, these data suggest that patients with suspected TCLs would benefit from evaluation by an expert hematopathologist.
BACKGROUND:T-cell lymphomas (TCLs) are uncommon in the United States. The accurate diagnosis of TCL is challenging and requires morphologic interpretation, immunophenotyping, and molecular techniques. The authors compared pathologic diagnoses at referring centers with diagnoses from expert hematopathology review to determine concordance rates and to characterize the usefulness of second-opinion pathology review for TCL. METHODS:Patients in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network non-Hodgkin lymphoma database with peripheral TCL, not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS), angioimmunoblastic TCL (AITL), and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive and ALK-negative anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) were eligible if they had prior tissue specimens examined at a referring institution. Pathologic concordance was evaluated using available pathology and diagnostic testing reports and provider progress notes. The etiology of discordance and the potential impact on treatment were examined. RESULTS: Among 131 eligible patients, 57 (44%) had concordant results, totaling 64% of the 89 patients who were referred with a final diagnosis. Thirty-two patients (24%) had discordant results, representing 36% of those who were referred with a final diagnosis. The rates of discordance among patients with of PTCL-NOS, AITL, ALK-negative ALCL, and ALK-positive ALCL were 19%, 33%, 34%, and 6%, respectively. In 14 patients (44% of discordant results), pathologic reclassification could have resulted in a different therapeutic strategy. Forty-two patients (32%) were referred for classification with a provisional diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with TCL who were referred to National Comprehensive Cancer Network centers, the likelihood of a concordant final diagnosis at a referring institution was low. As current and future therapies target TCL subsets, these data suggest that patients with suspected TCLs would benefit from evaluation by an expert hematopathologist.
Authors: Anas Younes; Nancy L Bartlett; John P Leonard; Dana A Kennedy; Carmel M Lynch; Eric L Sievers; Andres Forero-Torres Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: N L Harris; E S Jaffe; J Diebold; G Flandrin; H K Muller-Hermelink; J Vardiman; T A Lister; C D Bloomfield Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: José Rodríguez; Eulogio Conde; Antonio Gutiérrez; Reyes Arranz; Marcos Gandarillas; Angel Leon; Jesus Ojanguren; Anna Sureda; Dolores Carrera; Mauricio Bendandi; Jose Moraleda; Jose Maria Ribera; Carmen Albo; Alfonso Morales; Juan Carlos García; Pascual Fernández; Guillermo Cañigral; Juan Bergua; María Dolores Caballero Journal: Eur J Haematol Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 2.997
Authors: T Rüdiger; D D Weisenburger; J R Anderson; J O Armitage; J Diebold; K A MacLennan; B N Nathwani; F Ullrich; H K Müller-Hermelink Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Ann S LaCasce; Michelle E Kho; Jonathan W Friedberg; Joyce C Niland; Gregory A Abel; Maria Alma Rodriguez; Myron S Czuczman; Michael M Millenson; Andrew D Zelenetz; Jane C Weeks Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-09-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Sonali M Smith; Linda J Burns; Koen van Besien; Jennifer Lerademacher; Wensheng He; Timothy S Fenske; Ritsuro Suzuki; Jack W Hsu; Harry C Schouten; Gregory A Hale; Leona A Holmberg; Anna Sureda; Cesar O Freytes; Richard Thomas Maziarz; David J Inwards; Robert Peter Gale; Thomas G Gross; Mitchell S Cairo; Luciano J Costa; Hillard M Lazarus; Peter H Wiernik; Dipnarine Maharaj; Ginna G Laport; Silvia Montoto; Parameswaran N Hari Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-07-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Johannes Schetelig; Sebastian Fetscher; Albrecht Reichle; Wolfgang E Berdel; Yves Beguin; Salut Brunet; Dolores Caballero; Ignazio Majolino; Hans Hagberg; Hans E Johnsen; Eva Kimby; Emilio Montserrat; Douglas Stewart; Adrian Copplestone; Wolf Rösler; Jindra Pavel; Dorothea Kingreen; Wolfgang Siegert Journal: Haematologica Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Lisa Rimsza; Yuri Fedoriw; Louis M Staudt; Ari Melnick; Randy Gascoyne; Michael Crump; Lawrence Baizer; Kai Fu; Eric Hsi; John W C Chan; Lisa McShane; John P Leonard; Brad S Kahl; Richard F Little; Jonathan W Friedberg; Lale Kostakoglu Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2016-12-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Barbara Ottolini; Nadia Nawaz; Christopher S Trethewey; Sami Mamand; Rebecca L Allchin; Richard Dillon; Paul A Fields; Matthew J Ahearne; Simon D Wagner Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-06-09
Authors: M Wilhelm; M Smetak; P Reimer; E Geissinger; T Ruediger; B Metzner; N Schmitz; A Engert; K Schaefer-Eckart; J Birkmann Journal: Blood Cancer J Date: 2016-07-29 Impact factor: 11.037
Authors: Socorro Maria Rodriguez-Pinilla; Eva Domingo-Domenech; Fina Climent; Joaquin Sanchez; Carlos Perez Seoane; Javier Lopez Jimenez; Monica Garcia-Cosio; Dolores Caballero; Oscar Javier Blanco Muñez; Cecilia Carpio; Josep Castellvi; Antonio Martinez Pozo; Blanca Gonzalez Farre; Angeles Bendaña; Carlos Aliste; Ana Julia Gonzalez; Sonia Gonzalez de Villambrosia; Miguel A Piris; Jose Gomez Codina; Empar Mayordomo-Aranda; Belen Navarro; Carmen Bellas; Guillermo Rodriguez; Juan Jose Borrero; Ana Ruiz-Zorrilla; Marta Grande; Carmen Montoto; Raul Cordoba Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2020-05-19 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: Alejandro A Gru; Jinah Kim; Melissa Pulitzer; Joan Guitart; Maxime Battistella; Gary S Wood; Lorenzo Cerroni; Werner Kempf; Rein Willemze; Joya Pawade; Christiane Querfeld; Andras Schaffer; Laura Pincus; Michael Tetzlaff; Madeleine Duvic; Julia Scarisbrick; Pierluigi Porcu; Aaron R Mangold; David J DiCaudo; Michi Shinohara; Eric K Hong; Bethany Horton; Youn H Kim Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 6.298