PURPOSE: To detect the presence of MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humor of patients with cytologically proven vitreoretinal lymphoma. METHODS: Eight consecutive patients with bilateral vitreoretinal lymphoma (16 eyes) were prospectively evaluated. Genomic DNA was extracted from aqueous samples after paracentesis and vitreous humor samples after diagnostic vitrectomy. MYD88 codon 265 mutation was investigated by both amplification-refractory mutation system polymerase chain reaction approach and pyrosequencing assay in the aqueous humor of all patients and in the vitreous of 6 patients. A control group of 8 age-matched patients with established diagnosis of noninfectious uveitis was also tested for the presence of MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humor. RESULTS: Eight patients (three men, five women) with mean age of 69.5 years (range 50-85 years) were considered. All the patients tested for MYD88 L265P in the vitreous (six) were positive, and this result was consistent with cytological examination in all samples but one. The MYD88 L265P mutation was found in the aqueous of 6 patients (75%), and in 3 of them, the mutation was present in both eyes. Results of MYD88 L265P mutation in aqueous and vitreous sample were consistent in 7 of the 8 eyes with available samples. The aqueous humor of the noninfectious uveitis control group was negative for the detection of MYD88 L265P mutation. CONCLUSION: MYD88 mutation was detected in the aqueous humor of 75% of patients with cytologically proven vitreoretinal lymphoma. This technique may be considered as an additional diagnostic tool in the detection of the disease.
PURPOSE: To detect the presence of MYD88L265P mutation in the aqueous humor of patients with cytologically proven vitreoretinal lymphoma. METHODS: Eight consecutive patients with bilateral vitreoretinal lymphoma (16 eyes) were prospectively evaluated. Genomic DNA was extracted from aqueous samples after paracentesis and vitreous humor samples after diagnostic vitrectomy. MYD88 codon 265 mutation was investigated by both amplification-refractory mutation system polymerase chain reaction approach and pyrosequencing assay in the aqueous humor of all patients and in the vitreous of 6 patients. A control group of 8 age-matched patients with established diagnosis of noninfectious uveitis was also tested for the presence of MYD88L265P mutation in the aqueous humor. RESULTS: Eight patients (three men, five women) with mean age of 69.5 years (range 50-85 years) were considered. All the patients tested for MYD88L265P in the vitreous (six) were positive, and this result was consistent with cytological examination in all samples but one. The MYD88L265P mutation was found in the aqueous of 6 patients (75%), and in 3 of them, the mutation was present in both eyes. Results of MYD88L265P mutation in aqueous and vitreous sample were consistent in 7 of the 8 eyes with available samples. The aqueous humor of the noninfectious uveitis control group was negative for the detection of MYD88L265P mutation. CONCLUSION:MYD88 mutation was detected in the aqueous humor of 75% of patients with cytologically proven vitreoretinal lymphoma. This technique may be considered as an additional diagnostic tool in the detection of the disease.