Quintanilla-Martinez, Leticia

Large B-cell lymphoma with IRF4 rearrangement (LBCL-IRF4) predominantly affects children and young adults (CAYA) and presents as localized disease with excellent prognosis. Although most tumors harbor IRF4 rearrangements (IRF4-R), the existence of cryptic rearrangements has been suggested. Whether IRF4-R LBCL in adults represents the same biological entity remains unclear. To address this question, 35 CAYA patients diagnosed with LBCL-IRF4 and 7 adult (>40-year-old) LBCL with IRF4-R were investigated by an integrative molecular approach. Targeted sequencing structural variant analysis (SV-NGS) confirmed the IRF4-R in 84% of investigated cases. In CAYA, an enrichment (55% vs 29% in adults) of translocations involving IGH, with a breakpoint cluster 3' to IRF4 (EXOC2) was observed, including a cryptic insertion of IGHM-IGHJ5 into IRF4 locus. Novel translocations, IRF4::MIR142 in two CAYA (7%) and IRF4::BATF in one adult, were discovered. Whole-exome sequencing analysis identified unreported mutations in LBCL-IRF4 as YY1 and ZC3H12A (11% each). The high incidence of mutations affecting the B-cell receptor/NF-KB pathways in LBCL-IRF4 was confirmed in cases with diffuse component only. None of the CAYA tumors were classified by LymphGen tool. Adult IRF4-R LBCL showed higher levels of genetic complexity and a distinct mutational profile with mutations on KMT2D and DTX1 (43% each), and MYD88-L265P (29%), and were predicted as EZB or MCD (29% each). These differential genetic features were in line with different clinical presentations (extranodal involvement and advanced stage). In conclusion, IRF4-R architecture and mutational profile differ according to age, supporting that not all cases should be classified as LBCL-IRF4.

Abstract With the introduction of large-scale molecular profiling methods and high-throughput sequencing technologies, the genomic features of most lymphoid neoplasms have been characterized at an unprecedented scale. Although the principles for the classification and diagnosis of these disorders, founded on a multidimensional definition of disease entities, have been consolidated over the past 25 years, novel genomic data have markedly enhanced our understanding of lymphomagenesis and enriched the description of disease entities at the molecular level. Yet, the current diagnosis of lymphoid tumors is largely based on morphological assessment and immunophenotyping, with only few entities being defined by genomic criteria. This paper, which accompanies the International Consensus Classification of mature lymphoid neoplasms, will address how established assays and newly developed technologies for molecular testing already complement clinical diagnoses and provide a novel lens on disease classification. More specifically, their contributions to diagnosis refinement, risk stratification, and therapy prediction will be considered for the main categories of lymphoid neoplasms. The potential of whole-genome sequencing, circulating tumor DNA analyses, single-cell analyses, and epigenetic profiling will be discussed because these will likely become important future tools for implementing precision medicine approaches in clinical decision making for patients with lymphoid malignancies.

Abstract Since the publication of the Revised European-American Classification of Lymphoid Neoplasms in 1994, subsequent updates of the classification of lymphoid neoplasms have been generated through iterative international efforts to achieve broad consensus among hematopathologists, geneticists, molecular scientists, and clinicians. Significant progress has recently been made in the characterization of malignancies of the immune system, with many new insights provided by genomic studies. They have led to this proposal. We have followed the same process that was successfully used for the third and fourth editions of the World Health Organization Classification of Hematologic Neoplasms. The definition, recommended studies, and criteria for the diagnosis of many entities have been extensively refined. Some categories considered provisional have now been upgraded to definite entities. Terminology for some diseases has been revised to adapt nomenclature to the current knowledge of their biology, but these modifications have been restricted to well-justified situations. Major findings from recent genomic studies have impacted the conceptual framework and diagnostic criteria for many disease entities. These changes will have an impact on optimal clinical management. The conclusions of this work are summarized in this report as the proposed International Consensus Classification of mature lymphoid, histiocytic, and dendritic cell tumors.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with aberrant coexpression of CD10+BCL6+MUM1+ (DLBCL-AE), classified as germinal center B cell (GCB) type by the Hans algorithm (HA), was genetically characterized. To capture the complexity of DLBCL-AE, we used an integrated approach that included gene expression profiling (GEP), fluorescence in situ hybridization, targeted gene sequencing, and copy number (CN) arrays. According to GEP, 32/54 (59%) cases were classified as GCB-DLBCL, 16/54 (30%) as activated B-cell (ABC) DLBCL, and 6/54 (11%) as unclassifiable. The discrepancy between HA and GEP was 41%. Three genetic subgroups were identified. Group 1 included 13/50 (26%) cases without translocations and mainly showing and ABC/MCD molecular profile. Group 2 comprised 11/50 (22%) cases with IRF4 alterations (DLBCL-IRF4), frequent mutations in IRF4 (82%) and NF-κB pathway genes (MYD88, CARD11, and CD79B), and losses of 17p13.2. Five cases each were classified as GCB- or ABC-type. Group 3 included 26/50 (52%) cases with 1 or several translocations in BCL2/BCL6/MYC/IGH, and GCB/EZB molecular profile predominated. Two cases in this latter group showed complex BCL2/BCL6/IRF4 translocations. DLBCL-IRF4 in adults showed a similar copy number profile and shared recurrent CARD11 and CD79B mutations when compared with LBCL-IRF4 in the pediatric population. However, adult cases showed higher genetic complexity, higher mutational load with frequent MYD88 and KMT2D mutations, and more ABC GEP. IRF4 mutations were identified only in IRF4-rearranged cases, indicating its potential use in the diagnostic setting. In conclusion, DLBCL-AE is genetically heterogeneous and enriched in cases with IRF4 alterations. DLBCL-IRF4 in adults has many similarities to the pediatric counterpart.