Citations

Abstract Pediatric large B-cell lymphomas (LBCLs) share morphological and phenotypic features with adult types but have better prognosis. The higher frequency of some subtypes such as LBCL with IRF4 rearrangement (LBCL-IRF4) in children suggests that some age-related biological differences may exist. To characterize the genetic and molecular heterogeneity of these tumors, we studied 31 diffuse LBCLs (DLBCLs), not otherwise specified (NOS); 20 LBCL-IRF4 cases; and 12 cases of high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL), NOS in patients ≤25 years using an integrated approach, including targeted gene sequencing, copy-number arrays, and gene expression profiling. Each subgroup displayed different molecular profiles. LBCL-IRF4 had frequent mutations in IRF4 and NF-κB pathway genes (CARD11, CD79B, and MYD88), losses of 17p13 and gains of chromosome 7, 11q12.3-q25, whereas DLBCL, NOS was predominantly of germinal center B-cell (GCB) subtype and carried gene mutations similar to the adult counterpart (eg, SOCS1 and KMT2D), gains of 2p16/REL, and losses of 19p13/CD70. A subset of HGBCL, NOS displayed recurrent alterations of Burkitt lymphoma–related genes such as MYC, ID3, and DDX3X and homozygous deletions of 9p21/CDKN2A, whereas other cases were genetically closer to GCB DLBCL. Factors related to unfavorable outcome were age >18 years; activated B-cell (ABC) DLBCL profile, HGBCL, NOS, high genetic complexity, 1q21-q44 gains, 2p16/REL gains/amplifications, 19p13/CD70 homozygous deletions, and TP53 and MYC mutations. In conclusion, these findings further unravel the molecular heterogeneity of pediatric and young adult LBCL, improve the classification of this group of tumors, and provide new parameters for risk stratification.

Abstract The IGHV4-34 gene is very frequent (~10%) in the B cell receptor immunoglobulin (BcR IG) gene repertoire of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Over 30% of IGHV4-34 CLL cases can be assigned to different subsets with stereotyped BcR IG. The largest is subset #4 which represents ~1% of all CLL and ~10% of IGHV4-34 CLL and is considered a prototype for indolent disease. The BcR IG of a great majority (~85%) of IGHV4-34 CLL cases carry a significant load of somatic hypermutation (SHM), often with distinctive SHM patterns. This holds especially true for stereotyped subsets and is suggestive of particular modes of interactions with the selecting antigen(s). In detail, subsets #4 and #16, both involving IgG-switched cases (IgG-CLL), exhibit the greatest sequence similarity in SHM profiles, whereas they differ in this respect from IgM/D subsets #29 and #201. Prompted by these observations, here we explored the extent that these subset-biased SHM profiles in different IGHV4-34 stereotyped subsets were reflected in distinct demographics, clinical presentation, genomic aberrations and outcomes. Within a multi-institutional series of 20,331 CLL patients, 1790 (8.8%) expressed IGHV4-34 BcR IG. Following established bioinformatics approaches for the identification of BcR IG stereotypy, 573/1790 IGHV4-34 CLL cases (32%) were assigned to stereotyped subsets; of these, 340 cases (19% of all IGHV4-34 CLL and 60% of stereotyped IGHV4-34 cases) belonged to subsets #4, #16, #29 and #201, all concerning IGHV-mutated CLL (M-CLL). Clinicobiological information was available for 275/340 patients: #4, n=150; #16, n=44; #29, n=39; and #201, n=42. Comparisons between subsets revealed no differences in gender and age distribution. Interestingly, however, 36-43% of each subset cases were young for CLL (defined as patients aged ≤55 years), which is higher compared to general CLL cohorts, where young patients generally account for ~25% of cases. In contrast, significant differences were identified between subsets regarding: (i) disease stage at diagnosis, with >90% of IgG subsets #4 and #16 diagnosed at Binet stage A versus 83% in subset #201 and 74% in subset #29 (p=0.029); (ii) CD38 expression, ranging from 1% in subset #4 to 10% in subset #201 (p=0.013); (iii) the distribution of del(13q), peaking at a remarkable 92% in subset #29 versus only 37% in subset #16 (p<0.0001). Regarding other genomic aberrations, they were either absent (NOTCH1 mutations) or rare (SF3B1 mutations, trisomy 12, del(11q), TP53 aberrations due to either del(17p) and/or TP53 mutations). The sole exception concerned a high frequency (14%) of TP53 aberrations in subset #29 (p<0.05 compared with the other subsets), which is notable for M-CLL cases in general. Time to first treatment (TTFT) could be analyzed in 228 cases. IgG subsets #4 and #16 had significantly (p=0.036) longer TTFT (median TTFT: not yet reached) compared to the IgM/D subsets #29 and #201 (median TTFT: 11 and 12 years, respectively). In conclusion, we have identified distinct clinicobiological profiles for different stereotyped IGHV4-34 M-CLL subsets, highlighting subsets #4 and #16 as particularly indolent, which is important for both medical and social reasons, especially considering that a significant proportion of patients in these subsets are diagnosed at younger ages. Our findings support the notion that BcR IG stereotypy refines prognostication in CLL, superseding the crude immunogenetic distinction based on SHM load only. Additionally, the observed heterogeneity suggests that not all M-CLL are equal, prompting further research into the underlying biological background with the ultimate aim of tailored patient management. Disclosures Tausch: Gilead: Other: Travel support. Shanafelt:Glaxo-Smith_Kline: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Polyphenon E Int'l: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmactckucs: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Niemann:Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Travel grant. Langerak:InVivoScribe: Patents & Royalties: Licensing of IP and Patent on BIOMED-2-based methods for PCR-based Clonality Diagnostics.; DAKO: Patents & Royalties: Licensing of IP and Patent on Split-Signal FISH. Royalties for Dept. of Immunology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, NL; Roche: Other: Lab services in the field of MRD diagnostics provided by Dept of Immunology, Erasmus MC (Rotterdam). Hallek:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards, Research Funding; Boehringher Ingelheim: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Speakers Bureau and/or Advisory Boards, Research Funding. Ghia:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

Abstract The existence of stereotyped B cell receptor immunoglobulins (BcR IG) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) strongly implicated antigen selection in disease ontogeny. We have previously shown that the stereotyped fraction encompasses ~30% of all CLL and includes multiple subsets with distinct BcR IG configuration and variable size. Eventually, certain major subsets emerged as distinct clinical entities, exemplified by subset #2 (IGHV3-21/IGLV3-21, ~2.5-3% of all CLL, mixed somatic hypermutation (SHM) status) of a particularly aggressive clinical course, thus, sharply contrasting subset #4 (IGHV4-34/IGKV2-30, ~1% of all CLL, mutated IGHV genes, M-CLL), a prototype for indolent disease. Here, taking advantage of a multi-institutional cohort of 21,123 CLL IG rearrangements, almost three times the size of the largest previous study, and the availability of validated, purpose-built immunoinformatics methods, we reappraised BcR IG stereotypy especially focusing on major subsets and the degree of their sequence similarity to related minor subsets. Stereotypy discovery was performed with ARResT/Teiresias, while stereotypy assignment to existing subsets previously deemed as major was performed with ARResT/AssignSubsets (http://bat.infspire.org/arrest/). In the present study, a subset was characterized as major if representing > 0.2% of the cohort (i.e. at least 50 cases). Minor subsets closely related to major ones (termed satellite) were identified applying the following criteria: (i) usage of IGHV genes from the same phylogenetic clan; (ii) VH CDR3 length difference ranging from -2 to +2 compared to the respective major subset; (iii) shared VH CDR3 sequence motif; and, (iv) -2 to +2 difference in the offset of the VH CDR3 motif compared to the respective major subset. In total, 7378/21123 (34.9%) IG sequences were grouped into subsets with stereotyped VH CDR3, with the previously characterized 19 major subsets accounting collectively for 2594 sequences (12.3%) of the cohort: of these, 12 included cases with unmutated IGHV genes (U-CLL), 6 concerned M-CLL and 1 (subset #2) included cases with mixed SHM status. Four additional subsets exceeded 50 cases, and, thus, were also considered as 'major'. These results reinforce the notion that not all CLL will end up being stereotyped but rather that a plateau for stereotypy exists at ~1/3 of the cohort. Subset #2 was the largest subset (n=572, 2.7%), while subset #1 (IGHV clan I (IGHV1,5,7 subgroups)/IGKV1(D)-39) was the most frequent subset within U-CLL (n=515, 2.4%) and subset #4 the most common M-CLL subset (n=192, 0.9%), hence displaying remarkable consistency regarding their frequency in all cohorts published since the pioneering studies. Altogether, Teiresias and AssignSubsets gave concordant results for previously identified major subsets, illustrating the validity of our approach. Satellite subsets were sought for individually for each major subset. In general, few satellite subsets were identified, most of which concerned U-CLL major subsets. That notwithstanding, notable cases of satellite subsets were exemplified by major subset #1 and its satellite subset #99 from which it differed only in VH CDR3 length (13 aminoacids in subset #1 versus 14 in subset #99); interestingly, both subsets displayed equally aggressive clinical course. Another example concerned subset #8 (IGHV4-39/IGKV1(D)-39, U-CLL), an aggressive subset with very high risk for Richter's transformation, that, except for a one-aminoacid difference in VH CDR3 length, was otherwise identical to satellite subset #215, also displaying clinical aggressiveness. Overall, our results confirm that major subsets can be robustly identified and are consistent in relative size, hence representing distinct disease subgroups amenable to compartmentalized research with the potential of overcoming the pronounced heterogeneity of CLL. Most major subsets display unique sequence motifs, however satellite subsets exist, especially within U-CLL. Considering ever-increasing evidence that major stereotyped subsets may represent distinct disease subgroups, the existence of satellite subsets reveals a novel aspect of repertoire restriction and has implications for refined molecular classification of CLL. Disclosures Shanafelt: Genentech: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithkKine: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding. Gaidano:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Niemann:Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Langerak:F. Hofmann-LaRoche, Genentech: Research Funding; InVivoScribe Technologies: Patents & Royalties: Royalties are provided to European Network (EuroClonality). Jaeger:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kater:Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding. Hallek:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Rosenquist:Gilead Sciences: Speakers Bureau. Ghia:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Adaptive: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Stamatopoulos:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

One-third of peripheral T-cell lymphomas are “not otherwise specified” (PTCL-NOS), but they have been subdivided into 2 subgroups based on gene expression profiling. Amador and colleagues generated an immunohistochemical algorithm that parallels the molecular separation of PTCL-NOS and provides useful prognostic information.

While sexual and gender minorities are at increased risk for poor health outcomes, there is limited data regarding patient-provider interactions. In this study, we explored the perspectives of LGBTQ patients and their encounters with physicians in order to improve our understanding of patient-physician experiences. Using purposive selection of self-identified LGBTQ patients, we performed fourteen in-depth semi-structured interviews on topics of sexual orientation and gender identity, as well as their perceived role in the patient-provider relationship. Coding using a modified grounded theory approach was performed to generate themes. We identified three major themes that demonstrate the complexity of LGBTQ patient experiences. The first, Lacking trust, identifies mistrust and loss of the physician-patient relationship resulting from physicians’ poor or judgmental communication, or from physicians making assumptions about gender, using incorrect pronouns, and not recognizing heterogeneity within the transgender community. A second theme, Being vulnerable, describes the challenges and fears related to comfort of patients with disclosing their sexual orientation and/or gender identity. A final theme, Navigating discrimination, outlines racial or ethnic discrimination which creates an additional burden on top of illness and stigmatized identity. Our results reveal the complex needs of individuals with multiple stigmatized identities when developing relationships with providers. By using an intersectional perspective that appreciates the plurality of patients’ identities, providers can help to improve their relationships with LGBTQ patients. Incorporating intersectional training for medical students and residents could greatly benefit both LGBTQ patients and their physicians.

Objective Grip strength is a well-characterised measure of weakness and of poor muscle performance, but there is a lack of consensus on its prognostic implications in terms of cardiac adverse events in patients with cardiac disorders. Methods Articles were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, BioMed Central and EMBASE. The main inclusion criteria were patients with cardiac disorders (ischaemic heart disease, heart failure (HF), cardiomyopathies, valvulopathies, arrhythmias); evaluation of grip strength by handheld dynamometer; and relation between grip strength and outcomes. The endpoints of the study were cardiac death, all-cause mortality, hospital admission for HF, cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and myocardial infarction (MI). Data of interest were retrieved from the articles and after contact with authors, and then pooled in an individual patient meta-analysis. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to define predictors of outcomes. Results Overall, 23 480 patients were included from 7 studies. The mean age was 62.3±6.9 years and 70% were male. The mean follow-up was 2.82±1.7 years. After multivariate analysis grip strength (difference of 5 kg, 5× kg) emerged as an independent predictor of cardiac death (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.89, p<0.0001), all-cause death (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.89, p<0.0001) and hospital admission for HF (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.92, p<0.0001). On the contrary, we did not find any relationship between grip strength and occurrence of MI or CVA. Conclusion In patients with cardiac disorders, grip strength predicted cardiac death, all-cause death and hospital admission for HF. Trial registration number CRD42015025280.

Abstract Primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is recognized as a distinct entity in the World Health Organization classification. Currently, the diagnosis relies on consensus of histopathology, clinical variables, and presentation, giving rise to diagnostic inaccuracy in routine practice. Previous studies have demonstrated that PMBCL can be distinguished from subtypes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) based on gene expression signatures. However, requirement of fresh-frozen biopsy material has precluded the transfer of gene expression–based assays to the clinic. Here, we developed a robust and accurate molecular classification assay (Lymph3Cx) for the distinction of PMBCL from DLBCL subtypes based on gene expression measurements in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. A probabilistic model accounting for classification error, comprising 58 gene features, was trained on 68 cases of PMBCL and DLBCL. Performance of the model was subsequently evaluated in an independent validation cohort of 158 cases and showed high agreement of the Lymph3Cx molecular classification with the clinicopathological diagnosis of an expert panel (frank misclassification rate, 3.8%). Furthermore, we demonstrate reproducibility of the assay with 100% concordance of subtype assignments at 2 independent laboratories. Future studies will determine Lymph3Cx’s utility for routine diagnostic purposes and therapeutic decision making.