Histologic Patterns of Thymic Involvement in Langerhans Cell Proliferations: A Clinicopathologic Study and Review of the Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thymic involvement by Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH) has been described mainly in isolated case reports. A description of the histopathologic patterns of LCH proliferations in the thymus, together with therapeutic implications, has not, to our knowledge, been previously addressed. The pathology consultation files at Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of the University of Pennsylvania Medical Center were reviewed for cases of thymic involvement by LCH. Relevant cases in the literature were also reviewed, and the histopathology and clinical course of those cases were collected. Nine consultation cases of thymic involvement were reviewed, together with 23 cases in the literature, which provided adequate pathologic description and ancillary confirmation (n = 32), revealing 4 distinct pathologic groups. Group 1 showed microscopic collection of hyperplastic LCH-like cells in incidental thymectomies of patients without LCH disease, requiring no further treatment (n = 7; 22%). Group 2 showed solitary and/or cystic LCH of the thymus with gland disruption, and at least 3 cases resolved without systemic therapy (n = 10; 31%). Group 3 showed more variable thymic involvement in multisystemic LCH disease, with either a medullary restricted pattern or more diffuse gland involvement, requiring adjuvant therapy and having a higher mortality rate (n = 13; 41%). Group 4 showed a mixed histiocytic lesion with a concurrent LCH and juvenile xanthogranuloma-like proliferation (n = 2; 6%). Thymic involvement in LCH is quite rare. Based on our cases and those in the literature, we propose 4 distinct pathologic groups of thymic involvement in Langerhans cell proliferations with relevance for diagnosis and treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".