Immune Escape Mechanisms in Intravascular Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Molecular Cytogenetic and Immunohistochemical Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Intravascular large B-cell lymphomas (IVLBCLs) are rare extranodal LBCLs in which relapse is relatively frequent. We sought to further characterize potential immune escape mechanisms in IVLBCLs that newer therapies can exploit. METHODS: A series of 33 IVLBCLs were evaluated for programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and PD-L2 expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC), chromosomal alterations (CAs) in the PDL1/PDL2 locus by fluorescence in situ hybridization, and loss of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I and II expression by IHC. RESULTS: Cases were subclassified as classical (n = 22) or hemophagocytic syndrome (HPS)-associated (n = 11) variants. A total of 12 cases (39%; n = 12/31) expressed PD-L1 and/or PD-L2. CAs were seen in 7 cases (7/29 [24%]) and included gains, amplifications, and rearrangements. CAs in classical variant cases (24%; n = 5/21) included gains (n =1), gains with concurrent rearrangements (n = 2), and amplifications (n = 2). The 2 HPS-associated variant cases with CAs (25%; n = 2/8) both showed amplification, including 1 case with a concurrent rearrangement. A majority of cases with CAs (71%; n = 5/7) were PD-L1/PD-L2 IHC positive. Among PD-L1/PD-L2 IHC-positive cases, 45% harbored a CA. Loss of MHC class I and/or class II was seen in 27% (n = 9/33) of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, our data show that 65% (n = 20/31) of IVLBCLs may exploit immune evasion strategies through PD-L1/PD-L2 expression or downregulation of MHC proteins.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".