Primary Cutaneous Follicular Lymphoma: An Assessment of Clinical, Histopathologic, Immunophenotypic, and Molecular Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Unlike nodal follicular lymphoma (NFL), Primary cutaneous follicular lymphomas (PCFLs) rarely express Bcl-2 protein or t(14;18)(q32;q21) (Bcl-2/IgH). The aim of this study was to further characterize PCFL in a large series from North America. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data and archival formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue were obtained from 32 patients. PCFL was defined as follicular lymphoma limited to the skin at the time of diagnosis and within the first 6 months after diagnosis. Specimens were analyzed for the expression of CD3, CD10, CD20, Bcl-2, and Bcl-6 proteins by immunohistochemistry as well as for the presence of t(14;18)(q32;q21) by polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: The male-to-female ratio was 1.5:1, with a median age of 60 years. Twenty-four patients had lesions on the head and neck, five had lesions on the trunk, and three had lesions on both head and trunk. Follow-up data were available in all cases, with a mean length of 35.8 months. The majority of the patients were treated with radiation therapy. All patients were alive at last follow-up except one. Recurrence was noted in seven patients (22%), after a mean disease-free survival time of 17.7 months. CD10 and Bcl-6 expression were seen in 29 (91%) of 32 and 31 (97%) of 32 cases, respectively. Bcl-2 expression was noted in 13 (41%) of 32 cases. PCR results for t(14;18)(q32;q21) were positive in 11 (34%) of 32 patients and showed correlation with Bcl-2 protein expression. The sequencing of the t(14;18)(q32;q21) amplicons confirmed unique breakpoints in each of the seven tested cases. Comparison between the Bcl-2 and/or t(14;18)(q32;q21)-positive and t(14;18)(q32;q21)-negative cases revealed no significant difference in age, site, clinical course, or outcome. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated Bcl-2 protein expression and t(14;18)(q32;q21) in a significant minority of cases, suggesting a relationship with NFL. It remains to be seen whether, on longer follow-up, there is any clinical difference in cases with and without t(14;18)(q32;q21).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".