throbber
Original article
`
`Annuls of Oncology 12: 853-858. 2001.
`© 2001 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
`
`Among diffuse large B-cell lymphomas, T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL and
`CD30+ anaplastic B-cell subtypes exhibit distinct clinical features
`
`B. Maes,1 A. Anastasopoulou,2 J. C. Kluin-Nelemans,31. Teodorovic,2 R. Achten,1 A. Carbone4"*
`& C DeWolf-Peeters1* on behalf of the EORTC Lymphoma Group
`'Department ofPathology. Catholic University of Leuven; EORTC Data Center. Brussels. Belgium. ' Department of Hematology. Leiden
`University Medical Center, The Netherlands; 4 Department of Pathology. C.R.O. Aviano. Italy
`
`Summary
`
`Background: The EORTC clinical trial 20901, activated in
`1990, was designed to treat non-Hodgkin's lymphomas (NHL)
`of intermediate/high-grade malignancy according to the Work-
`ing Formulation. Established in 1994, the R.E.A.L. Classifica-
`tion on NH L has now replaced all former classifications.
`Patients and methods: We reanalysed all cases (n - 273)
`documented by material available for review according to the
`R.E.A.L. Classification. In addition, we subdivided cases recog-
`nised as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) into three
`morphologically distinct categories, namely, large cleaved
`DLBCL (LC-DLBCL), T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich B-cell lym-
`phoma (T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL) and CD30+ DLBCL
`with anaplastic cell features (CD30+ DLBCL). Finally, T/NULL
`anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) cases were subdivided
`into ALK+ and A L K- lymphomas. Review was performed
`independently by two pathologists from two different centres.
`Results: DLBCL (61%), T/NULL ALCL (15%) and mantle-
`cell lymphoma (MCL, 5%) were the main NHL categories
`represented in the study. Fifty-seven of one hundred sixty
`DLBCL cases were further subclassified as LC-DLBCL (33
`
`cases), T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL (13 cases) or CD30+
`DLBCL (11 cases). The remaining cases were indicated as
`unspecified DLBCL. A clinico-pathological correlation con-
`firmed the findings of previous studies suggesting that MCL,
`DLBCL and ALCL represent distinct entities with MCL being
`characterised by a short survival, in contrast with the longer
`survival and less frequent progression typical of ALK+ com-
`pared to ALK-ALCL. Within DLBCL, T-cell-rich/histiocyte-
`rich BCL showed distinctive features at presentation whereas
`CD30+ DLBCL showed a trend towards a more favourable
`prognosis, that might be comparable to that of ALK+ ALCL.
`Conclusions: Our data further support the usefulness of the
`R.E.A.L. Classification and illustrate the feasibility of DLBCL
`subtyping. Moreover, our results demonstrate the distinct
`clinical characteristics of T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL and
`CD30+ DLBCL with anaplastic cell features suggesting that
`they may represent clinico-pathologic entities.
`
`Key words: anaplastic large cell lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell
`lymphoma, EORTC, morphology, R.E.A.L. Classification.
`T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL
`
`Introduction
`
`In 1994 the International Lymphoma Study Group
`(ILSG), introduced the Revised European-American
`Lymphoma (R.E.A.L.) Classification for non-Hodgkin's
`lymphomas (NHL) [1]. It comprises a list of 'real' lym-
`phoma entities that could be defined at that time, using
`morphologic, immunologic and genetic techniques. Sub-
`sequently, various large retrospective studies were per-
`formed in order to evaluate the diagnostic reproducibility
`and the clinical validity of the R.E.A.L. Classification.
`These studies have demonstrated the clinical relevance
`of defining new R.E.A.L. entities (e.g., mantle-cell lym-
`phoma, marginal zone cell lymphoma) and the high
`diagnostic accuracy, which was shown to be additionally
`improved by the use of immunophenotyping [2-5]. As
`
`* Both authors contributed equally to this work.
`
`such, they have refuted the criticising reactions on the
`proposal and confirmed the usefulness of the R.E.A.L.
`Classification.
`Its principles have essentially been
`adopted in the forthcoming WHO Classification [6].
`However, to be able to reach their conceptual goal of
`listing only well identifiable entities with a significantly
`distinctive clinical behaviour, the ILSG chose to lump
`together all cases of diffuse
`large B-cell
`lymphoma
`(DLBCL) in one category. Only one subtype, primary
`mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma, was recog-
`nised as a separate entity based on its characteristic
`clinico-pathological features [1].
`Despite the grouping of all DLBCL into one R.E.A.L.
`category, various histological identifiable subtypes have
`been described in the past, for which often a distinct
`clinical course was suggested. The Kiel Classification
`
`Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/annonc/article-abstract/12/6/853/173523
`by UCLA user
`on 02 March 2018
`
`IPR2018-00685
`Celgene Ex. 2039, Page 1
`
`

`

`854
`
`distinguished immunoblastic from centroblastic lym-
`phoma based on the presence of over 90% immunoblasts
`[7]. Recently, it has been suggested that this particular
`morphological representation indicates an adverse prog-
`nosis when compared with classical centroblastic lym-
`phoma [8].
`In the early nineties, our group described the T-cell-
`rich/histiocyte-rich B-cell lymphoma (T-cell-rich/his-
`tiocyte-rich BCL) and noticed that this DLBCL subtype
`is associated with a characteristic clinical presentation
`and a particularly aggressive course [9].
`Large cleaved DLBCL (LC-DLBCL) was first identi-
`fied by Lukes and Collins [10] and was maintained by
`the Working Formulation as a subcategory 'of interest
`but of uncertain clinical importance' [11]. Whereas it
`was generally accepted that its characteristic nuclear
`morphology as well as the prominent sclerosis enabled
`its recognition, the actual clinical relevance of this sub-
`category has remained controversial, some investigators
`showing a favourable outcome [12-16], while others failed
`to demonstrate any clinical distinctiveness [17-23].
`The implications of CD30+
`immunopositivity in
`large B-cell lymphomas is enigmatic as it has received
`relatively little attention compared with CD30 expres-
`sion inT/null cell lymphomas [24]. CD30 expression in
`DLBCL may be correlated with anaplastic cell features,
`as such delineating another histological
`identifiable
`DLBCL subtype, which may be worthwhile to investigate
`in view of the R.E.A.L. principles.
`All available diagnostic biopsies of patients included
`in EORTC trial 20901 were reviewed. Firstly, all cases
`were reclassified according to the R.E.A.L. Classification.
`Secondly, it was decided to subdivide T/NULL anaplastic
`large-cell lymphoma (ALCL) cases into an ALK + and
`an ALK negative group, as recent studies suggested that
`ALK immunostaining in ALCL may provide crucial
`prognostic information [25, 26]. Finally, we tried to
`recognise the 4 morphologically subcategories of DLBCL
`mentioned above (immunoblastic DLBCL, LC-DLBCL,
`T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL and CD30+ DLBCL)
`and evaluated both the diagnostic applicability and the
`clinical significance of morphologically subgrouping
`DLBCL.
`
`Patients and methods
`
`Patients
`
`The EORTC clinical trial 20901 included newly diagnosed patients age
`15-60 years with stage 11 — IV NHL. In 1997. the upper age limit was
`increased to 65 years. The NHL was to fulfil the criteria of intermediate
`grade histology according to the Working Formulation. In addition,
`patients with stage I bulky or stage II-IV of the following high grade
`entities were accepted as well: diffuse large-cell immunoblastic. ana-
`plastic large-cell lymphoma, large-cell and small-cell (if containing
`numerous blasts) pleomorphic T-cell lymphoma and AILD-likeT-cell
`lymphoma. Low-grade NHL. lymphoblastic NHL and Burkitt's lym-
`phoma were excluded. A complete staging evaluation was performed.
`Only patients with a performance status of WHO 0. 1 or 2 in the
`
`absence of severe cardiac, pulmonary, neurologic or metabolic dys-
`function were included
`treatment arms, as
`Patients were randomised to two different
`described elsewhere [27]. A CHOP-like regimen, CHVmP/BV chemo-
`therapy was given. Briefly, patients were randomised after the first
`three CHVmP/BV cycles (reaching a complete or partial remission
`(CR/PR) with a histologically proven negative bone marrow, and no
`contraindications for bone marrow ablative chemotherapy), between
`the ABMTarm (a further 3 cycles CHVmP/BV followed by BEAC
`chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell rescue) or the control arm,
`with further five cycles CHVmP/BV. The protocol also recommended
`radiotherapy for all PR patients
`
`Pathology review
`
`Out of 311 cases included in the trial, 273 were available for the
`present study. Out of these 273 cases, 10 cases were excluded from the
`study due to the insufficient size or quality of the diagnostic biopsy
`specimen.
`The biopsy was taken from a nodal site in 78% of cases (n = 205)
`and from an extranodal site in 22% of cases (;i = 58). All cases were
`independently evaluated by two pathologists (C. de Wolf-Peeters.
`A. Carbone) and subtyped according the R.E.A.L. Classification [1],
`In addition, DLBCL cases were further classified based on the mor-
`phologic criteria described below.
`Immunophenotypic data (including CD20, CD3. CD30, CD15.
`CD5 and bcl-2) were known from the local pathology form in the vast
`majority of cases Since ALK staining was not included in the immuno-
`phenotypic panel performed at diagnosis, ALK staining was addi-
`tionally performed for the T/NULL ALCL cases and the CD30+
`DLBCL cases for which unstained sections were available (25 out of
`38 cases and 9 out of 11 cases, respectively).
`DLBCL cases characterised by neoplastic cells showing an irregular,
`typically indented or cleaved nucleus with evenly dispersed chromatin
`and by a compartmentalising fibrosis were further subtyped as LC-
`DLBCL [10]. Mitotic figures, apoptotic cells, foci of necrosis and an
`accompanying reactive infiltrate composed of small lymphocytes and
`histiocytes were variable features of these cases. DLBCL cases with
`strikingly scarce neoplastic large B-cells, but rich both in small reac-
`tive T lymphocytes and in histiocytes were specified as T-cell-rich/
`histiocyte-rich BCL. These DLBCL are to be distinguished from
`nodular paragranuloma, by the uniform distribution of large cells
`throughout the neoplasm and by the characteristic reactive background
`dominated by small T cells and histiocytes rather than B cells [9].
`DLBCL cases exhibiting both anaplastic cell morphology and CD30
`expression were identified as CD30+ DLBCL. Anaplastic cell features
`included large or very large cells with abundant cytoplasm, with large,
`often reniform or indented nuclei, and usually multiple nucleoli [24],
`DLBCL cases characterised by the predominance of immunoblasts,
`e.g.. more than 90% as defined by the Kiel group [7], were classified as
`immunoblastic DLBCL. DLBCL cases failing to answer the criteria to
`be included into one of these subgroups were left unspecified.
`
`Statistical analysis
`
`All cases analysed were equally distributed over both therapeutic arms.
`Only the cases that were classified under both schemes are included in
`the analysis.
`Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated as the time interval
`between the date of randomisation and the date of disease progression
`or death, whichever came first. If neither event had been observed,
`then the patient was censored at the dale of the last follow-up.
`Overall survival (OS) was calculated as the time interval between
`the date of randomisation and the date of death due to all causes.
`Patients who were still alive when last traced are censored at the date
`of last follow-up. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-
`Meier method. Due to small numbers, not all subtypes could be
`analysed so comparisons are only visually allowed.
`
`Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/annonc/article-abstract/12/6/853/173523
`by UCLA user
`on 02 March 2018
`
`IPR2018-00685
`Celgene Ex. 2039, Page 2
`
`

`

`Table I Baseline characteristics of patients subtyped as MCL,
`DLBCL or ALCL.
`
`MCL DLBCL ALCL ALK+ ALK-
`
`13(5)
`
`160(61)
`
`38(15)
`
`11(29)
`
`14(37)
`
`32-60
`51
`1.6
`
`18-64
`45
`16
`
`16-58
`30
`1.6
`
`16-45
`28
`4.5
`
`17-43
`30
`0.7
`
`8
`15
`8
`69
`
`38
`54
`8
`
`61
`39
`
`92
`8
`
`38
`62
`
`9
`32
`21
`38
`
`81
`16
`3
`
`65
`34
`I
`
`84
`10
`6
`
`76
`20
`4
`
`3
`47
`28
`22
`
`92
`8
`
`53
`47
`
`91
`3
`6
`
`86
`11
`3
`
`0
`27
`46
`27
`
`91
`9
`
`64
`36
`
`91
`9
`
`82
`18
`
`7
`64
`7
`22
`
`93
`7
`
`50
`50
`
`93
`0
`7
`
`93
`7
`
`H ( %)
`Age (years)
`Range
`Median
`Sex ratio (M: F)
`Ann Arbor stage (%)
`I
`II
`III
`IV
`Bone marrow
`involvement (%)
`Negative
`Positive
`Unknown
`Systemic symptoms
`
`Absent
`Present
`Unknown
`Hepatomegaly (%)
`Absent
`Present
`Unknown
`Splenomegaly (%)
`Absent
`Present
`Unknown
`
`Results
`
`Pathology review
`
`Full agreement among both pathologists was reached
`for R.E.A.L. subtyping and for further subdividing
`DLBCL cases, in all except two cases, which were
`excluded from further analysis.
`The R.E.A.L. subtypes mainly represented in the
`study were DLBCL (61%), T/NULL ALCL (15%) and
`MCL (5%). The remaining cases were either follicle
`centre cell lymphoma (4.7%), marginal zone cell lym-
`phoma (3.5%), Burkitt's or Burkitt's like lymphoma
`(2%), T-cell lymphoma (peripheral, not otherwise speci-
`fied or angioimmunoblastic) (3%), primary mediastinal
`large B-cell lymphoma (2%) and chronic lymphocytic
`leukemia (3.8%).
`Based on the morphologic features as described above
`(methods section), the group of DLBCL cases (n = 160)
`comprised 11 CD30+ DLBCL cases (7%), 13 cases of
`T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL (8%) and 33 LC-DLBCL
`cases (21%). None of the CD30+ DLBCL cases for
`which ALK staining was performed (9 of a total of 11
`cases) showed ALK expression. No more than two cases
`were composed of a sufficient number of immunoblasts
`to qualify as immunoblastic DLBCL. These two cases
`were analysed together with the remaining unspecified
`DLBCL subgroup (103 cases).
`For the 38 cases diagnosed as T/NULL ALCL, ALK
`
`v....
`
`% 100
`
`9 0-
`
`SO-
`
`7 0-
`
`6 0-
`
`5 0-
`
`4 0-
`
`3 0-
`
`2 0-
`
`10 -
`
`855
`
`(a)
`
`- MCL
`DLBCL
`. ALCL
`
`(b)
`
`Figure I. Overall survival (a) and progression-free survival (b)' com-
`parison of MCL patients (H = 13). DLBCL patients (;i = 160) and
`ALCL patients {n = 38).
`
`9 yean
`
`immunostaining was positive, negative or not done in
`respectively 11, 14 and 13 cases.
`
`Clinical data
`
`Clinical characteristics at patient entry of the three
`mainly represented R.E.A.L. categories (MCL, DLBCL,
`T/NULL ALCL) are summarised in Table l.The ALCL
`group included patients on the average 15-20 years
`younger when compared with MCL and DLBCL (median
`age 30 years vs. 51 and 45 years). Ann Arbor stages 111
`and IV were observed in 77% of MCL cases compared
`to 59% and 50% of respectively DLBCL and ALCL
`cases. Bone marrow involvement was found in more than
`half of the MCL cases (54%) and was rare in DLBCL
`and ALCL (respectively, 16% and 8%). Systemic symp-
`toms were more frequently present in ALCL (47%)
`compared to MCL (39%) and DLBCL (34%). Moreover,
`besides the important differences in clinical presentation,
`these three lymphomas appear to behave differently,
`MCL displaying a tendency towards an inferior prognosis
`in terms of progression-free survival (Figures la and b).
`ALK staining divides T/NULL ALCL in two distinct
`subentities in terms of prognosis as demonstrated by a
`different overall survival and progression-free survival
`(Figures 2a and b). Moreover, the ALK positive and the
`ALK negative subgroups show distinctive clinical charac-
`teristics at entry, with a marked male predominance and
`a higher incidence of aggressive stages HI and IV among
`ALK + ALCL (Table I).
`Among the DLBCL subgroups, T-cell-rich/histiocyte-
`rich BCL shows highly characteristic clinical features at
`presentation as shown in Table 2. A clear male prepon-
`
`Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/annonc/article-abstract/12/6/853/173523
`by UCLA user
`on 02 March 2018
`
`IPR2018-00685
`Celgene Ex. 2039, Page 3
`
`

`

`856
`
`00
`90-
`
`70-
`
`60 -
`50-
`
`40-
`
`30-
`
`20-
`10 -
`
`0 -
`
`Figure 2 Overall survival (a) and progression-free survival (b) of
`CD30 + DLBCL patients (;i = II), compared to ALCL patients,
`divided into ALK+ (n = 11). A L K- cases (n - 14) and cases without
`available ALK staining (n = 13).
`
`(a)
`
`LC-DLBCL
`CD30* DLBCL
`T cd rkfc/kWiocTtt ricti BCL
`nmr«rffl1 DLBCL
`
`9 yon
`
`LC-OLBCL
`CD3** DLBCL
`T «D ricWUBlocrU-rich BCL
`
`9 y««n
`
`Figure 3. Overall survival (a) and progression-free survival (b) of
`DLBCL patients, divided into LC-DLBCL (n = 33),T-cell-rich/histio-
`cyte-rich BCL (n = 13), CD30+ DLBCL (n = II) and unspecified
`DLBCL (n = 103)
`
`derance (ratio M : F = 5.5) was noted in this category,
`compared to an almost equal distribution between both
`sexes in the other DLBCL. T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich
`BCL patients presented more often with advanced Ann
`Arbor stages (III and IV) (84% vs. 55%, 45% and 62% in
`
`Discussion
`
`The morphological review of cases included in the
`EORTC trial 20901, allowed to address three issues of
`special current interest.
`Firstly, it was ascertained that the R.E.A.L. Classifi-
`cation [1] defines clinically distinct entities within a
`subpopulation of patients affected by intermediate/
`high-grade NHL. DLBCL, ALCL and MCL were the
`
`Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/annonc/article-abstract/12/6/853/173523
`by UCLA user
`on 02 March 2018
`
`(a)
`
`Table 2. Baseline characteristics for DLBCL subtypes.
`
`Unspecified
`CD30+ T-cell-rich/ LC-
`DLBCL histiocyte- DLBCL DLBCL
`rich BCL
`
`n (%)
`Age (year)
`Range
`Median
`Sex ratio (M : F)
`Ann Arbor stage (%)
`
`11(7)
`
`13(8)
`
`33(21)
`
`103(64)
`
`18-52
`41
`1.7
`
`24-52
`41
`5.5
`
`19-64
`44
`1 3
`
`18-64
`47
`1.3
`
`7
`31
`24
`38
`
`82
`15
`3
`
`65
`34
`I
`
`84
`12
`4
`
`79
`19
`2
`
`12
`43
`12
`33
`
`82
`15
`3
`
`67
`33
`0
`
`94
`
`0 6
`
`82
`
`9 9
`
`15
`69
`
`54
`38
`
`46
`54
`0
`
`69
`23
`
`30
`62
`
`18
`27
`18
`37
`
`90
`10
`0
`
`73
`27
`0
`
`73
`9
`18
`
`82
`18
`0
`
`II
`
`I
`III
`IV
`Bone marrow
`involvement (%)
`Negative
`Positive
`Unknown
`Systemic symptoms (%)
`Absent
`Present
`Unknown
`Hepatomegaly (%)
`Absent
`Present
`Unknown
`Splenomegaly (%)
`Absent
`Present
`Unknown
`
`CD30+ DLBCL, LC-DLBCL and unspecified DLBCL,
`respectively). Approximately 40 % of patients presented
`with bone marrow invasion at diagnosis, which is rather
`rare in the other subtypes and
`in the unspecified
`DLBCL. In addition, hepatosplenomegaly and systemic
`symptoms were more frequent findings in T-cell-rich/
`histiocyte-rich BCL at presentation. The survival curves
`of the DLBCL subtypes do not show a clear disadvantage
`for T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL patients (Figures 3a
`and b). The small number of T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich
`BCL patients included in the analysis may provide a
`reasonable explanation for this unexpected observation.
`CD30+ DLBCL, on the other hand, can be clearly
`distinguished from the other subtypes with respect to
`clinical behaviour. Overall and disease-free survival
`curves suggest that the clinical course of CD30+ DLBCL
`may be comparable to that of ALK+ ALCL (Figure 2a
`and b).
`
`i
`
`AUUAIXL
`ALK-ALCL
`
`CW0+ DLBCL
`
`9 ye«n
`
`(b)
`
`AJJUALCL
`ALK-ALCL
`ALKirinlaf
`•"- CDSftt DLBCL
`
`9 yem
`
`IPR2018-00685
`Celgene Ex. 2039, Page 4
`
`

`

`857
`
`three major categories represented in the study. These
`three lymphomas show a distinct clinical behaviour with
`MCL being the most aggressive. These findings confirm
`the data of other large studies [3,4], and underscore that
`lymphomas that were originally lumped together as
`'intermediate/high-grade', according to the Working
`Formulation, show marked differences in survival.
`Despite the low percentage of T-cell lymphoma cases
`represented in the study, partially due to the inclusion
`criteria of the trial, a relatively high number of cases
`diagnosed as T/NULL ALCL was found. Since they
`represented 38 out of a total of 261 cases analysed (15%),
`a second issue, the prognostic significance of ALK
`expression in this particular group of lymphomas, could
`be investigated. ALK expression results from the trans-
`location t(2;5) or from other chromosomal rearrange-
`ments involving the ALK gene [28]. t(2;5) has been
`demonstrated in 15%-85% of ALCL cases, an impres-
`sive variability that has been ascribed to differences in
`methodology applied, inclusion criteria, patient charac-
`teristics and the presence of variant translocations [25,
`26, 28-31]. In our study, of 25 cases that were stained for
`ALK, 11 cases showed positivity. Visual comparison of
`the survival curves, showed a clearly better clinical
`behaviour of ALK positive ALCL cases as compared to
`ALK negative cases, in terms of both overall survival
`and progression free survival (Figure 2). These results
`confirm those of Falini et al. who reported a signifi-
`cantly better prognosis of ALK positive cases in a series
`comprising 96 ALCL [25].
`Finally, we decided to assess whether previously de-
`scribed, morphologically distinct DLBCL subgroups
`may be adopted for subclassification. In the R.E.A.L.
`Classification, subdividing DLBCL was considered im-
`practical for the lack of both diagnostic reproducibility
`as well as clinical relevance. Our results show that three
`previously described DLBCL, being LC-DLBCL, T-cell-
`rich/histiocyte-rich BCL and CD30+ DLBCL can be
`recognised and distinguished from one another. In addi-
`tion, our data indicate that these entities have clinically
`distinct features, either because of the characteristics
`at presentation (T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL), or for
`prognostic reasons (CD30+ DLBCL). It has to be em-
`phasised that the latter findings merely represent observed
`trends in an analysis that, due to low patient numbers,
`lacked the power to reach the level of statistical signifi-
`cance.
`For LC-DLBCL, some investigators have suggested a
`better prognosis compared to unspecified DLBCL [12-
`16], whereas other could not confirm this finding [17-23].
`In the present study, no obvious difference could be
`observed between the clinical presentation and the sur-
`vival curves of LC-DLBCL on the one hand and
`DLBCL with non-cleaved cell morphology on the other,
`despite its readily identifiable morphology.
`Patients affected by T-cell-rich/histiocyte-rich BCL,
`usually middle-aged men, have been shown to present
`with advanced stage disease, with involvement of the
`spleen, the bone marrow and/or the liver, besides multi-
`
`ple peripheral lymph nodes [9]. The present study again
`highlights, apart from the typical morphology, the spe-
`cific clinical features of this subcategory at presentation,
`but, due to small patient numbers, does not allow to
`adequately judge the patients' prognosis.
`Except for one study by Noorduyn et al., CD30+
`DLBCL have only been found in small numbers in larger
`series essentially focusing on T/NULL-ALCL [24].
`Noorduyn et al. suggested that CD30 expression is not
`restricted to DLBCL with anaplastic morphology. More-
`over, they failed to demonstrate any correlation between
`survival on the one hand and CD30 expression and/or
`anaplastic morphology on the other. Our approach
`essentially differs from the one applied by Noorduyn et
`al. in that we required both anaplastic features and
`CD30 expression to delineate the particular DLBCL
`subtype. However, the observed trend towards a better
`prognosis comparable with ALK+ ALCL, requires con-
`firmation in a larger study.
`The low number (no more than two) of immunoblastic
`DLBCL cases identifiable in our study, corroborates the
`forthcoming WHO Classification that will not incorpo-
`rate this subtype. It was believed that neither reliable
`pathological or biological criteria for subclassification,
`nor distinctive therapies are available at this time to
`justify a distinction between immunoblastic and centro-
`blastic lymphoma [11].
`The WHO Advisory Committee has recommended to
`lump all DLBCL together [11], in the forthcoming clas-
`sification of NHL. Nevertheless, it was acknowledged
`that a further subclassification is mandatory, in order to
`identify subgroups of patients that might benefit from
`alternative therapies. Our data support the feasibility
`of subtyping DLBCL according previously described
`morphological entities. They further indicate that T-cell-
`rich/histiocyte-rich BCL and CD30+ DLBCL with ana-
`plastic cytology may have clinical distinct features.
`Recently DLBCL have been divided into two prog-
`nostically distinct subgroups
`(germinal centre
`like
`DLBCL and activated B-cell like DLBCL) using a
`DNA microarray for the analysis of lymphoid cells
`(Lymphochip) [32]. These techniques should be applied
`to DLBCL subtypes identified by morphology, in order
`to investigate the correlation between immunomorpho-
`logical findings and molecular data. Such analysis will
`hopefully result in less complicated utilities to be used in
`daily practice.
`
`Acknowledgements
`
`Supported by grants number 5U10 CA11488-21 through
`5U10 CA11488-29 from the National Cancer Institute
`(Bethesda, Maryland, USA). Its contents are solely the
`responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily
`represent the official views of the National Cancer
`Institute. Supported by a grant from the Associazione
`Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC), Milan, Italy,
`to A. Carbone.
`
`Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/annonc/article-abstract/12/6/853/173523
`by UCLA user
`on 02 March 2018
`
`IPR2018-00685
`Celgene Ex. 2039, Page 5
`
`

`

`858
`
`References
`
`5.
`
`1. Harris NL. Jaffe ES. Stem H et al. A Revised European-Ameri-
`can Classification of lymphoid neoplasms: A proposal from the
`International Lymphoma Study Group (see comments). Blood
`1994:84(5): 1361-92
`2. Pittaluga S. Bijnens L. Teodorovic 1 et al. Clinical analysis of 670
`cases in two trials of the European Organization for the Research
`and Treatment of Cancer Lymphoma Cooperative Group subtyped
`according to the Revised European-American Classification of
`Lymphoid Neoplasms: A comparison with the Working Formula-
`tion. Blood 1996: 87 (10). 4358-67.
`3. The Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Classification Project. A clinical
`evaluation of the International Lymphoma Study Group Classi-
`fication of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. Blood 1997: 89 (II)
`3909-18.
`4. Hiddemann W. Longo DL. Coiffier B et al. Lymphoma classifica-
`tion -
`the gap between biology and clinical management is
`closing. Blood 1996. 88 (11) 4085-9.
`Isobe K.Tamaru J. Hangaya K et al. Clinicopathological evalua-
`tion of
`the Revised European-American Classification of
`Lymphoid Neoplasms (R.E.A.L.) in Japan. Leuk Lymph 1999: 34
`(1-2): 143-9.
`6. Harris NL, JafTe ES. Diebold J et al The World Health Organ-
`ization classification of neoplastic diseases of the hematopoietic
`and lymphoid tissues. Report of the Clinical Advisory Committee
`meeting. Airlie House. Virginia, November. 1997. Ann Oncol
`1999; 10(12): 1419-32
`7. Stansfeld AG. Diebold J. Noel H et al. Updated Kiel Classifica-
`tion for lymphomas. Lancet 1988: 1 (8580): 292-3.
`8. Engelhard M. Brittinger G. Huhn D et al. Subclassification of
`diffuse large B-cell lymphomas according to the Kiel Classifica-
`tion. Distinction of centroblastic and immunoblastic lymphomas
`is a significant prognostic risk factor. Blood 1997: 89 (7): 2291-7.
`9. Delabie J. Vandenberghe E. Kennes C et al. Histiocyte-rich B-cell
`lymphoma. A distinct clinicopathologic entity possibly related to
`lymphocyte predominant Hodgkin's disease, paragranuloma sub-
`type. Am J Surg Pathol 1992: 16(1): 37-48.
`10. Lukes RJ, Collins RD. lmmunologic characterization of human
`malignant lymphomas. Cancer 1974; 34 (4, Suppl): 1488-503.
`11. National Cancer Institute sponsored study of classifications of
`non-Hodgkin's
`lymphomas: Summary and description of a
`working formulation for clinical usage. The Non-Hodgkin's Lym-
`phoma Pathologic Classification Project. Cancer 1982: 49 (10):
`2112-35.
`12. Strauchen JA. Young RC. DeVita VT Jr et al. Clinical relevance of
`the histopathological subclassification of diffuse'histiocytic" lym-
`phoma. N Engl J Med 1978; 299 (25)- 1382-7.
`13. Alavaikko M. Aine R The Lukes and Collins classification of
`non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. 1. A histological reappraisal of 301
`cases. Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand A 1982; 90 (4): 241-9.
`14 Aine R. Alavuikko M. Kataja M. The Lukes and Collins classi-
`fication of non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. 2. A survival study of 301
`patients. Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand A 1982; 90 (4).
`251-6.
`15. Stein RS, Magec MJ, Lenox RK el al. Malignant lymphomas of
`follicular center cell origin in man. VI. Large cleaved cell lym-
`phoma. Cancer 1987; 60 (11): 2704-11.
`16. Stein RS. Greer JP. Flexner JM et al. Large-cell lymphomas:
`Clinical and prognostic features J Clin Oncol 1990: 8 (8): 1370-9.
`17. Fisher Rl. HubbardSM. DeVitaVTetal Factors predicting long-
`term survival in diffuse mixed, histiocytic. or undifferentiated
`lymphoma. Blood 1981. 58 (1): 45-51
`
`18. Newcomer LN. Nerenberg MI. Cadman EC et al. The usefulness
`of the Lukes-Collins classification in identifying subsets of diffuse
`histiocytic lymphoma responsive to chemotherapy. Cancer 1982;
`50 (3): 439^13.
`19. Nathwani BN. Dixon DO. Jones SE et al. The clinical significance
`of the morphological subdivision of diffuse'histiocytic' lymphoma:
`A study of 162 patients treated by the Southwest Oncology
`Group. Blood 1982; 60(5): 1068-74.
`20 Warnke RA, Strauchen JA, Burke JS et al. Morphologic types of
`diffuse large-cell lymphoma. Cancer 1982; 50 (4): 690-5.
`21. Ersboll J, Schultz HB, Hougaard P et al. Comparison of the
`working formulation of non-Hodgkin's
`lymphoma with
`the
`Rappaport, Kiel, and Lukes & Collins classifications. Transla-
`tional value and prognostic significance based on review of 658
`patients treated at a single institution. Cancer 1985; 55 (10)- 2442-
`58
`22. Lieberman PH, Filippa DA, Straus DJ et al. Evaluation of
`malignant lymphomas using three classifications and the working
`formulation. 482 cases with median follow-up of 11.9 years. Am J
`Med 1986; 81 (3): 365-80.
`23 Kwak LW, Wilson M, Weiss LM et al. Clinical significance of
`morphologic subdivision in diffuse large-cell lymphoma. Cancer
`1991:68(9) 1988-93.
`24. Noorduyn LA. de Bruin PC, van Heerde P et al. Relation of
`CD30 expression to survival and morphology in large cell B cell
`lymphomas. J Clin Pathol 1994; 47 (1): 33-7.
`25. Falini B. Pileri S, Zinzani PL et al. ALK+ lymphoma: Clinico-
`pathological findings and outcome. Blood 1999; 93 (8): 2697-706
`26. Gascoyne RD, Aoun P, Wu D et al. Prognostic significance of
`anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) protein expression in adults
`with anaplastic large cell lymphoma. Blood 1999; 93 (11): 3913-21.
`27 Kluin-Nelemans HC, Zagonel V, Anastasopoulou A et al.
`Standard chemotherapy with or without high-dose chemotherapy
`for aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: Randomized phase III
`EORTC study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93 (1): 22-30.
`28. Falini B, Pulford K, Pucciarini A et al. Lymphomas expressing
`ALK fusion protein(s) other than NPM-ALK. Blood 1999; 94
`(10): 3509-15.
`29. Pittaluga S, Wlodarska I, Pulford K et al. The monoclonal antibody
`ALK1 identifies a distinct morphological subtype of anaplastic
`large cell lymphoma associated with 2p23/ALK rearrangements.
`Am J Pathol 1997; 151 (2)- 343-51.
`30. Benharroch D. Meguerian-Bedoyan Z, Lamant L et al. ALK-
`positive lymphoma: A single disease with a broad spectrum of
`morphology. Blood 1998: 91 (6): 2076-84.
`31. Pulford K. Lamant L. Morris SW et al. Detection of anaplastic
`lymphoma kinase (ALK) and nucleolar protein nucleophosmin
`(NPM)-ALK proteins in normal and neoplastic cells with the
`monoclonal antibody ALK1. Blood 1997, 89 (4): 1394-404.
`32. Alizadeh AA, Eisen MB, Davis RE et al. Distinct types of diffuse
`large B-cell lymphoma identified by gene expression profiling.
`Nature 2000: 403 (6769) 503-11.
`
`Received 31 October 2000; accepted 21 February 2001.
`
`Correspondence lo
`Dr B. Maes
`Department of Pathology
`University Hospitals, Catholic University of Leuven
`Minderbroedersstraat 12
`3000 Leuven
`Belgium
`E-mail: Brigitte.Maes@uz.kuleuven.ac.be
`
`Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/annonc/article-abstract/12/6/853/173523
`by UCLA user
`on 02 March 2018
`
`IPR2018-00685
`Celgene Ex. 2039, Page 6
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket