Lymph node excisions provide more precise lymphoma diagnoses than core biopsies: a French Lymphopath network survey

Author:

Syrykh Charlotte1ORCID,Chaouat Charlotte2,Poullot Elsa34,Amara Nadia1,Fataccioli Virginie34,Parrens Marie56,Traverse-Glehen Alexandra7,Molina Thierry-Jo8,Xerri Luc9,Martin Laurent10,Dubois Romain11,Lacheretz-Szablewski Vanessa12ORCID,Copin Marie-Christine1113,Moreau Anne1415,Chenard Marie-Pierre16,Cabarrou Bastien17,Lusque Amélie17,Gaulard Philippe34,Brousset Pierre118ORCID,Laurent Camille118ORCID

Affiliation:

1. 1Département de Pathologie, Institut Universitaire du Cancer, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) de Toulouse, Toulouse, France

2. 2Département de Pathologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) de Besançon, Besançon, France

3. 3Département de Pathologie, Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Groupe Hospitalier Henri Mondor–Albert Chenevier, Créteil, France

4. 4INSERM U955, Université Paris-Est, Créteil, France

5. 5Département de Pathologie, Hôpital du Haut Lévêque, Bordeaux, France

6. 6INSERM U1053, Université de Bordeaux2, Bordeaux, France

7. 7Département de Pathologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) Lyon-Sud, Lyon, France

8. 8Département de pathologie, Université de Paris, Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Necker–Enfants Malades et Robert Debre, Paris, France

9. 9Département de pathologie, Institut Paoli-Calmettes, Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie de Marseille, INSERM U1068, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) UMR7258, Université d’Aix-Marseille, UM105, Marseille, France

10. 10Département de Pathologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) de Dijon, Dijon, France

11. 11Département de Pathologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) de Lille, Lille, France

12. 12Département de Pathologie et d'Oncobiologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) Montpellier, Montpellier, France

13. 13Département de Pathologie, Université d’Angers, Université de Nantes, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) Angers, Inserm, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie et Immunologie Nantes Angers (CRCI2NA), Structure Fédérative de Recherche (SFR) Interactions Cellulaires et Applications Thérapeutiques (ICAT), Angers, France

14. 14Département de Pathologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) de Nantes, Nantes, France

15. 15Département de Pathologie, Centre Hospitalier Départemental (CHD) Vendée, La Roche sur Yon, France

16. 16Département de Pathologie, Centre Hospitalo-Universitaire (CHU) de Strasbourg, France

17. 17Département de Biostatistiques, Institut Claudius Regaud, Institut Universitaire du Cancer, Toulouse, France

18. 18INSERM, U1037, Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie de Toulouse-Purpan, laboratoire d’excellence TOUCAN, Toulouse, France

Abstract

Abstract According to expert guidelines, lymph node surgical excision is the standard of care for lymphoma diagnosis. However, core needle biopsy (CNB) has become widely accepted as part of the lymphoma diagnostic workup over the past decades. The aim of this study was to present the largest multicenter inventory of lymph nodes sampled either by CNB or surgical excision in patients with suspected lymphoma and to compare their diagnostic performance in routine pathologic practice. We reviewed 32 285 cases registered in the French Lymphopath network, which provides a systematic expert review of all lymphoma diagnoses in France, and evaluated the percentage of CNB and surgical excision cases accurately diagnosed according to the World Health Organization classification. Although CNB provided a definitive diagnosis in 92.3% and seemed to be a reliable method of investigation for most patients with suspected lymphoma, it remained less conclusive than surgical excision, which provided a definitive diagnosis in 98.1%. Discordance rates between referral and expert diagnoses were higher on CNB (23.1%) than on surgical excision (21.2%; P = .004), and referral pathologists provided more cases with unclassified lymphoma or equivocal lesion through CNB. In such cases, expert review improved the diagnostic workup by classifying ∼90% of cases, with higher efficacy on surgical excision (93.3%) than CNB (81.4%; P < 10−6). Moreover, diagnostic concordance for reactive lesions was higher on surgical excision than CNB (P = .009). Overall, although CNB accurately diagnoses lymphoma in most instances, it increases the risk of erroneous or nondefinitive conclusions. This large-scale survey also emphasizes the need for systematic expert review in cases of lymphoma suspicion, especially in those sampled by using CNB.

Publisher

American Society of Hematology

Subject

Cell Biology,Hematology,Immunology,Biochemistry

Cited by 21 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3