4.7 Article

Incidence and clinicobiologic characteristics of leukemic B-cell chronic lymphoproliferative disorders with more than one B-cell clone

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 102, Issue 8, Pages 2994-3002

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2003-01-0045

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Leukemic B-chronic lymphoproliferative disorders (B-CLPDs) are generally believed to derive from a monoclonal B cell; biclonality has only occasionally been reported. In this study, we have explored the incidence of B-CLPD cases with 2 or more B-cell clones and established both the phenotypic differences between the coexisting clones and the clinicobiologic features of these patients. In total, 53 B-CLPD cases with 2 or more B-cell clones were studied. Presence of 2 or more B-cell clones was suspected by immunophenotype and confirmed by molecular/genetic techniques in leukemic samples (n = 42) and purified B-cell subpopulations (n = 10). Overall, 4.8% of 477 consecutive B-CLPDs had 2 or more B-cell clones, their incidence being especially higher among hairy cell leukemia (3 of 13), large cell lymphoma (2 of 10), and atypical chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) (4 of 29). In most cases the 2 B-cell subsets displayed either different surface immunoglobulin (slg) light chain (n = 37 of 53) or different levels of the same sig (n = 9 of 53), usually associated with other phenotypic differences. Compared with monoclonal cases, B-CLL patients with 2 or more clones had lower white blood cell (WBC) and lymphocyte counts, more frequently displayed splenomegaly, and required early treatment. Among these, the cases in which a CLL clone coexisted with a non-CLL clone were older and more often displayed B symptoms, a monoclonal component, and diffuse infiltration of bone marrow and required early treatment more frequently than cases with monoclonal CLL or 2 CLL clones. (Blood. 2003;102:2994-3002) (C) 2003 by The American Society of Hematology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available