4.4 Article

MYD88 L265P MUTATION DETECTION IN THE AQUEOUS HUMOR OF PATIENTS WITH VITREORETINAL LYMPHOMA

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/IAE.0000000000002319

关键词

anterior chamber paracentesis; aqueous humor; MYD88 L265P mutation; primary central nervous system lymphoma; vitreoretinal lymphoma

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To detect the presence of MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humor of patients with cytologically proven vitreoretinal lymphoma. Methods: Eight consecutive patients with bilateral vitreoretinal lymphoma (16 eyes) were prospectively evaluated. Genomic DNA was extracted from aqueous samples after paracentesis and vitreous humor samples after diagnostic vitrectomy. MYD88 codon 265 mutation was investigated by both amplification-refractory mutation system polymerase chain reaction approach and pyrosequencing assay in the aqueous humor of all patients and in the vitreous of 6 patients. A control group of 8 age-matched patients with established diagnosis of noninfectious uveitis was also tested for the presence of MYD88 L265P mutation in the aqueous humor. Results: Eight patients (three men, five women) with mean age of 69.5 years (range 50-85 years) were considered. All the patients tested for MYD88 L265P in the vitreous (six) were positive, and this result was consistent with cytological examination in all samples but one. The MYD88 L265P mutation was found in the aqueous of 6 patients (75%), and in 3 of them, the mutation was present in both eyes. Results of MYD88 L265P mutation in aqueous and vitreous sample were consistent in 7 of the 8 eyes with available samples. The aqueous humor of the noninfectious uveitis control group was negative for the detection of MYD88 L265P mutation. Conclusion: MYD88 mutation was detected in the aqueous humor of 75% of patients with cytologically proven vitreoretinal lymphoma. This technique may be considered as an additional diagnostic tool in the detection of the disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据