4.6 Article

Bing-Neel syndrome, a rare complication of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia: analysis of 44 cases and review of the literature. A study on behalf of the French Innovative Leukemia Organization (FILO)

期刊

HAEMATOLOGICA
卷 100, 期 12, 页码 1587-1594

出版社

FERRATA STORTI FOUNDATION
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2015.133744

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Central nervous system involvement by malignant cells is a rare complication of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, and this clinicopathological entity is referred to as the Bing-Neel syndrome. There is currently no consensus on the diagnostic criteria, therapeutic approaches and response evaluation for this syndrome. In this series, we retrospectively analyzed 44 French patients with Bing-Neel syndrome. Bing-Neel syndrome was the first manifestation of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia in 36% of patients. When Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia was diagnosed prior to Bing-Neel syndrome, the median time interval between this diagnosis and the onset of Bing-Neel syndrome was 8.9 years. This study highlights the possibility of the occurrence of Bing-Neel syndrome without any other evidence of progression of Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia. The clinical presentation was heterogeneous without any specific signs or symptoms. Biologically, the median lymphocyte count in the cerebrospinal fluid was 31/mm(3). Magnetic resonance imaging revealed abnormalities in 78% of the cases. The overall response rate after first-line treatment was 70%, and the overall survival rate after the diagnosis of Bing-Neel syndrome was 71% at 5 years. Altogether, these results suggest that Bing-Neel syndrome should be considered in the context of any unexplained neurological symptoms associated with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia. The diagnostic approach should be based on cerebrospinal fluid analysis and magnetic resonance imaging of the brain and spinal axis. It still remains difficult to establish treatment recommendations or prognostic factors in the absence of large-scale, prospective, observational studies.

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

4.6
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