4.6 Article

Gene Expression Profiling Reveals Clear Differences Between EBV-Positive and EBV-Negative Posttransplant Lymphoproliferative Disorders

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF TRANSPLANTATION
卷 13, 期 5, 页码 1305-1316

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/ajt.12196

关键词

ABC; DLBCL; EBV; GCB; gene expression profiling; IC-DLBCL; immunodeficiency; organ transplantation; lymphomagenesis; lymphoid neoplasia; microarray; monomorphic PTLD; posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder; PT-DLBCL

资金

  1. K.U.Leuven [GOA/11/010]
  2. FWO-Vlaanderen [G081411N]
  3. Emmanuel van der Schuerenfonds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Posttransplant patients are at risk of developing a potentially life-threatening posttransplantation lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD), most often of diffuse large Bcell lymphoma (DLBCL) morphology and associated with EpsteinBarr Virus (EBV) infection. The aim of this study was to characterize the clinicopathological and molecular-genetic characteristics of posttransplant DLBCL and to elucidate whether EBV(+) and EBV() posttransplant DLBCL are biologically different. We performed gene expression profiling studies on 48 DLBCL of which 33 arose posttransplantation (PT-DLBCL; 72% EBV+) and 15 in immunocompetent hosts (IC-DLBCL; none EBV+). Unsupervised hierarchical analysis showed clustering of samples related to EBV-status rather than immune status. Except for decreased Tcell signaling these cases were inseparable from EBV() IC-DLBCL. In contrast, a viral response signature clearly segregated EBV(+) PT-DLBCL from EBV() PT-DLBCL and IC-DLBCL cases that were intermixed. The broad EBV latency profile (LMP1+/EBNA2+) was expressed in 59% of EBV(+) PT-DLBCL and associated with a more elaborate inflammatory response compared to intermediate latency (LMP1+/EBNA2). Inference analysis revealed a role for innate and tolerogenic immune responses (including VSIG4 and IDO1) in EBV(+) PT-DLBCL. In conclusion we can state that the EBV signature is the most determining factor in the pathogenesis of EBV(+) PT-DLBCL.

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