摘要目的 按照WHO(2008版)造血与淋巴组织肿瘤分类,分析弥漫性大B细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)各亚型的构成比情况、免疫表型特点,及其总体生存率.方法 按照新分类,结合形态学观察,利用免疫组织化学、基因重排、原位杂交、荧光原位杂交(FISH)等技术对500例DLBCL,进行回顾性分析和归类,收集随访资料,并对生发中心B细胞(GCB)型和非GCB型组之间、老年人EB病毒(EBV)阳性的DCBCL亚型和非特殊型弥漫性大B细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL-NOS)之间进行总体生存率比较.结果 500例中DLBCL-NOS约占77.2%(386/500),其次是老年人EBV阳性的DLBCL占9.4%(47/500),然后依次是原发中枢神经系统的DLBCL(4.4%,22/500)、原发纵隔(胸腺)的大B细胞淋巴瘤(2.8%,14/500)、富于T细胞/组织细胞的大B细胞淋巴瘤(2.6%,13/500),其余类型均属于比较罕见的.DLBCL-NOS按照形态学分类以中心母细胞性最为常见,约占95.1%(367/386);按免疫组织化学分型,非GCB型组在DLBCL-NOS中约占68.5%(219/320),GCB型组占28.4%(91/320),而CD5阳性DLBCL仅占3.1%(10/320).总体生存率比较,GCB型组和非GCB型组总体生存率差异无统计学意义(P=0.93),老年人EBV阳性的DLBCL组总体生存率与年龄匹配前、后的DLBCL-NOS组差异均无统计学意义(P值分别为0.13和0.28).对形态学表现为灰区的淋巴瘤病例进行FISH检测,发现了1例"双打击"(double-hit)淋巴瘤.结论 DLBCL-NOS在DLBCL中占绝大多数,其次是老年人EBV阳性的DLBCL和原发中枢神经系统的DLBCL,其他类型均属少见或罕见类型.按照Hans分类进行免疫组织化学分型,非GCB型占多数,GCB型和非GCB型分组总体生存率没有显著性差异.老年人EBV阳性的DLBCL组和用年龄匹配前后的DLBCL-NOS组的总体生存率均无显著性差异.

abstractsObjective To study the immunophenotype and overall survival of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) classified according to the 2008 World Health Organization classification of tumors of hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. Methods Five hundred cases of DLBCL were retrospectively analyzed with histologic review, immunohistochemistry, gene rearrangement study, in situ hybridization and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Follow-up data were collected. The overall survival rates of germinal center B-cell (GCB) and non-germinal center B-cell (non-GCB) subtypes, as well as those of DLBCL, not otherwise specified (NOS) and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-positive DLBCL of the elderly, were compared.Results DLBCL-NOS was the commonest subtype which accounted for 77.2% (386/500) of the cases.EBV-positive DLBCL of the elderly, primary DLBCL of central nervous system, primary mediastinal (thymic) large B-cell lymphoma and T cell/histiocyte-rich large B-cell lymphoma accounted for 9. 4%(47/500), 4. 4% (22/500), 2. 8% (14/500) and 2. 6% (13/500), respectively. 68. 5% (219/320) of DLBCL-NOS belonged to non-GCB subtype. The percentage of GCB subtype and CD5-positive subtype were 28.4% (91/320) and 3. 1% (10/320), respectively. Comparison of the overall survival, GCB and non-GCB immunophenotypic groups have no significant difference (P = 0. 93). And the same result in which of the EBV-positive DLBCL of the elderly and DLBCL-NOS group, before and after age matched (P =0. 13 and O. 28, respectively). A double-hit lymphoma was found by FISH detection, which presenting as gray zone lymphoma in morphology. Conclusions By using Hans algorithm, GCB and non-GCB subtypes show no significant difference in overall survival. EBV-positive DLBCL of the elderly and DLBCL-NOS also do not have significant difference in overall survival. Fluorescence in situ hybridization technique is helpful in identification of DLBCL with rare phenotypes.