Clinical review demonstrates diagnostic workflows integrating morphology and genetics in aggressive B-cell lymphomas, highlighting key differences between consensus classification systems.
OBJECTIVES: High-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL), introduced in the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) revised fourth edition classification, included cases defined by MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements or by high-grade morphology. Diagnostic criteria and nomenclature for these lymphomas were refined in the 2022 WHO fifth edition (WHO-5) classification and International Consensus Classification (ICC). This review describes our approach to the diagnosis of HGBL. METHODS: Two cases are presented illustrating how we diagnose HGBL, including 1 case harboring MYC and BCL6 rearrangements and a second showing TdT expression in an HGBL with MYC and BCL2 rearrangements. The ways in which these cases are distinguished from other lymphomas with high-grade features and the appropriate nomenclature using WHO-5 and ICC classifications are emphasized. RESULTS: An HGBL diagnosis requires integration of morphology, immunophenotype, and genetics and exclusion of other lymphomas with high-grade morphology, including Burkitt lymphoma, B-lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma (B-LBL/ALL), and blastoid mantle cell lymphoma. A diagnosis of HGBL/large B-cell lymphoma with 11q aberration should also be considered in certain patient populations. CONCLUSIONS: High-grade B-cell lymphomas are subclassified based on morphologic and genetic features. There are differences in the nomenclature and definition of these lymphomas in the WHO-5 and ICC classifications. Distinguishing HGBLs from other mature B-cell lymphomas and B-LBL/ALL is critical so that patients receive appropriate treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moore et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: