Post‐transplant lymphoproliferative disorders, Epstein‐Barr virus infection, and disease in solid organ transplantation: Guidelines from the American Society of Transplantation Infectious Diseases Community of Practice

A revision of the nearly 8-year-old World Health Organization classification of the lymphoid neoplasms and the accompanying monograph is being published. It reflects a consensus among hematopathologists, geneticists, and clinicians regarding both updates to current entities as well as the addition of a limited number of new provisional entities. The revision clarifies the diagnosis and management of lesions at the very early stages of lymphomagenesis, refines the diagnostic criteria for some entities, details the expanding genetic/molecular landscape of numerous lymphoid neoplasms and their clinical correlates, and refers to investigations leading to more targeted therapeutic strategies. The major changes are reviewed with an emphasis on the most important advances in our understanding that impact our diagnostic approach, clinical expectations, and therapeutic strategies for the lymphoid neoplasms.

The purpose of this work was to modernize recommendations for evaluation, staging, and response assessment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). A workshop was held at the 11th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma in Lugano, Switzerland, in June 2011, that included leading hematologists, oncologists, radiation oncologists, pathologists, radiologists, and nuclear medicine physicians, representing major international lymphoma clinical trials groups and cancer centers. Clinical and imaging subcommittees presented their conclusions at a subsequent workshop at the 12th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma, leading to revised criteria for staging and of the International Working Group Guidelines of 2007 for response. As a result, fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)–computed tomography (CT) was formally incorporated into standard staging for FDG-avid lymphomas. A modification of the Ann Arbor descriptive terminology will be used for anatomic distribution of disease extent, but the suffixes A or B for symptoms will only be included for HL. A bone marrow biopsy is no longer indicated for the routine staging of HL and most diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. However, regardless of stage, general practice is to treat patients based on limited (stages I and II, nonbulky) or advanced (stage III or IV) disease, with stage II bulky disease considered as limited or advanced disease based on histology and a number of prognostic factors. PET-CT will be used to assess response in FDG-avid histologies using the 5-point scale. The product of the perpendicular diameters of a single node can be used to identify progressive disease. Routine surveillance scans are discouraged. These recommendations should improve evaluation of patients with lymphoma and enhance the ability to compare outcomes of clinical trials.

We used the Collaborative Transplant Study database to analyze the incidence, risk, and impact of malignant lymphomas in approximately 200,000 organ transplant recipients. Over a 10-year period, the risk in renal transplant recipients was 11.8-fold higher than that in a matched nontransplanted population (p<0.0001). The majority of lymphomas were diagnosed after the first post-transplant year. Heart-lung transplants showed the highest relative risk (RR 239.5) among different types of organ transplants. In kidney recipients, immunosuppression with cyclosporine did not confer added risk compared with azathioprine/steroid treatment, whereas treatment with FK506 increased the risk approximately twofold. Induction therapy with OKT3 or ATG, but not with anti-IL2 receptor antibodies, increased the risk of lymphoma during the first year. Antirejection therapy with OKT3 or ATG also increased the risk. First-year mortality in renal and heart transplant patients with lymphoma was approximately 40% and 50%, respectively, and showed no improvement in recent years. A pattern of preferential localization to the vicinity of the transplant was noted, and the prognosis of the patient was related to localization. This study highlights the continuing risk for lymphoma with time post-transplantation, the contribution of immunosuppression to increased risk, and continuing poor outcomes in patients with post-transplant lymphoma.