Lymphoproliferative Disease Risk in Patients with Autoimmune Disease: Clustering of Primary CNS Lymphoma with Drug Regimen and Disease Process

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1490-1490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Genevieve Marie Crane ◽  
Helen Powell ◽  
Rumen Kostadinov ◽  
Peter C. Burger ◽  
Richard F. Ambinder ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: While immunosuppression for solid organ transplant is associated with an increased risk of lymphoproliferative disease (LPD), this has been more difficult to establish in autoimmune disorders, even though patients are often treated with similar agents. One reason is that autoimmune disease may elevate baseline LPD risk. However, associations have been shown with certain rare types of LPD; most strikingly hepatosplenic lymphoma, now known to occur as a consequence of anti-TNF-alpha therapy in young men with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) (J Ped Gast Nutr. 2007; 44:265-7). We have noticed a rise in the incidence of another rare lymphoma in autoimmune disease patients: primary central nervous system (PCNS) LPD. Six cases have been diagnosed at our institution since 2010, with none before that dating back to onset of electronic records in 1986. All of these patients were taking mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) and/or thiopurines. A similar rise in reported cases has been seen in the literature (Fig 1) with suggestion of but no direct association with drug treatment shown. We systematically investigated this trend. Methods: We searched our pathology database to identify all LPD cases diagnosed over a 28-year period in patients treated for autoimmune disease as well as all similar cases involving the CNS reported in the literature over the past 40 years. Statistical analyses were performed using the Fisher's exact test. Results: We identified 44 cases of LPD arising in patients treated for autoimmune disease, including 6 with PCNS disease (Table 1). Of LPDs in patients on anti-TNF-alpha agents, 4/5 had a T-cell phenotype, and 3 had IBD. By contrast, in patients who developed LPD while taking methotrexate, the majority for rheumatoid arthritis, only 1/18 had a T-cell phenotype. Instead they were categorized as polymorphous, Hodgkin or large B-cell morphologies, which were frequently EBV-positive (67%), but never involved the brain (0/18). The LPDs arising in patients on MMF and/or thiopurines showed a similar morphologic profile but were more likely to involve the CNS. In particular, MMF was significantly associated with PCNS compared to non-CNS disease (p<0.001), and the only patient on MMF that developed an LPD outside the CNS was taking MMF in combination with cyclosporine. The most common underlying disorders in PCNS disease were myasthenia gravis (MG) and IBD. We reviewed all cases of CNS LPD in patients treated for autoimmune disease reported in the literature (34 reports, 40 patients), including 32 with PCNS LPD and 8 with secondary CNS involvement. The vast majority of PCNS cases arose in patients taking MMF and/or thiopurines (29/32), but only MMF was significantly associated with primary compared to secondary CNS involvement (p<0.05). The most common underlying disease in PCNS patients was systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (10/32), followed by IBD and MG. No patients with secondary CNS involvement had SLE. Conclusions: While the overall risk of LPD in the context of autoimmune disease treatment has been controversial, the interaction between drug type and individual patient characteristics may dramatically increase risk for certain lymphomas. We now demonstrate a significant association between use of MMF and PCNS LPD, which appears to cluster in patients with a history of SLE, MG or IBD. Of interest, all 3 autoimmune patients in the JHH database who developed PCNS LPD following solid organ transplant (not shown) also had SLE. While methotrexate never produced a PCNS LPD in our series, it has been infrequently found in the literature. There is no evidence of an increased baseline risk of PCNS LPD in autoimmune patients; indeed, only one reported case in an untreated patient could be identified in the literature (J Rheum 1978; 5:75-78). In addition, EBV-associated PCNS lymphoma is virtually always seen in the context of immunosuppression. Further investigation into the increased risk of specific types of LPD with immunosuppressive treatment is warranted with significant implications for tailoring treatment options. Table 1. Demographics of JHH and Reported CNS Cases ('*' p<0.05). JHH All Reported CNS Cases (Literature) PCNS Non-CNS PCNS 2o CNS No. Cases 6 38 32 8 Age (range) 69(27-77) 61(18-77) 57(27-88) 62(15-71) % Male 50% 50% 32% 25% Deceased 17% 37% 45% 40% EBV 100% 69% 95% 100% MMF 80%* 3% 41%* 0 Thiopurines 40% 23% 72% 75% Methotrexate 0 58% 13% 38% SLE 0 9% 31%* 0 MG 33% 3% 19% 0 IBD 33% 24% 19% 38% Disclosures Borowitz: Becton Dickinson Biosciences, Medimmune: Research Funding.

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camila Macedo ◽  
Albert Donnenberg ◽  
Iulia Popescu ◽  
Jorge Reyes ◽  
Kareem Abu-Elmagd ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3507-3507
Author(s):  
Teresa E Goebel ◽  
Nicholas K Schiltz ◽  
Aiswarya Chandran Pillai ◽  
Paolo Caimi ◽  
Siran M Koroukian ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: MGUS is a precancerous condition which can progress to multiple myeloma (MM) or other hematologic malignancy. MGUS increases the risk of developing MM approximately 25-fold, and increases lifetime risk of infection, venous thromboembolism (VTE), and skeletal related events (SRE). Solid organ transplant requires immunosuppression, which is associated with overlapping risks, including hematologic malignancy such as post transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD). Hypothesizing that MGUS would further increase risk of PTLD and other complications after transplant, we described risk of these outcomes in patients with MGUS prior to solid organ transplant (MGUS+) compared to those without MGUS (MGUS-). Methods: We used the 2005-2011 California State Inpatient, Emergency, and Ambulatory Databases. MGUS and complications were identified by ICD-9 diagnosis codes, and solid organ transplant by ICD-9 procedure codes. Patients with the ICD-9 diagnosis code 273.1 documented on or before the day of solid organ transplant surgery were defined as MGUS+. We used logistic regression to analyze complications in MGUS+ versus MGUS- transplant patients. Results: Of 24,358,669 patients, we identified 22,062 solid organ transplant patients. Transplant patients were 8.8% African American, 29.5% Hispanic, 43.4% White, 15.1% other, and 3.2% had data missing. 72 were MGUS+ prior to solid organ transplant. Median age of MGUS+ was 61.5 years versus 51 years for MGUS-. Outcomes are shown in table 1. Table 1. Transplant Patients Outcome MGUS + N=72 MGUS – N=21,990 Odds Ratio (95% CI) PTLD 0 161 n/a MM ≤10 37 34.90 (12.11, 100.61) Lymphoma 0 193 n/a VTE 20 3,202 2.26(1.35, 3.79) SRE 18 2,320 2.83(1.66, 4.83) Infection 50 11,612 2.03(1.23, 3.36) *Frequencies ≤10 are reported as such per the data use agreement. Conclusions: Compared to MGUS-, MGUS+ solid organ transplant patients had higher risk of VTE, SRE, and infection, but did not have higher risk of PTLD or other lymphomas. MGUS+ transplant patients are more likely to develop MM than MGUS-; however, this risk is similar to that historically attributed to MGUS, in patients who have not undergone transplant. These data show increased risk of certain complications in MGUS+ patients, and do not support screening for MGUS to assess risk of PTLD prior to solid organ transplant. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e043731
Author(s):  
Adnan Sharif ◽  
Javeria Peracha ◽  
David Winter ◽  
Raoul Reulen ◽  
Mike Hawkins

IntroductionSolid organ transplant patients are counselled regarding increased risk of cancer (principally due to their need for lifelong immunosuppression) and it ranks as one of their biggest self-reported worries. Post-transplantation cancer is common, associated with increased healthcare costs and emerging as a leading cause of post-transplant mortality. However, epidemiology of cancer post-transplantation remains poorly understood, with limitations including translating data from different countries and national data being siloed across different registries and/or data warehouses.Methods and analysisStudy methodology for Epidemiology of Cancer after Solid Organ Transplantation involves record linkage between the UK Transplant Registry (from NHS Blood and Transplant), Hospital Episode Statistics (for secondary care episodes from NHS Digital), National Cancer Registry (from cancer registration data hosted by Public Health England) and the National Death Registry (from NHS Digital). Deterministic record linkage will be conducted by NHS Digital, with a fully anonymised linked dataset available for analysis by the research team. The study cohort will consist of up to 85 410 solid organ transplant recipients,who underwent a solid organ transplant in England between 1 January 1985 and 31 December 2015, with up-to-date outcome data.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Confidentiality Advisory Group (reference: 16/CAG/0121), Research Ethics Committee (reference: 15/YH/0320) and Institutional Review Board (reference: RRK5471). The results of this study will be presented at national and international conferences, and manuscripts with results will be submitted for publication in high-impact peer-reviewed journals. The information produced will also be used to develop national evidence-based clinical guidelines to inform risk stratification to enable risk-based clinical follow-up.Trial registration numberNCT02991105.


Viruses ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (10) ◽  
pp. 2019
Author(s):  
Anum Abbas ◽  
Andrea J. Zimmer ◽  
Diana Florescu

Solid organ transplant recipients are at increased risk for infections due to chronic immunosuppression. Diarrhea is a commonly encountered problem post transplantation, with infectious causes of diarrhea being a frequent complication. Viral infections/enteritides in solid organ transplant recipients often result from frequently encountered pathogens in this population such as cytomegalovirus, adenovirus, and norovirus. However, several emerging viral pathogens are increasingly being recognized as more sensitive diagnostic techniques become available. Treatment is often limited to supportive care and reduction in immunosuppression, though antiviral therapies mayplay a role in the treatment in certain diseases. Viral enteritis is an important entity that contributes to morbidity and mortality in transplant recipients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document