section name header

Authors

Chapter Summary

Cancers Staged Using This Staging System

Adult Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas

Cancers Not Staged Using This Staging System

These histopathologic types of cancer…Are staged according to the classification for…and can be found in chapter…
Ocular adnexal lymphomaOcular adnexal lymphoma71
Pediatric lymphomaPediatric lymphoma80
Primary cutaneous LymphomaPrimary cutaneous lymphoma81
Multiple myelomaPlasma cell myeloma82

Summary of Changes

ChangeDetails of ChangeLevel of Evidence
Ann Arbor stagingThe Cotswold modification1 of the Ann Arbor staging system2,3 has been updated to the Lugano classification4I
A and B Classification (Symptoms)B symptoms were eliminated for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (retained for Hodgkin lymphoma).I
X subscriptX subscript for bulk was eliminated. The diameter of the largest mass must be recorded.I
Stage IIIThe extension of disease into extralymphatic sites (E lesions) was eliminated from Stage III; any extralymphatic involvement with nodal disease above and below the diaphragm is Stage IV.I
Stage IIISInvolvement of the spleen no longer part of stage grouping.I
Stage IIAlthough four staging categories are retained, the concept of the Lugano classification is to divide patients into limited and advanced stages. Stage II bulky is variably categorized as limited- or advanced-stage based on the histology and prognostic factors.I
ImagingPosteroanterior chest X-ray is no longer required for the determination of bulk in Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin lymphoma.I

ICD-O-3 Topography Codes

CodeDescription
C00.0External upper lip
C00.1External lower lip
C00.2External lip, NOS
C00.3Mucosa of upper lip
C00.4Mucosa of lower lip
C00.5Mucosa of lip, NOS
C00.6Commissure of lip
C00.8Overlapping lesion of lip
C00.9Lip, NOS
C01.9Base of tongue, NOS
C02.0Dorsal surface of tongue, NOS
C02.1Border of tongue
C02.2Ventral surface of tongue, NOS
C02.3Anterior 2/3 of tongue, NOS
C02.4Lingual tonsil
C02.8Overlapping lesion of tongue
C02.9Tongue, NOS
C03.0Upper gum
C03.1Lower gum
C03.9Gum, NOS
C04.0Anterior floor of mouth
C04.1Lateral floor of mouth
C04.8Overlapping lesion of floor of mouth
C04.9Floor of mouth, NOS
C05.0Hard palate
C05.1Soft palate, NOS
C05.2Uvula
C05.8Overlapping lesion of palate
C05.9Palate, NOS
C06.0Cheek mucosa
C06.1Vestibule of mouth
C06.2Retromolar area
C06.8Overlapping lesion of other and unspecified parts of mouth
C06.9Mouth, NOS
C07.9Parotid gland
C08.0Submandibular gland
C08.1Sublingual gland
C08.1Sublingual gland duct
C08.8Overlapping lesion of major salivary glands
C08.9Major salivary gland, NOS
C09.0Tonsillar fossa
C09.1Tonsillar pillar
C09.8Overlapping lesion of tonsil
C09.9Tonsil, NOS
C10.0Vallecula
C10.1Anterior surface of epiglottis
C10.2Lateral wall of oropharynx
C10.3Posterior wall of oropharynx
C10.4Branchial cleft
C10.8Overlapping lesion of oropharynx
C10.9Oropharynx, NOS
C11.0Superior wall of nasopharynx
C11.1Posterior wall of nasopharynx
C11.2Lateral wall of nasopharynx
C11.3Anterior wall of nasopharynx
C11.8Overlapping lesion of nasopharynx
C11.9Nasopharynx, NOS
C12.9Pyriform sinus
C13.0Postcricoid region
C13.1Hypopharyngeal aspect of aryepiglottic fold
C13.2Posterior wall of hypopharynx
C13.8Overlapping lesion of hypopharynx
C13.9Hypopharynx, NOS
C14.0Pharynx, NOS
C14.2Waldeyer ring
C14.8Overlapping lesion of lip, oral cavity and pharynx
C15.0Cervical esophagus
C15.1Thoracic esophagus
C15.2Abdominal esophagus
C15.3Upper third of esophagus
C15.4Middle third of esophagus
C15.5Lower third of esophagus
C15.8Overlapping lesion of esophagus
C15.9Esophagus, NOS
C16.0Cardia, NOS
C16.1Fundus of stomach
C16.2Body of stomach
C16.3Gastric antrum
C16.4Pylorus
C16.5Lesser curvature of stomach, NOS
C16.6Greater curvature of stomach, NOS
C16.8Overlapping lesion of stomach
C16.9Stomach, NOS
C17.0Duodenum
C17.1Jejunum
C17.2Ileum
C17.3Meckel diverticulum
C17.8Overlapping lesion of small intestine
C17.9Small intestine, NOS
C18.0Cecum
C18.1Appendix
C18.2Ascending colon
C18.3Hepatic flexure of colon
C18.4Transverse colon
C18.5Splenic flexure of colon
C18.6Descending colon
C18.7Sigmoid colon
C18.8Overlapping lesion of colon
C18.9Colon, NOS
C19.9Rectosigmoid junction
C20.9Rectum, NOS
C21.0Anus, NOS
C21.1Anal canal
C21.2Cloacogenic zone
C21.8Overlapping lesion of rectum, anus and anal canal
C22.0Liver
C22.1Intrahepatic bile duct
C23.9Gallbladder
C24.0Extrahepatic bile duct
C24.1Ampulla of Vater
C24.8Overlapping lesion of biliary tract
C24.9Biliary tract, NOS
C25.0Head of pancreas
C25.1Body of pancreas
C25.2Tail of pancreas
C25.3Pancreatic duct
C25.4Islets of Langerhans
C25.7Other specified parts of pancreas
C25.8Overlapping lesion of pancreas
C25.9Pancreas, NOS
C26.0Intestinal tract, NOS
C26.8Overlapping lesion of digestive system
C26.9Gastrointestinal tract, NOS
C30.0Nasal cavity
C30.1Middle ear
C31.0Maxillary sinus
C31.1Ethmoid sinus
C31.2Frontal sinus
C31.3Sphenoid sinus
C31.8Overlapping lesion of accessory sinuses
C31.9Accessory sinus, NOS
C32.0Glottis
C32.1Supraglottis
C32.2Subglottis
C32.3Laryngeal cartilage
C32.8Overlapping lesion of larynx
C32.9Larynx, NOS
C33.9Trachea
C34.0Main bronchus
C34.1Upper lobe, lung
C34.2Middle lobe, lung
C34.3Lower lobe, lung
C34.8Overlapping lesion of lung
C34.9Lung, NOS
C37.9Thymus
C38.0Heart
C38.1Anterior mediastinum
C38.2Posterior mediastinum
C38.3Mediastinum, NOS
C38.4Pleura, NOS
C38.8Overlapping lesion of heart, mediastinum and pleura
C39.0Upper respiratory tract, NOS
C39.8Overlapping lesion of respiratory system and intrathoracic organs
C39.9Ill-defined sites within respiratory system
C40.0Long bones of upper limb, scapula and associated joints
C40.1Short bones of upper limb and associated joints
C40.2Long bones of lower limb and associated joints
C40.3Short bones of lower limb and associated joints
C40.8Overlapping lesion of bones, joints and articular cartilage of limbs
C40.9Bone of limb, NOS
C41.0Bones of skull and face and associated joints
C41.1Mandible
C41.2Vertebral column
C41.3Rib, sternum, clavicle and associated joints
C41.4Pelvic bones, sacrum, coccyx and associated joints
C41.8Overlapping lesion of bones, joints and articular cartilage
C41.9Bone, NOS
C42.0Blood
C42.1Bone marrow
C42.2Spleen
C42.3Reticuloendothelial system, NOS
C42.4Hematopoietic system, NOS
C47.0Peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system of head, face, and neck
C47.1Peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system of upper limb and shoulder
C47.2Peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system of lower limb and hip
C47.3Peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system of thorax
C47.4Peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system of abdomen
C47.5Peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system of pelvis
C47.6Peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system of trunk, unspecified
C47.8Overlapping lesion of peripheral nerves and autonomic nervous system
C47.9Autonomic nervous system, NOS
C48.0Retroperitoneum
C48.1Specified parts of peritoneum
C48.2Peritoneum, NOS
C48.8Overlapping lesion of retroperitoneum and peritoneum
C49.0Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of head, face, and neck
C49.1Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of upper limb and shoulder
C49.2Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of lower limb and hip
C49.3Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of thorax
C49.4Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of abdomen
C49.5Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of pelvis
C49.6Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues of trunk NOS
C49.8Overlapping lesion of connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues
C49.9Connective, subcutaneous and other soft tissues, NOS
C50.0Nipple
C50.1Central portion of breast
C50.2Upper-inner quadrant of breast
C50.3Lower-inner quadrant of breast
C50.4Upper-outer quadrant of breast
C50.5Lower-outer quadrant of breast
C50.6Axillary tail of breast
C50.8Overlapping lesion of breast
C50.9Breast, NOS
C51.1Labium minus
C51.2Clitoris
C51.8Overlapping lesion of vulva
C51.9Vulva, NOS
C52.9Vagina, NOS
C53.0Endocervix
C53.1Exocervix
C53.8Overlapping lesion of cervix uteri
C53.9Cervix uteri
C54.0Isthmus uteri
C54.1Endometrium
C54.2Myometrium
C54.3Fundus uteri
C54.8Overlapping lesion of corpus uteri
C54.9Corpus uteri
C55.9Uterus, NOS
C56.9Ovary
C57.0Fallopian tube
C57.1Broad ligament
C57.2Round ligament
C57.3Parametrium
C57.4Uterine adnexa
C57.7Other specified parts of female genital organs
C57.8Overlapping lesion of female genital organs
C57.9Female genital tract, NOS
C58.9Placenta
C60.0Prepuce
C60.1Glans penis
C60.2Body of penis
C60.8Overlapping lesion of penis
C61.9Prostate gland
C62.0Undescended testis
C62.1Descended testis
C62.9Testis, NOS
C63.0Epididymis
C63.1Spermatic cord
C63.7Other specified parts of male genital organs
C63.8Overlapping lesion of male genital organs
C63.9Male genital organs, NOS
C64.9Kidney, NOS
C65.9Renal pelvis
C66.9Ureter
C67.0Trigone of bladder
C67.1Dome of bladder
C67.2Lateral wall of bladder
C67.3Anterior wall of bladder
C67.4Posterior wall of bladder
C67.5Bladder neck
C67.6Ureteric orifice
C67.7Urachus
C67.8Overlapping lesion of bladder
C67.9Bladder, NOS
C68.0Urethra
C68.1Paraurethral gland
C68.8Overlapping lesion of urinary organs
C68.9Urinary system, NOS
C69.1Cornea, NOS
C69.2Retina
C69.3Choroid
C69.4Ciliary body
C73.9Thyroid gland
C74.0Cortex of adrenal gland
C74.1Medulla of adrenal gland
C74.9Adrenal gland, NOS
C76.0Head, face or neck, NOS
C76.1Thorax, NOS
C76.2Abdomen, NOS
C76.3Pelvis, NOS
C76.4Upper limb, NOS
C76.5Lower limb, NOS
C76.7Other ill-defined sites
C76.8Overlapping lesion of ill-defined sites
C77.0Lymph nodes of head, face, and neck
C77.1Intrathoracic lymph nodes
C77.2Intra-abdominal lymph nodes
C77.3Lymph nodes of axilla or arm
C77.4Lymph nodes of inguinal region or leg
C77.5Pelvic lymph nodes
C77.8Lymph nodes of multiple regions
C77.9Lymph node, NOS
C80.9Unknown primary site

WHO Classification of Tumors

This list includes histology codes and preferred terms from the WHO Classification of Tumors and the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology (ICD-O). Most of the terms in this list represent malignant behavior. For cancer reporting purposes, behavior codes /3 (denoting malignant neoplasms), /2 (denoting in situ neoplasms), and in some cases /1 (denoting neoplasms with uncertain and unknown behavior) may be appended to the 4-digit histology codes to create a complete morphology code.

CodeDescription
9823B-cell lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma

International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. International Classification of Diseases for Oncology. ICD-O-3-Online.http://codes.iarc.fr/home. Accessed August 16, 2017. Used with permission.

Introduction

All newly diagnosed patients with malignant lymphomas should have formal documentation of the anatomic disease extent before the initial therapeutic intervention; that is, clinical stage must be assigned and recorded. Although patients with recurrent disease generally do not have a new clinical stage assigned at the time of relapse, some prognostic models include stage at the time of second-line therapy, particularly in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with intent to proceed with high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell rescue.5-8 In all cases, recording of the anatomic disease extent at the time of relapse is recommended.

Lugano Classification Modification of the Ann Arbor Staging System

Anatomic staging of lymphomas traditionally has been based on the Ann Arbor classification system, which was originally developed more than 30 years ago for HL. It was based on the relatively predictable pattern of spread of HL and improved the ability to determine which patients might be suitable candidates for radiation therapy.2 It was updated as the “Cotswold system” to address some of the issues present in the original staging system and to accommodate newer diagnostic techniques, including computed tomography (CT) scan.1 It subsequently was applied to non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) as well, despite the fact that the pattern of spread is less predictable than that of HL. The Ann Arbor classification has been accepted as the best means of describing the anatomic disease extent and has been useful as a universal system for a variety of lymphomas; therefore, it was adopted by the AJCC and the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) as the official system for classifying the anatomic extent of disease in HL and NHL, with the exception of cutaneous lymphomas (e.g., mycosis fungoides), which are discussed later in this chapter. However, advances in diagnostics and therapy provided the impetus to review and modernize the evaluation and staging of lymphoma. Workshops were held at the 11th and 12th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma to study areas in need of clarification or updating and then to review the proposed changes. The Lugano classification was published and forms the basis for revised recommendations regarding anatomic staging and evaluation of disease before and after therapy.4 This staging system is adopted by the AJCC.

For the purposes of coding and staging, lymph nodes, Waldeyer's ring, thymus, and spleen are considered nodal or lymphatic sites. Extranodal or extralymphatic sites include the adrenal glands, blood, bone, bone marrow, central nervous system (CNS; leptomeningeal and parenchymal brain disease), gastrointestinal (GI) tract, gonads, kidneys, liver, lungs, skin, ocular adnexae (conjunctiva, lacrimal glands, and orbital soft tissue), skin, uterus, and others. HL rarely presents in an extranodal site alone, but about 25% of NHLs are extranodal at presentation. The frequency of extranodal presentation varies dramatically among different lymphomas, however, with some (e.g., mycosis fungoides and mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue [MALT] lymphomas) being virtually always extranodal, except in advanced stages of the diseases, and some (e.g., follicular lymphoma) seldom being extranodal, except for bone marrow involvement.

The Lugano classification includes an E suffix for lymphomas with either localized extralymphatic presentation (Stage IE) or by contiguous spread from nodal disease (Stage IIE). For example, lymphoma presenting in the thyroid gland with cervical lymph node involvement should be staged as IIE. However, in a change from the Cotswold modification of the Ann Arbor staging system, E lesions do not apply to patients with Stage III nodal disease; any patient with nodal disease above and below the diaphragm with concurrent contiguous extralymphatic involvement is Stage IV (previously Stage IIIE). Frequently, extensive lymph node involvement is associated with extranodal extension of disease that also may directly invade other organs. Such extension should be described with the E suffix if the nodal disease is on one side of the diaphragm. For example, mediastinal lymph nodes with adjacent lung extension should be classified as Stage IIE disease. Other examples of Stage IIE diseases include extension into the anterior chest wall and into the pericardium from a large mediastinal mass (two areas of extralymphatic involvement) and no nodal involvement below the diaphragm; involvement of the iliac bone in the presence of adjacent iliac lymph node involvement and no nodal involvement above the diaphragm; involvement of a lumbar vertebral body in conjunction with para-aortic lymph node involvement and no nodal involvement above the diaphragm; and involvement of the pleura or chest wall as an extension from adjacent internal mammary nodes. A pleural or pericardial effusion with negative (or unknown) cytology is not an E lesion. Liver involvement is an exception; any liver involvement by contiguous or noncontiguous spread should be recorded as Stage IV.

The definition of disease bulk varies according to lymphoma histology. In HL, the extent of mediastinal disease is defined as the ratio between the maximum diameter of the mediastinal mass and maximal intrathoracic diameter based on CT imaging in the Lugano classification. In HL, bulk at other sites is defined as a mass >10 cm. A recent analysis has suggested that in early stage disease, masses > 7 cm (at any site) may dictate the inclusion of radiation to provide optimal outcomes.9 For NHL, the recommended definitions of bulk vary by lymphoma subtype. In follicular lymphoma, 6 cm has been suggested based on the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index, version 2 (FLIPI-2) and its validation.10,11 In DLBCL, cutoffs ranging from 5 to 10 cm have been used, although 10 cm is recommended.12

Lymph Node Regions

The staging classification for lymphoma uses the term lymph node region. The lymph node regions were defined at the Rye Symposium in 1965 and have been used in the Ann Arbor classification; this is unchanged in the Lugano classification (Figure 103.1). They are not based on any physiologic principles but rather have been agreed upon by convention. The currently accepted classification of core nodal regions is as follows:

In addition to these core regions, HL and NHLs may involve epitrochlear lymph nodes, popliteal lymph nodes, internal mammary lymph nodes (considered mediastinal by convention), occipital lymph nodes, submental lymph nodes, preauricular lymph nodes (all considered cervical, Figure 103.1), and many other small nodal areas. Clinical prognostic models may include specific definitions of nodal regions. For example, in follicular lymphoma, the FLIPI-2 uses a different definition of nodal regions (see prognostic factors for follicular lymphoma). This is also the case in determination of favorable versus unfavorable early-stage HL as proposed by the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC; see prognostic factors for HL).

103.1 Lymph nodes above and below the diaphragm (Ann Arbor/Lugano classification).

A and B Classification (Symptoms)

For HL, each stage should be classified as either A or B according to the absence or presence of defined constitutional symptoms. The designation A or B is not included in the revised staging of NHL,4 although clinicians are encouraged to record the presence of these symptoms in the medical record. The symptoms are as follows:

  1. Fevers. Unexplained fever with temperature above 38°C
  2. Night sweats. Drenching sweats (e.g., those that require change of bedclothes)
  3. Weight loss. Unexplained weight loss of more than 10% of the usual body weight in the 6 months prior to diagnosis

Other symptoms, such as chills, pruritus, alcohol-induced pain, and fatigue, are not included in the A or B designation but are recorded in the medical record, as the reappearance of these symptoms may be a harbinger of recurrence.

Criteria for Organ Involvement

Lymph Node Involvement

Lymph node involvement is demonstrated by enlargement of a node detected clinically or by imaging when alternative pathology may reasonably be ruled out. Imaging criteria include demonstration of fludeoxyglucose (FDG) avidity on FDG positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) or unexplained node enlargement on CT. Suspicious nodes should always be biopsied if treatment decisions are based on their involvement, preferably with an excisional biopsy; fine-needle aspirations are strongly discouraged because of the potential for false negatives or misdiagnosis because of loss of lymph node architecture. Core needle biopsy may be able to provide adequate material for diagnosis, particularly of a secondary site.

Spleen Involvement

Spleen involvement is suggested by unequivocal palpable splenomegaly and demonstrated by radiologic confirmation (FDG-PET or CT). Positive findings on FDG-PET include diffuse uptake, a solitary mass, miliary lesions, or nodules and those on CT include enlargement of >13 cm in cranial-caudal dimension, a mass, or nodules that are neither cystic nor vascular.

Liver Involvement

Liver involvement is demonstrated on FDG-PET by diffuse uptake or mass lesions and on CT by nodules that are neither cystic nor vascular. Clinical enlargement alone, with or without abnormalities of liver function tests, is not adequate. Liver biopsy may be used to confirm the presence of liver involvement in a patient with abnormal liver function tests or when imaging assessment is equivocal, if treatment will be altered on the basis of those results.

Lung Involvement

Lung involvement is demonstrated by FDG-avid pulmonary nodules on FDG-PET and evidence of parenchymal involvement on CT in the absence of other likely causes, especially infection. Lung biopsy may be required to clarify equivocal cases.

Bone Involvement

Bone involvement is demonstrated in FDG-avid lymphoma by avid lesions on FDG-PET. It is quite common for FDG-PET to demonstrate more sites of bone involvement than CT imaging. A bone biopsy from an involved area of bone may be necessary for a precise diagnosis, if treatment decisions depend on the findings.

CNS Involvement

CNS involvement often is heralded by symptoms and is demonstrated by (a) a spinal intradural deposit or spinal cord or meningeal involvement, which may be diagnosed on the basis of the clinical history and findings supported by plain radiology, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) examination with flow cytometry, CT, and/or magnetic resonance (MR) imaging (spinal extradural deposits should be carefully assessed because they may be the result of soft tissue disease that represents extension from bone metastasis or disseminated disease) and (b) parenchymal brain disease demonstrated on CT and/or MR imaging, which may be confirmed by biopsy.

Bone Marrow Involvement

Bone marrow involvement is assessed by an aspiration and bone marrow biopsy. In HL, it is rare to have bone marrow involvement in the absence FDG-avid bone site. Therefore, if FDG-PET/CT is performed as part of the staging evaluation, routine bone marrow aspiration and biopsy is not required for staging of HL. In DLBCL, the presence of FDG-avid skeletal lesions precludes the need for a bone marrow aspiration and biopsy. However, the procedure generally should be done in the absence of FDG-avid bone disease because of the risk of identifying discordant bone marrow involvement by a small cell lymphoma. For the indolent B-cell lymphoma, bone marrow aspiration and biopsy remains the standard for evaluation; however, it may be deferred in patients who are candidates for initial observation. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) and/or flow cytometry may be useful adjuncts to histologic interpretation to determine whether a lymphocytic infiltrate is malignant.

Classification Rules

Clinical Classification

Clinical staging includes careful recording of medical history and physical examination; imaging of chest, abdomen, and pelvis; blood chemistry determination; complete blood count; erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR; in HL); and bone marrow biopsy (if indicated) (Table 103.1).

The basic staging investigation in HL and NHLs includes physical examination; complete blood count; lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) measurement; liver function tests; FDG-PET (for FDG-avid lymphomas); contrast-enhanced CT scan of the neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis; and bone marrow aspiration and biopsy in selected cases. In the Lugano classification, both FDG-PET and diagnostic contrast-enhanced CT scanning are recommended. However, in clinical practice, FDG-PET (for FDG-avid lymphomas) may suffice for diagnosis and response evaluation; however, at the end of treatment, contrast-enhanced CT may be useful if imaging is planned during follow up. In patients presenting with extranodal lymphoma, imaging of the presenting area with either CT or MR is required to define local disease extent. In patients at high risk for occult CNS involvement (see Table 103.1), CSF cytology is performed, preferably with flow cytometry. Biopsies of any suspicious lesions also may be conducted as part of the initial clinical staging, especially if this would alter stage assignment. Bone marrow aspiration and biopsy is recommended in indolent lymphoma and aggressive NHL if there is no FDG-avid skeletal disease. It is not routinely necessary for staging of HL. Liver biopsy is not required as part of clinical staging, unless abnormal liver function occurs in the presence of otherwise limited-stage disease. Clinical staging is repeated at the end of therapy and forms the basis for defining response.

Additionally, baseline evaluation of HIV status should be done in all cases, as this may have an impact on treatment. Evaluation of hepatitis B serology is essential if anti-CD20 therapy is contemplated and is recommended in all cases because of the risk of reactivation of occult hepatitis B with chemotherapy alone. In patients receiving anti-CD20 therapy and for patients with small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL)/chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), baseline quantitative immunoglobulins are helpful to evaluate for the presence of hypogammaglobulinemia.

CLL and SLL are a clinical continuum of a single entity characterized by clonal expansion of small B cells involving the bone marrow, the peripheral blood, and often the lymph nodes. The neoplastic cells express CD5, CD19, CD20, and CD23 on their surface and have low levels of surface immunoglobulin. The diagnosis of CLL requires demonstration of more than 5,000 clonal B lymphocytes per microliter of peripheral blood, with or without demonstrated adenopathy. If there is adenopathy with fewer than 5,000 clonal B lymphocytes per microliter of peripheral blood, the diagnosis is SLL. Fewer than 5,000 clonal CLL-phenotype cells in the peripheral blood in the absence of adenopathy is monoclonal B cell lymphocytosis (MBL). CLL/SLL has a variable clinical course, ranging from an asymptomatic disease requiring no treatment for many years to a rapidly progressive disease necessitating prompt and repeated treatment.

CLL most often is diagnosed in asymptomatic individuals, often when a complete blood count (CBC) is obtained as part of an annual physical examination. Modest lymphocytosis may be the only presenting abnormality and often is overlooked unless it is very high. An initial evaluation should include a clinical history and physical examination, including careful assessment for adenopathy or organomegaly. The diagnosis of CLL/SLL is established by flow cytometry analysis of a peripheral blood sample and/or results of a lymph node biopsy. A bone marrow examination is not required to establish the diagnosis.

Monoclonal B Lymphocytosis (MBL)

MBL is defined as the presence of monoclonal B-cell populations in the peripheral blood of up to 5 x 109/L, usually with the phenotype of CLL, in the absence of lymphomatous features diagnostic of SLL. Found in up to 12% of healthy individuals, in some it may be an extremely small population, but in others it may be associated with clinically evident lymphocytosis. MBL precedes virtually all cases of CLL/SLL. Current practice distinguishes between “low count” MBL, defined as a peripheral blood CLL count of <0.5 x 109/L, from “high count” MBL. Low-count MBL has an extremely small chance of progression and does not require active clinical monitoring. High-count MBL requires routine/yearly follow-up and has phenotypic and genetic/molecular features very similar to those of Rai stage 0 CLL, although IGHV-mutated cases are more frequent in MBL. Recently, a nodal equivalent of MBL was described with a variable rate of progression to CLL/SLL, correlating with nodal size and presence of growth centers. Non-CLL-type MBLs, at least some of which may be closely related to SMZL, are less common, although they recently were recognized.

Pathological Classification

The use of the term pathological staging is reserved for patients who undergo staging laparotomy with an explicit intent to assess the presence of abdominal disease or to define histologic microscopic disease extent in the abdomen. As a result of improved diagnostic imaging, staging laparotomy and pathological staging generally are no longer performed.

103.1 Recommendations for the diagnostic evaluation of patients with lymphoma

  1. Mandatory procedures
    1. Biopsy (preferably excisional), with interpretation by a qualified pathologist. Diagnosis from a core biopsy should be based on multiple core biopsies. Appropriate IHC and ancillary studies should be performed to establish a diagnosis.13
    2. History, with special attention to the presence and duration of fever, night sweats, and unexplained loss of 10% or more of body weight in the previous 6 months (B symptoms should be recorded in the medical record; in HL, they are part of staging)
    3. Physical examination
    4. Laboratory evaluation
      1. Complete blood cell count and platelet count with differential and slide review
      2. ESR (HL patients)
      3. Comprehensive metabolic panel (electrolytes, blood urea nitrogen [BUN], creatinine, calcium, aspartate transaminase [AST; serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT)], alanine transaminase [ALT; serum glutamic-pyruvic transaminase (SGPT)], bilirubin, total protein, albumin, alkaline phosphatase
      4. LDH, phosphorus, uric acid
      5. HIV testing
      6. Hepatitis B core antibody and hepatitis B surface antigen, especially in patients being considered for anti-CD20 therapy
    5. Radiographic examination
      1. CT of neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis with intravenous (IV) contrast (if safe)
      2. Functional (metabolic) imaging with FDG-PET
    6. Bone marrow aspiration and biopsy in selected cases
  1. Examples of ancillary procedures
    1. Plain bone radiographs and/or MR imaging in patients with bone disease on functional imaging to evaluate for fracture
    2. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, and/or GI series in patients with GI presentations
    3. MR imaging of the spine in patients with suspected leptomeningeal disease
    4. MR imaging of the brain in patients with cranial nerve palsy or suspicion of leptomeningeal or parenchymal brain disease
    5. CSF cytology with flow cytometry in patients with
      1. DLBCL
        1. CNS risk score*14 4-6
        2. CNS risk score 2-3 and double expressor (BCL2 and MYC by IHC)14
        3. HIV infection
        4. Testicular involvement15
        5. Breast involvement16
        6. Children
      2. Burkitt lymphoma

*CNS risk score: 1 point for each of the following risk factors: age >60 years; performance status (PS) 2; LDH greater than upper limit of normal; two or more extralymphatic sites; Stage III/IV; adrenal or renal involvement.

Registry Data Collection Variables
  1. Size of the largest mass in millimeters for all stages; essential for Stages I and II
  2. CLL/SLL: (should always be abstracted as lymphoma per expert panel)
    1. ALC>5,000 cells/μL
    2. Adenopathy: presence of lymph nodes >1.5 cm on PE
    3. Organomegaly: enlarged liver and/or spleen on PE
    4. Anemia: Hgb <11.0 g/dL
    5. Thrombocytopenia: Plt <100,000/μL

Prognostic Factors

Prognostic Factors Required for Stage Grouping

Stage is only one component in clinical prognostication. Clinical prognostic models have become the cornerstone for categorization of patients into various risk groups and in some cases, to guide therapy. However, the clinical prognostic models vary by lymphoma histology. In addition, important insights have been gained into the biology of the lymphoid neoplasms that also have had a profound impact on outcome and an emerging impact on therapy. These important factors for determination of clinical risk are discussed by disease entity.

Although SLL and CLL represent different clinical presentations of the same disease, traditionally they have been staged by using distinct staging systems. SLL generally was staged with Ann Arbor staging and now is staged with the Lugano classification. For CLL, two staging systems are commonly used: the Rai and Binet staging systems. Both are based on physical examination and CBC measurement. CT scans are not required for application of these staging systems. However, in clinical practice, CT scans commonly are performed. In most cases, this information is not used to determine CLL stage but may indicate more extensive disease than appreciated by physical examination and may influence treatment decisions. CT may be used to evaluate the spleen and peripheral nodes in an obese patient if the physical examination is limited. A finding of retroperitoneal or mesenteric adenopathy on CT does not alter stage. The modified Rai system is predominant in North America, whereas the Binet system is in wide use outside the United States. These staging systems provide prognostic information and also guide decisions regarding the start of therapy.

Modified Rai staging system (mainly used in North America)
StageRiskFindingsSurvival (mo)
0LowLymphocytosis onlygreater than 120
IIntermediate+ Adenopathy95
IIIntermediate+ Enlarged spleen and/or liver72
IIIHighLymphocytosis + Hgb less than 11 g/dL30
IVHighLymphocytosis + Plt less than 100,000/μL30
Binet staging system
StageFindingsSurvival (mo)
ALymphocytosis onlygreater than 120
B+ Adenopathy95
C+ Enlarged spleen and/or liver72

Absolute lymphocyte count (ALC)

Definition: ALC >5,000 cells/μL

Clinical significance: SLL with ALC >5,000 cells/μL is CLL and should be staged as such.

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

Adenopathy

Definition: Presence of lymph nodes >1.5 cm on physical examination (PE)

Clinical significance: Defines stage

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

Organomegaly

Definition: Enlarged liver and/or spleen on PE

Clinical significance: Defines stage

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

Anemia

Definition: Hgb <11.0 g/dL

Clinical significance: Defines stage

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

Thrombocytopenia

Definition: Platelets (Plt) <100,000/μL

Clinical significance: Defines stage

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

Additional Factors Recommended for Clinical Care

The modern era of prognostic markers in SLL/CLL is based on two key findings: recurrent cytogenetic abnormalities detected by FISH and the correlation of outcome with IGHV mutation status. Karyotypic analysis of SLL/CLL classically has been associated with limited results, because metaphases have been obtained in only 40-50% of cases secondary to the low mitotic rate. A landmark study evaluating a panel of FISH probes identified four recurrent abnormalities in SLL/CLL: del(11q), del(13q), trisomy 12, and del(17p).17 The del(13q) was the most common abnormality (occurring in 18-54% of cases) and is associated with a favorable OS (median, 11-15 years). Patients with trisomy 12 (occurring in 14-19%) had a median OS similar to that of patients with a normal FISH study (median, 10 years). Patients with del(11q) (11-20%) had a median OS of 6 to 9 years. Those with del(17p) (6-16% of patients) had the worst outcome, with a median OS of 2 to 4 years. In addition to del(17p), TP53 mutation was shown to be prognostic in CLL, as was mutation of ATM, which is almost invariably lost in del(11q). Neither trisomy 12 nor del(13q) as sole abnormalities drive treatment decisions and therefore are not included in this section.

IGHV Mutation Status. The role of IGHV mutation status is well established in SLL/CLL.18,19 This reflects the fact that some CLLs develop directly from naïve B cells and express a germline IGHV whereas others are derived from B cells that have transited through the germinal center (IGHV mutated). Evaluation of ZAP70 expression by flow cytometry has been suggested as a surrogate for IGHV testing. However, the results of ZAP70 flow cytometry may vary from laboratory to laboratory, and IHGV mutation testing is now readily available commercially. The cutoff for mutation is 2%, which reliably identifies a favorable IGHV-mutant group with a superior OS (median, >20 years) compared with the IGHV germline patients (median, 7-10 years). IGHV is invariant, thus needs to be tested only once during the course of the disease. It is an important predictor of time for first therapy.20 Notably, CLL with a rearranged VH3-21 has an aggressive course if the gene is germline or mutated.21

del(17p)/TP53 Mutation. As noted earlier, the finding of del(17p) by FISH is associated with a poor OS. Furthermore, this finding has been associated with a short time to initial therapy, short progression-free survival (PFS) and chemotherapy resistance.22-24 The incidence of del(17p) and TP53 mutation increases in relapsed/refractory disease, and reassessment of the tumor is appropriate if therapy is being considered. TP53 mutations also independently predict adverse outcome in CLL, including short time to initial therapy, PFS, OS, and chemotherapy resistance.25-28 New therapies approved for treatment of SLL/CLL, namely idelalisib and ibrutinib, both B-cell pathway inhibitors, have demonstrated activity in the treatment of cases with del(17p) and TP53 mutation.29,30 Additional agents (including venetoclax) have been identified that are active in patients with del(17p) and/or TP53 mutations. Therefore, obtaining this information is essential for treatment selection.

del(11q)/ATM Mutation. Cases of SLL/CLL with del(11q) have a poor prognosis and are associated with extensive peripheral, abdominal, and mediastinal adenopathy.31 Cases with del(11q) are more likely to be associated with germline IGHV. The del(11q) almost invariably involves deletion of the ATM gene, and mutation of ATM also has been associated with poor outcome.32 Cases with del(11q) are relatively resistant to treatment with fludarabine.23 In the LRF CLL4 trial, the addition of cyclophosphamide to fludarabine significantly increased OS compared with fludarabine alone (47% vs. 18.5% at 2 years).33 Furthermore, the addition of rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide significantly enhanced overall response rate, PFS, and OS in del(11q) patients in the CLL8 trial.26 As with del(17p), the incidence of del(11q) increases in patients with relapsed/refractory disease and must be evaluated before planning a course of therapy.

Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS). Clinical outcome in CLL/SLL is influenced by patient fitness. A measure of fitness that has been adopted in the management of patients with CLL/SLL is the CIRS score.34 Several studies used a CIRS score cutoff of >6 to indicate lack of fitness for aggressive chemoimmunotherapy. This scale is used for the selection of therapy.

IGHV mutation status18,19

Definition: Determination by DNA sequencing whether the IGHV is germline (unfavorable) or mutated (favorable)

Clinical significance: Tumors with mutated IGHV are post germinal center and have a favorable outcome.

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

del(17p)17,26,27 26,27,31

Definition: Identification of del(17p) by FISH

Clinical significance: Long-term outcome is generally worse in patients with del(17p); however, it is not adequate as a sole basis for treatment. Associated with resistance to genotoxic therapy.

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

TP53 mutation26-28

Definition: Identification of TP53 mutation by DNA sequencing

Clinical significance: Long-term outcome is generally worse in patients with TP53 mutation; however, it is not adequate as a sole basis for treatment.

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

del(11q)26,31

Definition: Identification of del(11q) by FISH (ATM deletion)

Clinical significance: Associated with inferior outcome; outcome improved by addition of an alkylator to therapy

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

CIRS score

Definition: Fit (6) or unfit (>6)

Clinical significance: Contributes to choice of therapy

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

Several factors are emerging that have prognostic value in patients with CLL/SLL.

Complex Karyotypes. Complex karyotypes, defined as karyotypes with three or more structural abnormalities, are associated with an adverse outcome in SLL/CLL35-38; this complexity is not captured by conventional FISH assays. The value of this prognostic marker is limited by the difficulty in obtaining metaphases with conventional techniques. Stimulated karyotypes with CpG oligonucleotides dramatically increase the yield of conventional cytogenetics in SLL/CLL.39 The importance of complex karyotype recently re-emerged, as it was found to be an important predictor of treatment failure in patients treated with ibrutinib and is independent of TP53 mutation or del(17p).40 In patients with relapsed/refractory CLL, CpG-stimulated karyotype may be an important factor for treatment selection in the future.

Minimal Residual Disease (MRD). Prospective studies have shown that assessment of MRD by multiparameter flow cytometry predicts durability of response, PFS, and OS following treatment with chemoimmunotherapy such as fludarabine/cyclophosphamide/rituximab and bendamustine/rituximab. However, its clinical applicability is limited by the lack of standardized evaluation and lack of therapies specifically for patients with MRD after chemoimmunotherapy. Furthermore, the prognostic value of MRD has not been evaluated extensively with the emerging novel agents, such as phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitors, Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and BH3-mimetics.

CLL-IPI. An international collaboration led by the German CLL Study Group developed a new prognostic index that has excellent discrimination of PFS and OS for patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy. The model was validated in a large independent dataset from the Mayo Clinic. In addition to clinical stage, the index includes several factors known to have an important impact on outcome in patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy: IGHV status, del(17p)/TP53 mutation status, and β2-microglobulin. These factors are weighted based on the hazard ratios from the statistical model. However, this index has not been applied prospectively, and its value in the current era of novel agents has not been evaluated.

Complex karyotype40

Definition: Conventional or CpG-stimulated karyotype with three or more abnormalities

Clinical significance: Predicts clinical resistance to ibrutinib

AJCC Level of Evidence: III

MRD

Definition:MRD negative is defined as inability to detect CLL-like cells with a sensitivity of 1 in 10-4 by multiparameter flow cytometry

Clinical significance: Predicts PFS and OS in patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy

AJCC Level of Evidence: I

CLL-IPI

Definition: 10-point scoring system:TP53 mutation or del(17p), 4 points; IGHV germline status, 2 points, β2-microglobulin >3.5 mg/dL, 2 points; Binet B/C or Rai I-IV, 1 point; age >65, 1 point

Low risk: 0-1 points; 5-y survival 93%Intermediate risk: 2-3 points; 5-y survival 79%High risk: 4-6 points; 5-y survival 64%Very high risk: 7-10 points; 5-y survival 23%

Clinical significance: Modified staging system with superior predictive power compared with Rai/Binet staging system for chemoimmunotherapy

AJCC Level of Evidence: III

Risk Assessment

Risk Assesment Models

Risk assessment models and prognostic tools play an important role in cancer medicine because they provide a mechanism to integrate disparate data elements into a process that leads to decreased prognostic heterogeneity. Such processes are useful for (1) identifying and characterizing important prognostic factors, (2) improving prognostic predictions for individual patients, and (3) designing, conducting, and analyzing clinical trials.41 The most common type of prognostic tool is a prognostic calculator that provides time-specific outcome (e.g., 5-year OS) probability predictions for individual patients based on their demographic, clinical, and tumor characteristics. The prognostic nomogram developed by Yang et al42 is an example of a risk calculator. Another type of prognostic tool is a prognostic classifier that places patients into ordered prognostic risk classes (either directly or based on cutoffs for individual probability estimates). The remaining tools referenced in this chapter (e.g., IPI, MIPI, FLIPI, and CLL-IPI) are prognostic classifiers. The AJCC Precision Medicine Core (PMC) developed and published criteria for critical evaluation of prognostic calculators,43 which are presented and discussed in Chapter 4. The prognostic nomogram developed by Yang et al42 meets all but one of the AJCC PMC criteria because it lacks discussion of how missing data were treated.

Stage Prognostic

Lugano Classification for Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma4
StageStage description
Limited stage
IInvolvement of a single lymphatic site (i.e., nodal region, Waldeyer's ring, thymus, or spleen)
IESingle extralymphatic site in the absence of nodal involvement (rare in HL)
IIInvolvement of two or more lymph node regions on the same side of the diaphragm
IIEContiguous extralymphatic extension from a nodal site with or without involvement of other lymph node regions on the same side of the diaphragm
II bulky*Stage II with disease bulk**
Advanced stage
IIIInvolvement of lymph node regions on both sides of the diaphragm; nodes above the diaphragm with spleen involvement
IV

Diffuse or disseminated involvement of one or more extralymphatic organs, with or without associated lymph node involvement

or noncontiguous extralymphatic organ involvement in conjunction with nodal Stage II disease

or any extralymphatic organ involvement in nodal Stage III disease

Stage IV includes any involvement of the CSF, bone marrow, liver, or multiple lung lesions (other than by direct extension in IIE disease).

*Stage II bulky may be considered either early- or advanced-stage disease based on lymphoma histology and prognostic factors (see discussion of HL prognostic factors).

**The definition of disease bulk varies according to the lymphoma histology. In the Lugano classification,4 bulk in HL is defined as a mass greater than one third of the thoracic diameter on CT of the chest or a mass greater than 10 cm. For NHL, the recommended definitions of bulk vary by lymphoma histology. In follicular lymphoma, 6 cm has been suggested based on the FLIPI-2 and its validation.10,11 In DLBCL, cutoffs ranging from 5 to 10 cm have been used, although 10 cm is recommended.12

HL uses an A or B designation with stage group. A/B is no longer used in NHL.

Bibliography

  1. Lister TA, Crowther D, Sutcliffe SB, et al. Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin's disease: Cotswolds meeting. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7(11):1630-1636.
  2. Carbone PP, Kaplan HS, Musshoff K, Smithers DW, Tubiana M. Report of the Committee on Hodgkin's Disease Staging Classification. Cancer Res. 1971;31(11):1860-1861.
  3. Rosenberg SA. Validity of the Ann Arbor staging classification for the non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. Cancer Treat Rep. 1977;61(6):1023-1027.
  4. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(27):3059-3068.
  5. Hamlin PA, Zelenetz AD, Kewalramani T, et al. Age-adjusted International Prognostic Index predicts autologous stem cell transplantation outcome for patients with relapsed or primary refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. 2003;102(6):1989-1996.
  6. Moskowitz CH, Kewalramani T, Nimer SD, Gonzalez M, Zelenetz AD, Yahalom J. Effectiveness of high dose chemoradiotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for patients with biopsy-proven primary refractory Hodgkin's disease. British journal of haematology. 2004;124(5):645-652.
  7. Moskowitz CH, Matasar MJ, Zelenetz AD, et al. Normalization of pre-ASCT, FDG-PET imaging with second-line, non-cross-resistant, chemotherapy programs improves event-free survival in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2012;119(7):1665-1670.
  8. Perales MA, Jenq R, Goldberg JD, et al. Second-line age-adjusted International Prognostic Index in patients with advanced non-Hodgkin lymphoma after T-cell depleted allogeneic hematopoietic SCT. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2010;45(9):1408-1416.
  9. Kumar A, Burger IA, Zhang Z, et al. Definition of bulky disease in early stage Hodgkin lymphoma in computed tomography era: prognostic significance of measurements in the coronal and transverse planes. Haematologica. 2016.
  10. Arcaini L, Rattotti S, Gotti M, Luminari S. Prognostic assessment in patients with indolent B-cell lymphomas. ScientificWorldJournal. 2012;2012:107892.
  11. Federico M, Bellei M, Marcheselli L, et al. Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index 2: a new prognostic index for follicular lymphoma developed by the international follicular lymphoma prognostic factor project. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(27):4555-4562.
  12. Pfreundschuh M, Ho AD, Cavallin-Stahl E, et al. Prognostic significance of maximum tumour (bulk) diameter in young patients with good-prognosis diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma treated with CHOP-like chemotherapy with or without rituximab: an exploratory analysis of the MabThera International Trial Group (MInT) study. The lancet oncology. 2008;9(5):435-444.
  13. Swerdlow SH, International Agency for Research on Cancer., World Health Organization. WHO classification of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2008.
  14. Savage KJ, Zeynalova S, Kansara RR, et al. Validation of a Prognostic Model to Assess the Risk of CNS Disease in Patients with Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma. Blood. 2014;124(21):Abract 394.
  15. Vitolo U, Chiappella A, Ferreri AJ, et al. First-line treatment for primary testicular diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with rituximab-CHOP, CNS prophylaxis, and contralateral testis irradiation: final results of an international phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(20):2766-2772.
  16. Hosein PJ, Maragulia JC, Salzberg MP, et al. A multicentre study of primary breast diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the rituximab era. British journal of haematology. 2014;165(3):358-363.
  17. Dohner H, Stilgenbauer S, Benner A, et al. Genomic aberrations and survival in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2000;343(26):1910-1916.
  18. Damle RN, Wasil T, Fais F, et al. Ig V gene mutation status and CD38 expression as novel prognostic indicators in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood. 1999;94(6):1840-1847.
  19. Hamblin TJ, Davis Z, Gardiner A, Oscier DG, Stevenson FK. Unmutated Ig V(H) genes are associated with a more aggressive form of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood. 1999;94(6):1848-1854.
  20. Wierda WG, O'Brien S, Wang X, et al. Multivariable model for time to first treatment in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(31):4088-4095.
  21. Thorselius M, Krober A, Murray F, et al. Strikingly homologous immunoglobulin gene rearrangements and poor outcome in VH3-21-using chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients independent of geographic origin and mutational status. Blood. 2006;107(7):2889-2894.
  22. Dohner H, Fischer K, Bentz M, et al. p53 gene deletion predicts for poor survival and non-response to therapy with purine analogs in chronic B-cell leukemias. Blood. 1995;85(6):1580-1589.
  23. Byrd JC, Gribben JG, Peterson BL, et al. Select high-risk genetic features predict earlier progression following chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine and rituximab in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: justification for risk-adapted therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(3):437-443.
  24. Wattel E, Preudhomme C, Hecquet B, et al. p53 mutations are associated with resistance to chemotherapy and short survival in hematologic malignancies. Blood. 1994;84(9):3148-3157.
  25. Dicker F, Herholz H, Schnittger S, et al. The detection of TP53 mutations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia independently predicts rapid disease progression and is highly correlated with a complex aberrant karyotype. Leukemia. 2009;23(1):117-124.
  26. Hallek M, Fischer K, Fingerle-Rowson G, et al. Addition of rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9747):1164-1174.
  27. Seiffert M, Dietrich S, Jethwa A, Glimm H, Lichter P, Zenz T. Exploiting biological diversity and genomic aberrations in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leuk Lymphoma. 2012;53(6):1023-1031.
  28. Zenz T, Vollmer D, Trbusek M, et al. TP53 mutation profile in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: evidence for a disease specific profile from a comprehensive analysis of 268 mutations. Leukemia. 2010;24(12):2072-2079.
  29. Furman RR, Sharman JP, Coutre SE, et al. Idelalisib and rituximab in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(11):997-1007.
  30. O'Brien S, Jones JA, Coutre S, et al. Efficacy and safety of ibrutinib in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic leukemia with 17p deletion: Results from the phase II RESONATE™-17 trial. Blood. 2014;124(21):327-327.
  31. Dohner H, Stilgenbauer S, James MR, et al. 11q deletions identify a new subset of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia characterized by extensive nodal involvement and inferior prognosis. Blood. 1997;89(7):2516-2522.
  32. Rossi D, Gaidano G. ATM and chronic lymphocytic leukemia: mutations, and not only deletions, matter. Haematologica. 2012;97(1):5-8.
  33. Oscier D, Wade R, Davis Z, et al. Prognostic factors identified three risk groups in the LRF CLL4 trial, independent of treatment allocation. Haematologica. 2010;95(10):1705-1712.
  34. Linn BS, Linn MW, Gurel L. Cumulative illness rating scale. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 1968;16(5):622-626.
  35. Dierlamm J, Michaux L, Criel A, Wlodarska I, Van den Berghe H, Hossfeld DK. Genetic abnormalities in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and their clinical and prognostic implications. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 1997;94(1):27-35.
  36. Juliusson G, Gahrton G. Abnormal/normal metaphase ratio and prognosis in chronic B-lymphocytic leukemia. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 1985;18(4):307-313.
  37. Juliusson G, Oscier DG, Fitchett M, et al. Prognostic subgroups in B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia defined by specific chromosomal abnormalities. N Engl J Med. 1990;323(11):720-724.
  38. Juliusson G, Robert KH, Ost A, et al. Prognostic information from cytogenetic analysis in chronic B-lymphocytic leukemia and leukemic immunocytoma. Blood. 1985;65(1):134-141.
  39. Heerema NA, Byrd JC, Dal Cin PS, et al. Stimulation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells with CpG oligodeoxynucleotide gives consistent karyotypic results among laboratories: a CLL Research Consortium (CRC) Study. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2010;203(2):134-140.
  40. Thompson PA, O'Brien SM, Wierda WG, et al. Complex karyotype is a stronger predictor than del(17p) for an inferior outcome in relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients treated with ibrutinib-based regimens. Cancer. 2015;121(20):3612-3621.
  41. Halabi S, Owzar K. The importance of identifying and validating prognostic factors in oncology. Paper presented at: Seminars in oncology2010.
  42. Yang Y, Zhang YJ, Zhu Y, et al. Prognostic nomogram for overall survival in previously untreated patients with extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal-type: a multicenter study. Leukemia. 2015;29(7):1571-1577.
  43. Kattan MW, Hess KR, Amin MB, et al. American Joint Committee on Cancer acceptance criteria for inclusion of risk models for individualized prognosis in the practice of precision medicine. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2016.