[Differential diagnosis and diagnostic strategies of lymphadenopathy]

Demographic, clinical and laboratory characteristics for differential diagnosis of peripheral lymphadenopathy (LAP) and the etiologic distribution of LAP in adults; a multicenter, nested case-control study including 1401 patients from Turkey

Peripheral lymphadenopathy (LAP) is an important and common abnormal finding of the physical exam in general medical practice. We aimed to reveal the LAP etiology and demographic, clinical and laboratory variables that may be useful in the differential evaluation of LAP. This multicenter, nested case-control study including 1401 patients between 2014 and 2019 was conducted in 19 tertiary teaching and research hospitals from different regions in Turkey. The ratio of infectious, malign and autoimmune/inflammatory diseases was 31.3%, 5% and 0.3%, respectively. In 870 (62%) of patients had nonspecific etiology. Extrapulmonary tuberculosis (n: 235, 16.8%) was the most frequent cause of LAP. The ratio of infective etiology of LAP was significantly lower in patients older than 65 years-old compared to younger patients with the rate of 66.67% and 83.84%, respectively (p 0.016, OR 0.386, 95% Cl 0.186-0.803). The probability of malign etiology was higher both in patients who are older than 45 years-old (p < 0.001, OR 3.23, 95% Cl 1.99-5.26) and older than 65 years-old (p 0.002, OR 3.36, 95% Cl 1.69-6.68). Age, localization and duration of LAP, leukocytosis, anemia, thrombocytopenia, CRP and sedimentation rate were important parameters to differentiate infections. Size of lymph node and splenomegaly in addition to the parameters above were useful parameters for differentiating malign from benign etiology. Despite the improvements in diagnostic tools, reaching a definite differential diagnosis of lymphadenopathy is still challenging. Our results may help clinicians to decide in which cases they need an aggressive workup and set strategies on optimizing the diagnostic approach of adulthood lymphadenopathy.

[Not Available]

Zusammenfassung. Zusammenfassung: Inguinal vergrösserte Lymphknoten stellen nach zervikalen Lymphadenopathien die zweithäufigste Lokalisation regionaler Lymphadenopathien dar. Die Differenzialdiagnose ist breit und geht von harmlosen lokalen Läsionen im Drainagegebiet über Infektionen wie insbesondere sexuell übertragbare Erkrankungen bis hin zu malignen Erkrankungen. Wegweisend im Abklärungsalgorithmus sind insbesondere eine fundierte Anamnese, die Klinik sowie im Weiteren spezifische Laboruntersuchungen und bei begründetem Verdacht oder verbleibender Unklarheit die Feinnadelpunktion bzw. Lymphknotenexzisionsbiopsie. Das folgende CME gibt eine Übersicht über die Differenzialdiagnose und weist eine mögliche Abklärungsstrategie auf.

Lymphoma: current status of clinical and preclinical imaging with radiolabeled antibodies

Lymphoma is a complex disease that arises from cells of the immune system with an intricate pathology. While lymphoma may be classified as Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin, each type of tumor is genetically and phenotypically different and highly invasive tissue biopsies are the only method to investigate these differences. Noninvasive imaging strategies, such as immunoPET, can provide a vital insight into disease staging, monitoring treatment response in patients, and dose planning in radioimmunotherapy. ImmunoPET imaging with radiolabeled antibody-based tracers may also assist physicians in optimizing treatment strategies and enhancing patient stratification. Currently, there are two common biomarkers for molecular imaging of lymphoma, CD20 and CD30, both of which have been considered for investigation in preclinical imaging studies. In this review, we examine the current status of both preclinical and clinical imaging of lymphoma using radiolabeled antibodies. Additionally, we briefly investigate the role of radiolabeled antibodies in lymphoma therapy. As radiolabeled antibodies play critical roles in both imaging and therapy of lymphoma, the development of novel antibodies and the discovery of new biomarkers may greatly affect lymphoma imaging and therapy in the future.