{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05590622182146077, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02750225428313796, 'mean_word_length': 5.683734939759036, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Utility of flow cytometry in subtyping composite and sequential lymphoma

Composite lymphoma (CL) is defined as more than one distinct lymphoma variant occurring in the same anatomic site, and sequential lymphoma (SL) is defined as different lymphoma variants occurring at different sites or at different times in the same patient. The utility of flow cytometry immunophenotyping in evaluating CL and SL has only been investigated in a few single‐case studies. To further define the utility of flow cytometry in evaluating these tumors, records were searched at two institutions. Cases representing high‐grade progression of low‐grade lymphoma were excluded. For each CL/SL, clinical data was obtained and morphology was evaluated in routinely processed H&E‐stained tissue sections. Tumor components were subtyped using revised European‐American classification (REAL) criteria. Follicle center components were graded using modified Rappaport criteria. Immunophenotype was determined using two‐color flow cytometry and paraffin‐section immunostains. Four cases were identified. Case 1, nodal follicle center, follicular, grade III plus marginal zone CL, showed two discrete populations of monoclonal B‐cells that differed in their expression of CD10. Case 2, cutaneous lymphoplasmacytoid lymphoma followed by mesenteric non‐Hodgkin's lymphoma (lymphoplasmacytoid plus follicle center, follicular, grade III) plus Hodgkin's disease CL, showed CD5–/CD10–/CD19+/kappa+ cells by flow cytometry in both tissue samples. The Hodgkin's disease component showed CD3–/CD15–/CD20–/CD30+ Reed‐Sternberg cell variants in paraffin‐section immunostains. Case 3 represented nodal follicle center lymphoma, follicular, grade I (CD3–/CD5–/CD10–/CD19+/kappa+) followed by cutaneous anaplastic large T‐cell lymphoma (CD2+/CD4+/CD5+/CD19– cells with partial expression of CD3 and CD7). Case 4 represented cutaneous follicle center lymphoma, follicular, grade I (CD5–/CD10+/CD19+/CD23+/lambda+) followed by bone marrow B‐cell small lymphocytic lymphoma (CD5+/CD10–/CD19+/CD23+/kappa+). Results show that flow cytometry is a potentially useful adjunct in characterizing CL and SL. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 13:199–204, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.