Zhengzhou University First Affiliated Hospital, Zhengzhou City, Henan Province, China.
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2020 Jan;24(17):8947-8956. doi: 10.26355/eurrev_202001_22836.
In 2016 WHO classification, EBV +DLBCL of the elderly was replaced by EBV+ DLBCL NOS. This is due to the fact that many young patients of EBV+ DLBCL were found in recent years.
In this study, we retrospectively analyzed clinical features and survival outcomes of EBV positive DLBCL patients in different age groups. All the patients treated at a single center.
When we use different ages (40, 50 and 60 years old) as cutoffs, the prevalence of EBV positive DLBCL was 12.0%, 12.3% and 13.0% in younger patients and 19.0%, 15.4% and 13.8% in elder patients respectively. Whatever the age cutoff was, EBV positive associated with unfavorable clinical prognosis in elder groups. When we use 40 and 50 years old as age cutoffs, poor impacts of EBV positive on overall survival and progression-free survival were observed only in elder patients, but not in younger patients. It should be noted that when we use 60 years old as age cutoff, the results were the opposite.
EBV+ DLBCL patients with age of 40 to 60 years old showed poorer prognostic features than EBV- DLBCL patients; however, patients in other age groups did not show evident differences in prognosis between EBV+ DLBCL patients and EBV- DLBCL patients. This finding was not reported before.
在 2016 年 WHO 分类中，老年 EBV+DLBCL 被替换为 EBV+DLBCLNOS。这是因为近年来发现了许多年轻的 EBV+DLBCL 患者。
本研究回顾性分析了不同年龄组 EBV 阳性 DLBCL 患者的临床特征和生存结局。所有患者均在单中心治疗。
当我们使用不同的年龄（40、50 和 60 岁）作为截止值时，年轻患者中 EBV 阳性 DLBCL 的患病率分别为 12.0%、12.3%和 13.0%，老年患者中分别为 19.0%、15.4%和 13.8%。无论年龄截止值如何，EBV 阳性与老年组不良的临床预后相关。当我们使用 40 岁和 50 岁作为年龄截止值时，只有老年患者中 EBV 阳性对总生存和无进展生存的不良影响明显，而年轻患者中则不明显。值得注意的是，当我们使用 60 岁作为年龄截止值时，结果则相反。
年龄在 40 至 60 岁的 EBV+DLBCL 患者比 EBV-DLBCL 患者预后更差；然而，其他年龄组的患者在 EBV+DLBCL 患者和 EBV-DLBCL 患者之间的预后差异不明显。这一发现以前没有报道过。
