4.5 Article

Natural Killer Cell Activity Test Helps to Suspect Aggressive Natural Killer Cell Leukemia - Diagnostic Challenge

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
Volume 20, Issue 2, Pages 206-210

Publisher

IVYSPRING INT PUBL
DOI: 10.7150/ijms.77583

Keywords

Aggressive natural killer cell leukemia; Epstein-Barr virus; Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis; NK cell activity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the clinicopathological characteristics of difficult-to-diagnose aggressive natural killer cell leukemia (ANKL) were assessed. Nine patients with ANKL were diagnosed during a ten-year period. The patients exhibited aggressive clinical courses and underwent bone marrow (BM) studies. The BM examination showed infiltration of neoplastic cells, positive for CD2, CD56, cytoplasmic CD3, and EBV in situ hybridization.
Aggressive natural killer cell leukemia (ANKL) is a rare disease with an aggressive clinical course. We aimed to assess the clinicopathological characteristics of the difficult to diagnose ANKL. During ten years, nine patients with ANKL were diagnosed. All the patients exhibited aggressive clinical course and underwent the BM study to rule out lymphoma and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH). BM examination showed varying degrees of infiltration of neoplastic cells, which were mainly positive for CD2, CD56, cytoplasmic CD3 and EBV in situ hybridization. Five BM aspirates showed histiocytic proliferation with active heomphagocytosis. Normal or increased NK cell activity test results were obtained from 3 patients who were available for testing. Four had multiple BM studies until diagnosis. An aggressive clinical course and positive EBV in situ hybridization, often with associated secondary HLH, should raise the suspicion of an ANKL. Conducting additional supplementary tests such as NK cell activity and NK cell proportion would be helpful for the diagnosis of ANKL.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available