↓ Skip to main content

Acute EBV infection masquerading as "In-situ Follicular Lymphoma": a pitfall in the differential diagnosis of this entity

Overview of attention for article published in Diagnostic Pathology, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acute EBV infection masquerading as "In-situ Follicular Lymphoma": a pitfall in the differential diagnosis of this entity
Published in
Diagnostic Pathology, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1746-1596-8-100
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alejandro A Gru, Friederike Kreisel, Eric Duncavage, TuDung T Nguyen, Anjum Hassan, John L Frater

Abstract

We present the case of a 30 year-old man who was referred for evaluation of diffuse lymphadenopathy. Six weeks prior, he noticed darkening of his urine associated with pale stools, nausea and an eventual 30 lb weight loss within a month. The initial laboratory findings showed elevation of the liver enzymes. A CT scan showed mesenteric and periaortic lymphadenopathy with the largest lymph node measuring 2.8 cm. Other laboratory results were otherwise unremarkable (including a normal LDH) with the exception of positive serum antibodies against Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) associated antigens (IgM+ and IgG+). An excisional biopsy of 4 of the small neck lymph nodes showed a normal architecture with prominent follicles and an intact capsule. But, by immunohistochemistry two of the follicles showed aberrant coexpression of BCL-2, in addition to CD10 and BCL-6. In-situ hybridization for early Epstein-Barr virus mRNA (EBER) and immunohistochemistry for latent membrane protein-1 (LMP-1) stained both scattered positive cells, as well as BCL-2 positive B-cells. Although an original diagnosis of in-situ follicular lymphoma was favored at an outside facility, additional interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) studies for t(14;18);(IGH-BCL2) rearrangement (performed on the BCL-2 + follicles microdissected from the tissue block; Abott probe dual colour fusion) and molecular studies (IGH gene rearrangement by PCR, also performed on the microdissected follicles) were negative. Serologic studies (positive EBV antibodies) and immunostains in conjunction with the molecular studies confirmed the reactive nature of the changes. Our case also shows direct immunopathogenic evidence of BCL-2 expression among the EBV-infected cells, which has to our knowledge not been previously documented in vivo. A diagnosis of EBV infection should, therefore, be considered when confronted with BCL-2 expression in germinal centers, particularly in younger individuals, as the diagnosis of FLIS may lead to extensive and invasive haematologic work-ups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 25%
Other 4 20%
Student > Bachelor 4 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Researcher 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 55%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 June 2013.
All research outputs
#17,690,153
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Diagnostic Pathology
#671
of 1,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,409
of 196,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diagnostic Pathology
#10
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,120 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 196,823 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.