TY - JOUR
T1 - A multimodality work-up of patients with Hypereosinophilia
AU - Hu, Zhihong
AU - Boddu, Prajwal C.
AU - Loghavi, Sanam
AU - Miranda, Roberto N.
AU - Goswami, Maitrayee
AU - Jeffrey, Medeiros L.
AU - Tam, Wayne
AU - Orazi, Attilio
AU - Verstovsek, Srdan
AU - Wang, Sa A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
PY - 2018/11
Y1 - 2018/11
N2 - The work-up of patients with hypereosinophilia (HE) is complex. Following the recently revised World Health Organization criteria, we retrospectively reviewed 125 patients who were referred to us to exclude a neoplastic cause of HE (2003-2016). The clinical laboratory work-up confirmed secondary HE in 25 (20%) patients; myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with rearrangements of PDGFRA (n = 9) or PDGFRB (n = 2) (9%); HE associated with a well-defined myeloid neoplasm in 8 (6%); and abnormal bone marrow and/or molecular genetic abnormalities consistent with chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL), not otherwise specified (NOS) in 21 (17%) patients. For the remaining 60 (48%) patients, a specific diagnosis was not identified, and 56 patients had HE related findings consistent with idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES), while 4 patients who were asymptomatic. With a median follow up of 35.3 months (range, <1-104), patients with CEL, not otherwise specified (NOS) had a median OS of 26.1 months, significantly inferior to patients with idiopathic HES (not reached, P <.01). Thus, our experience in a single tertiary cancer center shows that the work-up of HE following WHO recommendations requires a multimodality-based approach; and a correct diagnosis determines risk stratification and proper patient management. However, the causes of HE remain unknown in approximately half of referred patients, indicating the need for further studies.
AB - The work-up of patients with hypereosinophilia (HE) is complex. Following the recently revised World Health Organization criteria, we retrospectively reviewed 125 patients who were referred to us to exclude a neoplastic cause of HE (2003-2016). The clinical laboratory work-up confirmed secondary HE in 25 (20%) patients; myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with rearrangements of PDGFRA (n = 9) or PDGFRB (n = 2) (9%); HE associated with a well-defined myeloid neoplasm in 8 (6%); and abnormal bone marrow and/or molecular genetic abnormalities consistent with chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL), not otherwise specified (NOS) in 21 (17%) patients. For the remaining 60 (48%) patients, a specific diagnosis was not identified, and 56 patients had HE related findings consistent with idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES), while 4 patients who were asymptomatic. With a median follow up of 35.3 months (range, <1-104), patients with CEL, not otherwise specified (NOS) had a median OS of 26.1 months, significantly inferior to patients with idiopathic HES (not reached, P <.01). Thus, our experience in a single tertiary cancer center shows that the work-up of HE following WHO recommendations requires a multimodality-based approach; and a correct diagnosis determines risk stratification and proper patient management. However, the causes of HE remain unknown in approximately half of referred patients, indicating the need for further studies.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053911319&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053911319&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/ajh.25247
DO - 10.1002/ajh.25247
M3 - Article
C2 - 30105844
AN - SCOPUS:85053911319
SN - 0361-8609
VL - 93
SP - 1337
EP - 1346
JO - American journal of hematology
JF - American journal of hematology
IS - 11
ER -