Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical impact of the differentiation profile assessed by immunophenotyping in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Open access
Colomo, Lluı́s, López-Guillermo, Armando, Perales, Marı́a, Rives, Susana, Martı́nez, Antonio, Bosch, Francesc, Colomer, Dolors, Falini, Brunangelo, Montserrat, Emili, Campo, Elı́as·2003·Blood

Abstract

To analyze the relationship between immunophenotyping profile and main clinicopathological features and outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), we studied 128 patients (59 men, 69 women; median age 65 years) consecutively diagnosed with de novo DLBCL in a single institution. Cells from each patient were immunostained with CD20, CD79a, CD5, CD10, bcl-6, MUM1, CD138, bcl-2, p53, p27, and Ki-67 antibodies. Four immunophenotyping profiles were distinguished according to the pattern of differentiation: germinal center–CD10+ (GC-CD10+; CD10+/Bcl-6+/MUM1−/CD138−), germinal center–CD10− (GC-CD10−; CD10−/Bcl-6+/ MUM1−/CD138−), post–germinal center (pGC; CD10−/bcl-6±/ MUM1+/CD138−), and plasmablastic (CD10−/bcl-6−/MUM1+/CD138+). Rearrangement of bcl-2 was studied by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in 57 patients. Single-antigen expression was as follows: CD5, 2%; CD10, 21%; bcl-6, 72%; MUM1, 54%; CD138, 2%; bcl-2, 59%; p53, 28%; p27, 40%. Distribution according to differentiation profiles was as follows: GC-CD10+, 24 patients, GC-CD10-, 30 patients; pGC, 60 patients; plasmablastic, 2 patients; other patterns, 12 patients. The pGC profile was associated with primary nodal presentation and immunoblastic morphology, whereas GC-CD10+ tumors showed disseminated disease, centroblastic morphology, bcl-2 rearrangement, and lower Ki-67 proliferative index. GC-CD10− patients more often presented with primary extranodal origin, early stage, normal lactic acid dehydrogenase (LDH) levels, and low or low/intermediate International Prognostic Index (IPI) scores than the others. However, no significant difference was found in terms of response or overall survival (OS) according to these profiles. Expression of bcl-2 was associated with advanced stage, high or high-intermediate IPI, and poor OS. Expression of bcl-2 maintained predictive value in multivariate analysis, with stage and LDH. In conclusion, differentiation profile was associated with particular clinicopathological features but was not essential to predicting outcome in DLBCL patients.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1182/blood-2002-04-1286

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 48 references

Cited by

See all 391

Metadata

Authors
Colomo, L., López-Guillermo, A., Perales, M., Rives, S., Martı́nez, A., Bosch, F., Colomer, D., Falini, B., Montserrat, E., & Campo, E.
Venue
Blood
Published
2003-01-01
Volume
101
Issue
1
Pages
78-84
ISSN
  • 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-0020
OpenAlex
W2077832231
Cited by
391
References
48
FWCI
11.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Clinical impact of the differentiation profile assessed by immunophenotyping in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1182/blood-2002-04-1286
The paper
Colomo, L., López-Guillermo, A., Perales, M., Rives, S., Martı́nez, A., Bosch, F., Colomer, D., Falini, B., Montserrat, E., & Campo, E. (2003). Clinical impact of the differentiation profile assessed by immunophenotyping in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2002-04-1286

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.