Clinical and Histopathological Characteristics of Cutaneous Lymphoid Hyperplasia: A Comparative Study According to Causative Factors
<p>The clinicopathological features according to T cell- or B cell-dominant lymphocytic infiltration. (<b>a</b>–<b>f</b>) T cell-dominant cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia. (<b>a</b>) Multiple erythematous papules developed in both periauricular areas. (<b>b</b>) Histopathological examination revealed diffuse pandermal lymphocytic infiltration (hematoxylin and eosin stain; magnification, ×40). (<b>c</b>) The cells were mostly composed of small lymphohistiocytes as well as small amounts of eosinophils (hematoxylin and eosin stain; magnification, ×200). Immunohistochemical staining revealed that most lymphocytes showed positivity with (<b>d</b>) CD4, whereas (<b>e</b>) CD8 and (<b>f</b>) CD20 were stained in relatively smaller proportions (×40). (<b>g</b>–<b>l</b>) B-cell-dominant cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia. (<b>g</b>) Multiple erythematous nodules were noted in the chest area after trauma. (<b>h</b>) Skin biopsy analysis showed lymphoid follicular formation in the dermis: hematoxylin and eosin stain; original magnification, ×40; (<b>i</b>) hematoxylin and eosin stain; original magnification, ×200. Lymphocytes were weakly positive for (<b>j</b>) CD4 and (<b>k</b>) CD8 in the immunohistochemical staining, whereas most lymphocytes were densely stained with (<b>l</b>) CD20 (×40).</p> "> Figure 2
<p>The clinicopathological characteristics of cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia after hair dye use; (<b>a</b>,<b>b</b>) The patient had multiple erythematous nodules on his face after hair dye. (<b>c</b>) Skin biopsy reveals nodular and follicular infiltration in the dermis: Hematoxylin-eosin stain; magnification: ×40. Lymphocytes showed weak positivity for CD4 (<b>d</b>) and CD8 (<b>e</b>), while most lymphocytes stained positive with CD20 (<b>f</b>) (×40).</p> "> Figure 3
<p>The clinicopathological characteristics of arthropod-bite reaction; (<b>a</b>) solitary erythematous papule was noticed on the patient’s forearm. (<b>b</b>) Histopathological examination reveals lymphocytic infiltration mostly on the upper dermis. (<b>c</b>) Numerous eosinophils were observed. (b: Hematoxylin-eosin stain; magnification: ×40 c: Hematoxylin-eosin stain; magnification: ×200). Lymphocytes showed positive stains for CD4 (<b>d</b>) and CD8 (<b>e</b>) and weak positive staining for CD20 (<b>f</b>) (×40).</p> "> Figure 4
<p>The clinicopathological features of trauma-associated cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia; (<b>a</b>) multiple erythematous nodules were observed after injection-related trauma. (<b>b</b>) Biopsy specimen of the nodule reveals lymphocytic infiltration into deep dermis and subcutis (hematoxylin-eosin stain; magnification: ×20). Only small portions of lymphocytes showed positive reactivity for CD4 (<b>c</b>) and CD8 (<b>d</b>), while most lymphocytes showed positivity for CD20 (<b>e</b>) (×40).</p> "> Figure 5
<p>The clinicopathological features of drug-induced cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia. (<b>a</b>) Multiple erythematous papules were observed 1 month after taking new drugs. (<b>b</b>) Histopathological examination revealed diffuse lymphocytic infiltration in the whole dermis (hematoxylin and eosin stain; magnification, ×40). Lymphocytes were intensely stained with CD4 (<b>c</b>), whereas fewer than 10% of lymphocytes showed positive reactivity for CD8 (<b>d</b>) and CD20 (<b>e</b>) (×40).</p> ">
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Subjects
2.2. Clinical Variables of Interest
2.3. Histopathology and Immunohistochemistry
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Clinical Manifestations
3.2. Histopathological Features
3.3. Clinical and Histopathological Analysis According to Predominant B or T Cells
3.4. Clinical and Histopathological Analysis According to Causative Factors
3.5. Treatment and Follow-Up
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Viraben, R.; Lamant, L.; Brousset, P. Losartan-associated atypical cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia. Lancet 1997, 350, 1366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crowson, A.N.; Magro, C.M. Antidepressant therapy. A possible cause of atypical cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia. Arch. Dermatol. 1995, 131, 925–929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Erickson, S.P.; Nahmias, Z.; Rosman, I.S.; Sternhell-Blackwell, K.; Musiek, A.C. Sustained remission of recalcitrant cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia after thalidomide treatment. JAAD Case Rep. 2018, 4, 245–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kluger, N.; Vermeulen, C.; Moguelet, P.; Cotten, H.; Koeb, M.H.; Balme, B.; Fusade, T. Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia (pseudolymphoma) in tattoos: A case series of seven patients. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2010, 24, 208–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lanzafame, S.; Micali, G. Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia (pseudolymphoma) secondary to vaccination. Pathologica 1993, 85, 555–561. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Millican, E.A.; Conley, J.A.; Sheinbein, D. Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia related to squaric acid dibutyl ester. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2011, 65, 230–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Porrino-Bustamante, M.L.; Aneiros-Fernandez, J.; Retamero, J.A.; Sanchez-Lopez, J.; Fernandez-Pugnaire, M.A. Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia following vaccine for pollen hyposensitization. Indian J. Dermatol. Venereol. Leprol. 2016, 82, 193–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Recalcati, S.; Vezzoli, P.; Girgenti, V.; Venegoni, L.; Veraldi, S.; Berti, E. Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia associated with Leishmania panamensis infection. Acta Derm. Venereol. 2010, 90, 418–419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mitteldorf, C.; Kempf, W. Cutaneous Pseudolymphoma. Surg. Pathol. Clin. 2017, 10, 455–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bergman, R.; Khamaysi, K.; Khamaysi, Z.; Ben Arie, Y. A study of histologic and immunophenotypical staining patterns in cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2011, 65, 112–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Boudova, L.; Kazakov, D.V.; Sima, R.; Vanecek, T.; Torlakovic, E.; Lamovec, J.; Kutzner, H.; Szepe, P.; Plank, L.; Bouda, J.; et al. Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia and other lymphoid infiltrates of the breast nipple: A retrospective clinicopathologic study of fifty-six patients. Am. J. Dermatopathol. 2005, 27, 375–386. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Magro, C.M.; Crowson, A.N. Drugs with antihistaminic properties as a cause of atypical cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 1995, 32, 419–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, K.; Kelly, R.; Kendrick, V. Nonclonal lymphocytic proliferation in cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia: A flow-cytometric and morphological analysis. Dermatology 1992, 185, 113–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wantzin, G.L.; Thomsen, K.; Ralfkiaer, E. Evolution of cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia to cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. Clin. Exp. Dermatol. 1988, 13, 309–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tsujino, Y.; Dekio, S. Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia: Report of a case in which oral administration of minocycline was effective. J. Dermatol. 2000, 27, 753–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Madhogaria, S.; Carr, R.A.; Gach, J.E. Childhood cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia following feline scratches. Pediatr. Dermatol. 2010, 27, 294–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pham-Ledard, A.; Vergier, B.; Doutre, M.S.; Beylot-Barry, M. Disseminated cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia of 12 years’ duration triggered by vaccination. Dermatology 2010, 220, 176–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Paolino, G.; Vaira, F.; Mercuri, S.R.; Di Nicola, M.R. Fast recognition of Loxosceles rufescens in Italian spider bites to avoid misdiagnosis, alarmism and start a prompt treatment. J. Eur. Acad. Dermatol. Venereol. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Evans, H.L.; Winkelmann, R.K.; Banks, P.M. Differential diagnosis of malignant and benign cutaneous lymphoid infiltrates: A study of 57 cases in which malignant lymphoma had been diagnosed or suspected in the skin. Cancer 1979, 44, 699–717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Clinical Parameters | Number of Patients (%) |
---|---|
Number of patients | 50 |
Men | 24 |
Women | 26 |
Age range, y | 18–82 |
Mean | 53.2 |
Lesion morphology | |
Papules | 17 (34%) |
Nodules | 13 (26%) |
Plaques | 11 (22%) |
Maculopatches | 9 (18%) |
Site of presentation | |
Head and neck | 29 (58%) |
Trunk | 9 (18%) |
Upper extremities | 10 (20%) |
Lower extremities | 6 (12%) |
Number of lesions | |
Solitary | 28 (56%) |
Multiple (at the same anatomic site) | 18 (36%) |
Multiple (at different anatomic sites) | 4 (8%) |
Symptoms | |
Itching | 30 (60%) |
Pain | 2 (4%) |
Tenderness | 4 (8%) |
Asymptomatic | 16 (30%) |
Cause | |
Unknown | 15 |
Hair dye | 7 |
Insect bite | 9 |
Trauma | 14 |
Drug | 5 |
Time to diagnosis, mo | |
Range | 1–205 |
Average | 14.0 |
Histopathological Parameters | Number of Patients (%) |
---|---|
Infiltration pattern | 50 |
Diffuse | 21 (42%) |
Nodular | 21 (42%) |
Band-like | 1 (2%) |
Follicular | 7 (14%) |
Infiltration depth | 50 |
Upper dermis | 11 (22%) |
Lower dermis | 2 (4%) |
Whole dermis | 37 (74%) |
Formation of lymphoid follicle | 7 |
Well-defined structure | 5 (71.4%) |
Not well-defined structure | 2 (28.6%) |
Type of lymphocyte | 50 |
B cell | 20 (40%) |
T cell | 30 (60%) |
Molecular studies | |
IgH rearrangement | 11 |
Positive result | 1 |
Negative result | 10 |
TCR- γ rearrangement | 11 |
Positive result | 1 |
Negative result | 10 |
Clinical Features | T Cell | B Cell | p Value | Histopathological Features | T Cell | B Cell | p Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sex | 0.580 | Infiltration pattern | 0.001 | ||||
Men | 15/30 | 10/20 | |||||
Women | 15/30 | 10/20 | Nodular | 12/30 | 9/20 | ||
Age of diagnosis | 50.8 | 51.6 | 0.874 | Diffuse | 17/30 | 4/20 | |
Causative agents | 0.269 | Follicular | 0/30 | 7/20 | |||
Hair dye | 3/20 | 4/15 | Band-like | 1/30 | 0/20 | ||
Insect bite | 7/20 | 2/15 | Infiltration density | 0.541 | |||
Trauma | 6/20 | 8/15 | |||||
Drug | 4/20 | 1/15 | 1 | 0/30 | 1/20 | ||
Location of the lesion | 2 | 16/30 | 9/20 | ||||
Face | 16/30 | 13/20 | 0.413 | 3 | 14/30 | 10/20 | |
Trunk | 7/30 | 2/20 | 0.285 | Infiltration location | 0.424 | ||
Upper extremity | 4/30 | 6/20 | 0.171 | ||||
Lower extremity | 5/30 | 1/20 | 0.381 | Upper | 7/30 | 4/20 | |
Number of lesions | 0.580 | Lower | 0/30 | 1/20 | |||
Multiple | 17/30 | 10/20 | Pandermal | 23/30 | 15/20 | ||
Single | 13/30 | 10/20 | |||||
Symptoms | 0.170 | Eosinophil counts | 0.740 | ||||
Yes | 19/30 | 17/20 | |||||
No | 11/30 | 3/20 | Score 0 or 1 | 22/30 | 16/20 | ||
Morphology of lesion | 0.001 | Score 2 or 3 | 8/30 | 4/20 | |||
Papuloplaque | 23/50 | 5/20 | Plasma cell counts | 0.600 | |||
Maculopatch | 4/30 | 5/20 | |||||
Nodular | 3/30 | 10/20 | Score 0 or 1 | 29/30 | 20/20 | ||
Time to diagnosis | 21.4 | 29.2 | 0.348 | Score 2 or 3 | 1/30 | ||
Response to treatment | 0.08 | Histiocyte counts | 0.410 | ||||
Complete response | 9/27 | 7/15 | |||||
Partial response | 11/27 | 8/15 | Score 0 or 1 | 25/30 | 18/20 | ||
No response | 7/27 | 0/15 | 0.033 | Score 2 or 3 | 5/30 | 2/20 |
Clinical Parameters | Number of Patients (%) |
---|---|
Follow-up, mo | |
Range | 1–95 |
Mean | 14.0 |
Treatment | |
None | 2 |
Single | 13 |
Multiple | 35 |
Therapy modalities | |
Surgical excision | 8 |
Oral corticosteroids | 9 |
Immunosuppressant | 3 |
Hydroxychloroquine | 4 |
Dapsone | 2 |
Antihistamine | 20 |
Local corticosteroids injection | 19 |
Topical corticosteroids application | 23 |
Topical tacrolimus application | 8 |
Local radiotherapy | 1 |
Clinical course | |
Lost to follow-up | 7 |
Complete resolution | 16 |
Partial regression | 19 |
Maintenance | 7 |
Progression to lymphoma | 1 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Choi, M.E.; Lee, K.H.; Lim, D.J.; Won, C.H.; Chang, S.E.; Lee, M.W.; Choi, J.H.; Lee, W.J. Clinical and Histopathological Characteristics of Cutaneous Lymphoid Hyperplasia: A Comparative Study According to Causative Factors. J. Clin. Med. 2020, 9, 1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9041217
Choi ME, Lee KH, Lim DJ, Won CH, Chang SE, Lee MW, Choi JH, Lee WJ. Clinical and Histopathological Characteristics of Cutaneous Lymphoid Hyperplasia: A Comparative Study According to Causative Factors. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2020; 9(4):1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9041217
Chicago/Turabian StyleChoi, Myoung Eun, Keon Hee Lee, Dong Jun Lim, Chong Hyun Won, Sung Eun Chang, Mi Woo Lee, Jee Ho Choi, and Woo Jin Lee. 2020. "Clinical and Histopathological Characteristics of Cutaneous Lymphoid Hyperplasia: A Comparative Study According to Causative Factors" Journal of Clinical Medicine 9, no. 4: 1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9041217
APA StyleChoi, M. E., Lee, K. H., Lim, D. J., Won, C. H., Chang, S. E., Lee, M. W., Choi, J. H., & Lee, W. J. (2020). Clinical and Histopathological Characteristics of Cutaneous Lymphoid Hyperplasia: A Comparative Study According to Causative Factors. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9(4), 1217. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9041217