Purpose: To describe the clinical features, histologic findings, flow cytometric immunophenotypes, and molecular profiles of ocular adnexal lymphoid proliferations.
Study design: Prospective noncomparative case series.
Participants: Forty-three patients suspected of having ocular adnexal lymphoid proliferations were biopsied and prospectively evaluated.
Methods: Provisional diagnoses were made on the basis of routine histology and immunohistochemistry for B and T cells. Results of flow cytometric immunophenotyping (FCI) and molecular assessment using polymerase chain reaction for immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH) and TCR gamma chain gene rearrangement and bcl-2/IgH translocation were then incorporated into a final diagnosis. Demographic and clinical outcome data were collected.
Main outcome measures: Final diagnosis based on histology, flow cytometry, and polymerase chain reaction.
Results: Forty-three cases were studied. Final diagnoses included 17 lymphomas, 18 chronic inflammations, 4 reactive lymphoid hyperplasias, and 4 atypical lymphoid infiltrates. Preliminary evaluation accurately categorized all 43 cases as either lymphoma or nonlymphoma. FCI permitted more precise subclassification of the lymphomas according to the Revised European American Lymphoma (REAL) system of nomenclature as follows: eight marginal zone B cell (mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue type), three mantle cell, two follicular, three large cell, and one lymphoplasmacytoid lymphoma. FCI showed a clonal B cell proliferation in 94% (16 of 17) of the lymphomas; FCI identified a clonal B cell population in 4% (1 of 25) of cases of nonlymphomas. Molecular evidence of clonality was identified in 88% (15 of 17) of lymphomas, 39% (7 of 18) of chronic inflammations, and 50% (4 of 8) of reactive lymphoid hyperplasias and atypical lymphoid infiltrates.
Conclusions: The histologic diagnosis of ocular adnexal lymphoid lesions is highly accurate when determined by an experienced pathologist. FCI refines the histologic diagnosis and classification. Results of molecular studies should be interpreted in conjunction with clinical, histologic, and immunophenotyping findings.