Extramedullary plasmacytoma (EMP) is an uncommon plasma cell neoplasm results from plasma cell proliferation and consists of monoclonal plasmacytic infiltration, without bone marrow involvement and any other systemic characteristics of multiple myeloma. EMP accounts for 3% of all plasma cell neoplasms and approximately 80% to 90% of EMP involve submucosa of the upper aerodigestive, while scrotal, dermis and retroperitoneal infiltration are very rare. There are no consensus guidelines for treatment, but EMP is highly radiosensitive, surgery may be considered for some sites, but 11 at 30% can progress in multiple myeloma. We report here an exceptional case of recurrent EMP in much localization. It's about a man 72 years old with initially testicular plasmocytoma who generalized the plasmacytic infiltration after 16 months in skin and progressively in mediastinal and retroperitoneal plasmacytoma, without any medullar and bone involvement.

Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), as most of cancers results from a complex interaction between genetic or non genetic factors. Exposures to xenobiotics endogenous or exogenous associated with a reduced individual ability in detoxifying activity, constitutes a risk of developing cancer. It is known that polymorphism of glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) genes affects the detoxification of xenobiotics. Thus, we conducted a case-control study in which 92 patients (Mean age ± SD, 40.62 ± 12.7 years) with CML and 93 healthy unrelated controls (Mean age ± SD, 41.38 ± 13.4 years) have participated. GSTM1 and GSTT1 genotypes were determined by multiplex polymerase chain reaction. Logistic regression was used to assess the possible link between GSTM1 and GSTT1 null genotypes and CML as well as between combined genotypes and CML. GSTM1 null genotype frequency was slightly higher in patients than control (48.9% vs. 40.9%) but, it was not associated with CML (OR 95% CI, 1.4, 0.78-2.48; p = 0.271). Moreover, GSTT1 null genotype frequency showed a similar trend between patients and control (17.4% vs. 9.7%; OR 95% CI, 1.97, 0.82-4.71; p = 0.13). Surprisingly, GSTT1 null genotype was significantly associated with the risk of CML in males (OR 95% CI, 5, 1.25-20.1; p = 0.023). The combined GSTM1 present/GSTT1 null genotype was found to have a limited effect against the risk of CML (OR 95% CI, 0.3, 0.08-0.99; p = 0.049). Our findings have shown that GSTT1 null genotype might be a risk factor of CML in males. While, GSTT1 present genotype might be considered as protective against CML. However, further studies with a large sample size are needed to confirm our findings.

The glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) are phase II xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes known to be involved in the detoxification of carcinogens and anticancer drugs. Individual genetic variation linked to inherited polymorphisms of GSTT1 and GSTM1 leading to a complete loss of enzyme activity could expose subjects to develop cancer or to induce drug resistance. Indeed, despite the impressive results obtained with the imatinib, some patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) fail to achieve the expected results or develop resistance. The present study aimed to examine the impact of GSTT1 and GSTM1 polymorphisms on the response to imatinib in patients with CML. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction was used to detect the genotypes of GSTT1 and GSTM1 in 60 CML patients. We found that side effects were more frequent in patients carrying GSTT1 null when compared to GSTT1 present carriers (31 vs. 16.6 %; χ (2) = 6.2; p = 0.013). The loss of hematologic response was statistically greater in patients carrying the combined genotype GSTT1 present/GSTM1 present (26.3 %) when compared to GSTT1 null/GSTM1 present (12.8 %), GSTT1 present/GSTM1 null (8.3 %) and GSTT1 null/GSTM1 null (0 %), (χ (2) = 18.85; p < 0.001). The complete cytogenetic response was higher in patients harboring the GSTT1 null/GSTM1 null (75 %) compared with GSTT1 null/GSTM1 present (55.6 %), GSTT1 present/GSTM1 null (50 %) and GSTT1 present/GSTM1 present (47.8). On the other hand, the frequency of none cytogenetic responders was more common in patients carrying GSTT1 present/GSTM1 present (34.8 %) when compared to other genotype combinations (χ (2) = 20.99; p = 0.05). Moreover, the GSTT1 present/GSTM1 present appeared to be associated with a final dose of 600 or 800 mg of imatinib, but not significantly. Based on these findings, we find that the interaction between GSTT1 and GSTM1 seems to influence treatment outcome in patients with CML. Therefore, further investigations are required to confirm these results, for better genotype-phenotype correlation.

In the spite of the impressive results achieved with imatinib in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients, differences in patient's response are observed, which may be explained by interindividual genetic variability. It is known that cytochrome P450 enzymes play a major role in the metabolism of imatinib. The present study aimed to understand the functional impact of CYP2B6 15631G>T polymorphism on the response of imatinib in CML patients and its relation to CML susceptibility. We have genotyped CYP2B6 G15631T in 48 CML patients and 64 controls by PCR-RFLP. CYP2B6 15631G>T was not found to be a risk factor for CML (OR 95 % CI, 1.12, 0.6-2, p > 0.05). Hematologic response loss was higher in patients with 15631GG/TT genotype when compared with 15631GT (36.8 vs. 13.8 %; X (2) = 3.542, p = 0.063). Complete cytogenetic response was higher in 15631GG/GT genotype groups when compared with 15631TT (X (2) = 3.298, p = 0.024). Primary cytogenetic resistance was higher in patients carrying 15631GG/TT genotype when compared with 15631GT carriers (52.6 vs. 17.2 %; X (2) = 6.692, p = 0.010). Furthermore, side effects were more common for patients carrying 15631GG genotypes when compared with GT/TT carriers (36 vs. 13.8 %; X (2) = 8.3, p = 0.004). In light of our results, identification of 15631G>T polymorphism in CML patients might be helpful to predict therapeutic response to imatinib.