Report on a workshop convened to discuss the pathological and staging classifications of gastrointestinal tract lymphoma

Abstract

It was considered timely to review the pathological and staging classifications of GI tract lymphoma. This meeting specifically did not address the question of treatment; the management of GI tract lymphoma could perhaps form the basis for a further workshop. The following recommendations were made: to adopt the Isaacson histological classification, that all patients with GI tract lymphoma be investigated uniformly, to record the prognostic factors described above, to use the staging classification shown above. It is hoped that these recommendations will be taken into account in the design of future clinical trials of therapy for GI tract lymphoma.

Type II enteropathy‐associated T‐cell lymphoma: A multicenter analysis from the Asia Lymphoma Study Group

“…Staging procedures included laparotomy, computed tomography (CT) or 18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-CT, and bilateral bone marrow biopsies. The stage was defined by the Lugano staging system for GI lymphomas [13]. The peripheral T cell lymphoma prognostic index (PIT) was determined as described [14].…”

Primary gastrointestinal lymphoma in Japan

“…36 The staging workup included physical examination with inspection of the Waldeyer tonsillar ring, blood cell count and serum chemistry, chest radiographs (all patients), abdominal ultrasound (416 patients), computed tomography scan of the chest and abdomen (334 patients), gallium scintigraphy (248 patients), and bone marrow aspiration or biopsy (357 patients). Endoscopy with biopsy and/or barium studies of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tracts were used to assess the extent of lymphoma.…”

Outcome of patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma of the stomach after gastrectomy: clinicopathologic study and reclassification according to the revised European-American lymphoma classification

“…This system, a pathologic classification of gastrointestinal lymphoma, was based on the updated Kiel classification [22] which had been modified to adopt new categories of NHL. The high-grade MALT lymphoma in this classification [21] is biologically different from the low-grade MALT lymphoma. However, the same name, MALT, is sometimes confusing for clinicians in terms of determining the optimal treatment modality.…”

“…Therefore, we believe the REAL classification to be a more appropriate standard system for gastric NHL classification. At the same time as the REAL classification was introduced, a new, simple classification of gastrointestinal lymphoma was introduced [21], in which MALT lymphoma was classified into two grades, low and high. This system, a pathologic classification of gastrointestinal lymphoma, was based on the updated Kiel classification [22] which had been modified to adopt new categories of NHL.…”