2008
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2007.02540.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

T‐ and B‐cell clonally restricted pseudolymphoma in the setting of phytoestrogen therapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A topical estrogen patch has not been previously implicated in the evolution of drug‐associated pseudolymphoma. However, we recently reported a role for phytoestrogens in the evolution of an intraoral pseudolymphoma with both T and B‐cell clonality; we showed a reduction in T lymphocytic proliferative responses when the phytoestrogen at pharmacological concentration was added to lymphocyte cultures 25 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A topical estrogen patch has not been previously implicated in the evolution of drug‐associated pseudolymphoma. However, we recently reported a role for phytoestrogens in the evolution of an intraoral pseudolymphoma with both T and B‐cell clonality; we showed a reduction in T lymphocytic proliferative responses when the phytoestrogen at pharmacological concentration was added to lymphocyte cultures 25 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, we recently reported a role for phytoestrogens in the evolution of an intraoral pseudolymphoma with both T and B-cell clonality; we showed a reduction in T lymphocytic proliferative responses when the phytoestrogen at pharmacological concentration was added to lymphocyte cultures. 25 We use the designation of reversible granulomatous T-cell dyscrasia to emphasize the resemblance of these lesions to MF based not on light microscopic features but phenotypic and molecular characteristics that closely simulate MF. The biopsies in our cases showed significant losses of one or both of CD7 and CD62L and, in one case, of CD5.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%