Castleman disease: application of modern classification in a Canadian center
Rattachement africain : ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: CD (Castleman disease) is a rare and heterogeneous condition that poses a diagnostic and management challenge. Classification of CD has changed dramatically in recent years. This study aims to describe our experience with diagnosis and treatment of CD at a center in Canada. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of our cohort of CD patients evaluated and treated at the University of British Columbia between 2016-2025. RESULTS: A total of 23 patients with biopsy-confirmed CD were included. 7/23 had unicentric CD (UCD), 1/23 had Oligocentric CD (OligoCD), and 15/23 had multicentric CD (MCD). All MCD cases were idiopathic (iMCD) and of these, 3/15 had iMCD-TAFRO (thrombocytopenia, anasarca, fever, reticulin myelofibrosis or renal dysfunction, and organomegaly), 4/15 had iMCD-idiopathic plasmacytic lymphadenopathy (iMCD-IPL), and 8/15 had iMCD-not otherwise specified (iMCD-NOS). Median time to diagnosis was shortest for iMCD-TAFRO (1 month) and longest in iMCD-IPL (82 months). 100% of iMCD-TAFRO, 100% of iMCD-IPL, and 86% of iMCD-NOS cases treated with Siltuximab or Tocilizumab had at least a partial response. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the heterogeneous presentation, natural history, and response to treatment of CD in a North American center, and highlights the importance of awareness of the different subtypes of CD. Key limitations are its retrospective design and small sample size.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Castleman disease: application of modern classification in a Canadian center
- Date Crossref
- 03/08/2026
- Éditeur
- Informa UK Limited
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.