Martínez-Piva MM, Zambrano-Franco EA, Kowalczuk AM, Enz PA

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 185-190
PDF size: 335.70 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Atypical variants of mycosis fungoides have a wide spectrum of clinical manifestations, so the diagnosis may be difficult, but its evolution and prognosis is similar to classic mycosis fungoides. Objectives: To describe the epidemiology, prevalence, stages of diagnosis, main laboratory findings, and therapeutic response of the main atypical variants of mycosis fungoides. Material and methods: We evaluated the clinical records of 16 patients treated at our institution between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2015, who had an atypical variant of mycosis fungoides. Results: Of 73 patients with mycosis fungoides, 25.4% belonged to atypical variants. The most frequent variant was poikilodermic (37.5%), then erythrodermic (31.3%), third hypopigmented (18.8%). 62.5% were diagnosed in the early stages and 68.75% had a complete response. Conclusions: Regarding the objectives, we found differences with what was published in the literature. We observed that patients with early stages of mycosis fungoides had a higher rate of complete response than those with late stages, regardless of the mycosis fungoid variant.

REFERENCES

1. Trautinger F, Knobler R, Willemze R, Peris K, Stadler R, Laroche L et al. EORTC consensus recommendations for the treatment of mycosis fungoides/Sezary syndrome. Eur J Cancer. 2006; 42: 1014-1030.

2. Kazakov DV, Burg G, Kempf W. Clinicopathological spectrum of mycosis fungoides. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2004; 18 (4): 397-415.

3. Abeldaño A, Arias M, Ochoa K, Benedetti A, Kien MC, Pellerano G et al. Micosis Fungoide más allá de la forma clásica de Alibert-Bazin: comunicación de diecisiete variantes atípicas. Dermatología Argentina. 2008; 14 (2): 124-133.

4. Olsen EA, Whittaker S, Kim YH, Duvic M, Prince HM, Lessin SR et al. Clinical end points and response criteria in mycosis fungoides and Sezary syndrome: a consensus statement of the International Society for Cutaneous Lymphomas, the United States Cutaneous Lymphoma Consortium, and the Cutaneous Lymphoma Task Force of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29: 2598-2607.

5. Jawed SI, Myskowski PL, Horwitz S, Moskowitz A, Querfeld C. Primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome) Part I. Diagnosis: Clinical and histopathologic features and new molecular and biologic markers. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014; 70 (2): 205.e1-16.

6. Abeldaño A, Arias M, Benedetti A, Ochoa K, Maskin M, Pellerano G. et al. Unusual variants of mycosis fungoides. Skinmed. 2011; 9 (4): 218-222.

7. Günter Burg. Systemic involvement in mycosis fungoides. Clinics in Dermatology. 2015; 33: 563-571.

8. Barengo M, Valente E, Kurpis M, Ruiz Lascano A. Micosis fungoide: variantes clínicas infrecuentes. Dermatol Argent. 2007; 13: 44-50.

9. Van Santen S, Roach RE, van Doorn R, Horváth B, Bruijn MS, Sanders CJ et al. Clinical staging and prognostic factors in folliculotropic mycosis fungoides. JAMA Dermatol. 2016;152(9):992-1000.

10. Jawed SI, Myskowski PL, Horwitz S, Moskowitz A, Querfeld C. Primary cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome) Part II. Prognosis, management, and future directions. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2014; 70 (2): 223.e1-17.