Primary Mediastinal Large B-cell Lymphoma

Primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is a relatively rare lymphoma subtype affecting mainly young adults. Its molecular signature and clinical features resemble classical Hodgkin lymphoma. The optimal chemotherapy for this lymphoma subtype has not been established. The addition of rituximab to anthracycline based chemotherapy improved response rates and survival. Many centers use R-CHOP as standard treatment, but the role of the intensified regimens and consolidation radiotherapy has to be clarified. Recent data coming from retrospective analyses and an ongoing prospective study addressing the problem of consolidation radiotherapy will help to better identify risk groups and apply risk-adapted and effective treatment strategies. The latest research has helped to understand molecular mechanisms of PMBCL pathogenesis and indicated targets of directed therapy for the future.


Introduction
Primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) belongs to the group of aggressive diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. The current WHO 2008 classification distinguished this lymphoma as a separate entity due to its specific clinical and pathological features [1]. Gene expression profile studies showed that it shares common features with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) [20,21]. Treatment outcomes in the prerituximab era were not satisfactory with high relapse rates. Adding rituximab to anthracycline based regimens improved patient prognosis, and R-CHOP has been widely adopted as the standard treatment. However, there are still unresolved questions in the therapy of PMBCL. There are questions such as, is R-CHOP an optimal regimen for all patients? Historical data indicated superiority of more intense chemotherapy regimens, but they have not been compared to R-CHOP directly, and there is no consensus which group of patients would benefit from intensified regimens. Also, there is no convincing data supporting the use of radiotherapy. Retrospective studies generally did not show survival benefit, and late toxicities like cardiotoxicity and secondary cancers cannot be neglected. However, the questions if radiotherapy can be safely omitted and in which patient group it can be omitted, so far have not been answered. Relatively low patient numbers are the main obstacle in conducting randomized prospective trials, so therapeutic decisions have been based mainly on retrospective studies. familial case of PMBCL has been described in Finland, probably related to the 5533C>A mutation in the MLL gene. [4].

Clinical Presentation
PMBCL typically presents as a large, fast-growing tumor with invasion usually limited to the anterior-upper mediastinum although it tends to infiltrate adjacent thoracic structures like the chest wall, pleura, lungs, pericardium, and heart causing pleural/pericardial effusion in approximately 30-50 % of cases. The disease is mainly locally advanced. Eighty percent of patients have clinical stage I and II and 75 % of them have bulky disease with a tumor mass exceeding 10 cm. Enlarged lymph nodes localized outside the mediastinum are rarely found. Bone marrow infiltration is seen in few cases [5, 6, 7••, 8]. Recurrent disease tends to spread to distant extranodal organs like the kidneys, adrenal glands, liver, central nervous system, and less frequently to the lymph nodes. Typical symptoms such as cough, tachypnoe, vein thrombosis, chest pain, or dysphagia are related to the tumor mass infiltration or compression, with a history of complaints for usually less than three months. Approximately half of the patients present with upper vena cava syndrome. Systemic symptoms, mainly weight loss and fever, are relatively rare and they affect less than 20 % of patients [2].
Pathology PMBCL arises in the thymus from a so-called thymic B-cell originating either from a germinal center or a nongerminal center but with an expression of an activation induced cytidine deaminase (AID) gene. Cells are heterogenous, medium-sized to large-sized, with a pale, abundant cytoplasm. Their nuclei also show a degree of heterogeneity. They could be oval, irregular, pleomorphic like Reed-Sternberg cells or multilobated like in DLBCL. Characteristic feature of PMBCL is sclerosis dividing tumor tissue into compartments. Collagen bands are fine and not as broad as in cHL nodular sclerosis (NS) types. Immunophenotyping of tumor cells shows positive surface staining for pan-B cell antigens: CD19, CD20, CD22, also in a majority of cases for CD23, CD45 and MAL [1,9,10]. The last, associated with the specific population of B lymphocytes, thymic medullary Bcells, is expressed in 70 % of PMBCL, and it might be useful in differentiating PMBCL from DLBCL (expression only in 3 %) [11,12]. CD30, being an attractive therapy target in Hodgkin lymphoma or anaplastic lymphoma, is also positive in most of the PMBCL cases but its expression is usually weaker than in the mentioned lymphoma types. PMBCL cells are usually CD10(-) and CD15(-). They also typically lack surface immunoglobulin (sIg) and, what is characteristic for this lymphoma type, only one component of the B-cell receptor is present, namely CD79a [10]. Another significant feature of PMBCL cells is decreased or, in some cases, absent expression of human leukocyte antigen class I and II (HLA) correlated to worse outcome [13]. MUM1/IRF4 expression has been found to be present in 45 % of the cells and is also associated with inferior survival [14]. Staining for transcriptional factors PU.1, OCT2, PAX5, and BOB1 is often positive [10]. BCL2 and BCL6 are positive by immunohistochemistry in a majority of cases [10,15,16]. Knowledge of the characteristic immunophenotype of PMBCL cells is necessary in differential diagnosis. A decision tree for discriminating between PMBCL and cHL has been proposed by Hoeller S. et al., using mainly three markers: CD79a or alternatively BOB1 with combination with cyclin E. Applying this diagram enables classification correctly for 97-98 % of the patients to either PMBCL or cHL groups [17].

Molecular Pathology
Somatic hypermutations of immunoglobulin genes and BCL6 in PMBCL were found in some studies and they confirmed germinal (post-germinal) center origin of the malignant cells [18]. Notably, the mutated region in BCL6 gene differs from DLBCL and follicular lymphoma [19]. In 2003 two independent studies were published, indicating that PMBCL has a unique molecular transcriptional pattern, distinct from DLBCL but having common features with cHL [20,21]. Gene expression profiling (GEP) showed that over one-third of the genes overexpressed in PMBCL are also strongly expressed in HL cells. These genes are mostly related to the important signaling pathways of NFκB and JAK-STAT [21]. Dysregulation of these pathways contributes to the malignant phenotype of PMBCL leading to the inhibition of apoptosis and increased proliferation [22••]. NFκB is one of the most important transcription factors in the cell, responsible for proliferation and survival and constitutive activation of NFκB is typical for PMBCL [23]. This is achieved via different mechanisms such as overexpression of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor superfamily activating this pathway and overexpression of NFκB complex members [22••]. A20 protein is a negative regulator of IκB and NFκB, and a gene encoding this protein, TNFAIP3, is mutated in 36 % of cases resulting in constitutive activation of NFκB [24]. Nuclear localisation of REL, one of the NFκB complex proteins, is related to the activation of the NFκB pathway. Genomic gains and amplifications of the REL protooncogene locus on the short arm of chromosome 2p are present in over half of the PMBCL cases and associated with the nuclear position of REL [25,26]. JAK-STAT is another major pathway responsible for the regulation of cell proliferation. The JAK-STAT signaling cascade is activated by interleukin (IL) receptors, mainly IL-4 and IL-13, and aberrations have been found on different levels of this pathway, starting from an enhanced IL-13 receptor expression [20,21]. Genomic gains of distant regions of chromosome 9 -9p24.1 containing a locus for JAK2 have been found in approximately 63 % of PMBCL cases, and they correlate with an increased JAK2 mRNA and protein levels [27•], leading to JAK-STAT cascade activation and cell proliferation. Amplification of 9p24.1 and overexpression of JAK2 is also associated with an upregulation of an immunoregulatory programmed death (PD)-1 ligand resulting in the exhaustion of T lymphocytes [27•]. One of the key proteins in the JAK-STAT pathway is STAT6 protein and constitutive activation of STAT6 is typical for PMBCL [28]. Moreover, in 36 % of PMBCL somatic mutations in STAT6 DNA-binding domain cases have been identified, confirming the role of dysregulations of JAK-STAT in PMBCL pathogenesis [29]. Genes coding for a suppressor of cytokine signaling 1 (SOCS-1), a negative regulator of this pathway, have been found to be mutated in some PMBCL patient cases and in mediastinal Bcell lines leading to delayed degradation and prolonged phosphorylation of JAK2 [30]. PTNP1 being another negative regulator of JAK-STAT has been recently described to be mutated in 22 % of PMBCL cases, also resulting in increased phosphorylation of JAK2, although only a trend towards inferior progression-free survival in mutated cases was noted [31].
Another pathological mechanism giving survival advantage is correlated to tumor microenvironment reactions enabling the tumor to escape from immunosurveillance. One of them is a decreased expression of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class II genes and proteins in PMBCL as shown by gene expression profiling and immunohistochemistry studies, correlating with reduced cytotoxic CD8 T cell numbers and inferior survival [13,32]. MHC expression is regulated by the MHC class II transactivator CIITA. Genomic breaks in CIITA were found to be present in 38 % of PMBCL, and they were associated with lower levels of MHC class II expression, and a significantly lower patient survival rate [33]. Genomic rearrangements in CIITA also have an impact on the expression of programmed cell death ligands-1 -PD-1 ligands on the surface of PMBCL cells (PD-L2 -CD273 and PD-L1-CD274). These molecules are involved in costimulatory signal transduction between malignant cells and PD-1 receptor on T cells, in addition to T cell receptor (TCR) signaling, modulating T cell activity. Overexpression of PD-L2 and PD-L1 leads to an exhaustion of infiltrating T cells and the tumor's escape from immunosurveillance [33]. Genes encoding PD-L1 and PD-L2 are located in the 9p24.1 region, similarly to JAK2 [27•]. Recently, genomic rearrangements involving PD-L locus have been described in 20 % PMBCL, including break-apart, amplifications, and gains, and they were associated with PD-L protein overexpression. It was noteworthy that, although no survival correlation was established between rearranged and nonrearranged cases, the PD-L levels in PMBCL cells were higher than in the normal control, indicating another regulation pathway of PD-L expression [34]. Enhanced expression of PD-L1 on PMBCL and on tumor associated macrophages was also confirmed by the immunohistochemistry method in 71 % malignant cells [35•].
The results of cited studies shed light on the biology of PMBCL and some of the dysregulated molecular mechanisms described above will become an attractive therapy target in the future. Preclinical studies show that selective inhibition of JAK2 with fedratinib reduced phosphorylation of JAK2 and other proteins from the STAT family in cHL and PMBCL cell lines. It also inhibited the expression of PD-L1. In murine models inhibition of JAK2 significantly decreased tumor growth and prolonged survival, which was correlated with reduced STAT3 expression [36••]. PD-L1 has already become the subject of clinical trials in many cancers giving response rates in 20-25 % of patients [37] and seems to be also a natural therapy target in lymphomas overexpressing PD-L.

Diagnosis and Differential Diagnosis
Typical localization of PMBCL confined to mediastinum without the involvement of peripheral lymph nodes requires more invasive diagnostic procedures. Mediastinoscopy, anterior mediastinotomy, or percutaneous CT-guided core needle biopsies, are usually performed [2,15]. Representative and relatively extensive tissue samples should be taken, as the cells can be damaged during the biopsy, which can make diagnosis more difficult to establish.
Differential diagnosis of PMBCL includes other types of lymphomas with mediastinal localization [9]: -"gray zone" lymphoma -B-cell lymphoma, unclassifiable, with features intermediate between diffuse large Bcell lymphoma and classical Hodgkin lymphoma [38], composite lymphoma consisting of two types of lymphoma: PMBCL and a cHL mediastinal sequential lymphomas (i.e., PMBCL relapsing as HL) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with anterior mediastinum involvement -cHL NS type [38] -T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma -Thymoma -Germ cell tumors -Metastatic carcinomas Diagnosis is made on the basis of histopathological examination with mandatory immunohistochemical staining and typical clinical presentation.
Diagnostic procedures performed to assess clinical stage are typical and include physical examination, whole-body computer tomography, bone marrow biopsy, whole blood count, and blood biochemistry. Elevated LDH is found in 70-80 % of cases, and it can often be the only laboratory abnormality [6,8]. β2-microglobulin is usually within the normal range [39]. PMBCL belongs to FDG-avid lymphomas, so PET/CT has been incorporated into the diagnostic procedures carried out before and at the end of therapy (EOT) [40]. Clinical stage is assessed using the Ann Arbor staging system, and, as mentioned above, about 75 % of patients have clinical stage (CS) I or II [5, 6, 7••, 8].

Prognostic Factors
For the assessment of risk category, a standard international prognostic index (IPI) is used. However, its role in PMBCL is limited due to the fact that two out of five risk factors determining patients' survival are generally not present: age above 60 and CS III or IV [5, 6, 7••, 8]. Another reason for conflicting results of using IPI for assessing patient risk is the lack of consistency in evaluating the stage of the disease. Mediastinal tumor infiltrating per continuum/extension other thoracic structures can be described by a treating physician as stage IIE or stage IV. This may lead to discrepancies in evaluating the role of IPI in PMBCL in retrospective analyses published by different centers. In the authors' opinion as described by Vassilakopoulos et al. [41•], CS IV should be confined to lymphoma with extensive dissemination to extranodal organs, whereas a tumor infiltrating to a limited degree adjacent thoracic structures such as pleura, pericardium, thoracic wall or lungs should be assessed as CS IIE. In the retrospective analysis from 2012, age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) in a multivariate analysis failed to be of prognostic significance [41•]. This was similar to an earlier series of 141 patients from Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) [8]. In various published series of PMBCL patients, other negative prognostic factors for survival were described: age over 40 years of age, CS III and IV, bulky disease, male sex, poor performance status (PS), and LDH>2 x UNL [5,6], but their prognostic power has not been validated in large, prospective studies in the rituximab era. However, IPI proved to be a significant factor for survival in R-CHOP-treated patients in a recent retrospective study by a Japanese multicenter study group including 345 patients (187 of them treated with the R-CHOP regimen) [7••]. Multivariate analysis showed a pleural/pericardial effusion to be another adverse factor for PFS and a novel prognostic model for PMBCL (PMBL prognostic index -PMBIPI) was designed, including two factors: high/intermediate-risk and high-risk IPI and the presence of a pleural/pericardial effusion. Patients in a low-risk group (0 factors) had a favorable overall survival (OS) of 97 % and progression-free survival (PFS) 89 % at four years, whereas patients with two adverse risk factors had a statistically inferior 4-year OS and PFS of 72 % (P=0.001) and 44 % (P<0.001). As the authors stated, this novel prognostic index needs to be evaluated in prospective studies [7••].

First-Line Therapy
Initial treatment is critical in the management of PMBCL since outcomes of second and further therapy lines in relapsed/ progressive disease are unsatisfactory [6,42,43]. R-CHOP is used in many centers world-wide but there are some reports on the better efficacy of more intense chemotherapy regimens (socalled third-generation) with a higher cytostatics dose/density. However, these analyses are mainly retrospective and based on a small number of patients. The role of consolidation radiotherapy in the rituximab era and also in conjunction with thirdgeneration chemotherapy also needs to be determined.
Historically, before the rituximab era, PMBCL patients, like in DLBCL, were treated with CHOP, usually with consolidation radiotherapy, achieving a complete remission (CR) rate of 48-70 % and a long-term overall survival of 33-65 % [5,8,44] ( Tables 1 and 2 The difference in OS was not statistically significant for the PMBCL group in contrast to DLBCL (probably due to the smaller number of patients). In a multivariate analysis therapy containing rituximab and the absence of bulky disease were significant positive prognostic factors for OS, EFS, and overall response rates (ORR). The results of the MInT study, clearly showed that, in low-risk PMBCL, adding rituximab to CHOP improves treatment outcome, mainly by decreasing the progression rate, which established R-CHOP regimen as a standard of care in many centers. Many retrospective reports comparing R-CHOP with CHOP confirmed good outcomes in R-CHOP treated patients yielding 5-year PFS 68 -77 % and 5-year OS 79-90 %; some of them including a relatively high number of patients (Table 2)   Limited efficacy of R-CHOP in poor risk patients has prompted some groups to use more intense chemotherapy regimens. Such treatment approaches were applied in the prerituximab era, resulting in significantly better outcomes as compared to standard CHOP. One of the largest studies was a multinational retrospective analysis including 426 patients, which proved the superiority of the third-generation regimens (mainly MACOP-B and VACOP-B) over CHOP and CHOPlike [5]. Similar results were reported by other study groups [8,42,47], (Table 1). There is no certainty if adding rituximab to the third-generation chemotherapy brings any clinical benefit. Comparing the retrospective data of two groups of patients, that is, those treated with MACOP-B/VACOP-B and those with the same regimen but with the addition of rituximab, showed no statistical difference in relapse free survival and CR rates [48]. A more important problem that has not been addressed in randomized trials is the evaluation of third-generation regimens in the rituximab era by comparing them to standard R-CHOP chemotherapy. However, some papers on that topic have been published. They are mainly retrospective analyses or single-arm phase II studies assessing treatment outcomes with the use of more intense regimens. In 2013 the results of a prospective, phase II trial carried out in the National Cancer Institute (NCI) were published. Fifty-one patients with PMBCL were treated with 6-8 cycles of rituximab dose adjusted EPOCH (R-DA-EPOCH) chemotherapy without consolidation radiotherapy. It was given to only 4 % of patients who did not achieve CR [49••]. Adverse prognostic factors were frequently present in this population. Five-year EFS was 93 % and 5-year OS was 97 % with a median follow-up of 63 months. Toxicity was mainly hematological with neutropenia grade 4 occurring in 50 % of cycles, thrombocytopenia grade 4 in 6 %, and neutropenic fever in 13 % cycles. The results were compared to the historical cohort of DA-EPOCH-treated patients and, in contrast to Zinzani's study, significant survival benefit for the rituximab-containing regimen was proved. Another intensified chemotherapy regimen is GMALL B-ALL/NHL 2002, based on pediatric ALL protocols, created by the German Multicenter Adult ALL Study Group (GMALL). It is an intense, multidrug regimen consisting of six courses, each containing rituximab and methotrexate at a dose of 1.5 g/m 2 , with intrathecal prophylaxis. At first, radiotherapy was obligatory but after protocol amendment it was left to the physician's discretion, depending on the response   (Fig. 1). Although intensified regimens like R-DA-EPOCH and GMALL B-ALL/ NHL 2002 seem to improve survival, their superiority over R-CHOP has not been proved in randomized trials and this potential benefit must be balanced against significant, albeit manageable, toxicity.

Evaluation of Response to Therapy -The Role of PET/CT
The most useful, although not ideal tool, for assessing response to treatment is PET/CT [40]. Earlier CT was used but its value was sometimes limited as in many cases residual tumors were present after the treatment due to excessive fibrosis, and distinguishing between active and non-active mass was impossible. Published data show that PMBCL PET/CT has high sensitivity and high negative predictive value (NPV) but low specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) [54•, 55]. In the NCI series, 18 out of 36 patients with residual mass had positive PET but only three with SUV ≥5 had active disease [49••]. In an Italian cohort of 37 patients, 68 % had positive PET after R-chemotherapy but after radiotherapy 85 % converted to CR [53]. Only patients with the highest score of 5 progressed despite radiotherapy and their 2year OS was significantly worse (33 % vs 100 %). Another important study recently published was IELSG-26 by the International Extranodal Lymphoma Study Group [54•]. There were 115 patients assessed with PET/CT after immunochemotherapy. Forty-seven percent achieved metabolic CR (metCR) ( 18 FDG uptake below mediastinal blood pool, score 1 and 2) and had an excellent 5-year OS of 100 % and PFS 98 %. Among 53 % PET-positive patients those with score 4 and 5 ( 18 FDG uptake above liver) had significantly worse 5-year PFS (68 % vs 99 %) and OS (83 % vs 100 %) than patients with score 1-3. None of the patients with score 3 (residual uptake) progressed/relapsed, but notably 89 % of them received radiotherapy, so the rate of real false positive results in this group is unknown. This study confirms good prognosis of EOT-PET-negative patients and a high proportion of positive EOT-PET in PMBCL, probably due to the inflammation or thymic rebound contributing to relatively low PPVof PET. Consistent with previous studies, patients with the highest scores/ 18 FDG uptakes are at the highest risk of progression/ relapse [49••, 53, 54•]. Data on the role of interim PET/CT is rather scarce. In a study by MSKCC, interim PET did not prove to be of prognostic value [56]. However, two recent reports confirmed high NPV (86-100 %) and lower PPV (30-75 %) of interim PET and in both studies patients with negative interim PET achieved long-term remission [55,57]. The Role of Consolidation Radiotherapy In the past, radiotherapy was an important part of the treatment strategy, mainly due to the less effective chemotherapy in the pre-rituximab era, but no clear survival benefit was proven. Retrospective analysis of 426 patients showed that involvedfield radiotherapy (IFRTH) increased CR rates in both standard and intense chemotherapy groups. Eighty-one percent of patients with PR converted to CR, however, no improvement in survival was observed [5]. In another study, patients who received radiotherapy had significantly longer EFS, regardless of their chemotherapy regimen, with no difference in OS [42]. In a population based analysis from 2006, no difference in PFS or OS between irradiated and nonirradiated patients treated with various chemotherapy regimens was observed [6].
Other studies with more intense treatment regimens showed good results without IFRTH [8,47]. With the advent of more effective chemotherapy yielding high CR rates, the necessity of conducting IFRTH has become a matter of debate. In the cited NCI study, 9 6 [56]. A PET-guided strategy proposed by the British Columbia Cancer Agency indicated that the outcomes of patients with negative EOT-PET, who did not receive IFRTH, were similar to irradiated EOT-PET positive patients, suggesting that achieving metabolic CR may reduce the need for radiotherapy [58•]. Similar conclusions were drawn from the retrospective analysis from Italy. Radiotherapy was given only to PET-positive patients and there was no difference in disease free survival between this group and the PET-negative nonirradiated group [59]. In a Japanese study, the outcomes of PETnegative patients were similar, irrespective if they received IFRTH or not [7••]. A newly launched IELSG-37 study will probably give a definite answer to the question on the role of consolidation radiotherapy in PMBCL. The study is powered to determine noninferior outcome in patients not receiving radiotherapy. Patients who achieve metCR after R-CHOR/R-CHOP-like chemotherapy (R-CHOP-14/21, R-MACOP/B, R-DA-EPOCH, R-ACVBP) will be randomized to mediastinal radiotherapy of 30 Gy or to the observation arm. This important trial will help to determine whether omitting IFRTH, which allows sparing late toxicity in this young patient population, is a safe strategy [www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01599559].

Treatment of Relapsed/Refractory Disease. The Role of Stem Cell Transplantation
In the pre-rituximab era, early progression was a relatively frequent event and occurred in approximately 20 % of cases. Autologous SCT is also used as a consolidation of the first line therapy, especially in high-risk patients and in patients who achieved only PR. In the GEL-TAMO experience, patient outcome depended mostly on the disease status before autoSCT. Patients in CR had 4-year PFS and OS of 81 % and 84 %, patients in PR 56 % and 64 %, respectively [62]. Primary refractory patients had significantly inferior survival with 4-year PFS of 16 % and OS of 23 %. Similar results were reported by other groups [63]. In a retrospective analysis of PLRG, no difference in survival was found between intensified GMALL B-ALL/NHL 2002 regimen and frontline treatment with autoSCT after R-CHOP chemotherapy [52], similarly to the IELSG cohort [5].
In summary, autoSCT remains a valid strategy in relapsed/ refractory disease; however, the main factor determining longterm survival is achieving CR before the procedure. Since rituximab based chemotherapy and third-generation regimens improved survival in PMBCL, the role of frontline autoSCT is now debatable.

Conclusions
PMBCL is a distinct clinicopathological entity and needs to be thoroughly differentiated with other lymphoma types, especially medDLBCL, cHL and gray zone lymphoma. Since the incidence of PMBCL is not high, the optimal treatment choice is based mainly on retrospective data or few prospective studies without control groups or including low patient numbers. There is a strong rationale supporting the use of rituximab based chemotherapy coming from a subgroup analysis of a prospective MInT trial and from numerous retrospective analyses with historical control groups. The results unequivocally show that the addition of rituximab to a standard anthracycline containing regimen CHOP/CHOP-like improves response rates, survival, reduces progression rates, and, therefore, R-CHOP has become a new standard of care in many centers. Despite this improvement, the risk of disease progression/relapse is still not negligible. It is up to 20 %, especially in high-risk groups, and intensified regimens are being developed and used. These regimens seem to bring clinical benefits in survival, allowing in some cases to omit IFRTH, but at the cost of significantly increased toxicity. More importantly, they have not been compared to R-CHOP in a randomized study. As the substantial part of patients achieve long-term survival with R-CHOP (+/-RTH), the main problem is to identify a group of patients who would really benefit from the third-generation regimes and for whom this excessive, though short-term toxicity would be clinically justifiable. The role of radiotherapy in the era of more effective immunochemotherapy remains a matter of debate. It undoubtedly improves the quality of response, but there is no consensus in which clinical settings radiotherapy can be safely omitted. A PET-guided approach based on data from retrospective surveys seems to be the most rational one, and the ongoing prospective randomized study will hopefully answer this important clinical question. Response to standard salvage therapy in refractory/ relapsed disease is lower than in DLBCL and new treatment strategies are needed. Recent research has brought a new insight into molecular mechanisms contributing to the malignant phenotype of PMBCL and this could direct development of targeted therapies.

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
Conflict of Interest Dr. Anna Dabrowska-Iwanicka declares no potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article.
Professor Jan A. Walewski reports grants and personal fees from Roche, grants from GSK, grants and personal fees from Celgene, grants and personal fees from Mundipharma, grants from Takeda, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, and personal fees from Johnson and Johnson.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.