Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) is a ubiquitous virus detected in up to 95% of the general population. Most people are asymptomatic, while some may develop a wide range of EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disorders (LPD). Among them, EBV-positive T/NK LPD are uncommon diseases defined by the proliferation of T- or NK-cells infected by EBV. The 2017 World Health Organization (WHO) classification recognizes the following entities characterized by different outcomes: chronic active EBV infection of T- or NK-cell types (cutaneous and systemic forms), systemic EBV-positive T-cell lymphoma of childhood, EBV-positive aggressive NK-cell leukemia, extra nodal NK/T-cell lymphoma nasal type, and the new provisional entity known as primary EBV-positive nodal T/NK-cell lymphoma. In addition, EBV associated-hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis is part of EBV-positive T/NK LPD, but has not been included in the WHO classification due to its reactive nature. Despite novel insights from high-throughput molecular studies, EBV-positive NK/T-cell LPD diagnoses remain challenging, especially because of their rarity and overlap. Until now, an accurate EBV-positive NK/T LPD diagnosis has been based on its clinical presentation and course correlated with its histological features. This review aims to summarize clinical, pathological and molecular features of EBV-positive T/NK LPD subtypes and to provide an overview of new understandings regarding these rare disorders.

Therapeutic blockade of PD-1/PD-L1 shows promising results in Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) and in some diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients, but biomarkers predicting such responses are still lacking. To this end, we recently developed a transcriptional scoring of immune escape (IE) in cancer biopsies. Using this method in DLBCL, we identified four stages of IE correlated with overall survival, but whether Hodgkin’s lymphomas (HL) also display this partition was unknown. Thus, we explored the transcriptomic profiles of ~1000 HL and DLBCL using a comparative meta-analysis of their bulk microarrays. Relative to DLBCL, the HL co-clustered at the advanced stage of immune escape, displaying significant enrichment of both IE and T-cell activation genes. Analyses via transcriptome deconvolution and immunohistochemistry showed more CD3⁺ and CD4⁺ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in HL than DLBCL. Both HL and non-GCB DLBCL shared a high abundance of infiltrating CD8⁺ T-cells, but HL had less CD68⁺CD163⁺ macrophages. The same cellular distribution of PD-1 and TIM-3 was observed in HL and DLBCL, though HL had more PD-L1 tumor cells and LAG-3 ME cells. This study illuminates the advanced stage of immune activation and escape in HL, consistent with the response to checkpoint blockade therapies for this type of lymphoma.

Despite the ample improvements of CRC molecular landscape, the therapeutic options still rely on conventional chemotherapy-based regimens for early disease, and few targeted agents are recommended for clinical use in the metastatic setting. Moreover, the impact of cytotoxic, targeted agents, and immunotherapy combinations in the metastatic scenario is not fully satisfactory, especially the outcomes for patients who develop resistance to these treatments need to be improved. Here, we examine the opportunity to consider therapeutic agents targeting DNA repair and DNA replication stress response as strategies to exploit genetic or functional defects in the DNA damage response (DDR) pathways through synthetic lethal mechanisms, still not explored in CRC. These include the multiple actors involved in the repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) through homologous recombination (HR), classical non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), and microhomology-mediated end-joining (MMEJ), inhibitors of the base excision repair (BER) protein poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP), as well as inhibitors of the DNA damage kinases ataxia-telangiectasia and Rad3 related (ATR), CHK1, WEE1, and ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM). We also review the biomarkers that guide the use of these agents, and current clinical trials with targeted DDR therapies.

Upfront MRI is taking the lead in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer, while few image-guided biopsies (IGBs) fail to demonstrate clinically significant prostate cancer. The added value of innovative biomarkers is not confirmed in this context. We analysed SelectMDx-v2 (MDx-2) in a cohort of upfront MRI and image-guided biopsy patients. Participants included patients who received a trans-rectal elastic-fusion registration IGB on the basis of DRE, PSA, PCA3, and PCPT-2.0 risk evaluation. Pre-biopsy MRI DICOM archives were reviewed according to PI-RADS-v2. Post-massage first-void urine samples stored in the institutional registered bio-repository were commercially addressed to MDxHealth to obtain MDx-2 scores. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted with the detection on IGB of high-grade (ISUP 2 and higher) as the dependent variable. High-grade cancer was demonstrated in 32/117 (27.4%) patients (8/2010–8/2018). Age, prostate volume, biopsy history, MDx-2, and PI-RADS-v2 scores significantly related to the detection of high-grade cancer. MDx-2 scores and the clinical variables embedded into MDx-2 scores were analysed in multivariate analysis to complement PI-RADS-v2 scores. The two combinations outperformed PI-RADS-v2 alone (AUC-ROC 0.67 vs. 0.73 and 0.80, respectively, p < 0.05) and calibration curves confirmed an adequate prediction. Similar discrimination (C-statistics, p = 0.22) was observed in the prediction of high-grade cancer, thereby questioning the respective inputs and added values of biomarkers and clinical predictors in MDx-2 scores. Based on the results of this study, we can conclude that instruments of prediction developed for systematic prostate biopsies, including those that incorporate innovative biomarkers, must be reassessed and eventually confirmed in the context of upfront MRI and IGB.