
==== Front
Blood Adv
Blood Adv
Blood Advances
2473-9529
2473-9537
The American Society of Hematology

S2473-9529(24)00416-6
10.1182/bloodadvances.2024013548
Systematic Review
The clinical picture of Castleman disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Hoffmann Christian hoffmann@ich-hamburg.de
12∗
Oksenhendler Eric 3
Littler Sarah 4
Grant Lisa 5
Kanhai Karan 6
Fajgenbaum David C. 7
1 Infektionsmedizinisches Centrum Hamburg Study Center, Hamburg, Germany
2 Department of Medicine, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
3 Department of Clinical Immunology, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Paris, France
4 Select Statistical Services, Exeter, United Kingdom
5 TVF Communications, London, United Kingdom
6 Medical Affairs, Recordati Pharma Ltd, Hemel Hempstead, United Kingdom
7 Department of Medicine, Center for Cytokine Storm Treatment & Laboratory, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
∗ Correspondence: Christian Hoffmann, Infektionsmedizinisches Centrum Hamburg (Stadtmitte), Glockengießerwall 1, 20095 Hamburg, Germany; hoffmann@ich-hamburg.de
14 7 2024
24 9 2024
14 7 2024
8 18 49244935
3 5 2024
27 6 2024
© 2024 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.
2024
The American Society of Hematology
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Visual Abstract

Abstract

Castleman disease (CD) encompasses a spectrum of rare disorders, including unicentric CD (UCD), idiopathic multicentric CD (iMCD), and human herpesvirus 8–associated MCD (HHV8+ MCD). We performed a systematic review of publications reporting ≥5 cases of CD between 1995 and 2021, following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, to describe and compare subtypes. We extracted data on clinical symptoms and laboratory parameters as stated in international consensus diagnostic criteria for iMCD and estimated the frequency of each criterion using meta-analyses. We analyzed 32 studies describing 559 UCD, 1023 iMCD, and 416 HHV8+ MCD cases. Although many symptoms and laboratory abnormalities occurred at similar rates in patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD, patients with HHV8+ MCD had significantly higher rates of constitutional symptoms (46.6% vs 98.6%; P = .038) and splenomegaly (48.2% vs 89.2%; P = .031). Renal dysfunction was significantly more common in patients with iMCD than in patients with HHV8+ MCD before adjustment (36.9% vs 17.4%; P = .04; adjusted P = .1). Patients with UCD had lower rates of symptoms and laboratory abnormalities, although these were present in 20% of patients and were particularly pronounced in pediatric UCD. There are many similarities in the symptomatology of iMCD and HHV8+ MCD; many patients experience constitutional symptoms and organ dysfunction. Differences between these subtypes likely reflect differences in pathophysiology and/or comorbidity burdens.
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Castleman disease (CD) describes a spectrum of rare disorders with characteristic histopathology and enlarged lymph nodes (Figure 1). Unicentric CD (UCD) mainly occurs as a benign, localized lymphoid hyperplasia, often presenting as a solitary, indolent lymph node swelling. In contrast, multicentric CD (MCD) is potentially life threatening, with multifocal lymphadenopathy, systemic inflammation, and constitutional symptoms. Etiology of idiopathic MCD (iMCD) is unknown; various potential causes for pathological overproduction and dysregulation of proinflammatory cytokines (eg, interleukin-6) have been discussed.1 The clinical picture of iMCD can vary in terms of severity, course, and symptoms. iMCD can present with recurrent episodes of diffuse lymphadenopathy with systemic inflammation, edema, anemia, hypoalbuminemia, and/or multiple organ system dysfunctions, which can be fatal if improperly treated.2 Many MCD cases are caused by uncontrolled infection with human herpesvirus 8 (HHV8+ MCD), a γ-herpesvirus that drives hypercytokinemia via a viral interleukin-6 homologue. Unlike UCD and iMCD, HHV8+ MCD often occurs with concomitant HIV infection, and incidence and prevalence therefore closely follow the trajectory of HIV epidemiology. HHV8+ MCD, whether associated with HIV infection or not, appears to display a more aggressive clinical and biological presentation than iMCD.3Figure 1. Current classification of CD. NOS, not otherwise specified; RA, rheumatoid arthritis; SLE, systemic lupus erythematosus; TAFRO, thrombocytopenia, anasarca, fever, reticulin fibrosis, and organomegaly; TB, tuberculosis.

Histopathological features of CD have been well described. They occur over a spectrum from hyperplastic germinal centers with plasmacytosis (plasmacytic/plasma cell histopathology) to atrophic germinal centers with hypervascularity (hyaline vascular/hypervascular histopathology), with a mixed histopathological subtype in between.4 In 2017, international, evidence-based consensus diagnostic criteria for iMCD were established.4 These require the presence of major criteria (lymph node histopathology and multicentric lymphadenopathy) and ≥2 of 11 minor criteria (with ≥1 laboratory abnormality). Diagnostic tests and consensus criteria for iMCD are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. International iMCD management guidelines were published in 20185 and diagnostic and treatment guidelines for UCD in 2020.6 In contrast, there are no published diagnostic criteria for HHV8+ MCD. In the opinion of many experts, evidence of immunohistochemistry for HHV8 latency–associated nuclear antigen, systemic inflammatory symptoms, and detectable HHV8 viremia is sufficient for establishing diagnosis.7Table 1. Diagnostic workup for MCD

Purpose	Tests	
Inflammatory response	CBC, renal function, liver function, CRP, ESR, fibrinogen, immunoglobulins and free light chains, albumin, and ferritin	
Histopathology	Hypervascular/mixed cellularity/plasmacytic variant	
Virologic status	HIV serology, HHV8 qPCR (peripheral blood), EBER (lymph node), and LANA-1 (lymph node)	
Cytokine profile	Interleukin-6 and vascular endothelial growth factor	
Imaging	CT-PET or CT neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis	
Bone marrow evaluation	Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, myeloma, and reticulin fibrosis	
Immunology	ANA and rheumatoid factor	
Organ function	Echocardiogram and pulmonary function (additional organ assessment may be needed in severe cases)	
ANA, antinuclear antibody; CBC, complete blood count; CT, computed tomography; EBER, Epstein-Barr virus–encoded small RNAs; ESR, erythrocyte sedimentation rate; LANA, latency-associated nuclear antigen; PET, positron emission tomography; qPCR, quantitative polymerase chain reaction.

Adapted from van Rhee et al5

Table 2. Consensus criteria for idiopathic MCD

1. Presence of both major criteria	
 Lymph nodes with typical histology, and	
 lymph nodes enlarged >1 cm in at least 2 stations	
2. Presence of at least 2 of 11 minor criteria (including at least 1 laboratory criterion)	
 Clinical symptoms	
 1. B symptoms (night sweats, fever over 38°C, weight loss, or fatigue)	
 2. Splenomegaly and/or hepatomegaly	
 3. Edema, anasarca, ascites, and pleural effusions	
 4. Lymphocytic interstitial pneumonia	
 5. “Eruptive” hemangiomatosis	
 Laboratory criteria	
 1. Elevated CRP (>10 mg/L) or blood sedimentation (>15 mm/h)	
 2. Anemia (hemoglobin <12.5 g/dL for men and <11.5 g/dL for women)	
 3. Thrombocytopenia (platelet count, <150 per μL) or thrombocytosis (>400/μL)	
 4. Hypoalbuminemia (<3.5 g/dL)	
 5. Renal function impairment (eGFR, <60 mL/min per 1.73m2) or proteinuria (total protein, 150 mg/24 h or 10 mg/100 mL)	
 6. Polyclonal hypergammaglobulinemia (>1700 mg/dL)	
3. Exclusion of other diseases with “Castleman-like” histology	
 Infection-associated diseases: HHV8 (PCR, serology, and/or LANA staining in the lymph node); infectious mononucleosis (EBV, otherwise no exclusion criterion); and lymphadenopathy due to HIV, CMV, toxoplasmosis, and tuberculosis.	
 Defined autoimmune diseases (detected antibodies alone do not exclude iMCD) such as systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, adult-onset Still disease, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, and autoimmune lymphoproliferative syndrome.	
 Malignant or lymphoproliferative diseases, diagnosed at the same time (Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphomas, multiple myeloma, plasmacytoma localized primarily in the lymph node, and FDC sarcoma).	
CMV, cytomegalovirus; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; FDC, follicular dendritic cell; LANA, latency-associated nuclear antigen; PCR, polymerase chain reaction.

Adapted from Fajgenbaum et al4

To our knowledge, there is no major review summarizing clinical features across all CD subtypes. Given the rarity of all subtypes, information is mainly dispersed in small case series or case reports. It is notable that iMCD diagnostic criteria4 were defined from the existing evidence based on only 244 cases, including 128 cases from a systematic literature review and 79 cases from a clinical trial. Larger data sets are scarce, the largest review of 416 MCD cases did not distinguish between iMCD and HHV8+ MCD,8 and others focused on iMCD only.9 We used meta-analyses to estimate the prevalence of symptoms and laboratory findings for iMCD, HHV8+ MCD, and UCD, as described in the literature, and compared them, via statistical testing, to identify differences between subtypes. Differentiating subtypes is important to ensure timely diagnosis and treatment.

Methods

Search strategy

Following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, we searched PubMed for publications on CD from 1 January 1995 (when HHV8 testing was developed) to 9 February 2021. Searches were restricted to publications on humans reported in English. Search terms used were: (“present∗”[Title] OR “symptom∗”[Title] OR “diagn∗”[Title] OR “clinic∗”[Title]) AND (“castleman disease”[MeSH Terms] OR “castleman”[All Fields]) AND (“disease”[All Fields] OR “castleman disease”[All Fields]) AND (humans[Filter]) AND (english[Filter]) AND (1995:2021[pdat]). We also checked bibliographies of 2 large review articles for additional publications,8,10 and conducted a manual targeted search using Google Scholar and PubMed. The review protocol was not prepublished or registered.

Selection criteria

After removal of duplicate publications, abstracts were screened by a researcher (Azhaar Ashraf, see “Acknowledgments”) to identify appropriate publications including symptom data for patients with CD. To reduce bias from single case reports of unusual presentations, only those describing clinical data from ≥5 patients were included. Inclusion criteria were: (1) includes clinical data from patients with UCD, HHV8+ MCD, or iMCD; and (2) ≥5 patients. Exclusion criteria were: (1) review articles presenting symptoms from the literature without case reports; (2) describes patients with POEMS (polyneuropathy, organomegaly, endocrinopathy, monoclonal gammopathy, and skin abnormalities) without iMCD features; (3) no symptom data, or insufficient symptom data reported; (4) clinically selected cohorts focusing on a particular aspect of CD, for example abdominal, thoracic, head, and neck cases (most of these are small studies with patients who are also included in larger cohorts; these were excluded as they may cause a bias regarding the true clinical picture); and (5) randomized controlled trial. Another researcher (C.H.) independently confirmed the screening results. Full-text articles were then independently reviewed by 2 researchers (Azhaar Ashraf and L.G.) for inclusion. Disputes were resolved and results confirmed by a third researcher (C.H.).

We grouped publications into 3 categories: (1) aggregate-level data, publications with cohort-level data on CD symptoms; (2) patient-level data, publications reporting symptom data for each patient; and (3) pediatric data, publications focusing exclusively on pediatric/adolescent patients. To avoid inclusion of the same patient from >1 publication within each of the 3 groups, publications were independently cross-checked by 2 researchers (C.H. and L.G.) by study location, data collection period, and investigators to identify potentially duplicated patients. Where there was a possibility that a patient was included in >1 study, we excluded the study with the fewest patients or the least symptom data.

Data extraction

Three researchers (Azhaar Ashraf, L.G., and Hannah Lewis, see “Acknowledgments”) extracted data into an Excel worksheet, and an author (C.H.) answered queries on symptom classification. C.H. assessed results for potential discrepancies and a statistician (S.L.) noted inconsistent data points; publications were reanalyzed by L.G. to check these data. Descriptive study characteristics were extracted, including country, study center(s), data capture period, CD subtype (UCD, iMCD, or HHV8+ MCD), and patient numbers. For each CD subtype within each study, we extracted data on histology, sex, age, and ethnicity, and for UCD, location of affected lymph node/station.

We recorded the number of patients reporting clinical symptoms and laboratory parameters included in the international consensus diagnostic criteria for iMCD. Many publications reported less-specific clinical symptoms than those in the consensus criteria (eg, “rash”), and often thresholds for laboratory parameters were not reported (eg, “anemia”) or different from the consensus criteria. Therefore, we captured symptoms and laboratory parameters with broader criteria than the definitions in the consensus criteria (supplemental Table 1 shows the data extraction template).

Statistical analysis

Meta-analyses were performed using logistic regression to derive pooled prevalence estimates for each of the clinical symptoms and laboratory parameters, by CD subtype. To account for heterogeneity, random effects meta-analyses were used to estimate mean percentages of patients with each symptom or laboratory parameter. Differences between estimated mean prevalence of symptoms between CD subtypes were tested via a z test of the logit-transformed mean proportions (differences considered statistically significant if P <.05). To account for multiple testing, the false discovery rate (FDR) correction was applied. Results of tests for which there were limited numbers of studies and/or patients should be interpreted with caution. Analyses were conducted in R version 4.1.3 (further details on heterogeneity assessments and exploration of consistency are included in supplemental Methods).

Risk-of-bias assessment

As there was no intervention and the studies were not comparative; the studies were not randomized. Therefore, many of the possible risks of bias were not relevant in this case (such as allocation concealment, unblinding, attrition bias, etc) and the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials, the recommended tool for use in Cochrane reviews, was not applicable. However, consideration has been given to, for example, multiple publication bias (as discussed in “Methods”) for which studies were omitted to prevent duplication of patients. We have considered the potential for (non)reporting bias and any possible impact on, for example, the accuracy or generalizability of the results. Because this review is not of an intervention, this is likely to limit the risk of conflicts of interest and publication bias (whereby “negative” results may be less likely to be reported), as there should be little incentive to not report on the prevalence of observed symptoms/laboratory changes.

Results

Studies analyzed

Titles and abstracts of 428 publications were screened; 122 were further assessed for eligibility. Seventy publications were excluded because of lack of symptom data, potential duplication of patients, or for reasons associated with data quality or risk of bias (Figure 2). In total, 52 studies were included for analysis (Table 3),3,11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45,46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61 including 32 (n = 1998 patients) with aggregated cohort-level data, 15 (n = 335 patients) with patient-level data, and 5 (n = 104 patients) on pediatric patients.Figure 2. Study flow diagram. RCT, randomized controlled trial.

Table 3. Study characteristics

Data set	Study	Country	No. of centers	Data collection period	UCD (n)	iMCD (n)	HHV8+ MCD (n)	
Aggregate	Alzahrani et al11	Canada/Saudi Arabia	2	January 2005-September 2012			12	
	Dong et al12	China	1	November 1977-June 2014	62	52		
	Lan et al13	China	1	September 2011-September 2017	35	36		
	Zhang et al14	China	4	January 2001-January 2015	121	64		
	Zhang et al15∗	China	1	June 2015-June 2018		25		
	Zhang et al16	China	1	March 2008-June 2019	52	44		
	Zhao et al17	China	1	January 2010-May 2017	65	9		
	Boutboul et al18	France	National study	1997-2017	71			
	Oksenhendler et al3	France	1	1997-2017		27	169	
	Hoffmann et al19	Germany	11	January 1998-July 2010			52	
	Prakash et al20	India	1	2002-2014	8	8		
	Fujimoto et al21	Japan	77	October 2013-October 2016		150		
	Iwaki et al22	Japan	1	1999-2013		17		
	Kawabata et al23	Japan	1	January 2005-October 2012		21		
	Murakami et al24†	Japan	National study	June 2005-July 2011		342		
	Nishimura et al25	Japan	1	April 2012-June 2018		7		
	Volkow-Fernández et al (2020)26	Mexico	1	January 1994-December 2018			19	
	Melikyan et al27	Russia	1	1996-2016			6	
	Seo et al28	South Korea	1	January 1990-March 2013		28		
	Shin et al29	South Korea	1	May 1981-March 2009	43	27		
	Gonzalez-Garcia et al30	Spain	1	January 1985-December 2017	20	23		
	Bower et al31	United Kingdom	1	2000-2014			75	
	Casper et al32	United States	2	1 January 2000 to 31 December 2009		53	6	
	Chronowski et al33	United States	1	1988-1999	12	9		
	Dispenzieri et al34	United States	2	30 March 1948 to 18 June 2002	53	60		
	Herrada et al35	United States	1	March 1977-October 1995		8		
	Hill et al36	United States	1	1997-2012	17	13		
	Lurain et al37	United States	National study	2000-2013			19	
	Ramaswami et al38‡	United States	National study	2011-2018			8	
	Uldrick et al39§	United States	National study	2004-2009			14	
	Uldrick et al40‖	United States	National study	March 2006-September 2010			17	
	Venkataraman et al41	United States	National study	2004-2010			19	
Pediatric	Parez et al42	Canada/France	2	Not reported	7			
	Zhang et al43	China	1	January 2001-December 2012	9	2		
	Borocco et al44	France	3 societies	2016	17	6		
	Chisholm et al45	United States	2	1980-2018	37	2		
	Sopfe et al46	United States	1	1 January 2005 to 16 May 2017	18	6		
Patient-level	Loi et al47	Australia	3	January 1994-December 2001			11	
	Dong et al48	China	1	November 1977-July 2008	34	21		
	Wang et al49	China	1	September 2007-October 2015	14			
	Ye et al50	China	1	January 1999-November 2008	48	4		
	Zhu et al51	China	1	May 2004-October 2012		10		
	Dossier et al52	France	1	January 1995-June 2012		12	18	
	Oksenhendler et al53¶	France/United Kingdom	1	1990-2001			60	
	Kojima et al54	Japan	Not reported	1992-2007		28		
	Sato et al55	Japan	1	Not reported		6		
	Terasaki et al56	Japan	1	Not reported		15		
	Gopal et al (2015)57#	Malawi	1	1 June 2013 to 31 January 2015			6	
	Ghosh et al58	Nepal	1	January 2001-March 2008		5		
	Kim et al59	South Korea	1	1989-1998	10	12		
	Lachmann et al60	United Kingdom	1	Not reported	5			
	Bowne et al61	United States	1	July 1986-July 1997	13	3		
Most publications described retrospective studies, except for 7 prospective studies marked by respective footnote symbols in the table.

∗ Single-center, single-arm, phase 2 study

† Prospective observational study

‡ Open-label, single-center pilot study

§ Prospective pilot study

‖ Prospective study

¶ Prospective cohort study

# Prospective longitudinal cohort study

Table 3 shows study characteristics for publications analyzed. The aggregated cohort-level data set contains data for most symptoms and characteristics for each CD subtype across 1998 patients, making it the focus of this manuscript. The smaller patient-level data set (which contains potentially overlapping patients with the aggregated data, and therefore cannot be combined) describes symptoms and laboratory findings for individual patients. Analysis of these data confirms findings from the aggregated data set (supplemental Table 2).

Demographics and disease characteristics

Table 4 shows demographics of 1998 patients in the cohort-level data set. There was a predominance of males with HHV8+ MCD (88.5%) and iMCD (59.1%), whereas women appeared slightly more often affected with UCD (53.7%). Patients with UCD tended to be younger than patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD. Most patients with iMCD (91.8%) and UCD (84.7%) were of Asian ethnicity in this study. Only 58 patients (6.4%) with iMCD were White. In contrast, almost all patients with HHV8+ MCD (93.7%) were White or Black/African American. The higher proportion of males vs females with iMCD was consistent in pediatric patients, and in Asian and non-Asian groups.Table 4. Patient demographics and disease characteristics: an aggregate data set

Characteristic	UCD	iMCD	HHV8+ MCD	
Sex, n (%)∗				
 Female	239 (53.7)	377 (40.9)	48 (11.6)	
 Male	206 (46.3)	545 (59.1)	368 (88.5)	
 Not reported	114	101	0	
Age (y)†				
 Average mean age (no. of studies, n)	33.6 (2, 73)	47.4 (4, 412)	42.8 (5, 91)	
 Average median age (no. of studies, n)	35.4 (7, 372)	47.5 (14, 792)	43.6 (9, 337)	
 Range (no. of studies, n)	4-77 (6, 188)	3-84 (13, 619)	23-69 (7, 208)	
 Studies not reporting age data (n)	3	3	0	
Ethnicity, n (%)∗				
 African/African-American/Black	17 (3.7)	10 (1.1)	106 (42.1)	
 Asian	387 (84.7)	835 (91.8)	4 (1.6)	
 White	52 (11.4)	58 (6.4)	130 (51.6)	
 Others	1 (0.22)	7 (0.8)	12 (4.8)	
 Not reported	102	113	164	
Histology, n (%)∗				
 Hyaline vascular	430 (88.3)	145 (16.4)	3 (12.0)	
 Plasma cell	47 (9.7)	586 (66.2)	13 (52.0)	
 Mixed	10 (2.1)	154 (17.4)	9 (36.0)	
 Not reported	72	138	391	
UCD manifest location, n (%)∗				
 Abdominal	89 (34.4)			
 Axilla	11 (4.3)			
 Head and neck	57 (22.0)			
 Inguinal/pelvis	9 (3.5)			
 Other locations	6 (2.3)			
 Thoracic	87 (33.6)			
 Not reported	300			
∗ Percentages are reported for the percentage of patients for whom the characteristic has been reported (ie, not including patients with missing or unknown data for that characteristic). Percentages may not total 100 because of rounding errors.

† One study reporting HHV8+ MCD data, and 1 reporting iMCD data provided age at onset, which has been included in the summary information.

Plasmacytic histopathological subtype was most common for iMCD and HHV8+ MCD (66.2% and 52.0% when known, respectively), whereas hyaline vascular was most common for UCD (88.3% when known; Table 4). UCD location was reported for 316 of 559 patients. When known, approximately one-third of UCD cases were thoracic, one-third abdominal, and 22.0% in the head/neck region (Table 4).

Laboratory findings

Laboratory findings were similar in patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD (Figure 3). Rates of elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) were 92.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 64.5-98.8) in patients with iMCD and 89.6% (95% CI, 67.4-97.3) in patients with HHV8+ MCD. Similarly, hypergammaglobulinemia was present in most patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD (96.8% [95% CI, 96.7-96.9] and 100% [95% CI, 47.8-100], respectively). Anemia and hypoalbuminemia were present in 89.4% (95% CI, 59.8-98.0) and 60.8% (95% CI, 40.3-78.1) of patients with iMCD, and 74.9% (95% CI, 56.2-87.4) and 77.4% (95% CI, 60.8-88.3) of patients with HHV8+ MCD. Thrombocytopenia was present in fewer patients: 17.3% (95% CI, 7.0-36.9) and 37.3% (95% CI, 22.1-55.6) of patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD, respectively. There were no significant differences in laboratory findings between patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD. Patients with UCD had significantly lower rates of laboratory abnormalities vs those with iMCD or HHV8+ MCD (P < .05; Figure 3). However, elevated CRP, anemia, and hypergammaglobulinemia occurred in almost 20% of patients.Figure 3. Average percentage of laboratory findings. Aggregate cohort-level data showing average percentage of laboratory findings in patients with UCD, iMCD, or HHV8+ MCD (95% CIs) identified using a random effect meta-analysis model. ns, not significant.

Clinical presentation of CD

Enlarged lymph nodes were explicitly reported for almost all patients with iMCD (98.2% [95% CI, 96.8-99.0]) and HHV8+ MCD (99.8%; 95% CI, 92.5-100). Constitutional symptoms were present in significantly more patients with HHV8+ MCD (98.6% [95% CI, 65.7-100]) than with iMCD (46.6% [95% CI, 40.1-53.2]; P = .038; Figure 4). This was reflected in the significantly higher rate of fever reported in 317 patients with HHV8+ MCD (96.2% [95% CI, 76.4-99.5]) vs 710 with iMCD (48.4% [95% CI, 36.1-60.9]; P = .007). Splenomegaly was also present in significantly more patients with HHV8+ MCD (89.2% [95% CI, 60.3-97.8]) than with iMCD (48.2% [95% CI, 39.9-56.5]; P = .031; Figure 4). Similarly, hepatomegaly was observed in significantly more patients with HHV8+ MCD (74.1% [95% CI, 35.9-93.6; n = 31]) than with iMCD (27.7% [95% CI, 23.5-32.3 ;n = 390]; P = .038).Figure 4. Average percentage of symptoms. Aggregate cohort-level data showing average percentage of symptoms in patients with UCD, iMCD, or HHV8+ MCD (95% CIs) identified using a random effects meta-analysis model. ns, not significant.

Fluid accumulation, pulmonary findings, and cutaneous findings were less frequently seen but were found at similar ranges in patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD (Figure 4). Renal dysfunction was significantly more common in iMCD (36.9% of 503 patients) than HHV8+ MCD (17.4% of 258 patients; P = .04; not significant after FDR correction, P = .085; Figure 4). The higher rates of renal dysfunction in patients with iMCD vs HHV8+ MCD were also apparent in the patient-level data set (45.3% of 97 patients with iMCD vs 11.8% of 18 with HHV8+ MCD). Interestingly, neuropathy was reported in 31.4% (95% CI, 17.1-50.4) and 27.8% (95% CI, 12.1-51.9) of patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD, respectively. Except for cutaneous findings, patients with UCD had significantly lower rates of symptoms than patients with iMCD or HHV8+ MCD (Figure 4); however, pulmonary findings were observed in 15.3% (95% CI, 8.5-26.2) of cases. These findings (from aggregated cohort-level data) were also observed in the patient-level data set (supplemental Table 2).

It is noteworthy that there was considerable between-patient variability in clinical presentation of each CD subtype, as shown by the large range of symptoms reported between studies of the same subtype (supplemental Figure 1). For example, rates of pulmonary findings ranged from 14.0% to 88.9% in iMCD studies, and from 21.1% to 85.7% in HHV8+ MCD studies. Rates of anemia ranged from 50.0% to 100% in iMCD studies, and from 48.1% to 94.7% in HHV8+ MCD studies.

Pediatric presentation (UCD)

In publications exclusively describing pediatric CD, insufficient iMCD cases were available to draw conclusions about iMCD presentation in children and adolescents (n = 16; Table 3). No cases of HHV8+ MCD were reported. Characteristics of 88 pediatric/adolescent patients with UCD are shown in supplemental Table 3. Average median age was 11.8 years (range, 1.3-22). Sex distribution was even (50% female). Ethnicity was only reported for 27 patients. UCD location was reported for most patients (98%); more than half (53.5%) were head and neck manifestations, 24.4% were abdominal, and 16.3% were thoracic.

Symptoms and laboratory findings in pediatric UCD cases are shown in supplemental Table 4. Of note, pediatric patients with UCD had more signs of systemic inflammation than adult patients with UCD; 45.1% (95% CI, 20.9-71.8; n = 50) of pediatric patients with UCD had elevated CRP (vs 19.7% of adults [95% CI, 11.2-30.9]). Constitutional symptoms were reported in 44.4% (95% CI, 21.5-69.2; n = 18) of patients, significantly higher than the rate in adult patients with UCD patients (4.5% [95% CI, 1.6-12.3]; P = .0005).

Discussion

Our review provides a comprehensive analysis of the clinical features of CD subtypes. We found many similarities between patients with iMCD and HHV8+ MCD, most had enlarged lymph nodes and signs of inflammation. Hematological abnormalities (eg, anemia), as well as signs of organ dysfunction (eg, hypoalbuminemia) and immune activation (eg, hypergammaglobulinemia), were common and found at similar ranges in both groups. Thrombocytopenia, fluid accumulation, and pulmonary and cutaneous findings were less frequent, and at similar ranges in both groups. Neuropathy was reported in a larger proportion of patients than typically recognized (∼30% for iMCD and HHV8+ MCD).

Some differences between subtypes were apparent. Patients with iMCD had lower rates of constitutional symptoms, fever, and splenomegaly than patients with HHV8+ MCD. Although this likely reflects heterogeneity of pathomechanisms, constitutional symptoms, cytopenia, and hepatosplenomegaly occur in untreated HIV infection, therefore the lower rate of constitutional symptoms in iMCD vs HHV8+ MCD may reflect our study timeframe, which encapsulates a period with high rates of HIV infection and AIDS-related deaths.62 In a French study comparing 27 iMCD cases with 169 HHV8+ MCD cases over 20 years, HHV8+ MCD displayed a more aggressive clinical and biological presentation than iMCD.3 However, iMCD should not be considered benign: with 5-year mortality rates of 23% to 49%,15 patients may develop organ failure, and MCD sometimes progresses to non-Hodgkin lymphoma.63

Interestingly, renal dysfunction was more frequently found in patients with iMCD vs UCD and HHV8+ MCD (nonsignificant after FDR correction). Similarly, in an analysis of 271 patients with iMCD from a US health care claims database, renal dysfunction was reported in a third of patients with iMCD.64 Many patients with iMCD may present with TAFRO (thrombocytopenia, anasarca, fever, reticulin fibrosis, and organomegaly) syndrome, an iMCD variant displaying symptoms including renal insufficiency.65,66 Because many studies were performed before the introduction of the TAFRO definition, there were insufficient data in this study to distinguish patients with iMCD-TAFRO from those without TAFRO.

We confirmed findings from previous reviews suggesting that systemic symptoms may be present in UCD.8 Although UCD is typically thought of as an asymptomatic disease with solitary lymphadenopathy, intermediate cases may exist, namely UCD with inflammatory symptoms and MCD with only a few stations affected.6 In our analysis, inflammation signs (eg, elevated CRP) occurred in almost 20% of patients with UCD; and anemia, hypergammaglobulinemia, and pulmonary findings were seen in 15% to 20% of cases. Whether these cases represent a distinct entity remains to be elucidated. The relatively high rate of systemic inflammation in pediatric UCD may suggest differences in etiology between UCD age groups. We also confirmed that sex distribution shows a predominance of males in HHV8+ MCD and iMCD, whereas women appear slightly more often affected with UCD.8,64 These findings were apparent in pediatric patients and across ethnicities.

We revealed some differences vs previous reviews. Compared with a literature review of 128 iMCD cases (1995-2015),9 we found markedly lower rates of symptoms in iMCD; Liu et al reported fluid accumulation in 74% of patients (vs 27% in our analysis), organomegaly in 78% (vs 48%), renal dysfunction in 71% (vs 37%), and thrombocytopenia in 44% (vs 17%).9 This may be because of publication bias toward atypical and severe cases as, in contrast to our analysis (limited to studies with ≥5 cases), many individual case reports were included. In contrast, a retrospective study of 180 patients with HHV8− MCD, mainly from China, published rates of symptoms similar to ours.67 We also observed marked differences between studies analyzing the same subtypes. Another Chinese meta-analysis (1634 patients with CD) identified 139 patients with asymptomatic iMCD.68 Our study yielded no asymptomatic patients, but symptoms may not have been extensively reported in the studies analyzed. Recently, Mukherjee et al mapped an inventory of 27 symptoms categorized by organ system in patients with iMCD and evaluated symptom impact in 11 domains of daily living. Their findings suggest that symptom burden in iMCD may be more extensive than previously thought.69

It should be noted that most iMCD (and UCD) cases came from China and Japan (driven by more publications from these regions), whereas most HHV8+ MCD data were from the United States and Europe (driven by more publications from these regions). The disproportionate number of cases from certain regions of the world is an important limitation of our work. Although the impact of ethnicity on clinical presentation of CD is unknown, it is possible that CD presentation in Asian patients may differ from those in other geographic locations, limiting the generalizability of our results. It is notable that rates of fluid accumulation and low platelets were remarkably low (<10%) in the largest study from Japan.24 In fact, the authors noted differences in symptoms such as pulmonary involvement, secondary amyloidosis, electrocardiogram abnormalities, and rates of HIV and HHV8 infection between Japanese patients with MCD and those of other countries. Moreover, rates of thrombocytopenia were higher in patients with iMCD outside Japan, approaching those of HHV8+ MCD. We know that a substantial portion of patients with iMCD in Japan have TAFRO syndrome and thus thrombocytopenia, so this observation may be a result of publication bias. Publication bias can arise when a majority of studies included in a meta-analysis are from a specific region. Funding sources, and cultural and political factors, can influence publication decisions.70 Therefore factors such as local research priorities, diagnostic practices, methodology (eg, study design preference, clinical reporting standards), or local health care practices could influence publication of results. The limited geographical and ethnic diversity of patients included in our analysis is important to consider because our data may underrepresent certain racial or ethnic groups for whom CD may present differently to the predominantly Asian population in our analysis. Further publication of CD symptomatology in diverse populations is essential to continue to improve our understanding, and diagnosis, of patients with this rare disease. Ongoing enrollment of patients from around the world, particularly from the United States and other English-speaking countries, in the Advancing Castleman Care with an Electronic Longitudinal Registry, E-Repository, and Treatment/Effectiveness Research Natural History Registry will help to fill in these gaps.

Given the rarity of CD, the number of studies available for inclusion in the meta-analyses was sometimes small, affecting precision of the results. This work has limitations because of uncontrolled data collection. Symptoms and laboratory parameters were not systematically collected, and few studies followed consensus guidelines for iMCD.4 Because we collected CD diagnosis/classification determined by study investigators, we were unable to exclude misdiagnosed cases. There were likely cases included that would not meet the histopathological definition of iMCD or UCD. Furthermore, many publications did not report HHV8 status and very few described patients with POEMS.

Evidence of statistical heterogeneity was identified in many of the meta-analyses and this was incorporated via random effects. Heterogeneity may be due to a combination of clinical (variability between patients and outcomes) and/or methodological diversity between studies (processes, data collection tools, etc). It was not possible to formally explore causes of heterogeneity because there were insufficient studies to reliably investigate this. Therefore, it is not possible to explore the extent to which differences in estimates between subtypes may be due to clinical or methodological diversity. In addition to the aggregated data, we evaluated and compared studies with individual patient-level data (supplemental Material). This served as an internal control; analysis of patient-level data largely confirmed findings from the aggregated data, and differences between iMCD and HHV8+ MCD remained consistent in all evaluations. Although the patient-level data provide support for our findings from the aggregated data, they are also subject to the same limitations as the aggregated data set, namely uncontrolled data collection, heterogeneity, and geographical limitations. Although these limitations could impact the generalizability of our results, our study adds value to existing evidence by providing information that can help distinguish the presentation of CD subtypes and determine a correct diagnosis.

This review found many similarities between iMCD and HHV8+ MCD, but also some differences regarding symptoms and laboratory findings, likely reflecting heterogeneity of underlying pathological mechanisms and comorbidities. Our description of the clinical presentation of CD complements diagnosis and management guidelines for iMCD and UCD and provides a detailed description of the clinical presentation of HHV8+ MCD. We hope this will help physicians better identify and diagnose these rare diseases. Additionally, our work highlights inconsistent reporting of symptoms and laboratory parameters in the literature. To further our collective understanding of these diseases, diagnostic criteria4 should be applied to describe CD symptoms and laboratory abnormalities when reporting case presentations or studies.

Conflict-of-interest disclosure: C.H., E.O., and D.C.F. have received consulting fees from Recordati Pharmaceuticals. S.L. has received payment from TVF Communications for statistical analysis. L.G. has received payment from TVF Communications for medical writing. C.H. and E.O. have received honoraria from Recordati Pharmaceuticals. E.O. has participated in an advisory board for Recordati Pharmaceuticals. D.C.F. has received institution payments from Recordati Pharmaceuticals. K.K. is an employee of Recordati Pharmaceutical.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental Tables, Methods, References, and Figure

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Azhaar Ashraf and Hannah Lewis of TVF Communications for their support with performing the literature review and data extraction. The authors thank Lynsey McColl of Select Statistical Services for insightful discussions and support with the statistical analyses and their interpretation.

This study was funded by Recordati Pharmaceuticals Ltd. D.C.F. acknowledges the National Institutes of Health (grant R01HL141408), the US Food and Drug Administration (grant R01FD007632), and the Castleman Disease Collaborative Network for research funding support.

Authorship

Contribution: Recordati Pharmaceuticals Ltd conceived and designed the analysis in collaboration with C.H., had full access to the data, revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content, and approved the final version of the manuscript; L.G. performed the literature search, data collection, and data extraction; S.L. performed statistics; C.H. and K.K. conceived and designed the analysis; C.H. assessed and verified data and wrote the manuscript with substantial contributions and support from L.G. and S.L.; D.C.F. and E.O. critically evaluated the methodology, analysis, and data interpretation; and all authors had full access to the data, revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content, and approved the final version of the manuscript.

The data that support the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author, Christian Hoffmann (hoffmann@ich-hamburg.de).

The full-text version of this article contains a data supplement.
==== Refs
References

1 Fajgenbaum DC Novel insights and therapeutic approaches in idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease Blood 132 22 2018 2323 2330 30487129
2 Yu L Tu M Cortes J Clinical and pathological characteristics of HIV- and HHV-8-negative Castleman disease Blood 129 12 2017 1658 1668 28100459
3 Oksenhendler E Boutboul D Fajgenbaum D The full spectrum of Castleman disease: 273 patients studied over 20 years Br J Haematol 180 2 2018 206 216 29143319
4 Fajgenbaum DC Uldrick TS Bagg A International, evidence-based consensus diagnostic criteria for HHV-8-negative/idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease Blood 129 12 2017 1646 1657 28087540
5 van Rhee F Voorhees P Dispenzieri A International, evidence-based consensus treatment guidelines for idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease Blood 132 20 2018 2115 2124 30181172
6 van Rhee F Oksenhendler E Srkalovic G International evidence-based consensus diagnostic and treatment guidelines for unicentric Castleman disease Blood Adv 4 23 2020 6039 6050 33284946
7 Bower M How I treat HIV-associated multicentric Castleman disease Blood 116 22 2010 4415 4421 20688959
8 Haap M Wiefels J Horger M Hoyer A Müssig K Clinical, laboratory and imaging findings in Castleman's disease – the subtype decides Blood Rev 32 3 2018 225 234 29223447
9 Liu AY Nabel CS Finkelman BS Idiopathic multicentric Castleman's disease: a systematic literature review Lancet Haematol 3 4 2016 e163 e175 27063975
10 Dispenzieri A Fajgenbaum DC Overview of Castleman disease Blood 135 16 2020 1353 1364 32106302
11 Alzahrani M Hull MC Sherlock C Griswold D Leger CS Leitch HA Human immunodeficiency virus-associated multicentric Castleman disease refractory to antiretroviral therapy: clinical features, treatment and outcome Leuk Lymphoma 56 5 2015 1246 1251 25093377
12 Dong Y Wang M Nong L Clinical and laboratory characterization of 114 cases of Castleman disease patients from a single centre: paraneoplastic pemphigus is an unfavourable prognostic factor Br J Haematol 169 6 2015 834 842 25824806
13 Lan X Li Z Zhang M Analysis of clinical characteristics and prognosis factors of 71 cases with HIV-negative Castleman's disease: hypoproteinemia is an unfavorable prognostic factor which should be treated appropriately J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 144 7 2018 1265 1277 29736622
14 Zhang X Rao H Xu X Clinical characteristics and outcomes of Castleman disease: a multicenter study of 185 Chinese patients Cancer Sci 109 1 2018 199 206 29124835
15 Zhang L Zhao AL Duan MH Phase 2 study using oral thalidomide-cyclophosphamide-prednisone for idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease Blood 133 16 2019 1720 1728 30760451
16 Zhang Y Suo SS Yang HJ Clinical features and treatment of 7 Chinese TAFRO syndromes from 96 de novo Castleman diseases: a 10-year retrospective study J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 146 2 2020 357 365 31938902
17 Zhao S Wan Y Huang Z Song B Yu J Imaging and clinical features of Castleman disease Cancer Imaging 19 1 2019 53 31345268
18 Boutboul D Fadlallah J Chawki S Treatment and outcome of unicentric Castleman disease: a retrospective analysis of 71 cases Br J Haematol 186 2 2019 269 273 31016730
19 Hoffmann C Schmid H Müller M Improved outcome with rituximab in patients with HIV-associated multicentric Castleman disease Blood 118 13 2011 3499 3503 21778341
20 Prakash G Bal A Malhotra P Presentation and outcome of Castleman's disease in immunocompetent hosts Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus 32 4 2016 468 474 27812258
21 Fujimoto S Sakai T Kawabata H Is TAFRO syndrome a subtype of idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease? Am J Hematol 94 9 2019 975 983 31222819
22 Iwaki N Gion Y Kondo E Elevated serum interferon gamma-induced protein 10 kDa is associated with TAFRO syndrome Sci Rep 7 2017 42316
23 Kawabata H Kadowaki N Nishikori M Clinical features and treatment of multicentric Castleman's disease: a retrospective study of 21 Japanese patients at a single institute J Clin Exp Hematop 53 1 2013 69 77 23801137
24 Murakami M Johkoh T Hayashi S Clinicopathologic characteristics of 342 patients with multicentric Castleman disease in Japan Mod Rheumatol 30 5 2020 843 851 31829070
25 Nishimura Y Hanayama Y Fujii N Kondo E Otsuka F Comparison of the clinical characteristics of TAFRO syndrome and idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease in general internal medicine: a 6-year retrospective study Intern Med J 50 2 2020 184 191 31211492
26 Volkow-Fernandez P Lome-Maldonado C Quintero-Buenrostro H Islas-Muñoz B Cornejo-Juárez B HIV-associated multicentric Castleman disease: a report of 19 cases at an oncology institution Int J STD AIDS 31 4 2020 318 325 32089093
27 Melikyan AL Egorova EK Julhakyan HL Kovrigina AL Savchenko VG Human herpesvirus type 8-positive multicentric Castleman disease Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 16 suppl 2016 S159 S165 27133959
28 Seo S Yoo C Yoon DH Clinical features and outcomes in patients with human immunodeficiency virus-negative, multicentric Castleman's disease: a single medical center experience Blood Res 49 4 2014 253 258 25548759
29 Shin DY Jeon YK Hong YS Clinical dissection of multicentric Castleman disease Leuk Lymphoma 52 8 2011 1517 1522 21585280
30 Gonzalez-Garcia A Patier de la Peña JL García-Cosio M Clinical and pathological characteristics of Castleman disease: an observational study in a Spanish tertiary hospital Leuk Lymphoma 60 14 2019 3442 3448 31305183
31 Bower M Pria AD Coyle C Nelson M Naresh K Diagnostic criteria schemes for multicentric Castleman disease in 75 cases J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 65 2 2014 e80 e82 24442228
32 Casper C Teltsch DY Robinson D Jr. Clinical characteristics and healthcare utilization of patients with multicentric Castleman disease Br J Haematol 168 1 2015 82 93 25208471
33 Chronowski GM Ha CS Wilder RB Cabanillas F Manning J Cox JD Treatment of unicentric and multicentric Castleman disease and the role of radiotherapy Cancer 92 3 2001 670 676 11505414
34 Dispenzieri A Armitage JO Loe MJ The clinical spectrum of Castleman's disease Am J Hematol 87 11 2012 997 1002 22791417
35 Herrada J Cabanillas F Rice L Manning J Pugh W The clinical behavior of localized and multicentric Castleman disease Ann Intern Med 128 8 1998 657 662 9537940
36 Hill AJ Tirumani SH Rosenthal MH Multimodality imaging and clinical features in Castleman disease: single institute experience in 30 patients Br J Radiol 88 1049 2015 20140670
37 Lurain K Polizzotto MN Aleman K Viral, immunologic, and clinical features of primary effusion lymphoma Blood 133 16 2019 1753 1761 30782610
38 Ramaswami R Lurain K Peer CJ Tocilizumab in patients with symptomatic Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus-associated multicentric Castleman disease Blood 135 25 2020 2316 2319 32276276
39 Uldrick TS Polizzotto MN Aleman K High-dose zidovudine plus valganciclovir for Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus-associated multicentric Castleman disease: a pilot study of virus-activated cytotoxic therapy Blood 117 26 2011 6977 6986 21487108
40 Uldrick TS Polizzotto MN Aleman K Rituximab plus liposomal doxorubicin in HIV-infected patients with KSHV-associated multicentric Castleman disease Blood 124 24 2014 3544 3552 25331113
41 Venkataraman G Uldrick TS Aleman K Bone marrow findings in HIV-positive patients with Kaposi sarcoma herpesvirus-associated multicentric Castleman disease Am J Clin Pathol 139 5 2013 651 661 23596117
42 Parez N Bader-Meunier B Roy CC Dommergues JP Paediatric Castleman disease: report of seven cases and review of the literature Eur J Pediatr 158 8 1999 631 637 10445341
43 Zhang J Li C Lv L Clinical and experimental study of Castleman disease in children Pediatr Blood Cancer 62 1 2015 109 114 25213773
44 Borocco C Ballot-Schmit C Ackermann O The French paediatric cohort of Castleman disease: a retrospective report of 23 patients Orphanet J Rare Dis 15 1 2020 95 32303241
45 Chisholm KM Fleming MD Histologic and laboratory characteristics of symptomatic and asymptomatic Castleman disease in the pediatric population Am J Clin Pathol 153 6 2020 821 832 32112075
46 Sopfe J Endres A Campbell K Castleman disease in pediatrics: insights on presentation, treatment, and outcomes from a two-site retrospective cohort study Pediatr Blood Cancer 66 5 2019 e27613
47 Loi S Goldstein D Clezy K Milliken ST Hoy J Chipman M Castleman's disease and HIV infection in Australia HIV Med 5 3 2004 157 162 15139981
48 Dong Y Na J Lv J Clinical and laboratory characterization of a large cohort of patients with Castleman disease retrospectively collected from a single center Leuk Lymphoma 50 8 2009 1308 1317 19579073
49 Wang S Chen S Xu J Cai S Clinicopathological characteristics of unicentric retroperitoneal Castleman's disease: a study of 14 cases World J Surg Oncol 14 1 2016 3 26739518
50 Ye B Gao SG Li W A retrospective study of unicentric and multicentric Castleman's disease: a report of 52 patients Med Oncol 27 4 2010 1171 1178 19937164
51 Zhu SH Yu YH Zhang Y Sun JJ Han DL Li J Clinical features and outcome of patients with HIV-negative multicentric Castleman's disease treated with combination chemotherapy: a report on 10 patients Med Oncol 30 1 2013 492 23400962
52 Dossier A Meignin V Fieschi C Boutboul D Oksenhendler E Galicier L Human herpesvirus 8-related Castleman disease in the absence of HIV infection Clin Infect Dis 56 6 2013 833 842 23223599
53 Oksenhendler E Boulanger E Galicier L High incidence of Kaposi sarcoma-associated herpesvirus-related non-Hodgkin lymphoma in patients with HIV infection and multicentric Castleman disease Blood 99 7 2002 2331 2336 11895764
54 Kojima M Nakamura N Tsukamoto N Clinical implications of idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease among Japanese: a report of 28 cases Int J Surg Pathol 16 4 2008 391 398 18499694
55 Sato Y Kojima M Takata K Multicentric Castleman's disease with abundant IgG4-positive cells: a clinical and pathological analysis of six cases J Clin Pathol 63 12 2010 1084 1089 20974624
56 Terasaki Y Ikushima S Matsui S Comparison of clinical and pathological features of lung lesions of systemic IgG4-related disease and idiopathic multicentric Castleman's disease Histopathology 70 7 2017 1114 1124 28207938
57 Gopal S Liomba NG Montgomery ND Characteristics and survival for HIV-associated multicentric Castleman disease in Malawi J Int AIDS Soc 18 1 2015 20122
58 Ghosh A Pradhan SV Talwar OP Castleman's disease – hyaline vascular type – clinical, cytological and histological features with review of literature Indian J Pathol Microbiol 53 2 2010 244 247 20551525
59 Kim JE Kim CJ Park IA Clinicopathologic study of Castleman's disease in Korea J Korean Med Sci 15 4 2000 393 398 10983686
60 Lachmann HJ Gilbertson JA Gillmore JD Hawkins PN Pepys MB Unicentric Castleman's disease complicated by systemic AA amyloidosis: a curable disease QJM 95 4 2002 211 218 11937647
61 Bowne WB Lewis JJ Filippa DA The management of unicentric and multicentric Castleman's disease: a report of 16 cases and a review of the literature Cancer 85 3 1999 706 717 10091744
62 UNAIDS Core epidemiology slides https://www.unaids.org/en/resources/documents/2023/core-epidemiology-slides 2023
63 van Rhee F Greenway A Stone K Treatment of idiopathic Castleman disease Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 32 1 2018 89 106 29157622
64 Mukherjee S Kanhai K Kauffman D Organ dysfunction, thrombotic events and malignancies in patients with idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease: a population-level US health claims analysis Leukemia 36 10 2022 2539 2543 36175555
65 Iwaki N Fajgenbaum D Nabel CS Clinicopathologic analysis of TAFRO syndrome demonstrates a distinct subtype of HHV-8-negative multicentric Castleman disease Am J Hematol 91 2 2016 220 226 26805758
66 Nishimora Y Fajgenbaum DC Pierson SK Validated international definition of the thrombocytopenia, anasarca, fever, reticulin fibrosis, renal insufficiency, and organomegaly clinical subtype (TAFRO) of idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease Am J Hematol 96 10 2021 1241 1252 34265103
67 Liu W Cai W Yu T Clinical characteristics and outcomes of Castleman disease: a multicenter Consortium study of 428 patients with 15-year follow-up al Am J Cancer Res 12 9 2022 4227 4240 36225639
68 Zhang L Dong Y-j Peng H-l A national, multicenter, retrospective study of Castleman disease in China implementing CDCN criteria Lancet Reg Health West Pac 34 2023 100720
69 Mukherjee S Shupo F Wayi-Wayi G Symptom burden in patients with idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease and its impact on daily life: an international patient and caregiver survey eClinicalMedicine 64 2023 102192
70 Montori VM Smieja M Guyatt GH Publication bias: a brief review for clinicians Mayo Clin Proc 75 12 2000 1284 1288 11126838
