Aa
Aa
A
A
A
Close
Avatar universal

Is low grade lymphoma common in young adults?

I’ve read before that low grade lymphomas are common in young adults but then also read that low grade cancer s in young people are incredibly rare at the same time so I’m a bit confused by that. As you know I’ve had swollen nodes for well over a year now (nearing a year and a half) and I’m just concerned about low grade lymphomas.

According to this article ; https://www.aafp.org/afp/2002/1201/p2103.html
Low grade lymphomas can present no growth for over a year yet my time with swollen nodes and no growth is one of the biggest reasons my doctors have thought I was fine. Is the article saying that sometimes low grade lymphomas can have no growth (in nodal size at least) for extended periods or it is saying that typically there would still be increased size after a year but rarely with low grade there isn’t (when it says ‘the rare exceptions to the latter {no increase in nodal size over a year})?
3 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
1081992 tn?1389903637
COMMUNITY LEADER
"Is the article saying that sometimes low grade lymphomas can have no growth (in nodal size at least) for extended periods..."
Yes, that's what it claims.

"or it is saying that typically there would still be increased size after a year but rarely with low grade there isn’t"
Yes. More specifically, it is also purposefully excluding metastatic cancer from having zero growth in nodes.

I'd keep in mind that the article is from 2002, it cites a book from 1993 and a study from 1980, etc. The passage about the 1980 study says, "In one series of 628 patients undergoing nodal biopsy, benign or self-limited causes were found in 79 percent of patients younger than 30 years of age, versus 59 percent in patients 31 to 50 years of age and 39 percent in those older than 50 years."
Much more recent data says that the incidence of cancer in people who see a doctor because of unexplained lymphadenopathy is around 2%, among all ages combined. I haven't seen that broken down by age, but the % would increase according to age.


"I’ve read before that low grade lymphomas are common in young adults but then also read that low grade cancer s in young people are incredibly rare at the same time so I’m a bit confused by that."
They probably meant that it is rare, but when it happens it is likley to be low rather than high grade.
Helpful - 0
2 Comments
Actually the article said that Hodgkins is the most common cause for cancer in young adults etc and that the vast majority of those cases tend to grow quickly but respond well to treatment, then saying there was a very small chance it could potentially be low grade in young people but that low grade lymphomas are very uncommon in young people rather than ‘normal’ Hodgkin’s disease.

I don’t know what’s going on with the link sorry but that and another article I read stated the same than (lymphomas at least) cancers in young people are typically high grade and low grade lymphomas are typically  more in elderly people etc

Also I think I may have misunderstood your statement regarding the original article, where it says no increase in over a year will only occur in rare low grade exceptions, is that implying that low grades in general wouldn’t see growth in a year? Or more implying that even in low grade lymphoma there is typically nodal growth but rarely it can be so slow there isn’t?  I’m just wondering as the timeframe is one of the biggest points the hematologists worked off of and in their notes they even state ‘it is very unlikely mr. ******* has an indolent lymphoma given the stability in nodal size over the last year’ in person he even said if I go two years with no growth to him it’s basically as solid as an excision to him (regarding cancer at least) to me that seems contradictory
Avatar universal
https://lymphoma-action.org.uk/types-lymphoma-lymphoma-children-and-young-people/lymphoma-young-people#top
Helpful - 0
1081992 tn?1389903637
COMMUNITY LEADER
"is that implying that low grades in general wouldn’t see growth in a year?"
Nope, it would be very rare to see no growth in a year without any treatment.

"in person he even said if I go two years with no growth to him it’s basically as solid as an excision to him (regarding cancer at least)"
Yes, so true - but there is even a twist: sometimes even post-excision pathology can't be sure. The report might say 'suspicious". That'd also be very rare.

A biopsy is really only sure if it definitely finds a cancer, not if it doesn't find one.
Helpful - 0
1 Comments
I see, and I understand the point you and the hematologist are making; no test is 100%, maybe it’s 99.99 but not certain and his logic is my odds are so low anyway that weighing that against the biopsy (and whatever minute risk associated) doesn’t seem productive.
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the Leukemia and Lymphoma Community

Top Leukemia & Lymphoma Answerers
1081992 tn?1389903637
PA
Learn About Top Answerers
Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
An interview with the co-discoverer of one of the biggest breakthroughs in cancer research
From causes to treatment options, get answers to your questions about CML, a type of blood cancer
New drug options on the horizon may make CML, a type of blood cancer, one of the few success stories in cancer treatment
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.