Flow Cytometry Immunophenotyping of Canine Lymphoma: Technical Principles, Diagnostic Classification, and Prognostic Applications

Introduction

Canine lymphoma is a common hematopoietic neoplasm with an annual incidence of approximately 160 cases per 100,000 dogs [1]. The disease encompasses a heterogeneous group of lymphoid malignancies that require accurate diagnosis and classification to guide therapeutic decisions and prognostication [2, 3]. Flow cytometry (FC) has emerged as a critical tool for the immunophenotypic characterization of canine lymphoma, enabling rapid, multiparametric analysis of cell suspensions derived from fine needle aspirates (FNA), lymph node biopsies, peripheral blood, and other body fluids [4, 5, 6, 7]. The technique provides objective quantitative data on antigen expression, cell size, and proliferative activity, which are essential for distinguishing lymphoma subtypes, detecting aberrant phenotypes, and assessing disease stage [8, 9].

The integration of FC with cytology, histopathology, and molecular clonality testing (e.g., PCR for antigen receptor rearrangement, PARR) has refined the diagnostic accuracy for canine lymphoma [10, 11]. Consensus recommendations for reporting FC data in canine hematopoietic neoplasms have been established to standardize interpretation across laboratories [9]. This article provides an exhaustive review of the technical principles, antibody panels, immunophenotypic classification, aberrant antigen expression, prognostic markers, and clinical applications of FC immunophenotyping in canine lymphoma, with a focus on evidence from the peer-reviewed literature.

Technical Principles of Flow Cytometry for Canine Lymphoma

FC measures the physical and fluorescence properties of individual cells as they pass through a laser beam in a fluid stream [7]. For canine lymphoma diagnosis, cells are typically obtained via FNA of enlarged lymph nodes, yielding single-cell suspensions suitable for staining with fluorochrome-conjugated monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) [4, 5]. The forward scatter (FSC) signal correlates with cell size, while side scatter (SSC) reflects granularity and internal complexity [7]. Fluorescence signals from labeled antibodies allow quantification of surface and intracellular antigen expression [12].

The use of a personal bench-top flow cytometer has been validated for canine lymphoma immunophenotyping, demonstrating high correlation with conventional cytometers for both peripheral blood (r=0.95) and lymph node aspirates (r=0.98) [5]. The protocol from sample receipt to immunophenotype reporting can be completed in 2 to 3 hours using a limited panel of two antibodies (anti-CD3 and anti-CD21) [5]. However, comprehensive immunophenotyping typically requires multicolor panels including markers for T-cell lineage (CD3, CD4, CD5, CD8, TCRαβ, TCRγδ), B-cell lineage (CD21, CD79a, PAX5, CD20), natural killer (NK) cells (CD94), stem/progenitor cells (CD34), and activation/proliferation markers (Ki67, MHC class II) [13, 14, 15, 2, 3, 16, 17, 18].

Pre-analytical variables significantly affect FC results. Sample storage time, transport conditions, and anticoagulant type can influence cell viability and antigen expression [19]. For lymph node aspirates, immediate processing or storage in appropriate media (e.g., RPMI-1640 with serum) is recommended to maintain cell integrity [19]. The European canine lymphoma network has published consensus guidelines for FC reporting, including gating strategies, minimum antibody panels, and quality control metrics [9].

Sample Preparation and Antibody Panels

Fine Needle Aspirates and Cell Suspensions

FNA of peripheral lymph nodes is the most common sampling method for FC immunophenotyping of canine lymphoma [4, 10]. The aspirate is expelled into a buffer solution (e.g., phosphate-buffered saline with 2% fetal bovine serum) and filtered through a mesh to remove debris and clumps [4]. Cell concentration is adjusted to approximately 1-2 x 10^6 cells/mL for staining [5]. For bone marrow evaluation, samples are collected via aspiration from the humerus or ilium and processed similarly [20, 21].

Urine-derived cells have been successfully used for FC diagnosis of renal lymphoma, with 83% of cells identified as large CD3+CD8+ T cells in one reported case [11]. This demonstrates the versatility of FC for extranodal lymphoma diagnosis.

Antibody Panels

A core panel for canine lymphoma immunophenotyping includes antibodies against CD3 (pan-T cell), CD21 (mature B cell), and CD45 (leukocyte common antigen) [5, 14, 9]. Expanded panels incorporate CD4, CD5, CD8, CD79a, CD20, CD34, CD44, CD94, MHC class II, and Ki67 [13, 14, 15, 2, 3, 16, 17, 22, 18]. The table below summarizes commonly used markers and their diagnostic significance.

The development of new mAbs for canine leukocyte antigens continues to expand the diagnostic toolkit [18]. Notably, a canine-specific anti-CD94 mAb has been applied to blood and lymph node samples, identifying expanded CD94+ populations in a subset of T-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia cases [13].

Immunophenotypic Classification of Canine Lymphoma

B-Cell Lymphoma

B-cell lymphoma (BCL) constitutes the majority of canine lymphomas, with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) being the most common subtype [3]. FC immunophenotyping of BCL typically reveals expression of CD21, CD79a, and CD20, with variable expression of CD45 and MHC class II [3, 26]. Aberrant expression of CD5 or CD34 may be observed in a subset of BCL cases [17]. The Ki67 proliferation index, assessed by FC, has prognostic significance in high-grade BCL, with higher values associated with shorter survival times [22]. A cut-off value of 42.5% Ki67 has been proposed to differentiate indolent from aggressive lymphomas [27].

T-Cell Lymphoma

T-cell lymphoma (TCL) represents approximately 30-40% of canine lymphomas and includes several subtypes with distinct clinical behaviors [2]. The most common immunophenotype is CD3+CD4+CD8- (helper T-cell phenotype), which corresponds to peripheral T-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS) [2, 23, 24]. CD8+ and CD4-CD8- (double negative) TCL are less common and often associated with aggressive disease [25]. Mediastinal enlargement and hypercalcemia are more frequent in CD4-CD8- TCL [25].

T-Zone Lymphoma

T-zone lymphoma (TZL) is an indolent form of TCL characterized by loss of CD45 expression, which is a specific diagnostic feature [14, 15, 27]. TZL cells are typically CD3+CD4+CD5+CD8- (or occasionally CD8+) and express CD21 aberrantly in many cases [14, 15, 17, 28]. The Ki67 index in TZL is low (mean 13.32% in one study), and a cut-off of 42.5% Ki67 can differentiate TZL from high-grade TCL with 100% sensitivity and specificity [27]. Golden Retrievers are overrepresented among TZL cases (40-44%) [14, 27]. The median survival for TZL is approximately 637 days, reflecting its indolent nature [14].

Aberrant Antigen Expression

Phenotypic aberrancies are common in canine lymphoma and can aid in diagnosis and classification [16, 17]. In a large retrospective study of 310 dogs, the most frequent aberrancies included CD5 loss in T-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified (T-NOS), CD21 expression in TZL, and CD34 expression in B-cell lymphoma [17]. Aberrant co-expression of CD3 and CD21 (so-called dual expressers) is particularly characteristic of TZL [15, 28]. Detection of aberrant phenotypes by FC can help distinguish neoplastic from reactive lymphoid populations and may have prognostic implications [16, 17].

Prognostic Markers Assessed by Flow Cytometry

FC provides several prognostic indicators in canine lymphoma. The Ki67 proliferation index, measured by intracellular staining, correlates with histologic grade and survival in BCL and TCL [12, 22]. A moderate correlation (ρ=0.57) between FC and immunohistochemistry for Ki67 has been reported, with FC offering the advantage of analyzing a larger number of cells [12].

Expression of CD25 (IL-2 receptor alpha) has been associated with poorer prognosis in BCL [29]. MHC class II expression is variable; loss of MHC class II may indicate a more aggressive phenotype [29, 25]. The peripheral lymphocyte/monocyte ratio and the ratio of T to B lymphocytes in extranodal sites have also been explored as prognostic factors [29].

Bone marrow infiltration (BMI) detected by FC is a strong negative prognostic factor in canine large B-cell lymphoma [20, 21]. A cut-off of 5% neoplastic cells in bone marrow has been proposed to define BMI positivity [21]. FC is more sensitive than cytology for detecting low-level marrow involvement [20].

Machine learning models combining FC immunophenotyping data with ex vivo chemosensitivity results have been developed to predict chemotherapy response in canine lymphoma [30]. These models achieved ROC-AUC values >0.95 for predicting response to doxorubicin, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, lomustine, and rabacfosadine [30].

Clinical Applications and Workflow

FC immunophenotyping is used for initial diagnosis, classification, staging, and monitoring of minimal residual disease (MRD) in canine lymphoma [2, 3]. The technique can be applied to lymph node aspirates, peripheral blood, bone marrow, and extranodal samples such as urine [11] and lingual masses [31, 28].

The following Mermaid diagram illustrates a typical diagnostic workflow integrating FC with cytology and molecular testing.

flowchart TD
    A[Clinical suspicion of lymphoma], > B[Physical exam + CBC + biochemistry]
    B, > C[Lymph node fine needle aspirate]
    C, > D[Cytology]
    D, > E{Diagnostic?}
    E, >|Yes| F[Flow cytometry immunophenotyping]
    E, >|No| G[Repeat FNA or biopsy]
    F, > H[Immunophenotype classification]
    H, > I{B vs T cell?}
    I, >|B cell| J[Assess CD21, CD79a, Ki67, MHCII]
    I, >|T cell| K[Assess CD3, CD4, CD5, CD8, CD45, CD94]
    J, > L[Subtype: DLBCL, marginal zone, etc.]
    K, > M[Subtype: PTCL, TZL, others]
    L, > N[Staging: blood, bone marrow FC]
    M, > N
    N, > O[Prognostic markers: Ki67, BMI, CD25]
    O, > P[Treatment planning]
    P, > Q[Response monitoring: FC for MRD]

FC is also used to evaluate the MDR-1 gene expression profile indirectly through immunophenotype correlations; CD45- T-cell lymphomas show higher intrinsic MDR-1 expression, which may influence chemoresistance [32].

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the role of flow cytometry in diagnosing canine lymphoma?

FC provides rapid, quantitative immunophenotyping of neoplastic lymphocytes from FNA samples, enabling differentiation of B-cell from T-cell lymphoma and identification of specific subtypes such as T-zone lymphoma [4, 5, 8, 2, 3].

Which antibodies are essential for immunophenotyping canine lymphoma?

A minimal panel includes anti-CD3 and anti-CD21, which can classify most cases as B or T cell [5]. Expanded panels add CD4, CD5, CD8, CD45, CD79a, CD34, CD94, and Ki67 for detailed subtyping and prognostic assessment [13, 14, 9, 16, 17, 18].

How is T-zone lymphoma identified by flow cytometry?

TZL is characterized by loss of CD45 expression, variable CD4 and CD8 expression, frequent aberrant CD21 co-expression, and low Ki67 index [14, 15, 27, 28].

Can flow cytometry detect minimal residual disease in canine lymphoma?

Yes, FC can detect low levels of neoplastic cells in blood or bone marrow during and after treatment, aiding in early detection of relapse [20, 2, 3, 21].

What prognostic information does flow cytometry provide?

FC provides Ki67 proliferation index, detection of bone marrow infiltration, expression of CD25 and MHC class II, and identification of aberrant phenotypes, all of which correlate with survival and treatment response [30, 12, 29, 22, 21].

Is flow cytometry useful for extranodal lymphoma diagnosis?

Yes, FC has been applied to urine samples for renal lymphoma [11], lingual masses [31, 28], and other extranodal sites, demonstrating its versatility.

How does flow cytometry compare to immunohistochemistry for Ki67 assessment?

FC and IHC show moderate correlation (ρ=0.57) for Ki67, with FC analyzing more cells and avoiding sampling bias from hot spots [12].

What are the limitations of flow cytometry in canine lymphoma?

Limitations include the need for fresh samples, potential loss of antigen expression during storage, inability to assess tissue architecture, and requirement for experienced operators [19, 9].

References

[1] Nascimento AC, Peterson S, Connell DR, et al. Pilot evaluation of a liquid biopsy test for longitudinal monitoring of disease status in dogs undergoing treatment for multicentric lymphoma. BMC Veterinary Research. 2026. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/72788f4916b99b48ccb67e7d50c29df6055a9c7b

[2] Comazzi S, Riondato F. Flow Cytometry in the Diagnosis of Canine T-Cell Lymphoma. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2021. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7d025201358619ccb73b50897672e736672e8ab1

[3] Riondato F, Comazzi S. Flow Cytometry in the Diagnosis of Canine B-Cell Lymphoma. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2021. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/54bb3a535cce1db7e66562afae4768ffb13c8647

[4] Sözmen M, Tasca S, Carli E, et al. Use of Fine Needle Aspirates and Flow Cytometry for the Diagnosis, Classification, and Immunophenotyping of Canine Lymphomas. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 2005. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0e0c0498e41771afba678a2843c75bde9980bda0

[5] Papakonstantinou S, Berzina I, Lawlor A, et al. Rapid, effective and user-friendly immunophenotyping of canine lymphoma using a personal flow cytometer. Irish Veterinary Journal. 2013. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5829512eedcf9dcbdae71423226a0d6d716386c3

[6] Silvestre M. Use of flow cytometry in the diagnosis of canine lymphoma. 2014. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c48d7870505977dc1a7d49f1da492d101675786c

[7] Chabanne L, Bonnefont C, Bernaud J, et al. Clinical applications of flow cytometry and cell immunophenotyping to companion animals (dog and cat). Methods in Cell Science. 2000. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0243a3ec9b617761ee3e031798d0aa7d983cc779

[8] Comazzi S, Gelain M. Use of flow cytometric immunophenotyping to refine the cytological diagnosis of canine lymphoma. The Veterinary Journal. 2011. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/28d0bd2a556c92c92e5fea34ca2fa3500545a75b

[9] Comazzi S, Avery P, Garden OA, et al. European canine lymphoma network consensus recommendations for reporting flow cytometry in canine hematopoietic neoplasms. Cytometry Part B Clinical Cytometry. 2017. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bf056e2ffcbc84a3ed2a27e1773189bf1ef58f6b

[10] Heinrich DA, Avery A, Henson M, et al. Cytology and the cell block method in diagnostic characterization of canine lymphadenopathy and in the immunophenotyping of nodal lymphoma. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3ddf92c22706b6908dbcadae080a5f49efaaa0b3

[11] Witschen PM, Sharkey L, Seelig D, et al. Diagnosis of canine renal lymphoma by cytology and flow cytometry of the urine. Veterinary Clinical Pathology. 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/656584b78c785e66127739fac75b7cfc0ec4cf19

[12] Rigillo A, Fuchs-Baumgartinger A, Sabattini S, et al. Ki-67 assessment, agreeability between immunohistochemistry and flow cytometry in canine lymphoma. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2021. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6281a439a4e265980dfcf092954e1749ef2d7257

[13] Blockeel A, Demeyere K, Steenbrugge J, et al. CD94 as a novel marker for immunophenotyping of leukemia and lymphoma in dogs. Frontiers in Veterinary Science. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/55334c2508730decf7a780af08ce9dd12b740412

[14] Seelig D, Avery PR, Webb TL, et al. Canine T-Zone Lymphoma: Unique Immunophenotypic Features, Outcome, and Population Characteristics. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine. 2014. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/e8b79737cfd4fe085c6b7c2bbb499c7d7b8b1390

[15] Shin S, Lim YJ, Bae H, et al. CD3+/CD4+/CD5+/CD8+/CD21+/CD34-/CD45-/CD79a-/TCRαβ+/TCRγδ-/MHCII+ T-zone lymphoma in a dog with generalized lymphadenopathy: a case report. Korean Journal of Veterinary Research. 2021. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0dc3283b03baff65fb63192f46a697b07bd62f46

[16] Gelain M, Mazzilli M, Riondato F, et al. Aberrant phenotypes and quantitative antigen expression in different subtypes of canine lymphoma by flow cytometry. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology. 2008. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c332706cee4a3fe130eea2f382be0001655de004

[17] Celant E, Marconato L, Stefanello D, et al. Clinical and Clinical Pathological Presentation of 310 Dogs Affected by Lymphoma with Aberrant Antigen Expression Identified via Flow Cytometry. Veterinary Sciences. 2022. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5a0181013ce157ed39d6ecb328060f2dbedc822f

[18] de Souza C, Fidel J, Davis WC. Update on development of monoclonal antibodies for use in clinical flow cytometry and research in dogs. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5841374d96c98109f28d96fe0cc6f6aed7f836f5

[19] Comazzi S, Cozzi M, Bernardi S, et al. Effects of pre-analytical variables on flow cytometric diagnosis of canine lymphoma: A retrospective study (2009-2015). The Veterinary Journal. 2018. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c148dae0a22ad9493866e6732849e72b1c0b6ad2

[20] Riondato F, Miniscalco B, Poggi A, et al. Analytical and diagnostic validation of a flow cytometric strategy to quantify blood and marrow infiltration in dogs with large B-cell lymphoma. Cytometry Part B Clinical Cytometry. 2016. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ee9fd84c8afacdc8317385c0d5f4ea61ea976d96

[21] Marconato L, Martini V, Aresu L, et al. Assessment of bone marrow infiltration diagnosed by flow cytometry in canine large B cell lymphoma: prognostic significance and proposal of a cut-off value. The Veterinary Journal. 2013. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9dc4deb7b15b728c79a8e3636e522285c626c55a

[22] Poggi A, Miniscalco B, Morello E, et al. Prognostic significance of Ki67 evaluated by flow cytometry in dogs with high-grade B-cell lymphoma. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2017. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7de79ca1082b9e8e6b1c2c472b43d9a7aa25013a

[23] Harris LJ, Hughes KL, Ehrhart E, et al. Canine CD4+ T-cell lymphoma identified by flow cytometry exhibits a consistent histomorphology and gene expression profile. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2019. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/46a18d65433506c29b5123f88df256c514d7c12d

[24] Owens E, Harris LJ, Harris A, et al. The gene expression profile and cell of origin of canine peripheral T-cell lymphoma. BMC Cancer. 2024. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/59dbc0a2acdb91fed658c7e9ef686c8d0c13771a

[25] Harris LJ, Rout E, Labadie J, et al. Clinical Features of Canine Nodal T-Cell Lymphomas Classified as CD8+ or CD4-CD8- by Flow Cytometry. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/8c0d26e498e061e78715d552ce39a0c1b11995a5

[26] Kornya MR, Bryant C, Lillie BN, et al. Canine polyostotic B-cell lymphoma: a case with clinical, immunohistochemical, and flow cytometric characterization, and review of the literature. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/26d74d78826d0b2e263b5879a02a7b88695c8a48

[27] Lima G, Sueiro F, Senhorello I, et al. Characterization and Ki67 cut-off evaluation in canine indolent T-zone lymphoma: epidemiological and immunohistochemical aspects. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c2c03b74b866afcf6f5a98f9f66ec0f1b9185418

[28] Park H, Lee JM, Bae H, et al. Treatment of canine CD3+/CD21+/CD45- T-zone lymphoma with chlorambucil and prednisolone in two dogs: case reports. Korean Journal of Veterinary Research. 2023. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a90b0330039e6fc4d3ebc96884db22b6b70bf4e7

[29] Haythornthwaite B. What prognostic information does flow cytometry provide in canine B-cell lymphoma? Veterinary Evidence. 2022. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/22f0b0a1986bca6b600723f6fd30de37a25e222d

[30] Bohannan Z, Pudupakam RS, Koo J, et al. Predicting likelihood of in vivo chemotherapy response in canine lymphoma using ex vivo drug sensitivity and immunophenotyping data in a machine learning model. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2020. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0b4210b04727d8c2293526cca7cad6d1d61cd7b2

[31] Harris LJ, Rout E, Hughes KL, et al. Clinicopathologic features of lingual canine T-zone lymphoma. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2018. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/25a7850af620278f0f131d364d394792743ea437

[32] Sánchez-Solé R, Mosquillo F, Balemian N, et al. Quantification of intrinsic MDR-1 gene expression in different immunophenotypes of canine multicentric lymphomas. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b4e51a7e11c13a5ffa5b95cf8edc71cc6619f45b

[33] Gibson D, Aubert I, Woods JP, et al. Flow cytometric immunophenotype of canine lymph node aspirates. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine. 2004. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c081764555d7fef5e3276249e042bd1effe0ebea

[34] Martínez-Caro J, Lemos M, Agulla B, et al. Diagnostic Evaluation of the Sysmex XN-1000V Lymphocyte Fluorescence for Differentiating Canine Nodal Large B-Cell and T-Cell Lymphoma. Veterinary and Comparative Oncology. 2025. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/852669665a5495a732b7e6cbc76b8cc1b4c4023e

[35] Owens E, Harris A, Avery A. Abstract 1772: A naturally occurring canine model of peripheral T-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified. Cancer Research. 2024. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f9924cedb6bc7911d878105693dda155cab34353 *** Disclaimer: This article is for educational and informational purposes only. It is not intended to substitute for professional veterinary advice, diagnosis, treatment, or regulatory guidance. Always consult a licensed veterinarian or qualified specialist regarding animal health, disease diagnosis, and therapeutic decisions.