123
#.# HEADLINE-2
4 EPILOGUE, 1989–2004
The EAHP has had 11 meetings since the first one in Geneva (see p. 119). The most recent one was held in Thessaloniki, Greece. It was organized by Papa- dimitriou. The number of participants had risen to 509, which was more than double the number (246) attending the first meeting in Geneva. They came from all continents. The pathology of the bone marrow was more at the focus of attention, whereas lymphomas had been in the foreground at the first meeting.
At first the Kiel classification was used by all members of the EAHP. This changed at the seventh meeting in Toledo, Spain, in 1994, which took place shortly after the so-called REAL classification (“revised European-American lymphoma classification”) had been suggested by an international group at the proposal of Isaacson and Stein [99]. In this classification the updated Kiel classification was revised in a few places and the previously excluded extranodal lymphomas were added. Hodgkin’s lymphomas were also in- cluded. At the request of the Editor of »Histopathology« I wrote a comment on the classification [100] in which I emphasized how important the initia- tive of Isaacson and Stein on the European side and of Harris and Jaffe on the American side was for improving the ever so crucial transatlantic communication.
At the meeting in Toledo, after much discussion, it was decided that a generally acceptable and binding classification should be developed on the basis of the REAL classification. Members of both the Society for Hematopa- thology and the EAHP should get together and come to an agreement which would be published as a “Blue Book” by the WHO.
At the initiative of J. O. Armitage, however, the clinical value of the
Working Formulation in comparison with the Kiel classification and the
REAL classification would be investigated beforehand. An international
panel of experienced haematopathologists did a study at several institutions
in various countries. The results were first presented just orally by Rosen-
berg at a meeting in Omaha, NE, USA on 11 September 1997. His presenta-
tion was very fair. He reported that the Working Formulation, in which he
had invested so much time and energy, was clearly inferior in clinical value
to both the Kiel and the REAL classifications. The latter were of equal value
and clinically useful. The results were also discussed at a meeting at Airlie
House in November 1997 [101]. At that meeting the members of a “clinical
advisory committee” came to a unanimous agreement that a “Blue Book”
124 4 EPILOGUE, 1989–2004
