Evidence Hub

Clinicopathologic Features of Isolated AFOP Nodules Radiologically Mimicking Malignancy in Post COVID-19 Patients: A Case Series Study

Massimiliano Mancini, Lavinia Bargiacchi, Gisella Guido, Fabiana Messa, Beatrice Trabalza Marinucci, E. Rendina, Mohsen Ibrahim, A. Vecchione

Journal of Clinical Medicine, 2025

119 participants

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Acute Fibrinous and Organizing Pneumonia (AFOP) is a rare pulmonary condition histologically characterized by intra-alveolar fibrin deposition and organizing pneumonia without hyaline membranes. This study aims to describe the clinicopathologic and radiologic features of isolated AFOP nodules presenting as solitary pulmonary nodules (SPNs) mimicking malignancy in patients with recent COVID-19 infection. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive cases of histologically confirmed AFOP (n = 20) and organizing pneumonia (OP; n = 119) presenting radiologically as SPNs suspicious for malignancy from January 2021 to December 2023. Clinical data, COVID-19 status, radiologic features (including nodular characteristics, ground-glass opacity [GGO], and consolidation), and histopathological findings were collected and analyzed. Digital image analysis quantified the intra-alveolar fibrin content. Results: AFOP nodules showed a significant association with previous COVID-19 infection compared to OP (55% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.001). Radiologically, AFOP lesions were predominantly located in the upper lobes, frequently exhibiting a mixed pattern of GGO and consolidation within solitary nodules (8–28 mm diameter), distinctly differing from the predominantly lower-lobe homogeneous consolidations in OP. Histologically, AFOP was defined by prominent intra-alveolar fibrin “balls,” correlating significantly with radiological consolidation patterns (r = 0.991, p < 0.05).…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 119 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free