Cargando…

八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较

OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity of 8-color panels and next generation flow cytometry (NGF) for detecting minimal residual disease of multiple myeloma patients. METHODS: 8-color-membrane antigens (8C-Mem) panel was built including CD45, CD38, CD138, CD19, CD56, CD81, CD27 and CD117 to identify...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7342407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31340626
http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2019.06.012
_version_ 1783555475323748352
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity of 8-color panels and next generation flow cytometry (NGF) for detecting minimal residual disease of multiple myeloma patients. METHODS: 8-color-membrane antigens (8C-Mem) panel was built including CD45, CD38, CD138, CD19, CD56, CD81, CD27 and CD117 to identify the plasma cells, while 8-color-cytoplasmic antigens (8C-Cyto) panel was built including CD45, CD38, CD138, CD19, CD56, CD81, cKappa (cK) and cLambda (cλ), and 8-color-two-tubes (8C-2tubes) panel were built including 8C-Mem and 8C-Cyto panels, the data of three groups was analyzed by Diva software. NGF uses Infinicyt software to fuse 8C-2tubes data to further analyze the expression of plasma antigens. Bone marrow aspiration obtained from 20 controls and 76 multiple myeloma patients who achieved complete remission were measured and analyzed. RESULTS: Positive MRD samples were discriminated in 88.2% of the specimen evaluated through either abnormal plasma cells (aPCs) or clonal plasma cells (cPCs) by NGF antigens panel, Among of them, consistency was 94.7%. The median percentage of cPCs was 0.3530%, The lowest sensitivity of NGF was 0.0003%. In 8-color panels, the positive MRD rates of 8C-Mem, 8C-Cyto and 8C-2tubes panels were 84.2%, 85.5% and 86.8%, respectively, which lower than that of NGF (P<0.001). The positive MRD rate of 8C-Mem and 8C-Cyto panels were lower than that of 8C-2tubes panel (P<0.001), and the positive MRD rate of 8C-Mem panel was lower than that of 8C-Cyto panel (P<0.001). Sensitivity and specificity of NGF was higher than that of 8-color panels. 8C-2tubes panel has the best sensitivity, accuracy, negative predicted value, positive predicted value and specificity than other 8-color panels. However, huge data and low efficiency for analysis is the disadvantage. 8C-Cyto panel was the second choice, and 8C-Mem panel was the last. CONCLUSION: Membrane and cytoplasmic light chain is a better method for multiple myeloma-MRD detection and NGF panel is an ideal approach. 8C-Cyto panel is recommended in 8-MFC groups.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7342407
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73424072020-07-16 八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较 Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi 论著 OBJECTIVE: To compare the sensitivity of 8-color panels and next generation flow cytometry (NGF) for detecting minimal residual disease of multiple myeloma patients. METHODS: 8-color-membrane antigens (8C-Mem) panel was built including CD45, CD38, CD138, CD19, CD56, CD81, CD27 and CD117 to identify the plasma cells, while 8-color-cytoplasmic antigens (8C-Cyto) panel was built including CD45, CD38, CD138, CD19, CD56, CD81, cKappa (cK) and cLambda (cλ), and 8-color-two-tubes (8C-2tubes) panel were built including 8C-Mem and 8C-Cyto panels, the data of three groups was analyzed by Diva software. NGF uses Infinicyt software to fuse 8C-2tubes data to further analyze the expression of plasma antigens. Bone marrow aspiration obtained from 20 controls and 76 multiple myeloma patients who achieved complete remission were measured and analyzed. RESULTS: Positive MRD samples were discriminated in 88.2% of the specimen evaluated through either abnormal plasma cells (aPCs) or clonal plasma cells (cPCs) by NGF antigens panel, Among of them, consistency was 94.7%. The median percentage of cPCs was 0.3530%, The lowest sensitivity of NGF was 0.0003%. In 8-color panels, the positive MRD rates of 8C-Mem, 8C-Cyto and 8C-2tubes panels were 84.2%, 85.5% and 86.8%, respectively, which lower than that of NGF (P<0.001). The positive MRD rate of 8C-Mem and 8C-Cyto panels were lower than that of 8C-2tubes panel (P<0.001), and the positive MRD rate of 8C-Mem panel was lower than that of 8C-Cyto panel (P<0.001). Sensitivity and specificity of NGF was higher than that of 8-color panels. 8C-2tubes panel has the best sensitivity, accuracy, negative predicted value, positive predicted value and specificity than other 8-color panels. However, huge data and low efficiency for analysis is the disadvantage. 8C-Cyto panel was the second choice, and 8C-Mem panel was the last. CONCLUSION: Membrane and cytoplasmic light chain is a better method for multiple myeloma-MRD detection and NGF panel is an ideal approach. 8C-Cyto panel is recommended in 8-MFC groups. Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology 2019-06 /pmc/articles/PMC7342407/ /pubmed/31340626 http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2019.06.012 Text en 2019年版权归中华医学会所有 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (CC-BY-NC). The Copyright own by Publisher. Without authorization, shall not reprint, except this publication article, shall not use this publication format design. Unless otherwise stated, all articles published in this journal do not represent the views of the Chinese Medical Association or the editorial board of this journal.
spellingShingle 论著
八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较
title 八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较
title_full 八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较
title_fullStr 八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较
title_full_unstemmed 八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较
title_short 八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较
title_sort 八色组合与二代流式细胞术检测多发性骨髓瘤微小残留病的比较
topic 论著
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7342407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31340626
http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2019.06.012
work_keys_str_mv AT bāsèzǔhéyǔèrdàiliúshìxìbāoshùjiǎncèduōfāxìnggǔsuǐliúwēixiǎocánliúbìngdebǐjiào
AT bāsèzǔhéyǔèrdàiliúshìxìbāoshùjiǎncèduōfāxìnggǔsuǐliúwēixiǎocánliúbìngdebǐjiào
AT bāsèzǔhéyǔèrdàiliúshìxìbāoshùjiǎncèduōfāxìnggǔsuǐliúwēixiǎocánliúbìngdebǐjiào
AT bāsèzǔhéyǔèrdàiliúshìxìbāoshùjiǎncèduōfāxìnggǔsuǐliúwēixiǎocánliúbìngdebǐjiào
AT bāsèzǔhéyǔèrdàiliúshìxìbāoshùjiǎncèduōfāxìnggǔsuǐliúwēixiǎocánliúbìngdebǐjiào
AT bāsèzǔhéyǔèrdàiliúshìxìbāoshùjiǎncèduōfāxìnggǔsuǐliúwēixiǎocánliúbìngdebǐjiào
AT bāsèzǔhéyǔèrdàiliúshìxìbāoshùjiǎncèduōfāxìnggǔsuǐliúwēixiǎocánliúbìngdebǐjiào