Cargando…
MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation
In IgM monoclonal gammopathies MYD88(L265P) is a prognostic and predictive biomarker of therapy response. MYD88(L265P) detection is mainly performed by allele-specific quantitative PCR (ASqPCR), however recently, droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) has been proved to be suitable for MYD88(L265P) screening a...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8146978/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926007 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11050779 |
_version_ | 1783697523235356672 |
---|---|
author | Ferrante, Martina Furlan, Daniela Zibellini, Silvia Borriero, Michela Candido, Chiara Sahnane, Nora Uccella, Silvia Genuardi, Elisa Alessandria, Beatrice Bianchi, Benedetta Mora, Barbara Grimaldi, Daniele Defrancesco, Irene Jiménez, Cristina Cavallo, Federica Ferrero, Dario Dogliotti, Irene Merli, Michele Varettoni, Marzia Ferrero, Simone Drandi, Daniela |
author_facet | Ferrante, Martina Furlan, Daniela Zibellini, Silvia Borriero, Michela Candido, Chiara Sahnane, Nora Uccella, Silvia Genuardi, Elisa Alessandria, Beatrice Bianchi, Benedetta Mora, Barbara Grimaldi, Daniele Defrancesco, Irene Jiménez, Cristina Cavallo, Federica Ferrero, Dario Dogliotti, Irene Merli, Michele Varettoni, Marzia Ferrero, Simone Drandi, Daniela |
author_sort | Ferrante, Martina |
collection | PubMed |
description | In IgM monoclonal gammopathies MYD88(L265P) is a prognostic and predictive biomarker of therapy response. MYD88(L265P) detection is mainly performed by allele-specific quantitative PCR (ASqPCR), however recently, droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) has been proved to be suitable for MYD88(L265P) screening and minimal residual disease monitoring (MRD). This study compared ASqPCR and ddPCR to define the most sensitive method for MYD88(L265P) detection in bone marrow (BM), peripheral blood (PB) sorted or unsorted CD19+ cells, and in plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA). Overall, the analysis showed a good concordance rate (74%) between the two methods, especially in BM samples, while discordances (26%) were mostly in favor of ddPCR (ddPCR+ vs. ASqPCR-) and were particularly evident in samples with low mutational burden, such as PB and cfDNA. This study highlights ddPCR as a feasible approach for MYD88(L265P) detection across different specimen types (including cfDNA). Interestingly, its high sensitivity makes CD19+ selection dispensable. On the other hand, our results showed that MYD88(L265P) detection on PB samples, especially with ASqPCR, is suboptimal for screening and MRD analysis. Finally, significantly different MYD88(L265P) mutational levels observed between Waldenström Macroglobulinemia and IgM monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance patients suggest the need for further studies in order to identify possible correlations between mutational levels and risk of progression to Waldenström. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8146978 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-81469782021-05-26 MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation Ferrante, Martina Furlan, Daniela Zibellini, Silvia Borriero, Michela Candido, Chiara Sahnane, Nora Uccella, Silvia Genuardi, Elisa Alessandria, Beatrice Bianchi, Benedetta Mora, Barbara Grimaldi, Daniele Defrancesco, Irene Jiménez, Cristina Cavallo, Federica Ferrero, Dario Dogliotti, Irene Merli, Michele Varettoni, Marzia Ferrero, Simone Drandi, Daniela Diagnostics (Basel) Article In IgM monoclonal gammopathies MYD88(L265P) is a prognostic and predictive biomarker of therapy response. MYD88(L265P) detection is mainly performed by allele-specific quantitative PCR (ASqPCR), however recently, droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) has been proved to be suitable for MYD88(L265P) screening and minimal residual disease monitoring (MRD). This study compared ASqPCR and ddPCR to define the most sensitive method for MYD88(L265P) detection in bone marrow (BM), peripheral blood (PB) sorted or unsorted CD19+ cells, and in plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA). Overall, the analysis showed a good concordance rate (74%) between the two methods, especially in BM samples, while discordances (26%) were mostly in favor of ddPCR (ddPCR+ vs. ASqPCR-) and were particularly evident in samples with low mutational burden, such as PB and cfDNA. This study highlights ddPCR as a feasible approach for MYD88(L265P) detection across different specimen types (including cfDNA). Interestingly, its high sensitivity makes CD19+ selection dispensable. On the other hand, our results showed that MYD88(L265P) detection on PB samples, especially with ASqPCR, is suboptimal for screening and MRD analysis. Finally, significantly different MYD88(L265P) mutational levels observed between Waldenström Macroglobulinemia and IgM monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance patients suggest the need for further studies in order to identify possible correlations between mutational levels and risk of progression to Waldenström. MDPI 2021-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8146978/ /pubmed/33926007 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11050779 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Ferrante, Martina Furlan, Daniela Zibellini, Silvia Borriero, Michela Candido, Chiara Sahnane, Nora Uccella, Silvia Genuardi, Elisa Alessandria, Beatrice Bianchi, Benedetta Mora, Barbara Grimaldi, Daniele Defrancesco, Irene Jiménez, Cristina Cavallo, Federica Ferrero, Dario Dogliotti, Irene Merli, Michele Varettoni, Marzia Ferrero, Simone Drandi, Daniela MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation |
title | MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation |
title_full | MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation |
title_fullStr | MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation |
title_full_unstemmed | MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation |
title_short | MYD88(L265P) Detection in IgM Monoclonal Gammopathies: Methodological Considerations for Routine Implementation |
title_sort | myd88(l265p) detection in igm monoclonal gammopathies: methodological considerations for routine implementation |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8146978/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33926007 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11050779 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ferrantemartina myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT furlandaniela myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT zibellinisilvia myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT borrieromichela myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT candidochiara myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT sahnanenora myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT uccellasilvia myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT genuardielisa myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT alessandriabeatrice myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT bianchibenedetta myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT morabarbara myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT grimaldidaniele myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT defrancescoirene myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT jimenezcristina myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT cavallofederica myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT ferrerodario myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT dogliottiirene myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT merlimichele myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT varettonimarzia myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT ferrerosimone myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation AT drandidaniela myd88l265pdetectioninigmmonoclonalgammopathiesmethodologicalconsiderationsforroutineimplementation |