Cargando…
Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma
PURPOSE: Neuroblastoma (NB) is the most frequent extracranial tumor in children. The detection of bone marrow (BM) involvement is crucial for correct staging and risk-adapted treatment. We compared three methods regarding the detection of NB involvement in BM. METHODS: Eighty-one patients with NB we...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9470647/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34623519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-021-03780-7 |
_version_ | 1784788889599213568 |
---|---|
author | Schriegel, Felix Taschner-Mandl, Sabine Bernkopf, Marie Grunwald, Uwe Siebert, Nikolai Ambros, Peter F. Ambros, Inge Lode, Holger N. Henze, Guenter Ehlert, Karoline |
author_facet | Schriegel, Felix Taschner-Mandl, Sabine Bernkopf, Marie Grunwald, Uwe Siebert, Nikolai Ambros, Peter F. Ambros, Inge Lode, Holger N. Henze, Guenter Ehlert, Karoline |
author_sort | Schriegel, Felix |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Neuroblastoma (NB) is the most frequent extracranial tumor in children. The detection of bone marrow (BM) involvement is crucial for correct staging and risk-adapted treatment. We compared three methods regarding the detection of NB involvement in BM. METHODS: Eighty-one patients with NB were included in this retrospective study. BM samples were obtained at designated time points at study entry and during treatment or follow-up. The diagnostic tools for BM analysis included cytomorphology (CM), flow cytometry (FCM) and automatic immunofluorescence plus fluorescence in situ hybridization (AIPF). RESULTS: We analyzed 369 aspirates in 81 patients in whom AIPF, CM, and FCM were simultaneously available. During the observation period, NB cells were detected in 86/369 (23.3%) cases, by CM in 32/369 (8.7%), by FCM in 52 (14.1%), and by AIPF in 72 (19.5%) samples. AIPF and/or FCM confirmed all positive results obtained in CM and detected 11 additional positive BM aspirates in 294 CM negative samples (p < 0,001). Survival of patients with BM involvement at study entry identified solely by FCM/AIPF was 17.4% versus 0% for patients in whom BM involvement was already identified by CM. CONCLUSION: The combination of AIPF/FCM yielded the highest detection rate of NB cells in BM. AIPF was the single, most sensitive method in detecting these cells. Although CM did not provide any additional positive results, it is still a useful, readily available and cost-effective tool. The prognostic significance of FCM and AIPF should be confirmed in a prospective study with a larger number of patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9470647 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94706472022-09-15 Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma Schriegel, Felix Taschner-Mandl, Sabine Bernkopf, Marie Grunwald, Uwe Siebert, Nikolai Ambros, Peter F. Ambros, Inge Lode, Holger N. Henze, Guenter Ehlert, Karoline J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Original Article – Clinical Oncology PURPOSE: Neuroblastoma (NB) is the most frequent extracranial tumor in children. The detection of bone marrow (BM) involvement is crucial for correct staging and risk-adapted treatment. We compared three methods regarding the detection of NB involvement in BM. METHODS: Eighty-one patients with NB were included in this retrospective study. BM samples were obtained at designated time points at study entry and during treatment or follow-up. The diagnostic tools for BM analysis included cytomorphology (CM), flow cytometry (FCM) and automatic immunofluorescence plus fluorescence in situ hybridization (AIPF). RESULTS: We analyzed 369 aspirates in 81 patients in whom AIPF, CM, and FCM were simultaneously available. During the observation period, NB cells were detected in 86/369 (23.3%) cases, by CM in 32/369 (8.7%), by FCM in 52 (14.1%), and by AIPF in 72 (19.5%) samples. AIPF and/or FCM confirmed all positive results obtained in CM and detected 11 additional positive BM aspirates in 294 CM negative samples (p < 0,001). Survival of patients with BM involvement at study entry identified solely by FCM/AIPF was 17.4% versus 0% for patients in whom BM involvement was already identified by CM. CONCLUSION: The combination of AIPF/FCM yielded the highest detection rate of NB cells in BM. AIPF was the single, most sensitive method in detecting these cells. Although CM did not provide any additional positive results, it is still a useful, readily available and cost-effective tool. The prognostic significance of FCM and AIPF should be confirmed in a prospective study with a larger number of patients. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-10-08 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9470647/ /pubmed/34623519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-021-03780-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article – Clinical Oncology Schriegel, Felix Taschner-Mandl, Sabine Bernkopf, Marie Grunwald, Uwe Siebert, Nikolai Ambros, Peter F. Ambros, Inge Lode, Holger N. Henze, Guenter Ehlert, Karoline Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma |
title | Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma |
title_full | Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma |
title_fullStr | Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma |
title_short | Comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma |
title_sort | comparison of three different methods to detect bone marrow involvement in patients with neuroblastoma |
topic | Original Article – Clinical Oncology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9470647/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34623519 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00432-021-03780-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schriegelfelix comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT taschnermandlsabine comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT bernkopfmarie comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT grunwalduwe comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT siebertnikolai comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT ambrospeterf comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT ambrosinge comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT lodeholgern comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT henzeguenter comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma AT ehlertkaroline comparisonofthreedifferentmethodstodetectbonemarrowinvolvementinpatientswithneuroblastoma |