Venditti A, Battaglia A, Del Poeta G, Buccisano F, Maurillo L, Tamburini A, Del Moro B, Epiceno A M, Martiradonna M, Caravita T, Santinelli S, Adorno G, Picardi A, Zinno F, Lanti A, Bruno A, Suppo G, Franchi A, Franconi G, Amadori S
Cattedra di Ematologia, Università 'Tor Vergata', Divisione di Ematologia, Ospedale S Eugenio, Rome, Italy.
Bone Marrow Transplant. 1999 Nov;24(9):1019-27. doi: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1702013.
Three different methods for determination of CD34+ cells in G-CSF-mobilized peripheral blood were compared. The methods were: the Milan/Mulhouse protocol, the ISHAGE guidelines for CD34+ cells enumeration and our own protocol. The procedure we have adopted is essentially a Milan/Mulhouse protocol-derived methodology combined with a multiparametric approach using the PAINT-A-GATE software analysis program. The samples were collected from 70 patients affected by acute leukemia, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma, myeloma and breast cancer who were scheduled to receive autologous PBSC transplantation. PBSC collection was performed following mobilization with subcutaneous G-CSF at 5-10 microg/kg/day. A minimum target of 2 x 10(6)/kg CD34+ cells was considered an acceptable harvest to ensure a safe transplant. On average, three aphereses per patient were performed and a total of 204 apheresis samples were analyzed. Regression analysis of the percentage and absolute number of CD34+ cells, as calculated with each method, achieved an excellent correlation in spite of methodological differences. In fact, both CD34+dim and CD34+CD45- events were included in our gating strategy. In the setting of a triple staining associating CD34, CD38 and CD45, we identified a variable fraction of CD34+CD38+CD45- cells which would be otherwise undetected due to its CD45 negativity. To this end, we used a new technology referred to as laser-scanning cytometry (LSC) which allowed the isolation and morphological identification of CD34+CD45- cells. By comparing CD34+CD45+ and CD34+CD45- cells, we found that they share a common morphology, thus confirming the hypothesis that the latter are to be considered for CD34+ cell calculation. The median number of CD34+ cells/kg, as calculated by the three methods, was: 4.79 x 10(6)/kg (range 1-570) for the Milan/Mulhouse protocol, 3.9 x 10(6)/kg (range 0.8-498) for the ISHAGE one, and 5.17 x 10(6)/kg (range 2-599) for our protocol. The median time to ANC and PLT engraftment was 11 (range 9-24) and 20 (range 10-70) days, respectively. Our protocol achieved the best correlation between CD34+ cells/kg and time to ANC/PLT recovery according to the Spearman's rank test (r = -40 and P < 0. 015 for ANC, r= -46 and P = 0.005 for PLT). We conclude that (1) CD45 does not appear the ideal partner of HPCA-2 for determination of hematopoietic progenitors in mobilized peripheral blood; and (2) for clinical application, a single staining with 8G12 appears simple, reliable and feasible when rigorous procedures for sample preparation and acquisition are followed and an adequate software for multiparametric analysis is available.
比较了三种测定G-CSF动员外周血中CD34+细胞的不同方法。这些方法分别是:米兰/米卢斯方案、ISHAGE CD34+细胞计数指南以及我们自己的方案。我们采用的程序本质上是一种源自米兰/米卢斯方案的方法,并结合了使用PAINT-A-GATE软件分析程序的多参数方法。样本取自70例患有急性白血病、非霍奇金淋巴瘤、霍奇金淋巴瘤、骨髓瘤和乳腺癌且计划接受自体外周血干细胞移植的患者。皮下注射G-CSF以5-10微克/千克/天进行动员后采集外周血干细胞。将每千克2×10⁶个CD34+细胞的最低目标视为可接受的采集量,以确保安全移植。平均每位患者进行了三次单采,共分析了204个单采样本。尽管方法存在差异,但用每种方法计算的CD34+细胞百分比和绝对数量的回归分析显示出极好的相关性。实际上,我们的设门策略中包括了CD34+dim和CD34+CD45-事件。在将CD34、CD38和CD45进行三重染色的情况下,我们识别出了一部分CD34+CD38+CD45-细胞,由于其CD45阴性,否则这些细胞会未被检测到。为此,我们使用了一种称为激光扫描细胞术(LSC)的新技术,该技术可对CD34+CD45-细胞进行分离和形态鉴定。通过比较CD34+CD45+和CD34+CD45-细胞,我们发现它们具有共同的形态,从而证实了在计算CD34+细胞时应考虑后者的假设。三种方法计算的每千克CD34+细胞中位数分别为:米兰/米卢斯方案为4.79×(10⁶/kg)(范围1-570),ISHAGE方案为3.9×(10⁶/kg)(范围0.8-498),我们的方案为5.17×(10⁶/kg)(范围2-599)。中性粒细胞和血小板植入的中位时间分别为11天(范围9-24)和20天(范围10-70)。根据Spearman秩检验,我们的方案在每千克CD34+细胞与中性粒细胞/血小板恢复时间之间实现了最佳相关性(中性粒细胞:r = -40,P < 0.015;血小板:r = -46,P = 0.005)。我们得出结论:(1)对于测定动员外周血中的造血祖细胞,CD45似乎不是HPCA-2的理想搭档;(2)对于临床应用,当遵循严格的样本制备和采集程序并具备用于多参数分析的适当软件时,用8G12进行单染色显得简单、可靠且可行。