Pugh Trevor J, Fink James M, Lu Xinyan, Mathew Susan, Murata-Collins Joyce, Willem Pascale, Fang Min
Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network; Ontario Institute for Cancer Research; and Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Hennepin County Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Cancer Genet. 2018 Dec;228-229:184-196. doi: 10.1016/j.cancergen.2018.07.002. Epub 2018 Oct 5.
Plasma cell neoplasms (PCNs) encompass a spectrum of disorders including monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance, smoldering myeloma, plasma cell myeloma, and plasma cell leukemia. Molecular subtypes have been defined by recurrent cytogenetic abnormalities and somatic mutations that are prognostic and predictive. Karyotype and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) have historically been used to guide management; however, new technologies and markers raise the need to reassess current testing algorithms.
We convened a panel of representatives from international clinical laboratories to capture current state-of-the-art testing from published reports and to put forward recommendations for cytogenomic testing of plasma cell neoplasms. We reviewed 65 papers applying FISH, chromosomal microarray (CMA), next-generation sequencing, and gene expression profiling for plasma cell neoplasm diagnosis and prognosis. We also performed a survey of our peers to capture current laboratory practice employed outside our working group.
Plasma cell enrichment is widely used prior to FISH testing, most commonly by magnetic bead selection. A variety of strategies for direct, short- and long-term cell culture are employed to ensure clonal representation for karyotyping. Testing of clinically-informative 1p/1q, del(13q) and del(17p) are common using karyotype, FISH and, increasingly, CMA testing. FISH for a variety of clinically-informative balanced IGH rearrangements is prevalent. Literature review found that CMA analysis can detect abnormalities in 85-100% of patients with PCNs; more specifically, in 5-53% (median 14%) of cases otherwise normal by FISH and cytogenetics. CMA results in plasma cell neoplasms are usually complex, with alteration counts ranging from 1 to 74 (median 10-20), primarily affecting loci not covered by FISH testing. Emerging biomarkers include structural alterations of MYC as well as somatic mutations of KRAS, NRAS, BRAF, and TP53. Together, these may be measured in a comprehensive manner by a combination of newer technologies including CMA and next-generation sequencing (NGS). Our survey suggests most laboratories have, or are soon to have, clinical CMA platforms, with a desire to move to NGS assays in the future.
We present an overview of current practices in plasma cell neoplasm testing as well as an algorithm for integrated FISH and CMA testing to guide treatment of this disease.
浆细胞肿瘤(PCNs)涵盖一系列疾病,包括意义未明的单克隆丙种球蛋白病、冒烟型骨髓瘤、浆细胞骨髓瘤和浆细胞白血病。分子亚型已通过具有预后和预测价值的复发性细胞遗传学异常和体细胞突变来定义。核型分析和荧光原位杂交(FISH)历来用于指导治疗;然而,新技术和标志物使得有必要重新评估当前的检测算法。
我们召集了一个来自国际临床实验室的代表小组,以总结已发表报告中的当前最先进检测方法,并就浆细胞肿瘤的细胞基因组检测提出建议。我们回顾了65篇应用FISH、染色体微阵列(CMA)、下一代测序和基因表达谱分析进行浆细胞肿瘤诊断和预后评估的论文。我们还对同行进行了一项调查,以了解我们工作组之外目前采用的实验室操作。
在FISH检测之前广泛采用浆细胞富集,最常用的方法是磁珠分选。采用多种直接、短期和长期细胞培养策略来确保核型分析的克隆代表性。使用核型分析、FISH以及越来越多的CMA检测来检测具有临床意义的1p/1q、del(13q)和del(17p)。检测多种具有临床意义的平衡IGH重排的FISH方法很普遍。文献综述发现,CMA分析可在85%至100%的浆细胞肿瘤患者中检测到异常;更具体地说,在FISH和细胞遗传学检测结果正常的病例中,有5%至53%(中位数为14%)可检测到异常。浆细胞肿瘤的CMA结果通常很复杂,改变数量范围为1至74(中位数为10至20),主要影响FISH检测未覆盖的位点。新兴的生物标志物包括MYC的结构改变以及KRAS、NRAS、BRAF和TP53的体细胞突变。这些可以通过包括CMA和下一代测序(NGS)在内的多种新技术组合进行综合检测。我们的调查表明,大多数实验室已经或即将拥有临床CMA平台,并希望在未来转向NGS检测。
我们概述了浆细胞肿瘤检测的当前实践以及用于指导该疾病治疗的FISH和CMA综合检测算法。