G Basso1, B Buldini, L De Zen, A Orfao. 1. Laboratorio di Oncoematologia Dipartimento di Pediatria, Università di Padova, via Giustiniani 3, 35128 Padua, Italy. gbasso@oncopedipd.org
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Flow cytometry is nowadays the preferred method for immunophenotypic identification, enumeration and characterization of blast cells at diagnosis. Despite widespread application of standardized protocols, inter-laboratory reproducibility has still not been achieved. The complexity of diagnosis and evaluation of minimal residual disease, in immunophenotyping acute leukemia, demands the use of a test that provides all the necessary information. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: The information given here is derived from the experience of the authors and from literature files. The most relevant studies with adequate conclusions were considered. We report on the current status of multiparametric immunophenotyping using simultaneous three and four-color staining and the applications of this technique. RESULTS: Multiparametric immunophenotyping is a powerful method for achieving a clear discrimination between normal and pathologic cells. The specific identification of leukemic cells by immunologic gating forms the basis for immunophenotypic diagnosis, classification as well as prognostic evaluation of patients with acute leukemias. The performance of the procedure with regards to the panels of reagents and the analytic processes, is necessarily different in lymphoblastic and myeloblastic leukemias, since the diagnostic questions are different. Phenotypic information should be specifically provided for the blast cells and antigen expression should preferably be reported in quantitative units and CV. This would allow a standardized cross evaluation of immunophenotypic results between different investigators and laboratories. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Recent reports indicate that phenotypic aberrations reflect genetic abnormalities of leukemic cells and therefore their definition and identification is of clinical relevance not only for minimal residual disease monitoring but also for subclassifying acute myeloid and lymphocytic leukemias.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Flow cytometry is nowadays the preferred method for immunophenotypic identification, enumeration and characterization of blast cells at diagnosis. Despite widespread application of standardized protocols, inter-laboratory reproducibility has still not been achieved. The complexity of diagnosis and evaluation of minimal residual disease, in immunophenotyping acute leukemia, demands the use of a test that provides all the necessary information. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: The information given here is derived from the experience of the authors and from literature files. The most relevant studies with adequate conclusions were considered. We report on the current status of multiparametric immunophenotyping using simultaneous three and four-color staining and the applications of this technique. RESULTS: Multiparametric immunophenotyping is a powerful method for achieving a clear discrimination between normal and pathologic cells. The specific identification of leukemic cells by immunologic gating forms the basis for immunophenotypic diagnosis, classification as well as prognostic evaluation of patients with acute leukemias. The performance of the procedure with regards to the panels of reagents and the analytic processes, is necessarily different in lymphoblastic and myeloblastic leukemias, since the diagnostic questions are different. Phenotypic information should be specifically provided for the blast cells and antigen expression should preferably be reported in quantitative units and CV. This would allow a standardized cross evaluation of immunophenotypic results between different investigators and laboratories. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Recent reports indicate that phenotypic aberrations reflect genetic abnormalities of leukemic cells and therefore their definition and identification is of clinical relevance not only for minimal residual disease monitoring but also for subclassifying acute myeloid and lymphocytic leukemias.
Authors: Giuseppe Gaipa; Giovanni Cazzaniga; Maria Grazia Valsecchi; Renate Panzer-Grümayer; Barbara Buldini; Daniela Silvestri; Leonid Karawajew; Oscar Maglia; Richard Ratei; Alessandra Benetello; Simona Sala; Angela Schumich; Andre Schrauder; Tiziana Villa; Marinella Veltroni; Wolf-Dieter Ludwig; Valentino Conter; Martin Schrappe; Andrea Biondi; Michael N Dworzak; Giuseppe Basso Journal: Haematologica Date: 2012-05-11 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: J J M van Dongen; L Lhermitte; S Böttcher; J Almeida; V H J van der Velden; J Flores-Montero; A Rawstron; V Asnafi; Q Lécrevisse; P Lucio; E Mejstrikova; T Szczepański; T Kalina; R de Tute; M Brüggemann; L Sedek; M Cullen; A W Langerak; A Mendonça; E Macintyre; M Martin-Ayuso; O Hrusak; M B Vidriales; A Orfao Journal: Leukemia Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: David I Marks; Elisabeth M Paietta; Anthony V Moorman; Susan M Richards; Georgina Buck; Gordon DeWald; Adolfo Ferrando; Adele K Fielding; Anthony H Goldstone; Rhett P Ketterling; Mark R Litzow; Selina M Luger; Andrew K McMillan; Marc R Mansour; Jacob M Rowe; Martin S Tallman; Hillard M Lazarus Journal: Blood Date: 2009-12-10 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: T Kalina; J Flores-Montero; V H J van der Velden; M Martin-Ayuso; S Böttcher; M Ritgen; J Almeida; L Lhermitte; V Asnafi; A Mendonça; R de Tute; M Cullen; L Sedek; M B Vidriales; J J Pérez; J G te Marvelde; E Mejstrikova; O Hrusak; T Szczepański; J J M van Dongen; A Orfao Journal: Leukemia Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 11.528