BACKGROUND: Flow cytometric analysis of minimal residual disease (MRD) depends on detecting phenotypically abnormal populations. However, little is known about how phenotypic shifts between diagnosis and relapse affect MRD detection in childhood acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL). METHODS: We compared diagnostic and relapse bone marrow specimens in 42 children with precursor B-ALL studied with the two-tube panel CD19-APC/CD45-PerCP/CD10-PE/CD20-FITC and CD19-APC/CD45-PerCP/CD9-PE/CD34-FITC. RESULTS: At least 29 cases had phenotypic shifts of intensity or coefficient of variation of distribution of one or more markers. Shifts were complex and could not be explained by change in maturation stage. In the majority of cases MRD populations more closely resembled the diagnostic than the relapse specimen. In 6 of 7 MRD negative cases we did not identify an abnormal population that resembled diagnosis or relapse. In the remaining case, in which CD34 and CD10 were lost between diagnosis and relapse, it is possible that we could have missed an MRD population resembling relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Phenotypic shifts are common, but do not affect MRD recognition. At most 1 of 42 cases might have harbored an abnormal population undetected because of shift. However, MRD analysis with rigid gating (looking strictly for abnormal phenotypes at diagnosis) might have missed many positive cases, 8 of 22 (36%) in this series. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND: Flow cytometric analysis of minimal residual disease (MRD) depends on detecting phenotypically abnormal populations. However, little is known about how phenotypic shifts between diagnosis and relapse affect MRD detection in childhood acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL). METHODS: We compared diagnostic and relapse bone marrow specimens in 42 children with precursor B-ALL studied with the two-tube panel CD19-APC/CD45-PerCP/CD10-PE/CD20-FITC and CD19-APC/CD45-PerCP/CD9-PE/CD34-FITC. RESULTS: At least 29 cases had phenotypic shifts of intensity or coefficient of variation of distribution of one or more markers. Shifts were complex and could not be explained by change in maturation stage. In the majority of cases MRD populations more closely resembled the diagnostic than the relapse specimen. In 6 of 7 MRD negative cases we did not identify an abnormal population that resembled diagnosis or relapse. In the remaining case, in which CD34 and CD10 were lost between diagnosis and relapse, it is possible that we could have missed an MRD population resembling relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Phenotypic shifts are common, but do not affect MRD recognition. At most 1 of 42 cases might have harbored an abnormal population undetected because of shift. However, MRD analysis with rigid gating (looking strictly for abnormal phenotypes at diagnosis) might have missed many positive cases, 8 of 22 (36%) in this series. (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
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: Michael Keeney; Brent L Wood; Benjamin D Hedley; Joseph A DiGiuseppe; Maryalice Stetler-Stevenson; Elisabeth Paietta; Gerard Lozanski; Adam C Seegmiller; Bruce W Greig; Aaron C Shaver; Lata Mukundan; Howard R Higley; Caroline C Sigman; Gary Kelloff; J Milburn Jessup; Michael J Borowitz Journal: Cytometry B Clin Cytom Date: 2017-05-05 Impact factor: 3.058
Authors: Mikhail Roshal; Jonathan R Fromm; Stuart Winter; Kimberly Dunsmore; Brent L Wood Journal: Cytometry B Clin Cytom Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 3.058
Authors: Nicolaus Kröger; Ulrike Bacher; Peter Bader; Sebastian Böttcher; Michael J Borowitz; Peter Dreger; Issa Khouri; Homer A Macapinlac; Homer Macapintac; Eduardo Olavarria; Jerald Radich; Wendy Stock; Julie M Vose; Daniel Weisdorf; Andre Willasch; Sergio Giralt; Michael R Bishop; Alan S Wayne Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2010-06-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Michael N Dworzak; Angela Schumich; Dieter Printz; Ulrike Pötschger; Zvenyslava Husak; Andishe Attarbaschi; Giuseppe Basso; Giuseppe Gaipa; Richard Ratei; Georg Mann; Helmut Gadner Journal: Blood Date: 2008-09-09 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Julie Irving; Jenny Jesson; Paul Virgo; Marian Case; Lynne Minto; Lisa Eyre; Nigel Noel; Ulrika Johansson; Marion Macey; Linda Knotts; Margaret Helliwell; Paul Davies; Liam Whitby; David Barnett; Jeremy Hancock; Nick Goulden; Sarah Lawson Journal: Haematologica Date: 2009-04-18 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Wenbin Xiao; Dalia Salem; Catharine S McCoy; Daniel Lee; Nirali N Shah; Maryalice Stetler-Stevenson; Constance M Yuan Journal: Cytometry B Clin Cytom Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 3.058