H Robert Bergen1, Surendra Dasari2, Angela Dispenzieri3, John R Mills4, Marina Ramirez-Alvarado5, Renee C Tschumper6, Diane F Jelinek6, David R Barnidge4, David L Murray4. 1. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, bergen.bob@mayo.edu. 2. Department of Health Sciences Research. 3. Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, and. 4. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, and. 5. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Department of Immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 6. Department of Immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Analytically sensitive techniques for measuring minimal residual disease (MRD) in multiple myeloma (MM) currently require invasive and costly bone marrow aspiration. These methods include immunohistochemistry (IHC), flow cytometry, quantitative PCR, and next-generation sequencing. An ideal MM MRD test would be a serum-based test sensitive enough to detect low concentrations of Ig secreted from multifocal lesions. METHODS: Patient serum with abundant M-protein before treatment was separated on a 1-dimensional SDS-PAGE gel, and the Ig light-chain (LC) band was excised, trypsin digested, and analyzed on a Q Exactive mass spectrometer by LC-MS/MS. We used the peptide's abundance and sequence to identify tryptic peptides that mapped to complementary determining regions of Ig LCs. The clonotypic target tryptic peptides were used to monitor MRD in subsequent serum samples with prior affinity enrichment. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were tested, 20 with no detectable disease by IHC and 42 with no detectable disease by 6-color flow cytometry. A target peptide that could be monitored was identified in 57 patients (91%). Of these 57, detectable disease by LC-MS/MS was found in 52 (91%). CONCLUSIONS: The ability to use LC-MS/MS to measure disease in patients who are negative by bone marrow-based methodologies indicates that a serum-based approach has more analytical sensitivity and may be useful for measuring deeper responses to MM treatment. The method requires no bone marrow aspiration.
BACKGROUND: Analytically sensitive techniques for measuring minimal residual disease (MRD) in multiple myeloma (MM) currently require invasive and costly bone marrow aspiration. These methods include immunohistochemistry (IHC), flow cytometry, quantitative PCR, and next-generation sequencing. An ideal MM MRD test would be a serum-based test sensitive enough to detect low concentrations of Ig secreted from multifocal lesions. METHODS:Patient serum with abundant M-protein before treatment was separated on a 1-dimensional SDS-PAGE gel, and the Ig light-chain (LC) band was excised, trypsin digested, and analyzed on a Q Exactive mass spectrometer by LC-MS/MS. We used the peptide's abundance and sequence to identify tryptic peptides that mapped to complementary determining regions of Ig LCs. The clonotypic target tryptic peptides were used to monitor MRD in subsequent serum samples with prior affinity enrichment. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were tested, 20 with no detectable disease by IHC and 42 with no detectable disease by 6-color flow cytometry. A target peptide that could be monitored was identified in 57 patients (91%). Of these 57, detectable disease by LC-MS/MS was found in 52 (91%). CONCLUSIONS: The ability to use LC-MS/MS to measure disease in patients who are negative by bone marrow-based methodologies indicates that a serum-based approach has more analytical sensitivity and may be useful for measuring deeper responses to MM treatment. The method requires no bone marrow aspiration.
Authors: G Martinelli; C Terragna; E Zamagni; S Ronconi; P Tosi; R Lemoli; G Bandini; N Testoni; M Amabile; E Ottaviani; S Buonamici; S Soverini; V Montefusco; A de Vivo; F Bonifazi; S Tura; M Cavo Journal: Haematologica Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: David R Barnidge; Renee C Tschumper; Jason D Theis; Melissa R Snyder; Diane F Jelinek; Jerry A Katzmann; Angela Dispenzieri; David L Murray Journal: J Proteome Res Date: 2014-03-05 Impact factor: 4.466
Authors: Elizabeth R Remily-Wood; Kaaron Benson; Rachid C Baz; Y Ann Chen; Mohamad Hussein; Monique A Hartley-Brown; Robert W Sprung; Brianna Perez; Richard Z Liu; Sean J Yoder; Jamie K Teer; Steven A Eschrich; John M Koomen Journal: Proteomics Clin Appl Date: 2014-09-15 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: M Ladetto; M Brüggemann; L Monitillo; S Ferrero; F Pepin; D Drandi; D Barbero; A Palumbo; R Passera; M Boccadoro; M Ritgen; N Gökbuget; J Zheng; V Carlton; H Trautmann; M Faham; C Pott Journal: Leukemia Date: 2013-12-17 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Robert A Kyle; Morie A Gertz; Thomas E Witzig; John A Lust; Martha Q Lacy; Angela Dispenzieri; Rafael Fonseca; S Vincent Rajkumar; Janice R Offord; Dirk R Larson; Matthew E Plevak; Terry M Therneau; Philip R Greipp Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Kathrin Andrich; Ute Hegenbart; Christoph Kimmich; Niraja Kedia; H Robert Bergen; Stefan Schönland; Erich Wanker; Jan Bieschke Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2016-12-28 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: Carlo O Martins; Sarah Huet; San S Yi; Maria S Ritorto; Ola Landgren; Ahmet Dogan; Jessica R Chapman Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2020-04-14 Impact factor: 5.568