| Literature DB >> 26556869 |
Paloma Bárcena1, María Jara-Acevedo1, María Dolores Tabernero2, Antonio López1, María Luz Sánchez1, Andrés C García-Montero1, Noemí Muñoz-García1, María Belén Vidriales3, Artur Paiva4, Quentin Lecrevisse1, Margarida Lima5, Anton W Langerak6, Sebastian Böttcher7, Jacques J M van Dongen6, Alberto Orfao1, Julia Almeida1.
Abstract
Currently, the lack of a universal and specific marker of clonality hampers the diagnosis and classification of chronic expansions of natural killer (NK) cells. Here we investigated the utility of flow cytometric detection of aberrant/altered NK-cell phenotypes as a surrogate marker for clonality, in the diagnostic work-up of chronic lymphoproliferative disorders of NK cells (CLPD-NK). For this purpose, a large panel of markers was evaluated by multiparametric flow cytometry on peripheral blood (PB) CD56(low) NK cells from 60 patients, including 23 subjects with predefined clonal (n = 9) and polyclonal (n = 14) CD56(low) NK-cell expansions, and 37 with CLPD-NK of undetermined clonality; also, PB samples from 10 healthy adults were included. Clonality was established using the human androgen receptor (HUMARA) assay. Clonal NK cells were found to show decreased expression of CD7, CD11b and CD38, and higher CD2, CD94 and HLADR levels vs. normal NK cells, together with a restricted repertoire of expression of the CD158a, CD158b and CD161 killer-associated receptors. In turn, NK cells from both clonal and polyclonal CLPD-NK showed similar/overlapping phenotypic profiles, except for high and more homogeneous expression of CD94 and HLADR, which was restricted to clonal CLPD-NK. We conclude that the CD94(hi)/HLADR+ phenotypic profile proved to be a useful surrogate marker for NK-cell clonality.Entities:
Keywords: CLPD-NK; NK cells; clonality; immunophenotype; natural killer cells
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26556869 PMCID: PMC4767482 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.5480
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Clinical and laboratory characteristics of subjects with monoclonal vs. polyclonal expansions of PB CD56low NK cells vs. normal CD56low NK cells
| Healthy adults ( | Cases with expanded/aberrant CD56low NK cells | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Polyclonal cases ( | Monoclonal cases ( | |||
| 47 ± 24 (27–87) | 55 ± 16 (42–83) | 54 ± 26 (25–81) | NS | |
| Routine blood analysis | NA | 83% | 80% | NS |
| General symptoms | NA | 17% | 20% | NS |
| Skin lesions | 0% | 0% | 25% | NS |
| 0% | 0% | 13%** | NS | |
| Leukocytosis (>10 × 109/L) | 0% | 17% | 25% | NS |
| Lymphocytosis (>5 × 109/L) | 0% | 33% | 38% | |
| Lymphocytosis (>3 × 109/L) | ||||
| Neutropenia (<1.5 × 109/L) | 0% | 8% | 13% | NS |
| Anemia (<100g/L) | 0% | 17% | 0% | NS |
| Thrombocytopenia | 0% | 25% | 13% | NS |
| | 135 ± 17 (160–97) | 124 ± 26 (88–186) | 139 ± 13 (114–159) | NS |
| | 233 ± 61 (159–327) | 240 ± 120 (79–476) | 218 ± 86 (83–346) | NS |
| | 6.1 ± 3.1 (4.5–8.2) | 7.1 ± 3.4 (3.9–15.5) | 8.7 ± 3.6 (4.2–15.4) | NS |
| | 3.6 ± 0.8 (2.4–4.9) | 2.6 ± 1.6 (0.9–7.4) | 3.2 ± 2.4 (0.3–8.3) | |
| | 1.9 ± 0.7 (0.7–2.8) | 3.8 ± 1.9 (1.6–7) | 4.7 ± 1.3 (3.1–6.6) | |
| | 0.25 ± 0.1 (0.1–0.4) | 1.2 ± 0.6 (0.6–2.2) | 2.2 ± 1.2 (0.6–4) | |
| From all PB leucocytes | 4.2 ± 1.3 (2–6) | 20 ± 7 (7–33) | 28 ± 12 (14–43) | |
| From PB lymphocytes | ||||
Results expressed as percentage of cases or (*) as mean ± one standard deviation (range).
P-values correspond to the following group comparisons:
healthy adults vs. both polyclonal plus monoclonal CD56low NK-cell expansions;
healthy adults vs. polyclonal CD56low NK-cell expansions;
healthy adults vs. monoclonal CD56low NK-cell expansions;
polyclonal vs. monoclonal CD56low NK-cell expansions.
PB: peripheral blood. NA: not applicable. NS: no statistically significant differences found (p > 0.05).PB: peripheral blood. WBC: white blood cells.
None of the cases studied showed lymphadenopathies, hepatosplenomegaly and/or associated neoplasias.
One case diagnosed with immune thrombocytopenia.
Figure 1Immunophenotypic characteristics of expanded monoclonal versus expanded polyclonal and normal adult peripheral blood CD56low NK cells
Clonality was assessed in all patients included in the analyses displayed (n = 23) by the HUMARA assay. CD56low NK cells from the three groups of subjects showed a similar positive reactivity for CD8, CD45RA and CD45, while the expression of CD3, CD25, CD27, CD28 and CD197 (CCR7) was systematically negative. Results are expressed for each marker as percentage of positive cells (light gray boxes, referred to the scales at the left of the plots) and mean fluorescence intensity - MFI- of positive cells - arbitrary relative linear units scaled from 0 to 104 cells (dark gray boxes, referred to the scales at the right of the plots). Notches boxes represent 25th and 75th percentile values; the line in the middle and vertical lines correspond to the median value and the minimum-maximum values (without the extreme values and outliers), respectively. Please note that the high expression levels of CD5 for clonal cases corresponds only to one case in which 1% of CD56low NK cells were CD5+ with a MFI of 482. # P-value < 0.05 vs. CD56low NK cells from the control group (healthy adults).*P-value < 0.05 vs. expanded polyclonal CD56low NK cells.
Expression of the CD158a/b/e killer-immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIR) and the CD94 and CD161 C-type lectin-like receptors on peripheral blood CD56low NK cells from patients with clonal (n = 9) and polyclonal (n = 12*) expansions of CD56low NK cells
| Percentage of CD56low NK cells expressing each marker | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD158a | CD158b | CD158e | CD94 | CD161 | |
| Clonal#1 | 20 | 58 | 6 | 100 | 40 |
| Clonal#2 | 8 | 10 | 8 | 100 | 100 |
| Clonal#3 | 39 | 20 | 46 | 100 | 87 |
| Clonal#4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 |
| Clonal#5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 100 | 5 |
| Clonal#6 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 100 | 0 |
| Clonal#7 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 100 | 2 |
| Clonal#8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100 | 0 |
| Clonal#9 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 100 | 100 |
| Polyclonal#1 | 73 | 23 | 9 | 100 | 57 |
| Polyclonal#2 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 81 | 35 |
| Polyclonal#5 | 14 | n.a. | 9 | 47 | 32 |
| Polyclonal#6 | 27 | 28 | 20 | 42 | 25 |
| Polyclonal#7 | 28 | 15 | 11 | 40 | 78 |
| Polyclonal#8 | 46 | 37 | 26 | 34 | 75 |
| Polyclonal#9 | 3 | 43 | 0 | 56 | n.a. |
| Polyclonal#10 | 75 | 15 | 6 | 65 | 61 |
| Polyclonal#11 | 58 | 73 | 0 | 75 | 62 |
| Polyclonal#12 | 6 | 76 | 0 | 80 | 20 |
| Polyclonal#13 | 3 | 60 | 18 | 76 | 77 |
| Polyclonal#14 | 29 | 70 | 0 | 72 | 37 |
| n.s. | n.s. | ||||
n.a.: not available; n.s.: Not statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) between clonal and polyclonal cases.
In two out of the 14 cases with expanded polyclonal CD56low NK cells, data about more than one killer receptor was not available, and therefore, these two cases were excluded from Table 2.
Figure 2Unsupervised hierarchical clustering analysis of the immunophenotypic pattern of expanded monoclonal, expanded polyclonal and normal adult peripheral blood (PB) CD56low NK cells
Trees were generated based on the expression patterns observed on PB CD56low NK cells for the 30 immunophenotypic variables included in the study, generated using the Cluster and TreeView software programs. Panel A. shows the clustering trees of the three groups included in the study, while Panels B, C. and D. show the trees generated for the following analyses: healthy adults vs. expanded polyclonal NK-cell cases (B); expanded monoclonal NK-cell cases vs. healthy adults (C) and; expanded monoclonal vs. expanded polyclonal patient groups (D), respectively. For each given marker, immunophenotypic data is expressed both as percentage of positive cells and as mean fluorescence intensity of positive cells –arbitrary relative linear units scaled from 0 to 104cells–, except for CD38 and CD45RA, which are expressed only as MFI values (for a total of 30 immunophenotypic variables). Columns show the expression levels for a single sample; rows represent the relative levels of expression for a single immunophenotypic parameter, centered at the geometric mean of the expression levels observed for all samples. Red and green colors indicate values higher or lower than the mean, respectively; color intensity represents the magnitude of the deviation from the mean; black color represents no significant change in the expression levels for that sample vs. the mean.
Figure 3Identification of the most relevant phenotypic markers contributing to the discrimination between normal/polyclonal and monoclonal peripheral blood CD56low NK cells
Panel A. illustrates the “Nearest-shrunken centroid” analysis, showing the shrunken differences for the 7 immunophenotypic markers having at least 1 non-zero difference, selected as significant by SAM analysis. Left-sided and right-sided bars indicate lower and higher expression in each group with respect to the overall centroid, respectively. Markers are ordered from the greatest to the smallest difference. Numbers in brackets indicate d-Values: positive d-Values denote over-expression on clonal CD56low NK cells, while negative d-Values indicate under-expression on clonal CD56low NK cells. Panel B. shows pairwise PCA-based comparisons of the phenotypes of expanded monoclonal, expanded polyclonal and normal adult peripheral blood CD56low NK cells. APS -Automated Population Separator function included in the INFINICYT software, corresponding to the principal components 1 (X axis) and 2 (y axis)- views showing the discrimination between CD56low NK cells from: healthy adults (blue circles) vs. reactive polyclonal (orange circles) cases (a and b); healthy adults (blue circles) vs. clonal (red circles) cases (c and d); clonal (red circles) vs. polyclonal (orange circles) (e and f); and clonal (red circles) vs. both healthy adults and reactive (green circles) cases (g and h). Each circle represents one single case (median expression observed for all the phenotypic parameters evaluated). Contour lines in these plots represent one standard deviation curves. Panels a, c, e and g show mean principal component 1 vs. principal component 2 values for each case, considering all phenotypic parameters analyzed; the first four parameters contributing to the best discrimination between the two groups (ordered according to their percentage of contribution) are displayed at the bottom of each plot. Panels b, d, f and h show mean principal component 1 vs. principal component 2 values for each case, but considering only the CD94 and HLADR parameters. The arrow denotes the only misclassified case.