medigraphic.com

2011, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Hematol Mex 2011; 12 (2)

Flow cytometry in the study of plasma cell dyscrasias

Reyes N, Monserrat-Coll J, Martínez-Sánchez MV, Campillo JA, Periago A, González C, Ibáñez J, Moraleda JM, Álvarez-López MR, Minguela-Puras A

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 90-98
PDF size: 169.31 Kb.


ABSTRACT

In the last decade survival of patients suffering from plasma cell dyscrasias has improved mainly due to a better understanding of its cellular and molecular pathophysiology. Flow cytometry and genetic studies have decisively contributed to a better categorization of the disease and to set the adequate treatment in each patient. Flow cytometry facilitates the phenotypic characterization of plasma cells (CD38++CD138+), the differentiation between malignant (generally CD19-CD56+) and normal or reactive plasma cells (generally CD19+CD56-), and at the same time provides us with relevant prognostic parameters (CD27, CD28, CD45, CD117, CD200 y CD221). Clonality analysis of immunoglobulin heavy and/or light chains allows to define and to precisely quantify the ratio of pathologic/healthy plasma cells, also with prognostic interest. Flow cytometry offers additional prognostic information such as the presence of aneuploidy as well as the plasma cell proliferative and apoptotic indexes. The high sensitivity of multiparametric flow cytometry makes it also useful for monitoring the residual disease after treatment, providing relevant predictive information of the evolution of the disease, particularly with the use of the new drugs such as Bortezomib and Lenalidomide. As a consequence, flow cytometry is becoming an essential tool for diagnosis, the selection of prognostic-directed therapies and for monitoring the treatment of plasma cell dyscrasias.


REFERENCES

  1. Reece DE. Management of multiple myeloma: The changing Landscape. Blood 2007;21:301-314.

  2. Kyle RA, Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma. Blood 2008;11:2962-2972.

  3. International Myeloma Working Group. Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group. Br J Haematol 2003;121:749-757.

  4. Greipp PR, S Miguel J , Durie BG, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. Journal Clinical Oncolology 2005;23:3412-3420.

  5. Durie BG, Harousseau JL, S Miguel J, et al. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia 2006;20:1467-1473.

  6. D´Sa S, Abildgaard N, Tighe J, et al. Guidelines for the use of imaging in the management of myeloma. British Journal Haematology 2007;137:49-63.

  7. Paiva B, Vidriales MB, Pérez JJ, et al. Multiparameter flow cytometry quantification of bone marrow plasma cells at diagnosis provides more prognostic information than morphological assessment in myeloma patients. Haematologica 2009;94:1599-1602.

  8. Bataille R, Jégo G, Robillard N, et al. The phenotype of normal, reactive and malignant plasma cells. Identification of “many and multiple myelomas” and of new targets for myeloma therapy. Haematologica 2006;91:1234-1240.

  9. Raja KRM, Kovorova L, Hajek R. Review of phenotypic markers used in flow cytometric analysis of MGUS and MM, and applicability of flow cytometry in other plasma cell disorders. British Journal Haematology 2010;149:334-351.

  10. Moreaux J, Hose D, Reme T, et al. CD200 is a new prognostic factor in multiple myeloma. Blood 2006;108:4194-4197.

  11. San Miguel JF, García-Sanz R, González M, et al. DNA cell content studies in multiple myeloma. Leukemia Lymphoma 1996;23(1-2):33-41.

  12. Minarik J, Scudla V, Ordeltova M, et al. Prognostic significance of apoptotic index in multiple myeloma patients treated by conventional therapy and novel agents, thalidomide and bortezomib. European Journal Haematology 2009;83:528-534.

  13. Pérez-Persona E, Vidriales MB, Mateo, et al. New criteria to identify risk of progression in monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance and smoldering multiple myeloma based on multiparameter flow cytometry analysis of bone marrow plasma cells. Blood 2007;110:2586-2592.

  14. Paiva B, Vidriales MB, Mateo G, et al. The persistence of immunophenotypically normal residual bone marrow plasma cells at diagnosis identifies a good prognostic subgroup of symptomatic multiple myeloma patients. Blood 2009;114:4369-4372.

  15. Kumar S, Rajkumar SV, Kyle R, et al. Prognostic value of circulating plasma cells in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. Journal Clinical Oncology 2005;23:5668-5674.

  16. Nowakowski GS, Witzig TE, Dingli D, et al. Circulating plasma cells detected by flow cytometry as a predictor of survival in 302 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Blood 2005;106:2276-2279.

  17. Van den Hove LE, Meeus P, Derom A, et al. Lymphocyte profiles in multiple myeloma and monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: flow-cytometric characterization and analysis in a two-dimensional correlation biplot. Annals of Hematology 1998;76:249-256.

  18. Rawstron AC, Davies FE, DasGupta R, et al. Flow cytometric disease monitoring in multiple myeloma: the relationship between normal and neoplastic plasma cells predicts outcome after transplantation. Blood 2002;100:3095-3100.

  19. Van Dongen JJM, Lhermitte L, Böttcher S, et al. EuroFlow antibody panels for standardized n-dimensional flow cytometric immunophenotyping of normal, reactive and malignant leukocytes. EuroFlow™ antibody panels. Handout at 14th EHA Congress 2009; Berlin, DE.

  20. Tohami T, Drucker L, Shapiro H, et al. Overexpression of tetraspanins affects multiple myeloma cell survival and invasive potential. The FASEB Journal 2007;21:691-699.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com