评估新一代测序技术在三种主要融合转录本亚型B前体急性淋巴细胞白血病中的可测量残留疾病监测效果

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q1 PATHOLOGY Pathology Pub Date : 2024-04-18 DOI:10.1016/j.pathol.2024.02.008
Ying-Jung Huang , Shih-Hsiang Chen , Hsi-Che Liu , Tang-Her Jaing , Ting-Chi Yeh , Ming-Chung Kuo , Tung-Liang Lin , Chiu-Chen Chen , Shih-Chung Wang , Te-Kau Chang , Chih-Cheng Hsiao , Der-Cherng Liang , Lee-Yung Shih
{"title":"评估新一代测序技术在三种主要融合转录本亚型B前体急性淋巴细胞白血病中的可测量残留疾病监测效果","authors":"Ying-Jung Huang ,&nbsp;Shih-Hsiang Chen ,&nbsp;Hsi-Che Liu ,&nbsp;Tang-Her Jaing ,&nbsp;Ting-Chi Yeh ,&nbsp;Ming-Chung Kuo ,&nbsp;Tung-Liang Lin ,&nbsp;Chiu-Chen Chen ,&nbsp;Shih-Chung Wang ,&nbsp;Te-Kau Chang ,&nbsp;Chih-Cheng Hsiao ,&nbsp;Der-Cherng Liang ,&nbsp;Lee-Yung Shih","doi":"10.1016/j.pathol.2024.02.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for monitoring measurable residual disease (MRD) in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) has been gaining traction. This study aimed to investigate the utility of NGS in MRD monitoring for the three major fusion transcript (FT) subtypes of B-precursor ALL (B-ALL). The MRD results for 104 bone marrow samples from 56 patients were analysed through NGS and real time quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) for the three major FTs: <em>BCR::ABL1</em>, <em>TCF3::PBX1</em>, and <em>ETV6::RUNX1</em>. To validate the NGS approach, NGS-MRD was initially compared with allele-specific oligonucleotide-qPCR-MRD, and the coefficient of determination was good (R<sup>2</sup>=0.8158). A subsequent comparison of NGS-MRD with FT-MRD yielded a good coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>=0.7690), but the coefficient varied by subtype. Specifically, the R<sup>2</sup> was excellent for <em>TCF3::PBX1</em> ALL (R<sup>2</sup>=0.9157), good for <em>ETV6::RUNX1</em> ALL (R<sup>2</sup>=0.8606), and subpar for <em>BCR::ABL1</em> ALL (R<sup>2</sup>=0.5763). The overall concordance between the two methods was 83.7%, and an excellent concordance rate of 95.8% was achieved for <em>TCF3::PBX1</em> ALL. Major discordance, which was defined as a &gt;1 log difference between discordant NGS-MRD and FT-MRD, occurred in 6.7% of the samples, with all but one sample being <em>BCR::ABL1</em> ALL. Among the four non-transplanted patients with <em>BCR::ABL1</em>-MRD (+)/NGS-MRD (−), three did not relapse after long-term follow-up. Our finding indicates that NGS-MRD has a better prognostic impact than RT-qPCR-MRD in <em>ETV6::RUNX1</em> and <em>BCR::ABL1</em> ALL, whereas in <em>TCF3::PBX1</em> ALL, both methods exhibit comparable efficacy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":19915,"journal":{"name":"Pathology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of next-generation sequencing for measurable residual disease monitoring in three major fusion transcript subtypes of B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia\",\"authors\":\"Ying-Jung Huang ,&nbsp;Shih-Hsiang Chen ,&nbsp;Hsi-Che Liu ,&nbsp;Tang-Her Jaing ,&nbsp;Ting-Chi Yeh ,&nbsp;Ming-Chung Kuo ,&nbsp;Tung-Liang Lin ,&nbsp;Chiu-Chen Chen ,&nbsp;Shih-Chung Wang ,&nbsp;Te-Kau Chang ,&nbsp;Chih-Cheng Hsiao ,&nbsp;Der-Cherng Liang ,&nbsp;Lee-Yung Shih\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pathol.2024.02.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for monitoring measurable residual disease (MRD) in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) has been gaining traction. This study aimed to investigate the utility of NGS in MRD monitoring for the three major fusion transcript (FT) subtypes of B-precursor ALL (B-ALL). The MRD results for 104 bone marrow samples from 56 patients were analysed through NGS and real time quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) for the three major FTs: <em>BCR::ABL1</em>, <em>TCF3::PBX1</em>, and <em>ETV6::RUNX1</em>. To validate the NGS approach, NGS-MRD was initially compared with allele-specific oligonucleotide-qPCR-MRD, and the coefficient of determination was good (R<sup>2</sup>=0.8158). A subsequent comparison of NGS-MRD with FT-MRD yielded a good coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>=0.7690), but the coefficient varied by subtype. Specifically, the R<sup>2</sup> was excellent for <em>TCF3::PBX1</em> ALL (R<sup>2</sup>=0.9157), good for <em>ETV6::RUNX1</em> ALL (R<sup>2</sup>=0.8606), and subpar for <em>BCR::ABL1</em> ALL (R<sup>2</sup>=0.5763). The overall concordance between the two methods was 83.7%, and an excellent concordance rate of 95.8% was achieved for <em>TCF3::PBX1</em> ALL. Major discordance, which was defined as a &gt;1 log difference between discordant NGS-MRD and FT-MRD, occurred in 6.7% of the samples, with all but one sample being <em>BCR::ABL1</em> ALL. Among the four non-transplanted patients with <em>BCR::ABL1</em>-MRD (+)/NGS-MRD (−), three did not relapse after long-term follow-up. Our finding indicates that NGS-MRD has a better prognostic impact than RT-qPCR-MRD in <em>ETV6::RUNX1</em> and <em>BCR::ABL1</em> ALL, whereas in <em>TCF3::PBX1</em> ALL, both methods exhibit comparable efficacy.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pathology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031302524001004\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031302524001004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

使用下一代测序技术(NGS)监测急性淋巴细胞白血病(ALL)的可测量残留病(MRD)已越来越受到重视。本研究旨在探讨 NGS 在 B 前体 ALL(B-ALL)三大融合转录本(FT)亚型 MRD 监测中的实用性。通过 NGS 和实时定量反转录 PCR(RT-qPCR)分析了 56 例患者 104 份骨髓样本中三种主要 FT 的 MRD 结果:BCR::ABL1、TCF3::PBX1 和 ETV6::RUNX1。为了验证 NGS 方法,最初将 NGS-MRD 与等位基因特异性寡核苷酸-qPCR-MRD 进行了比较,两者的判定系数良好(R2=0.8158)。随后将 NGS-MRD 与 FT-MRD 进行比较,得出了良好的判定系数(R2=0.7690),但系数因亚型而异。具体来说,TCF3::PBX1 ALL 的 R2 非常好(R2=0.9157),ETV6::RUNX1 ALL 的 R2 很好(R2=0.8606),而 BCR::ABL1 ALL 的 R2 不佳(R2=0.5763)。两种方法的总体吻合率为 83.7%,TCF3::PBX1 ALL 的吻合率高达 95.8%。6.7%的样本出现重大不一致,即NGS-MRD和FT-MRD不一致的对数值相差1个对数,除一个样本外,其他样本均为BCR::ABL1 ALL。在 4 例 BCR::ABL1-MRD (+)/NGS-MRD (-) 的非移植患者中,有 3 例在长期随访后没有复发。我们的发现表明,在 ETV6::RUNX1 和 BCR::ABL1 ALL 中,NGS-MRD 比 RT-qPCR-MRD 对预后有更好的影响,而在 TCF3::PBX1 ALL 中,两种方法的疗效相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of next-generation sequencing for measurable residual disease monitoring in three major fusion transcript subtypes of B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia

The use of next-generation sequencing (NGS) for monitoring measurable residual disease (MRD) in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) has been gaining traction. This study aimed to investigate the utility of NGS in MRD monitoring for the three major fusion transcript (FT) subtypes of B-precursor ALL (B-ALL). The MRD results for 104 bone marrow samples from 56 patients were analysed through NGS and real time quantitative reverse transcription PCR (RT-qPCR) for the three major FTs: BCR::ABL1, TCF3::PBX1, and ETV6::RUNX1. To validate the NGS approach, NGS-MRD was initially compared with allele-specific oligonucleotide-qPCR-MRD, and the coefficient of determination was good (R2=0.8158). A subsequent comparison of NGS-MRD with FT-MRD yielded a good coefficient of determination (R2=0.7690), but the coefficient varied by subtype. Specifically, the R2 was excellent for TCF3::PBX1 ALL (R2=0.9157), good for ETV6::RUNX1 ALL (R2=0.8606), and subpar for BCR::ABL1 ALL (R2=0.5763). The overall concordance between the two methods was 83.7%, and an excellent concordance rate of 95.8% was achieved for TCF3::PBX1 ALL. Major discordance, which was defined as a >1 log difference between discordant NGS-MRD and FT-MRD, occurred in 6.7% of the samples, with all but one sample being BCR::ABL1 ALL. Among the four non-transplanted patients with BCR::ABL1-MRD (+)/NGS-MRD (−), three did not relapse after long-term follow-up. Our finding indicates that NGS-MRD has a better prognostic impact than RT-qPCR-MRD in ETV6::RUNX1 and BCR::ABL1 ALL, whereas in TCF3::PBX1 ALL, both methods exhibit comparable efficacy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pathology
Pathology 医学-病理学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.20%
发文量
459
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Published by Elsevier from 2016 Pathology is the official journal of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA). It is committed to publishing peer-reviewed, original articles related to the science of pathology in its broadest sense, including anatomical pathology, chemical pathology and biochemistry, cytopathology, experimental pathology, forensic pathology and morbid anatomy, genetics, haematology, immunology and immunopathology, microbiology and molecular pathology.
期刊最新文献
Judicious use of precise fluorescence in situ hybridisation panels guided by population prevalence may assist pragmatic detection of clinically targetable Philadelphia chromosome-like acute lymphoblastic leukaemia fusions: a systematic review Frequent detection of herpes simplex virus and varicella zoster virus in samples submitted for monkeypox virus testing in New South Wales, Australia during the mpox outbreak 2022–2023 Ossifying fibromyxoid tumour with fibrosarcoma-like features and novel PHF1::HCFC1 gene fusion Mutations of cysB in urinary isolates of cysteine-requiring Escherichia coli Comparison of PD-L1 assays in head and neck carcinoma
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1