Yu Jeong Choi, Jaeguk Choi, Yehyun Kang, Saeam Shin, Seung-Tae Lee, Jong Rak Choi
{"title":"评价多发性骨髓瘤患者浆细胞分选方法:流式细胞术与磁珠。","authors":"Yu Jeong Choi, Jaeguk Choi, Yehyun Kang, Saeam Shin, Seung-Tae Lee, Jong Rak Choi","doi":"10.1186/s12935-025-03647-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prognosis of a plasma cell neoplasm (PCN) varies depending on the presence of genetic abnormalities. However, detecting sensitive genetic mutations poses challenges due to the heterogeneous nature of the cell population in bone marrow aspiration. The established gold standard for cell sorting is fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS), which is associated with lengthy processing times, substantial cell quantities, and expensive equipment. Magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) can be performed without the need for FACS equipment and allows for rapid sorting of many cells, making it a practical alternative. Our objective is to conduct a comparative analysis of these two sorting techniques to assess whether MACS can viably replace FACS in clinical applications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Plasma cell purity, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and next-generation sequencing analyses were performed on FACS- and MACS-sorted bone marrow samples from 31 PCN patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The MACS-sorted samples yielded a higher percentage of plasma cells than FACS-sorted samples under microscopy (p = 0.0156) and flow cytometry (p = 0.0313). FISH performed by two methods in 10 samples showed the same results, and the proportion of abnormal cells was significantly higher in MACS than in FACS (p = 0.001). Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test analysis showed that the median of differences of variant allele frequency (VAF) of two methods (VAF of MACS minus VAF of FACS) in the DNMT3A, TET2, and ASXL1 (DTA) group was - 0.006555 (p = 0.0020), while that in the non-DTA group was 0.002805 (p = 0.0019). Ten copy number variants (CNVs) were found in both FACS- and MACS-sorted samples, eight were identified only in MACS-sorted samples, and one was detected only in FACS-sorted samples.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates that MACS is a viable alternative for plasma cell sorting in bone marrow samples of patients with PCN.</p>","PeriodicalId":9385,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Cell International","volume":"25 1","pages":"16"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11740577/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of plasma cell sorting methods in multiple myeloma patients: flow cytometry versus magnetic beads.\",\"authors\":\"Yu Jeong Choi, Jaeguk Choi, Yehyun Kang, Saeam Shin, Seung-Tae Lee, Jong Rak Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12935-025-03647-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The prognosis of a plasma cell neoplasm (PCN) varies depending on the presence of genetic abnormalities. However, detecting sensitive genetic mutations poses challenges due to the heterogeneous nature of the cell population in bone marrow aspiration. The established gold standard for cell sorting is fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS), which is associated with lengthy processing times, substantial cell quantities, and expensive equipment. Magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) can be performed without the need for FACS equipment and allows for rapid sorting of many cells, making it a practical alternative. Our objective is to conduct a comparative analysis of these two sorting techniques to assess whether MACS can viably replace FACS in clinical applications.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Plasma cell purity, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and next-generation sequencing analyses were performed on FACS- and MACS-sorted bone marrow samples from 31 PCN patients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The MACS-sorted samples yielded a higher percentage of plasma cells than FACS-sorted samples under microscopy (p = 0.0156) and flow cytometry (p = 0.0313). FISH performed by two methods in 10 samples showed the same results, and the proportion of abnormal cells was significantly higher in MACS than in FACS (p = 0.001). Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test analysis showed that the median of differences of variant allele frequency (VAF) of two methods (VAF of MACS minus VAF of FACS) in the DNMT3A, TET2, and ASXL1 (DTA) group was - 0.006555 (p = 0.0020), while that in the non-DTA group was 0.002805 (p = 0.0019). Ten copy number variants (CNVs) were found in both FACS- and MACS-sorted samples, eight were identified only in MACS-sorted samples, and one was detected only in FACS-sorted samples.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates that MACS is a viable alternative for plasma cell sorting in bone marrow samples of patients with PCN.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9385,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Cell International\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"16\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11740577/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Cell International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12935-025-03647-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Cell International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12935-025-03647-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Evaluation of plasma cell sorting methods in multiple myeloma patients: flow cytometry versus magnetic beads.
Background: The prognosis of a plasma cell neoplasm (PCN) varies depending on the presence of genetic abnormalities. However, detecting sensitive genetic mutations poses challenges due to the heterogeneous nature of the cell population in bone marrow aspiration. The established gold standard for cell sorting is fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS), which is associated with lengthy processing times, substantial cell quantities, and expensive equipment. Magnetic-activated cell sorting (MACS) can be performed without the need for FACS equipment and allows for rapid sorting of many cells, making it a practical alternative. Our objective is to conduct a comparative analysis of these two sorting techniques to assess whether MACS can viably replace FACS in clinical applications.
Methods: Plasma cell purity, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and next-generation sequencing analyses were performed on FACS- and MACS-sorted bone marrow samples from 31 PCN patients.
Results: The MACS-sorted samples yielded a higher percentage of plasma cells than FACS-sorted samples under microscopy (p = 0.0156) and flow cytometry (p = 0.0313). FISH performed by two methods in 10 samples showed the same results, and the proportion of abnormal cells was significantly higher in MACS than in FACS (p = 0.001). Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test analysis showed that the median of differences of variant allele frequency (VAF) of two methods (VAF of MACS minus VAF of FACS) in the DNMT3A, TET2, and ASXL1 (DTA) group was - 0.006555 (p = 0.0020), while that in the non-DTA group was 0.002805 (p = 0.0019). Ten copy number variants (CNVs) were found in both FACS- and MACS-sorted samples, eight were identified only in MACS-sorted samples, and one was detected only in FACS-sorted samples.
Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that MACS is a viable alternative for plasma cell sorting in bone marrow samples of patients with PCN.
期刊介绍:
Cancer Cell International publishes articles on all aspects of cancer cell biology, originating largely from, but not limited to, work using cell culture techniques.
The journal focuses on novel cancer studies reporting data from biological experiments performed on cells grown in vitro, in two- or three-dimensional systems, and/or in vivo (animal experiments). These types of experiments have provided crucial data in many fields, from cell proliferation and transformation, to epithelial-mesenchymal interaction, to apoptosis, and host immune response to tumors.
Cancer Cell International also considers articles that focus on novel technologies or novel pathways in molecular analysis and on epidemiological studies that may affect patient care, as well as articles reporting translational cancer research studies where in vitro discoveries are bridged to the clinic. As such, the journal is interested in laboratory and animal studies reporting on novel biomarkers of tumor progression and response to therapy and on their applicability to human cancers.