Minimal Residual Disease Detection by Droplet Digital PCR in Multiple Myeloma, Mantle Cell Lymphoma, and Follicular Lymphoma: A Comparison with Real-Time PCR

Real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) is a well-established tool for minimal residual disease (MRD) detection in mature lymphoid malignancies. Despite remarkable sensitivity and specificity, qPCR has some limitations, particularly in the need for a reference standard curve, based on target serial diluti...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD 2015-11, Vol.17 (6), p.652-660
Hauptverfasser: Drandi, Daniela, Kubiczkova-Besse, Lenka, Ferrero, Simone, Dani, Nadia, Passera, Roberto, Mantoan, Barbara, Gambella, Manuela, Monitillo, Luigia, Saraci, Elona, Ghione, Paola, Genuardi, Elisa, Barbero, Daniela, Omedè, Paola, Barberio, Davide, Hajek, Roman, Vitolo, Umberto, Palumbo, Antonio, Cortelazzo, Sergio, Boccadoro, Mario, Inghirami, Giorgio, Ladetto, Marco
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) is a well-established tool for minimal residual disease (MRD) detection in mature lymphoid malignancies. Despite remarkable sensitivity and specificity, qPCR has some limitations, particularly in the need for a reference standard curve, based on target serial dilutions. In this study, we established droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) for MRD monitoring in multiple myeloma, mantle cell lymphoma, and follicular lymphoma and compared it head-to-head with qPCR. We observed that ddPCR has sensitivity, accuracy, and reproducibility comparable with qPCR. We then compared the two approaches in 69 patients with a documented molecular marker at diagnosis (18 multiple myelomas, 21 mantle cell lymphomas assessed with the immunoglobulin gene rearrangement, and 30 follicular lymphomas with the use of the BCL2/immunoglobulin gene major breakpoint region rearrangement). ddPCR was successful in 100% of cases, whereas qPCR failed to provide a reliable standard curve in three patients. Overall, 222 of 225 samples were evaluable by both methods. The comparison highlighted a good concordance (r = 0.94, P 
ISSN:1943-7811
DOI:10.1016/j.jmoldx.2015.05.007