Comparison of Free Light Chain Assay with Protein Electrophoresis for Screening and Monitoring PTLD

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 5883-5883 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Kuhn ◽  
Ping Wang ◽  
Irene Shu ◽  
Jie Xuan ◽  
Zheng Cao ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (PTLD) is primarily diagnosed histologically using tissue biopsy. Free light chain (FLC) assay and serum protein electrophoresis (SPE) have both been studied as tools to screen and monitor PTLD. However, limited data are available to compare these two assays in a well characterized patient population. It is also not clear what reference ranges should be adopted for the FLC assay in a post-transplant population. Method: Blood samples from 169 patients receiving a variety of solid organ transplants were analyzed for FLCs and screened for gammopathies by SPE/IFE. Results: Compared with non-PTLD patients, PTLD patients had higher mean, median and upper 95 percentile range of both κ and λ FLCs (p ranging from 0.0002 to 0.024). The mean, median and 95 percentile range of κ:λ ratio were similar between the two groups. PTLD patients were more likely to have polyclonal or monoclonal FLC elevations (p = 0.04). They also showed a higher frequency of gammopathy abnormalities (p = 0.0052). Nonetheless, neither FLC assay nor SPE demonstrated a clear association with the timing of PTLD diagnosis. FLC concentrations in non-PTLD recipients were higher than those in the general healthy population (95 percentile range: κ, 0.60-8.33 mg/dL vs. 0.33-1.94 mg/dL; λ, 0.77-7.08 mg/dL vs. 0.571-2.63 mg/dL) but the κ:λ ratio was similar to that of the healthy group (0.26-1.65). Conclusions: Our results suggested that elevated FLC concentrations and gammopathy abnormalities were both associated with PTLD. Therefore, FLC assay and SPE should be used conjunctively for screening PTLD among solid organ transplant recipients. For this application, the data showed that a higher upper limit of κ and λ FLC levels and normal κ:λ ratio should be used as diagnostic reference ranges. Additionally, neither method was clearly associated with the timing of PTLD diagnosis, indicating that they may be unsuitable for monitoring PTLD in the post-transplant population. Table 1. Longitudinal measurements of serum/plasma free light chains and SPE/IFE in eight PTLD cases. Type of transplant and type of PTLD Samples Days from PTLD diagnosisa κ FLC, mg/dL λ FLC, mg/dL κ /λ SPE/IFE Liver transplant, B-cell PTLD 1.1 1.2 – 616 2.33b 1.82 4.96 6.01 0.47 0.303 no band –c Liver transplant, B-cell PTLD 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 -145* -126 84 141 428 0.338 0.79 0.335 0.476 2.53 0.62 1.02 1.06 1.15 1.98 0.545 0.775 0.316 0.414 1.28 no band no band 1 IgG ©µ, 1 IgG λ 1 IgG ©µ, 1 IgG λ no band Liver transplant, polymorphic hyperplasia 3.1 3.2 -77 208 4.19 7.18 5.9 3.38 0.71 2.12 2 IgG ©µ, 2 λ FLC– Liver transplant, B-cell PTLD 4.1 4.2 4.3 61 272 537 4.64 3.25 7.1 11.1 6.65 10.96 0.418 0.489 0.648 no band no band no band Liver transplant, B-cell PTLD 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 9 12 393 429 476 305.5 957 0.721 1.01 1.24 74.25 192 1.67 1.72 2.56 4.11 4.98 0.432 0.587 0.484 1 IgG ©µ, 1 λ FLC 2 IgM ©µ no band no band no band Liver transplant, B-cell PTLD 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 62 153 174 188 3.16 5.58 3.97 2.14 2.92 3.91 3.81 3.37 1.08 1.43 1.04 0.635 – 1 IgG ©µ 1 IgG ©µ 1 IgG ©µ Kidney transplant, PTLD 7.1 7.2 15 30 1.4 1.68 1.58 2.06 0.89 0.82 no band no band Lung transplant, Non-Hodgkin lymphoma 8.1 -60 4.28 4.58 0.94 no band a Positive values indicate time points before PTLD diagnosis, while negative values indicate time points after PTLD diagnosis. b Numbers in bold format indicates values above ULN. c SPE/IFE results not available due to insufficient sample volume. Disclosures Kuhn: The Binding Site, Inc: Employment.

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 312-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joannes F.M. Jacobs ◽  
Corrie M. de Kat Angelino ◽  
Huberdina M.L.M. Brouwers ◽  
Sandra A. Croockewit ◽  
Irma Joosten ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Serum free light chain (sFLC) measurements are increasingly important in the context of screening for monoclonal gammopathies, prognostic stratification, and monitoring of therapy responses. At the same time, analytical limitations have been reported with the currently available nephelometric and turbidimetric sFLC assays. We have evaluated a new quantitative sFLC ELISA for its suitability in routine clinical use. Methods: Reference ranges of the Sebia FLC assay were calculated from 208 controls. Assay interference, reproducibility, lot-to-lot variability, and linearity were assessed. Method comparison to the Freelite assay (Binding Site) was conducted by retrospective analysis of 501 patient sera. Results: Reference ranges of the Sebia κ/λFLC-ratio were 0.37–1.44. We observed good sensitivity (1.5 mg/L) and linearity in both polyclonal and monoclonal sFLC samples and never experienced antigen excess. Sebia FLC reproducibility varied between 6.7% and 8.1% with good lot-to-lot consistency. Method comparison with Freelite showed the following correlations: κFLC R=0.94, λFLC R=0.92 and κ/λFLC-ratio R=0.96. The clinical concordance of the κ/λFLC-ratio of both methods was 94%. Significant quantitative differences were observed between both methods, mainly in sera with high FLC concentrations. The Sebia monoclonal FLC concentrations were coherent with those obtained by serum protein electrophoresis (SPE). Freelite monoclonal FLC concentrations were consistently higher, with a mean 12-fold overestimation compared to SPE. Conclusions: The Sebia FLC assay provides a novel platform for sensitive and accurate sFLC measurements. The Sebia FLC showed good clinical concordance with Freelite. Further studies are warranted to confirm the clinical value of this assay.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2074-2074
Author(s):  
Kentaro Narita ◽  
Yoshiaki Usui ◽  
Yoshiaki Abe ◽  
Masami Takeuchi ◽  
Kosei Matsue

Abstract Background: Monitoring of serum free light chain (sFLC) ratio after treatment in multiple myeloma (MM) patients is valuable for assessing monoclonal component of free light chain (FLC). However, the recent International Myeloma Working Group guidelines did not recommend replacing 24-hour urine analysis with FLC analysis in diagnosis or response assessment of MM, and previous studies indicated discordance between urine analysis and sFLC levels in light chain-only MM (LCMM). This is clinically relevant because sFLC normalization was considered a surrogate for improved outcome in both LCMM and intact immunoglobulin MM (IIMM). The clinical impact of FLC ratio normalization on detection of monoclonal component may differ between LCMM or oligosecretory myeloma (OSMM) and IIMM. This study explored the utility of sFLC ratio as a surrogate for residual clonal monoclonal component compared with 24-hour urine immunofixation electrophoresis (uIFx) after treatment. We evaluated the impact of normalization of sFLC ratio in patients with LCMM/OSMM that obtained very good partial response (VGPR), complete response (CR), and immunophenotypic CR (iCR; sIFx/uIF negative plus ≤ 10-4 clonal PCs) determined by multicolor flow cytometry (MFC). Methods: We included 176 patients (51 with LCMM and OSMM, 125 with IIMM) treated between April 2006 and January 2016 at Kameda Medical Center, Japan. Immunoglobulin levels in serum and urine samples were examined by serum protein electrophoresis (SPEP), serum immunofixation electrophoresis (sIFx), urine protein electrophoresis (UPEP), uIFx, and sFLC for response assessment. Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessments after treatment were performed by 6-color MFC and the results were compared to other tests of monoclonal components, including SPEP, UPEP, sIFx, uIFx, and FLC. Agreement between sFLC normalization and MRD by MFC was assessed using kappa statistic. Disease response was evaluated using IMWG criteria. sFLC was measured by Fleelite® assay (The Binding Site Group Ltd.). Reference ranges for sFLC have been previously published. Statistical analyses were performed with EZR, which is a graphical user interface for R ver. 3.2.1. Ethical considerations: This study was approved by the local ethics committee and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice Guidelines. Results: All of 51 LCMM/OSMM patients (100%) and 95 of the 125 IIMM patients (72%) had measurable and abnormal involved sFLC (≥ 100 mg/L) and positive uIFx at presentation. VGPR, CR, and iCR were obtained in 31 (61%), 25 (49%), and 14 (27%) patients with LCMM/OSMM, respectively, and normalization of sFLC ratio at VGPR, CR and iCR was seen in 1/31 (3%), 13/25 (48%), and 8/14 (57%) of these patients, respectively. Among the LCMM/OSMM patients with iCR, 4 patients obtained deeper iCR (≤ 10-5 clonal PCs) and all of them had normal sFLC ratio, while sFLC ratio remained abnormal in the rest of 10 iCR patients that did not achieve deeper iCR. In IIMM patients, VGPR, CR, and iCR were obtained in 78 (61%), 52 (42%), and 20 (16%) patients, respectively. In contrast to the LCMM/OSMM patients, normalization of the sFLC ratio at VGPR, CR, and iCR was seen in 52/78 (67%), 39/52 (75%), and 17/20 (85%) of IIMM patients, respectively. Thirteen of the 14 IIMM patients (93%) that obtained deeper iCR had normal sFLC ratio. Among the patients with IIMM, percentage of patients with normalized sFLC ratio did not differ between the response groups (p=0.11), while it was significantly different in LCMM/OSMM patients (p<0.001) (Figure 1). These observations indicated that the normalization of sFLC ratio is significantly associated with deeper response in LCMM/OSMM patients, but not in IIMM patients. Conclusions: Our observations indicated that sFLC test has greater sensitivity than urine immunofixation for detection of the monoclonal component of sFLC, especially in patients with LCMM/OSMM. In addition, we also showed that normalization of sFLC ratio is correlated with the depth of response assessed by MFC in patients with LCMM/OSMM, but not in IIMM patients. These findings suggest that FLC ratio provides greater sensitivity for residual disease monitoring than uPEP or uIFx in patients with LCMM and OSMM, and therefore could be considered as an alternative to urine analysis for monitoring of LCMM/OSMM patients. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3347-3347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Dejoie ◽  
Michel Attal ◽  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Jean-Luc Harousseau ◽  
Herve Avet-Loiseau

Abstract The introduction of the serum free light chain (sFLC) changed the diagnostic paradigm for patients with B cell disorders. IMWG guideline recommends the assay as a replacement for 24h urine at diagnosis, however with the exception of oligosecretory disease the assay is not recommended as a tool to monitor patients. One rationale for this recommendation is that to date, studies have compared the concentrations of FLC as measured by the two tests rather than determine which test provides the more reliable clinical assessment. Here we compare the sensitivities of FLC and 24h urine and comment on the reliability of each to monitor patients. Sequential sera from 25 LCMM (14 FLCκ, 11 FLCλ; stage I: 10, II: 10, III: 5) and 157 IIMM patients (79 IgGκ, 34 IgGλ, 26 IgAκ, 18 IgAλ; Stage I: 46, II: 75, III: 35, 1 missing) enrolled onto the IFM 2007-02 MM trial were analysed. Serum FLCκ and FLCλ levels were measured by Freelite® in samples collected at presentation, after cycles 2 and 4 of therapy and post ASCT. Results were compared to previously published sFLC reference ranges (sFLCκ 3.3-19.4 mg/L, sFLCλ 5.7-26.3 mg/L, sFLCκ/λ ratio 0.26-1.65), SPEP, UPEP sIFE and uIFE. IMWG guidelines were used to define measurable disease and to assess response the therapy. Quadratic Weighted Kappa (WK) analysis was performed to assess agreement in responses assigned by sFLC and urine tests. All 25 LCMM patients had abnormal sFLC ratios (14 FLCκ, 11 FLCλ) and measurable disease at presentation (iFLC 3620 (689-22000) mg/L). Similarly, all patients were positive by uIFE and had measurable disease by UPE (1940 (490-42000) mg/24h). However, in keeping with previous reports quantitative correlation between the two assays was poor (r=0.27). Responses assigned by sFLC and UPEP were concordant in 11/25 (44%) patients, although in 4/11 (40%) timing of the response was different (UPEP 89 (58-118) days; sFLC 226 (216-227) days). In the remaining 14/25 patients the responses assigned using the two tests differed. In 7/14 patients UPEP and uIFE became negative whilst the FLC ratio remained abnormal; in 1/7 patient sIFE confirmed the presence of the M protein. In 3 patients FLC identified relapse, while UPEP was negative or indicated response. In a further 2 patients FLC identified no response whilst UPEP initially identified a response and subsequent relapse. Overall, a moderate concordance was identified between the responses assigned by sFLC and urine tests (WK (95% CI): 0.59 (0.36-0.82)). At presentation, 154/157 (98%) IIMM patients had abnormal FLC ratios (FLCκ ratio 57 (2-33191); FLCλ ratio 0.009 (0.00003-0.25)), whereas only 85/157 (54%) patients were positive by uIFE and 67/157 (43%) by UPEP. 98/157 (62%) had measurable disease using sFLC (κFLC 491 (101-15600) mg/L; λFLC 441 (101-14100) mg/L), and 55/157 (35%) had measurable disease by UPEP (1000 (210-9200) mg/24h). 53/157 (34%) patients had measurable disease by both methods. The correlation between sFLC and UPEP measurements was poor (r=0.36) as was the correlation between intact immunoglobulin measurements by SPEP and sFLC (r=-0.06) or UPEP (r=-0.26). In 53 IIMM patients with measurable disease by both FLC and UPEP, sFLC ratios normalised in 14/53 patients (in 8/14 sIFE remained positive) while uIFE became negative in 33/53 patients (20/33 remained sIFE positive). WK showed better agreement for response assignment between intact immunoglobulin and sFLC measurements (WK (95% CI): 0.63 (0.48-0.79); substantial agreement) than with urine tests (0.49 (0.27-0.72); moderate agreement). Additionally, there was an association between depth of response by sFLC pre- and post-transplant: patients achieving >VGPR before transplant were more likely to achieve >VGPR post-transplant compared with patients who achieved <VGPR prior to transplant (96.2% vs. 63.2%, respectively; p=0.001). Finally 5/157 IIMM patients were oligosecretory and had measurable levels of disease by both UPEP and sFLC, but not by SPEP. In all 5 patients UPEP became negative by cycle 2; however, an abnormal sFLC ratio and positive sIFE indicated persistent disease. sFLC was a more sensitive tool and showed a greater degree of concordance with IFE and SPEP than UPEP in LCMM and IIMM patients respectively during patient monitoring. Furthermore, >90% reduction in sFLC prior to transplant was associated with post-transplant response in IIMM patients. Larger studies with patient outcome are required to validate our findings. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Author(s):  
Stephen J. Harding ◽  
Graham P. Mead ◽  
Arthur R. Bradwell ◽  
Annie M. Berard

Abstract: Protein and immunofixation electrophoresis of serum and urine are established as diagnostic aids for identifying monoclonal gammopathies. However, many patient sera sent to laboratories are not accompanied by urine samples and recent reports suggest the use of serum free light chain (sFLC) analysis in combination with serum protein electrophoresis (SPE) and immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE) could eliminate the need for urinalysis. The aim of the study was to assess the utility of sFLC measurement in addition to serum protein electrophoresis in the identification of patients with B-cell malignancies.: A total of 952 serum samples were analysed by serum protein electrophoresis and those with abnormal bands were analysed by immunofixation. sFLCs were measured in a retrospective manner by automated assay.: In our study of 952 patient sera, it was found that FLC analysis identified 23 additional cases of B-cell malignancies which were missed by SPE.: The additional malignancies identified by sFLC analysis add support for its inclusion in the routine screening protocol for B-cell malignancies.Clin Chem Lab Med 2009;47:302–4.


Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 1916-1916
Author(s):  
Daniela Capello ◽  
Giuliana Muti ◽  
Michaela Cerri ◽  
Davide Rossi ◽  
Pierluigi Oreste ◽  
...  

Abstract Most PTLD occurring in solid organ patients arise from recipient cells, whereas few cases derive from donor transplanted lymphocytes. Donor-derived PTLD usually have a predilection for the allograft and are particularly frequent following liver transplant. To clarify the histogenesis and pathogenesis of donor-derived PTLD, we investigated 11 monoclonal PTLD occurring in liver transplant patients, including 6 cases arising from donor cells and 5 cases from recipient cells. Phenotypic markers of histogenesis included expression of BCL6, MUM1 and CD138, which segregate the germinal center (GC) stage of B-cell differentiation (BCL6+/MUM1−/+/CD138−) from later stages of maturation (BCL6−/MUM1+/CD138+/−). Genotypic markers of histogenesis were represented by somatic hypermutation of immunoglobulin variable (IGV) genes, that is experienced by B-cells during GC reaction. To assess the role of antigen in disease pathogenesis, we also analyzed usage and mutational profile of clonal IGV heavy (IGHV) and light (IGLV) chain gene rearrangements. All PTLD or donor origin were EBV-infected lymphoproliferations morphologically classified as polymorphic PTLD (P-PTLD). PTLD arising from recipient cells were classified as diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL); EBV infection was restricted to 1 case. Analysis of phenotypic markers of B-cell histogenesis showed expression of the BCL6+/MUM1−/CD138− profile in 3 DLBCL with centroblastic features, all arising from recipient cells. The phenotypic profile BCL-6−/MUM1+/CD138+/−, consistent with a post-GC stage of pre-terminal B-cell differentiation, was detected in 8/11 PTLD, including 6/6 donor-derived PTLD and 2/5 recipient-derived PTLD. Analysis of somatic hypermutation showed the presence of somatically hypermutated IGHV genes in 7/11 PTLD. Unmutated IGHV rearrangements were identified in 2/6 donor-derived PTLD and in 2/5 recipient-derived PTLD. Analysis of intraclonal heterogeneity showed the presence of ongoing mutations in 1 donor-derived PTLD. The distribution of individual IGHV families and genes differed between donor-derived and recipient-derived PTLD and between the normal repertoire and donor-derived PTLD. Donor-derived PTLD preferentially rearranged IGHV3 (2/6 cases) and IGHV4 (3/6 cases) family genes, whereas recipient-derived PTLD rearranged virtually all IGVH families. The IGHV4-39 gene was the most frequently rearranged IGHV gene in donor-derived PTLD (3/6 cases), but was absent in recipient-derived PTLD and relatively rare in the non-neoplastic B-cell repertoire. Despite extensive investigation by multiple PCR strategies, a functional IGV light chain rearrangement was found in only 5/11 PTLD. Two donor-derived and one recipient-derived PTLD harbored IGLV rearrangement, whereas 2 donor-derived PTLD harbored a functional IGKV rearrangement. In 2 recipient-derived and in 2 donor-derived PTLD, we identified only non-functional IGV light chain rearrangement. In conclusion, our data suggest that both donor-derived and recipient-derived PTLD occurring in liver transplant patients arise from a B-cell subset that phenotypically mimicks post-GC, pre-terminally differentiatiated B-cells. Lack of IGV mutations, however, suggests that a fraction of cases failed to perform a proper GC reaction. The biased usage of the IGHV4-39 gene suggests that antigen stimulation and selection might have a role in the pathogenesis of donor-derived PTLD.


2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 1133-1139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Maiolo ◽  
Eleonora Alma ◽  
Cecilia Napodano ◽  
Francesca Gulli ◽  
Silvia Bellesi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document