Computer-assisted detection of monoclonal components: results from the multicenter study for the evaluation of CASPER (Computer Assisted Serum Protein Electrophoresis Recognizer) algorithm

2008 ◽  
Vol 46 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agostino Ognibene ◽  
Maria S. Graziani ◽  
Anna Caldini ◽  
Alessandro Terreni ◽  
Gabriella Righetti ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 252-258 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Clavijo ◽  
Nathan Ryan ◽  
Hongyan Xu ◽  
Gurmukh Singh

Abstract Background Protein concentration of monoclonal immunoglobulin in plasma-cell myeloma/multiple myeloma provides an estimate of the tumor mass and allows for monitoring of the response to treatment. Accurate and reproducible estimates of the monoclonal immunoglobulin concentration are important for patient care. Objective To address the optimum method for estimation of the concentration of monoclonal immunoglobulins. Methods Serum protein electrophoresis and immunofixation electrophoresis were conducted by using the Helena SPIFE Touch instrument. Estimation of the protein concentration of monoclonal immunoglobulin in the gamma region by computer-assisted reading was compared with the reading by technologists and pathology residents, in 300 gels. The data were compared using t-testing and analysis of variance. Results Computer-generated readings had a consistent positive bias. The correlation coefficient of the average reading by technologists and residents with the computer generated value was 0.997. The average positive bias by the computer reading was 0.29 g per dL. The intercept on the regression analysis was 0.22 g per dL. The reading by the computer was significantly higher than each of the human-interpreted readings. The readings by the 3 human groups were not significantly different amongst them. The main reason for the higher reading by the computer was inclusion of a greater area on the anodal size of the peak on the densitometric scan. Conclusions Human- and computer-interpreted readings of the protein concentration of monoclonal immunoglobulin have a high degree of correlation. The consistent positive bias by the computer reading occurred due to inclusion of a greater area of the densitometric scan on the anodal side of the peak. We suggest that vendors should adjust such computer programs to provide readings comparable to those generated by expert humans. We recommend manual delineation of the monoclonal peaks for measuring the concentration of monoclonal immunoglobulins.


2021 ◽  
pp. 337-343
Author(s):  
Eugenie Mok ◽  
Ka Wai Kam ◽  
Anthony J. Aldave ◽  
Alvin L. Young

A 65-year-old man presented with bilateral, painless, progressive blurring of vision over 9 years. Slit-lamp examination revealed bilateral subepithelial corneal opacities in clusters located at the mid-periphery. Anterior segment optical coherence tomography, in vivo confocal microscopy (IVCM), serum protein electrophoresis, and molecular genetic testing were performed to evaluate the cause of corneal opacities. Anterior segment optical coherence tomography revealed a band-like, hyperreflective lesion in the Bowman layer and anterior stroma of both corneas. IVCM revealed hyperreflective deposits in the epithelium, anterior stroma, and endothelium. Serum protein electrophoresis identified the presence of paraproteins (immunoglobulin kappa), and molecular genetic testing revealed absence of mutations in the transforming growth factor beta-induced gene (<i>TGFBI</i>) and collagen type XVII alpha 1 gene (<i>COL17A1</i>). The ocular diagnosis of paraproteinemic keratopathy eventually led to a systemic diagnosis of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance by our hematologist/oncologist. Paraproteinemic keratopathy is a rare differential diagnosis in patients with bilateral corneal opacities and therefore may be misdiagnosed as corneal dystrophy or neglected as scars. In patients with bilateral corneal opacities of unknown cause, serological examination, adjunct anterior segment imaging, and molecular genetic testing play a role in establishing the diagnosis.


2021 ◽  
pp. e00200
Author(s):  
J.M. Gastélum-Cano ◽  
J. Fragoso-Flores ◽  
V.M. Noffal-Nuño ◽  
M. Deffis-Court

PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. e0200347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma H. Hooijberg ◽  
Michele Miller ◽  
Carolyn Cray ◽  
Peter Buss ◽  
Gerhard Steenkamp ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Rachel D Wheeler ◽  
Micsha V Costa ◽  
Asante Crichlow ◽  
Fenella Willis ◽  
Yasmin Reyal ◽  
...  

Multiple myeloma is a haematological cancer caused by malignant plasma cells in the bone marrow that can result in organ dysfunction and death. Recent novel treatments have contributed to improved survival rates, including monoclonal antibody therapies that target the CD38 protein on the surface of plasma cells. Anti-CD38 therapies are IgG kappa monoclonal antibodies that are given in doses high enough for the drug to be visible on serum protein electrophoresis as a small paraprotein. We present a case where isatuximab, the most recent anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody to be approved for treatment of myeloma, obscured the patient’s paraprotein on gel immunofixation, so that complete remission could not be demonstrated. This was resolved using the isatuximab Hydrashift assay. The interference on gel immunofixation was unexpected because isatuximab migrated in a position distinct from the patient’s paraprotein on capillary zone electrophoresis. We demonstrate the surprising finding that isatuximab migrates in a different position on gel electrophoresis compared to capillary zone electrophoresis. It is vital that laboratories are aware of the possible interference on electrophoresis from anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody therapies, and are able to recognise these drugs on protein electrophoresis. The difference in isatuximab’s electrophoretic mobility on capillary and gel protein electrophoresis makes this particularly challenging. Laboratories should have a strategy for alternative analyses in the event that the drugs interfere with assessment of the patient’s paraprotein.


2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 22585
Author(s):  
Carlos E. Medina-De la Garza ◽  
Marisela García-Hernández ◽  
María de los Ángeles Castro-Corona

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 ◽  
pp. 61-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mina Salamatmanesh ◽  
Christopher R. McCudden ◽  
Arleigh McCurdy ◽  
Ronald A. Booth

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document