> Detailanzeige

Gagnon, Marie-France; Midthun, Sally M; Fangel, James A; Schuh, Cynthia M; Luoma, Ivy M; Pearce, Kathryn E; Meyer, Reid G; Ailawadhi, Sikander; Arribas, Mariano J; Braggio, Esteban; Fonseca, Rafael; Rajkumar, S Vincent; Zepeda-Mendoza, Cinthya; Xu, Xinjie; Greipp, Patricia T; Timm, Michael M; Otteson, Gregory E; Shi, Min; Jevremovic, Dragan; Olteanu, Horatiu; Peterson, Jess F; Ketterling, Rhett P; Kumar, Shaji; Baughn, Linda B

Superior detection rate of plasma cell FISH using FACS-FISH

Literatur-
verwaltung

Zur
Merkliste

Lösche von
Merkliste

Per Whatsapp teilen

Schließen

Merkliste



Sie können Bookmarks mittels Listen verwalten, loggen Sie sich dafür bitte in Ihr SLUB Benutzerkonto ein.
  • Medientyp: E-Artikel
  • Titel: Superior detection rate of plasma cell FISH using FACS-FISH
  • Beteiligte: Gagnon, Marie-France; Midthun, Sally M; Fangel, James A; Schuh, Cynthia M; Luoma, Ivy M; Pearce, Kathryn E; Meyer, Reid G; Ailawadhi, Sikander; Arribas, Mariano J; Braggio, Esteban; Fonseca, Rafael; Rajkumar, S Vincent; Zepeda-Mendoza, Cinthya; Xu, Xinjie; Greipp, Patricia T; Timm, Michael M; Otteson, Gregory E; Shi, Min; Jevremovic, Dragan; Olteanu, Horatiu; Peterson, Jess F; Ketterling, Rhett P; Kumar, Shaji; Baughn, Linda B
  • Erschienen: Oxford University Press (OUP), 2024
  • Erschienen in: American Journal of Clinical Pathology
  • Sprache: Englisch
  • DOI: 10.1093/ajcp/aqad108
  • ISSN: 0002-9173; 1943-7722
  • Schlagwörter: General Medicine
  • Entstehung:
  • Anmerkungen:
  • Beschreibung: <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Objectives</jats:title> <jats:p>Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for plasma cell neoplasms (PCNs) requires plasma cell (PC) identification or purification strategies to optimize results. We compared the efficacy of cytoplasmic immunoglobulin FISH (cIg-FISH) and fluorescence-activated cell sorting FISH (FACS-FISH) in a clinical laboratory setting.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Methods</jats:title> <jats:p>The FISH analysis results of 14,855 samples from individuals with a suspected PCN subjected to cytogenetic evaluation between 2019 and 2022 with cIg-FISH (n = 6917) or FACS-FISH (n = 7938) testing were analyzed.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Results</jats:title> <jats:p>Fluorescence-activated cell sorting–FISH increased the detection rate of abnormalities in comparison with cIg-FISH, with abnormal results documented in 54% vs 50% of cases, respectively (P &amp;lt; .001). It improved the detection of IGH::CCND1 (P &amp;lt; .001), IGH::MAF (P &amp;lt; .001), IGH::MAFB (P &amp;lt; .001), other IGH rearrangements (P &amp;lt; .001), and gains/amplifications of 1q (P &amp;lt; .001), whereas the detection rates of IGH::FGFR3 fusions (P = .3), loss of 17p (P = .3), and other abnormalities, including hyperdiploidy (P = .5), were similar. Insufficient PC yield for FISH analysis was decreased between cIg-FISH and FACS-FISH (22% and 3% respectively, P &amp;lt; .001). Flow cytometry allowed establishment of ploidy status in 91% of cases. In addition, FACS-FISH decreased analysis times, workload efforts, and operating costs.</jats:p> </jats:sec> <jats:sec> <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title> <jats:p>Fluorescence-activated cell sorting–FISH is an efficient PC purification strategy that affords significant improvement in diagnostic yield and decreases workflow requirements in comparison with cIg-FISH.</jats:p> </jats:sec>