Heteroduplex analysis of VDJ amplified segments from rearranged IgH genes for clonality assessments in B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. A comparison between different strategies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The main difficulty of PCR-based clonality studies for B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders (B-LPD) is discrimination between monoclonal and polyclonal PCR products, especially when there is a high background of polyclonal B cells in the tumor sample. Actually, PCR-based methods for clonality assessment require additional analysis of the PCR products in order to discern between monoclonal and polyclonal samples. Heteroduplex analysis represents an attractive approach since it is easy to perform and avoids the use of radioactive substrates or expensive equipment. DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied the sensitivity and specificity of heteroduplex PCR analysis for monoclonal detection in samples from 90 B-cell non Hodgkin's lymphoma (B-NHL) patients and in 28 individuals without neoplastic B-cell disorders (negative controls). Furthermore, in 42 B-NHL and in the same 28 negative controls, we compared heteroduplex analysis vs the classical PCR technique. We also compared ethidium bromide (EtBr) vs. silver nitrate (AgNO(3)) staining as well as agarose vs. polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE). RESULTS: Using two pair consensus primers sited at VH (FR3 and FR2) and at JH, 91% of B-NHL samples displayed monoclonal products after heteroduplex PCR analysis using PAGE and AgNO(3) staining. Moreover, no polyclonal sample showed a monoclonal PCR product. By contrast, false positive results were obtained when using agarose (5/28) and PAGE without heteroduplex analysis: 2/28 and 8/28 with EtBr and AgNO(3) staining, respectively. In addition, false negative results only appeared with EtBr staining: 13/42 in agarose, 4/42 in PAGE without heteroduplex analysis and 7/42 in PAGE after heteroduplex analysis. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that AgNO(3) stained PAGE after heteroduplex analysis is the most suitable strategy for detecting monoclonal rearrangements in B-NHL samples because it does not produce false-positive results and the risk of false-negative results is very low.

The comparative utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction in the diagnosis of alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma.

Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for FOXO1 gene rearrangement and reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for PAX3/7-FOXO1 fusion transcripts have become routine ancillary tools for the diagnosis of alveolar rhabdomyosarcomas (ARMS). Here we summarize our experience of these adjunct diagnostic modalities at a tertiary center, presenting the largest comparative series of FISH and PCR for suspected or possible ARMS to date. All suspected or possible ARMS tested by FISH or PCR for FOXO1 rearrangement or PAX3/7-FOXO1 fusion transcripts over a 7-year period were included. FISH and PCR results were correlated with clinical and histologic findings. One hundred samples from 95 patients had FISH and/or PCR performed. FISH had higher rates of technical success (96.8 %) compared with PCR (88 %). Where both tests were utilized successfully, there was high concordance rate between them (94.9 %). In 24 histologic ARMS tested for FISH or PCR, 83.3 % were translocation-positive (all for PAX3-FOXO1 by PCR) and included 3 histologic solid variants. In 76 cases where ARMS was excluded, there were 3 potential false-positive cases with FISH but none with PCR. PCR had similar sensitivity (85.7 %) and better specificity (100 %) in aiding the diagnosis of ARMS, compared with FISH (85 and 95.8 %, respectively). All solid variant ARMS harbored FOXO1 gene rearrangements and PAX3-FOXO1 ARMS were detected to the exclusion of PAX7-FOXO1. In comparative analysis, both FISH and PCR are useful in aiding the diagnosis of ARMS and excluding its sarcomatous mimics. FISH is more reliable technically but has less specificity than PCR. In cases where ARMS is in the differential diagnosis, it is optimal to perform both PCR and FISH: both have similar sensitivities for detecting ARMS, but FISH may confirm or exclude cases that are technically unsuccessful with PCR, while PCR can detect specific fusion transcripts that may be useful prognostically.

A quality control program for mutation detection in KIT and PDGFRA in gastrointestinal stromal tumours.

BACKGROUND: Although most gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) carry oncogenic mutations in KIT exons 9, 11, 13 and 17, or in platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRA) exons 12, 14 and 18, around 10% of GIST are free of these mutations. Genotyping and accurate detection of KIT/PDGFRA mutations in GIST are becoming increasingly useful for clinicians in the management of the disease. METHOD: To evaluate and improve laboratory practice in GIST mutation detection, we developed a mutational screening quality control program. Eleven laboratories were enrolled in this program and 50 DNA samples were analysed, each of them by four different laboratories, giving 200 mutational reports. RESULTS: In total, eight mutations were not detected by at least one laboratory. One false positive result was reported in one sample. Thus, the mean global rate of error with clinical implication based on 200 reports was 4.5%. Concerning specific polymorphisms detection, the rate varied from 0 to 100%, depending on the laboratory. The way mutations were reported was very heterogeneous, and some errors were detected. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that such a program was necessary for laboratories to improve the quality of the analysis, because an error rate of 4.5% may have clinical consequences for the patient.

Heteroduplex PCR analysis of rearranged immunoglobulin genes for clonality assessment in multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Molecular analysis by PCR of monoclonally rearranged immunoglobulin (Ig) genes can be used for diagnosis in B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders (LPD), as well as for monitoring minimal residual disease (MRD) after treatment. This technique has the risk of false-positive results due to the "background" amplification of similar rearrangements derived from polyclonal B-cells. This problem can be resolved in advance by additional analyses that discern between polyclonal and monoclonal PCR products, such as the heteroduplex analysis. A second problem is that PCR frequently fails to amplify the junction regions, mainly due to somatic mutations frequently present in mature (post-follicular) B-cell lymphoproliferations. The use of additional targets (e.g. Ig light chain genes) can avoid this problem. DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied the specificity of heteroduplex PCR analysis of several Ig junction regions to detect monoclonal products in samples from 84 MM patients and 24 patients with B cell polyclonal disorders. RESULTS: Using two distinct VH consensus primers (FR3 and FR2) in combination with one JH primer, 79% of the MM displayed monoclonal products. The percentage of positive cases was increased by amplification of the Vlamda-Jlamda junction regions or kappa(de) rearrangements, using two or five pairs of consensus primers, respectively. After including these targets in the heteroduplex PCR analysis, 93% of MM cases displayed monoclonal products. None of the polyclonal samples analyzed resulted in monoclonal products. Dilution experiments showed that monoclonal rearrangements could be detected with a sensitivity of at least 10(-2) in a background with >30% polyclonal B-cells, the sensitivity increasing up to 10(-3) when the polyclonal background was