Comparison of Immunohistochemistry, Cytochemistry, and Flow Cytometry in AML for Myeloperoxidase Detection
- 65 Downloads
Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) as per World Health Organization (WHO 2008) classification is on the basis of the antigenic characterization, enzymes restriction in the neoplastic myeloid cells and the specific translocations/mutations. AML can be assessed and differentiated by flowcytometry (FCM)/immunohistochemistry (IHC)/cytochemistry techniques. Myeloperoxidase (MPO) is an unequivocal marker to differentiate AML from the acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Despite FCM popularity, it has its limitations, in form of ‘dry-tap’, cost, and inability of being performed by retrospective analysis. IHC, though an old technique has overcome these disadvantages of FCM. Cytochemistry, on the other hand has its own advantages in being cost-effective; technically easy to do while its disadvantages are its inability to be carried out in the old samples, ‘dry-tap’ conditions in aleukemic leukemia. There has been non-uniformity in the literature among these techniques especially concerning their sensitivity for MPO. A prospective study was done at All India Institute of Medical Sciences New Delhi from 01 July 2014 to 30 Nov 2015 to include 120 diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia cases. Myeloperoxidase stain was done by cytochemistry, immunohistochemistry and flow cytometry and results were compared. There were 28 cases which showed discrepancies. Out of these 28 cases immunohistochemistry showed positivity in majority (22 cases) followed by flow cytometry (14 cases). Therefore it is important to employ more than one technique and IHC must be included for detection of MPO in all suspected cases of AML especially when negative with FCM .
KeywordsAcute myeloid leukemia (AML) Myeloperoxidase (MPO) Cytochemistry Immunohistochemistry (IHC) Flow cytometry (FMC) Bone marrow aspirate (BMA) Bone marrow biopsy (BMB) CD34 Blasts
We acknowledge the support of our patients, as with their support the study had been feasible.
AA and ST were involved in conceptualization, designing, writing and critical review of the manuscript and were responsible for overall supervision. TS, HPT, GPSG, PT and VS were involved in literature search, writing and manuscript editing. ST is the overall guarantor of the article.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
The present study is in compliance with Ethical Standards.
- 4.Peffault de Latour R, Legrand O, Moreau D, Perrot J, Blanc C, Chaoui D, Casadeall N, Marie J (2003) Comparison of flow cytometry and enzyme cytochemistry for the detection of myeloperoxidase in acute myeloid leukaemia: interests of a new positivity threshold. Br J Haematol 122:211–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Harris NL et al (2008) WHO classification of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. IARC Press, LyonGoogle Scholar
- 9.Prabhu M, Vandana P, Venkatesan S, Abhishek P, Rahul KS, Mandeep D, Renu S (2015) Can threshold for MPO by flow cytometry be reduced in classifying acute leukaemia? A comparison of flow cytometric and cytochemical myeloperoxidase using different flow cytometric cut-offs. Hematology 20:455–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.van den Ancker W, Westers TM, de Leeuw DC, van der Veeken YF, Loonen A, van Beckhoven E, Ossenkoppele GJ, van de Loosdrecht AA (2013) A threshold of 10% for myeloperoxidase by flow cytometry is valid to classify acute leukemia of ambiguous and myeloid origin. Cytom B Clin Cytom 84B:114–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Jaffe E, Harris N, Stein H, Vardiman J (eds) (2001) World health organization classification of tumors. Pathology and genetics of tumors of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues, chapter 4. IARC Press, LyonGoogle Scholar