Laboratory Support for Diagnosis of Amyloidosis

Chapter
Part of the Current Clinical Pathology book series (CCPATH)

Abstract

The definitive diagnosis of amyloidosis requires identification and characterization of amyloid deposits. Serum- and urine-based laboratory testing are important initial observations in guiding both the differential diagnosis of primary amyloidosis (AL) and the testing for identifying and characterizing tissue amyloid. Since the fibrils in AL are derived from intact or fragmented monoclonal immunoglobulin light chains, patients with AL typically have intact monoclonal immunoglobulin and/or free immunoglobulin light chains in their serum and/or urine. Protein electrophoresis (PEL) is the most utilized laboratory method to detect these monoclonal proteins. The fundamental principle of the test is the detection of monoclonal immunoglobulins from the polyclonal immunoglobulin background by their relatively restricted mobility. Immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE) can be used to type the monoclonal immunoglobulin. Unlike patients with multiple myeloma, AL patients may have a very small population of clonal plasma cells in the bone marrow which can elude detection by PEL and IFE. A newer, more sensitive, immunonephelometric assay is available to quantify the serum immunoglobulin free light chains (FLCs). The FLC assays have increased the diagnostic sensitivity for identification of light chain diseases such as AL, and in addition they have improved disease monitoring and prognosis. The FLC κ/λ ratio in conjunction with serum IFE defines a sensitive diagnostic screen for AL and reduces the need for urine PEL in the screening algorithm

Keywords

Free light chains Serum protein electrophoresis Urine protein Electrophoresis Nephelometry Immunofixation electrophoresis Primary (AL) amyloidosis Monoclonal immunoglobulins 

References

  1. 1.
    Kyle RA, et al. Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(13):1362–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kyle RA, et al. A long-term study of prognosis in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(8):564–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Landgren O, et al. Risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and subsequent multiple myeloma among African American and white veterans in the United States. Blood. 2006;107(3):904–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rajkumar SV, Gertz MA, Kyle RA. Primary systemic amyloidosis with delayed progression to multiple myeloma. Cancer. 1998;82(8):1501–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Madan S, et al. Clinical features and treatment response of light chain (AL) amyloidosis diagnosed in patients with previous diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(3):232–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Steensma DP. “Congo” red: out of Africa? Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2001;125(2):250–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hoffman JE, Hassoun H, Landau H, Comenzo RL, Coincindal gammopathies in patients with systemic amyloidosis and transthyretin gene mutations. Proceeedings of the 52nd ASH Annual Meeting, Orlando FL, 2010.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Strege RJ, Saeger W, Linke RP. Diagnosis and immunohistochemical classification of systemic amyloidoses. Report of 43 cases in an unselected autopsy series. Virchows Arch. 1998;433(1):19–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gertz MA, Lacy MQ, Dispenzieri A. Amyloidosis: recognition, confirmation, prognosis, and therapy. Mayo Clin Proc. 1999;74(5):490–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bradwell AR, et al. Highly sensitive, automated immunoassay for immunoglobulin free light chains in serum and urine. Clin Chem. 2001;47(4):673–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Katzmann JA, et al. Serum reference intervals and diagnostic ranges for free kappa and free lambda immunoglobulin light chains: relative sensitivity for detection of monoclonal light chains. Clin Chem. 2002;48(9):1437–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Drayson M, et al. Serum free light-chain measurements for identifying and monitoring patients with nonsecretory multiple myeloma. Blood. 2001;97(9):2900–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lachmann HJ, et al. Outcome in systemic AL amyloidosis in relation to changes in concentration of circulating free immunoglobulin light chains following chemotherapy. Br J Haematol. 2003;122(1):78–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Abraham RS, et al. Quantitative analysis of serum free light chains. A new marker for the diagnostic evaluation of primary systemic amyloidosis. Am J Clin Pathol. 2003;119(2):274–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dispenzieri A, et al. Absolute values of immunoglobulin free light chains are prognostic in patients with primary systemic amyloidosis undergoing peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2006;107(8):3378–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Katzmann JA, et al. Diagnostic performance of quantitative kappa and lambda free light chain assays in clinical practice. Clin Chem. 2005;51(5):878–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bradwell AR, et al. Serum test for assessment of patients with Bence Jones myeloma. Lancet. 2003;361(9356):489–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Katzmann JA, et al. Elimination of the need for urine studies in the screening algorithm for monoclonal gammopathies by using serum immunofixation and free light chain assays. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81(12):1575–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katzmann JA, et al. Screening panels for detection of monoclonal gammopathies. Clin Chem. 2009;55(8):1517–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Palladini G, et al. Identification of amyloidogenic light chains requires the combination of serum-free light chain assay with immunofixation of serum and urine. Clin Chem. 2009;55:499–504.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dispenzieri A, et al. Prevalence and risk of progression of light-chain monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance: a retrospective population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2010;375(9727):1721–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gertz MA, et al. Definition of organ involvement and treatment response in immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis (AL): a consensus opinion from the 10th International Symposium on Amyloid and Amyloidosis, Tours, France, 18–22 April 2004. Am J Hematol. 2005;79(4):319–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kumar SK, et al. Changes in serum-free light chain rather than intact monoclonal immunoglobulin levels predicts outcome following therapy in primary amyloidosis. Am J Hematol. 2011;86(3):251–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kumar S, et al. Serum immunoglobulin free light-chain measurement in primary amyloidosis: prognostic value and correlations with clinical features. Blood. 2010;116(24):5126–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yamamoto K, et al. The amyloid fibrils of the constant domain of immunoglobulin. FEBS Lett. 2010;584(15):3348–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Klimtchuk ES, et al. The critical role of the constant region in thermal stability and aggregation of amyloidogenic immunoglobulin light chain. Biochemistry. 2010;49(45):9848–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Businees Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Laboratory Medicine and PathologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations