Flow Cytometric Analysis in the Diagnosis and Prognostication of Plasma Cell Neoplasms

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

Flow cytometry immunophenotyping (FCM) has become an integral part of diagnosis and management of patients with plasma cell neoplasms (PCN) and related diseases. Immunophenotypic profiles of neoplastic plasma cells (PCs) in PCN are distinct from that of benign or reactive PCs, and differs from that of B cell neoplasms with plasmacytic differentiation. Progression of monoclonal gammopathy  of undetermined significance (MGUS) or smoldering myeloma to myeloma is usually accompanied by expansion of neoplastic fraction of the total PCs quantifiable by FCM. The most powerful application of FCM concerns monitoring of minimal residual disease (MRD). FCM is sensitive, quantitative, fast, and widely applicable. Absence of MRD by a sensitive multicolor FCM assay has been shown to correlate with a better progression free survival and overall survival. MRD assessment by FCM may serve as a surrogate for therapeutic efficacy, and in turn the endpoint of clinical trials, allowing speedier approval of newer drugs by regulatory bodies. With the emerging immunotherapy, FCM also allows rapid identification of potential markers for targeted therapy. The chapter begins with an overview of immunophenotypic features of neoplastic PCs and their distinction from normal PCs. This is followed by discussion of immmunophenotypic profiles that may help distinguish PCs from B cell lymphoma versus those from PCN. The principles and a practical approach to assessing MRD by FCM are emphasized and illustrated. The chapter concludes with a summary of clinical utilities and future outlook of FCM as a powerful tool for diagnostic and prognostication of PCN.

Keywords

Flow cytometry Plasma cell neoplasms Immunophenotype Minimal residual disease 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. 1.
    Flores-Montero J, de Tute R, Paiva B, et al. Immunophenotype of normal vs. myeloma plasma cells: toward antibody panel specifications for MRD detection in multiple myeloma. Cytom Part B Clin Cytom. 2015.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu D, Lin P, Hu Y, et al. Immunophenotypic heterogeneity of normal plasma cells: comparison with minimal residual plasma cell myeloma. J Clin Pathol. 2012;65:823–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tembhare PR, Yuan CM, Venzon D, et al. Flow cytometric differentiation of abnormal and normal plasma cells in the bone marrow in patients with multiple myeloma and its precursor diseases. Leuk Res. 2014;38:371–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mateo G, Montalban MA, Vidriales MB, et al. Prognostic value of immunophenotyping in multiple myeloma: a study by the PETHEMA/GEM cooperative study groups on patients uniformly treated with high-dose therapy. J Clin Oncol off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2737–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Olteanu H, Harrington AM, Kroft SH. CD200 expression in plasma cells of nonmyeloma immunoproliferative disorders: clinicopathologic features and comparison with plasma cell myeloma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;138:867–76.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Douds JJ, Long DJ, Kim AS, Li S. Diagnostic and prognostic significance of CD200 expression and its stability in plasma cell myeloma. J Clin Pathol. 2014;67:792–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Alapat D, Coviello-Malle J, Owens R, et al. Diagnostic usefulness and prognostic impact of CD200 expression in lymphoid malignancies and plasma cell myeloma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137:93–100.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lopez-Corral L, Gutierrez NC, Vidriales MB, et al. The progression from MGUS to smoldering myeloma and eventually to multiple myeloma involves a clonal expansion of genetically abnormal plasma cells. Clin Cancer Res Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2011;17:1692–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Paiva B, Perez-Andres M, Vidriales MB, et al. Competition between clonal plasma cells and normal cells for potentially overlapping bone marrow niches is associated with a progressively altered cellular distribution in MGUS vs myeloma. Leukemia. 2011;25:697–706.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Paiva B, Vidriales MB, Mateo G, et al. The persistence of immunophenotypically normal residual bone marrow plasma cells at diagnosis identifies a good prognostic subgroup of symptomatic multiple myeloma patients. Blood. 2009;114:4369–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paiva B, Vidriales MB, Rosinol L, et al. A multiparameter flow cytometry immunophenotypic algorithm for the identification of newly diagnosed symptomatic myeloma with an MGUS-like signature and long-term disease control. Leukemia. 2013;27:2056–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Paiva B, Gutierrez NC, Chen X, et al. Clinical significance of CD81 expression by clonal plasma cells in high-risk smoldering and symptomatic multiple myeloma patients. Leukemia. 2012;26:1862–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mateo G, Castellanos M, Rasillo A, et al. Genetic abnormalities and patterns of antigenic expression in multiple myeloma. Clin Cancer Res Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 2005;11:3661–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bataille R, Jego G, Robillard N, et al. The phenotype of normal, reactive and malignant plasma cells. Identification of “many and multiple myelomas” and of new targets for myeloma therapy. Haematologica. 2006;91:1234–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Paino T, Paiva B, Sayagues JM, et al. Phenotypic identification of subclones in multiple myeloma with different chemoresistant, cytogenetic and clonogenic potential. Leukemia. 2015;29:1186–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gonsalves WI, Rajkumar SV, Gupta V, et al. Quantification of clonal circulating plasma cells in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: implications for redefining high-risk myeloma. Leukemia. 2014;28:2060–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rajkumar SV, Harousseau JL, Durie B, et al. Consensus recommendations for the uniform reporting of clinical trials: report of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 1. Blood. 2011;117:4691–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rawstron AC, Child JA, de Tute RM, et al. Minimal residual disease assessed by multiparameter flow cytometry in multiple myeloma: impact on outcome in the Medical Research Council Myeloma IX Study. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2013;31:2540–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rawstron AC, Gregory WM, de Tute RM, et al. Minimal residual disease in myeloma by flow cytometry: independent prediction of survival benefit per log reduction. Blood. 2015;125:1932–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paiva B, Gutierrez NC, Rosinol L, et al. High-risk cytogenetics and persistent minimal residual disease by multiparameter flow cytometry predict unsustained complete response after autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. Blood. 2012;119:687–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arroz M, Came N, Lin P, et al. Consensus guidelines on plasma cell myeloma minimal residual disease analysis and reporting. Clinical cytometry: Cytom Part B; 2015.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stetler-Stevenson M, Paiva B, Stoolman L, et al. Consensus guidelines for myeloma minimal residual disease sample staining and data acquisition. Cytome Part B Clin Cytom. 2015.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Morice WG, Chen D, Kurtin PJ, Hanson CA, McPhail ED. Novel immunophenotypic features of marrow lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma and correlation with Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia. Modern pathology: an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc 2009;22:807–16.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Howard MT, Hodnefield J, Morice WG. Immunohistochemical phenotyping of plasma cells in lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma/Waldenstrom’s macroglobulinemia is comparable to flow cytometric techniques. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2011;11:96–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HematopathologyUniversity of Texas-MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations