Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Molecular Techniques in the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Acute and Chronic Leukaemias

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Pathogenesis and Treatment of Leukemia

  • 509 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter discusses the use of current molecular techniques in the clinical laboratories for investigating acute and chronic leukaemias, including short-read massively parallel sequencing, measurable residual disease monitoring by real-time quantitative PCR or digital PCR, and gene expression profiling. Practical implementation of these molecular techniques will be discussed, with emphases on the special considerations related to acute and chronic leukaemias, including discussion on the bioinformatic analyses of NGS data. Newer genomic techniques, including long-read sequencing, single-cell sequencing, optical genome mapping, and circulating tumour DNA testing, will be briefly covered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Change history

  • 27 December 2023

    A correction has been published.

References

  1. Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Harris NL, Jaffe ES, Pileri SA, Stein H, et al. WHO classification of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues. 4th ed. International Agency for Research on Cancer: Lyon; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Genovese G, Kähler AK, Handsaker RE, Lindberg J, Rose SA, Bakhoum SF, et al. Clonal hematopoiesis and blood-cancer risk inferred from blood DNA sequence. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(26):2477–87.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Jaiswal S, Fontanillas P, Flannick J, Manning A, Grauman PV, Mar BG, et al. Age-related clonal hematopoiesis associated with adverse outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(26):2488–98.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Abelson S, Collord G, Ng SWK, Weissbrod O, Mendelson Cohen N, Niemeyer E, et al. Prediction of acute myeloid leukaemia risk in healthy individuals. Nature. 2018;559(7714):400–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Desai P, Mencia-Trinchant N, Savenkov O, Simon MS, Cheang G, Lee S, et al. Somatic mutations precede acute myeloid leukemia years before diagnosis. Nat Med. 2018;24(7):1015–23.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Papaemmanuil E, Gerstung M, Bullinger L, Gaidzik VI, Paschka P, Roberts ND, et al. Genomic classification and prognosis in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(23):2209–21.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Grinfeld J, Nangalia J, Baxter EJ, Wedge DC, Angelopoulos N, Cantrill R, et al. Classification and personalized prognosis in myeloproliferative neoplasms. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(15):1416–30.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gerstung M, Papaemmanuil E, Martincorena I, Bullinger L, Gaidzik VI, Paschka P, et al. Precision oncology for acute myeloid leukemia using a knowledge bank approach. Nat Genet. 2017;49(3):332–40.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Burd A, Levine RL, Ruppert AS, Mims AS, Borate U, Stein EM, et al. Precision medicine treatment in acute myeloid leukemia using prospective genomic profiling: feasibility and preliminary efficacy of the beat AML master trial. Nat Med. 2020;26(12):1852–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Patrinos GP, Ansorge WJ, Danielson PB, editors. Molecular diagnostics. 3rd ed. London: Elsevier; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Buckingham L. Molecular diagnostics: fundamentals, methods, and clinical applications. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rehm HL. Disease-targeted sequencing: a cornerstone in the clinic. Nat Rev Genet. 2013;14(4):295–300.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Stark R, Grzelak M, Hadfield J. RNA sequencing: the teenage years. Nat Rev Genet. 2019;20(11):631–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Park PJ. ChIP-seq: advantages and challenges of a maturing technology. Nat Rev Genet. 2009;10(10):669–80.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Buenrostro JD, Giresi PG, Zaba LC, Chang HY, Greenleaf WJ. Transposition of native chromatin for fast and sensitive epigenomic profiling of open chromatin, DNA-binding proteins and nucleosome position. Nat Methods. 2013;10(12):1213–8.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Lieberman-Aiden E, van Berkum NL, Williams L, Imakaev M, Ragoczy T, Telling A, et al. Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome. Science. 2009;326(5950):289–93.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Metzker ML. Sequencing technologies—the next generation. Nat Rev Genet. 2010;11(1):31–46.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Goodwin S, McPherson JD, McCombie WR. Coming of age: ten years of next-generation sequencing technologies. Nat Rev Genet. 2016;17(6):333–51.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Hubbard T, Barker D, Birney E, Cameron G, Chen Y, Clark L, et al. The Ensembl genome database project. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30(1):38–41.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. O’Leary NA, Wright MW, Brister JR, Ciufo S, Haddad D, McVeigh R, et al. Reference sequence (RefSeq) database at NCBI: current status, taxonomic expansion, and functional annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(D1):D733–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Quinlan AR, Hall IM. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(6):841–2.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Robinson JT, Thorvaldsdóttir H, Winckler W, Guttman M, Lander ES, Getz G, et al. Integrative genomics viewer. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;29(1):24–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Kent WJ, Sugnet CW, Furey TS, Roskin KM, Pringle TH, Zahler AM, et al. The human genome browser at UCSC. Genome Res. 2002;12(6):996–1006.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. McKerrell T, Moreno T, Ponstingl H, Bolli N, Dias JM, Tischler G, et al. Development and validation of a comprehensive genomic diagnostic tool for myeloid malignancies. Blood. 2016;128(1):e1–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Aziz N, Zhao Q, Bry L, Driscoll DK, Funke B, Gibson JS, et al. College of American Pathologists’ laboratory standards for next-generation sequencing clinical tests. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2015;139(4):481–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bolger AM, Lohse M, Usadel B. Trimmomatic: a flexible trimmer for Illumina sequence data. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(15):2114–20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Li H, Durbin R. Fast and accurate long-read alignment with burrows-wheeler transform. Bioinformatics. 2010;26(5):589–95.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Langmead B, Salzberg SL. Fast gapped-read alignment with bowtie 2. Nat Methods. 2012;9(4):357–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Van der Auwera GA, Carneiro MO, Hartl C, Poplin R, Del Angel G, Levy-Moonshine A, et al. From FastQ data to high confidence variant calls: the genome analysis toolkit best practices pipeline. Curr Protoc Bioinformatics. 2013;43(1110):11.10.11–33.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Koboldt DC. Best practices for variant calling in clinical sequencing. Genome Med. 2020;12(1):91.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Jennings LJ, Arcila ME, Corless C, Kamel-Reid S, Lubin IM, Pfeifer J, et al. Guidelines for validation of next-generation sequencing-based oncology panels: a joint consensus recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and College of American pathologists. J Mol Diagn. 2017;19(3):341–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Yan B, Hu Y, Ng C, Ban KH, Tan TW, Huan PT, et al. Coverage analysis in a targeted amplicon-based next-generation sequencing panel for myeloid neoplasms. J Clin Pathol. 2016;69(9):801–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Aguilera-Diaz A, Vazquez I, Ariceta B, Mañú A, Blasco-Iturri Z, Palomino-Echeverría S, et al. Assessment of the clinical utility of four NGS panels in myeloid malignancies. Suggestions for NGS panel choice or design. PLoS One. 2020;15(1):e0227986.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Mandelker D, Schmidt RJ, Ankala A, McDonald Gibson K, Bowser M, Sharma H, et al. Navigating highly homologous genes in a molecular diagnostic setting: a resource for clinical next-generation sequencing. Genet Med. 2016;18(12):1282–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Q, Jia P, Li F, Chen H, Ji H, Hucks D, et al. Detecting somatic point mutations in cancer genome sequencing data: a comparison of mutation callers. Genome Med. 2013;5(10):91.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Krøigård AB, Thomassen M, Lænkholm AV, Kruse TA, Larsen MJ. Evaluation of nine somatic variant callers for detection of somatic mutations in exome and targeted deep sequencing data. PLoS One. 2016;11(3):e0151664.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Cai L, Yuan W, Zhang Z, He L, Chou KC. In-depth comparison of somatic point mutation callers based on different tumor next-generation sequencing depth data. Sci Rep. 2016;6:36540.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Callari M, Sammut SJ, De Mattos-Arruda L, Bruna A, Rueda OM, Chin SF, et al. Intersect-then-combine approach: improving the performance of somatic variant calling in whole exome sequencing data using multiple aligners and callers. Genome Med. 2017;9(1):35.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Wang M, Luo W, Jones K, Bian X, Williams R, Higson H, et al. SomaticCombiner: improving the performance of somatic variant calling based on evaluation tests and a consensus approach. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):12898.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. McLaren W, Gil L, Hunt SE, Riat HS, Ritchie GR, Thormann A, et al. The Ensembl variant effect predictor. Genome Biol. 2016;17(1):122.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Wang K, Li M, Hakonarson H. ANNOVAR: functional annotation of genetic variants from high-throughput sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38(16):e164.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Cingolani P, Platts A, Le Wang L, Coon M, Nguyen T, Wang L, et al. A program for annotating and predicting the effects of single nucleotide polymorphisms, SnpEff: SNPs in the genome of Drosophila melanogaster strain w1118; iso-2; iso-3. Fly (Austin). 2012;6(2):80–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Yang H, Wang K. Genomic variant annotation and prioritization with ANNOVAR and wANNOVAR. Nat Protoc. 2015;10(10):1556–66.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Li MM, Datto M, Duncavage EJ, Kulkarni S, Lindeman NI, Roy S, et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of sequence variants in cancer: a joint consensus recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and College of American Pathologists. J Mol Diagn. 2017;19(1):4–23.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Sukhai MA, Craddock KJ, Thomas M, Hansen AR, Zhang T, Siu L, et al. A classification system for clinical relevance of somatic variants identified in molecular profiling of cancer. Genet Med. 2016;18(2):128–36.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Thorvaldsdóttir H, Robinson JT, Mesirov JP. Integrative genomics viewer (IGV): high-performance genomics data visualization and exploration. Brief Bioinform. 2013;14(2):178–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Roy S, Coldren C, Karunamurthy A, Kip NS, Klee EW, Lincoln SE, et al. Standards and guidelines for validating next-generation sequencing bioinformatics pipelines: a joint recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and the College of American Pathologists. J Mol Diagn. 2018;20(1):4–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ye K, Schulz MH, Long Q, Apweiler R, Ning Z. Pindel: a pattern growth approach to detect break points of large deletions and medium sized insertions from paired-end short reads. Bioinformatics. 2009;25(21):2865–71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Au CH, Wa A, Ho DN, Chan TL, Ma ES. Clinical evaluation of panel testing by next-generation sequencing (NGS) for gene mutations in myeloid neoplasms. Diagn Pathol. 2016;11:11.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Rustagi N, Hampton OA, Li J, Xi L, Gibbs RA, Plon SE, et al. ITD assembler: an algorithm for internal tandem duplication discovery from short-read sequencing data. BMC Bioinformatics. 2016;17:188.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Spencer DH, Abel HJ, Lockwood CM, Payton JE, Szankasi P, Kelley TW, et al. Detection of FLT3 internal tandem duplication in targeted, short-read-length, next-generation sequencing data. J Mol Diagn. 2013;15(1):81–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. He R, Devine DJ, Tu ZJ, Mai M, Chen D, Nguyen PL, et al. Hybridization capture-based next generation sequencing reliably detects FLT3 mutations and classifies FLT3-internal tandem duplication allelic ratio in acute myeloid leukemia: a comparative study to standard fragment analysis. Mod Pathol. 2020;33(3):334–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Salk JJ, Schmitt MW, Loeb LA. Enhancing the accuracy of next-generation sequencing for detecting rare and subclonal mutations. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19(5):269–85.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Kinde I, Wu J, Papadopoulos N, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B. Detection and quantification of rare mutations with massively parallel sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011;108(23):9530–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Yoest JM, Shirai CL, Duncavage EJ. Sequencing-based measurable residual disease testing in acute myeloid leukemia. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020;8:249.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Thol F, Gabdoulline R, Liebich A, Klement P, Schiller J, Kandziora C, et al. Measurable residual disease monitoring by NGS before allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in AML. Blood. 2018;132(16):1703–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Balagopal V, Hantel A, Kadri S, Steinhardt G, Zhen CJ, Kang W, et al. Measurable residual disease monitoring for patients with acute myeloid leukemia following hematopoietic cell transplantation using error corrected hybrid capture next generation sequencing. PLoS One. 2019;14(10):e0224097.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Hourigan CS, Dillon LW, Gui G, Logan BR, Fei M, Ghannam J, et al. Impact of conditioning intensity of allogeneic transplantation for acute myeloid leukemia with genomic evidence of residual disease. J Clin Oncol. 2020;38(12):1273–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Schmitt MW, Kennedy SR, Salk JJ, Fox EJ, Hiatt JB, Loeb LA. Detection of ultra-rare mutations by next-generation sequencing. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(36):14508–13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Kennedy SR, Schmitt MW, Fox EJ, Kohrn BF, Salk JJ, Ahn EH, et al. Detecting ultralow-frequency mutations by duplex sequencing. Nat Protoc. 2014;9(11):2586–606.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Short NJ, Kantarjian H, Kanagal-Shamanna R, Sasaki K, Ravandi F, Cortes J, et al. Ultra-accurate duplex sequencing for the assessment of pretreatment ABL1 kinase domain mutations in Ph+ ALL. Blood Cancer J. 2020;10(5):61.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. van Dongen JJ, Langerak AW, Brüggemann M, Evans PA, Hummel M, Lavender FL, et al. Design and standardization of PCR primers and protocols for detection of clonal immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor gene recombinations in suspect lymphoproliferations: report of the BIOMED-2 concerted action BMH4-CT98-3936. Leukemia. 2003;17(12):2257–317.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Langerak AW, Groenen PJ, Brüggemann M, Beldjord K, Bellan C, Bonello L, et al. EuroClonality/BIOMED-2 guidelines for interpretation and reporting of Ig/TCR clonality testing in suspected lymphoproliferations. Leukemia. 2012;26(10):2159–71.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Mendoza H, Tormey CA, Rinder HM, Howe JG, Siddon AJ. The utility and limitations of B- and T-cell gene rearrangement studies in evaluating lymphoproliferative disorders. Pathology. 2021;53(2):157–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Brüggemann M, Kotrová M, Knecht H, Bartram J, Boudjogrha M, Bystry V, et al. Standardized next-generation sequencing of immunoglobulin and T-cell receptor gene recombinations for MRD marker identification in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia; a EuroClonality-NGS validation study. Leukemia. 2019;33(9):2241–53.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Scheijen B, Meijers RWJ, Rijntjes J, van der Klift MY, Möbs M, Steinhilber J, et al. Next-generation sequencing of immunoglobulin gene rearrangements for clonality assessment: a technical feasibility study by EuroClonality-NGS. Leukemia. 2019;33(9):2227–40.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Arcila ME, Yu W, Syed M, Kim H, Maciag L, Yao J, et al. Establishment of immunoglobulin heavy (IGH) chain clonality testing by next-generation sequencing for routine characterization of B-cell and plasma cell neoplasms. J Mol Diagn. 2019;21(2):330–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Ho C, Syed M, Roshal M, Petrova-Drus K, Moung C, Yao J, et al. Routine evaluation of minimal residual disease in myeloma using next-generation sequencing clonality testing: feasibility, challenges, and direct comparison with high-sensitivity flow cytometry. J Mol Diagn. 2021;23(2):181–99.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Gupta SK, Viswanatha DS, Patel KP. Evaluation of somatic Hypermutation status in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the era of next generation sequencing. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020;8:357.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  70. Duncavage EJ, Schroeder MC, O’Laughlin M, Wilson R, MacMillan S, Bohannon A, et al. Genome sequencing as an alternative to cytogenetic analysis in myeloid cancers. N Engl J Med. 2021;384(10):924–35.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Mareschal S, Palau A, Lindberg J, Ruminy P, Nilsson C, Bengtzén S, et al. Challenging conventional karyotyping by next-generation karyotyping in 281 intensively treated patients with AML. Blood Adv. 2021;5(4):1003–16.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Akkari YMN, Baughn LB, Dubuc AM, Smith AC, Mallo M, Dal Cin P, et al. Guiding the global evolution of cytogenetic testing for hematologic malignancies. Blood. 2022;139(15):2273–84.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Mercer TR, Gerhardt DJ, Dinger ME, Crawford J, Trapnell C, Jeddeloh JA, et al. Targeted RNA sequencing reveals the deep complexity of the human transcriptome. Nat Biotechnol. 2011;30(1):99–104.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Zheng Z, Liebers M, Zhelyazkova B, Cao Y, Panditi D, Lynch KD, et al. Anchored multiplex PCR for targeted next-generation sequencing. Nat Med. 2014;20(12):1479–84.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Mercer TR, Clark MB, Crawford J, Brunck ME, Gerhardt DJ, Taft RJ, et al. Targeted sequencing for gene discovery and quantification using RNA CaptureSeq. Nat Protoc. 2014;9(5):989–1009.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Heyer EE, Deveson IW, Wooi D, Selinger CI, Lyons RJ, Hayes VM, et al. Diagnosis of fusion genes using targeted RNA sequencing. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):1388.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  77. Dobin A, Davis CA, Schlesinger F, Drenkow J, Zaleski C, Jha S, et al. STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner. Bioinformatics. 2013;29(1):15–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Kim D, Paggi JM, Park C, Bennett C, Salzberg SL. Graph-based genome alignment and genotyping with HISAT2 and HISAT-genotype. Nat Biotechnol. 2019;37(8):907–15.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Liao Y, Smyth GK, Shi W. featureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics. 2014;30(7):923–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Anders S, Pyl PT, Huber W. HTSeq—a python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data. Bioinformatics. 2015;31(2):166–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Anders S, McCarthy DJ, Chen Y, Okoniewski M, Smyth GK, Huber W, et al. Count-based differential expression analysis of RNA sequencing data using R and bioconductor. Nat Protoc. 2013;8(9):1765–86.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Haas BJ, Dobin A, Li B, Stransky N, Pochet N, Regev A. Accuracy assessment of fusion transcript detection via read-mapping and de novo fusion transcript assembly-based methods. Genome Biol. 2019;20(1):213.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Arindrarto W, Borràs DM, de Groen RAL, van den Berg RR, Locher IJ, van Diessen S, et al. Comprehensive diagnostics of acute myeloid leukemia by whole transcriptome RNA sequencing. Leukemia. 2021;35(1):47–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Gu M, Zwiebel M, Ong SH, Boughton N, Nomdedeu J, Basheer F, et al. RNAmut: robust identification of somatic mutations in acute myeloid leukemia using RNA-sequencing. Haematologica. 2020;105(6):e290–3.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Audemard EO, Gendron P, Feghaly A, Lavallée VP, Hébert J, Sauvageau G, et al. Targeted variant detection using unaligned RNA-Seq reads. Life Sci Alliance. 2019;2(4):e201900336.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Schuurhuis GJ, Heuser M, Freeman S, Béné MC, Buccisano F, Cloos J, et al. Minimal/measurable residual disease in AML: a consensus document from the European LeukemiaNet MRD working party. Blood. 2018;131(12):1275–91.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Pfeifer H, Cazzaniga G, van der Velden VHJ, Cayuela JM, Schäfer B, Spinelli O, et al. Standardisation and consensus guidelines for minimal residual disease assessment in Philadelphia-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph + ALL) by real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase PCR of e1a2 BCR-ABL1. Leukemia. 2019;33(8):1910–22.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Cross NC, White HE, Colomer D, Ehrencrona H, Foroni L, Gottardi E, et al. Laboratory recommendations for scoring deep molecular responses following treatment for chronic myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 2015;29(5):999–1003.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Hochhaus A, Baccarani M, Silver RT, Schiffer C, Apperley JF, Cervantes F, et al. European LeukemiaNet 2020 recommendations for treating chronic myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 2020;34(4):966–84.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Kim B, Lee H, Shin S, Lee ST, Choi JR. Clinical evaluation of massively parallel RNA sequencing for detecting recurrent gene fusions in hematologic malignancies. J Mol Diagn. 2019;21(1):163–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. de Boer EN, Johansson LF, de Lange K, Bosga-Brouwer AG, van den Berg E, Sikkema-Raddatz B, et al. Detection of fusion genes to determine minimal residual disease in leukemia using next-generation sequencing. Clin Chem. 2020;66(8):1084–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Sharplin K, Altamura H, Taylor K, Wellwood J, Taylor D, Branford S. Chronic myeloid leukaemia: the dangers of not knowing your BCR-ABL1 transcript. Leuk Res. 2019;87:106231.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Hughes T, Deininger M, Hochhaus A, Branford S, Radich J, Kaeda J, et al. Monitoring CML patients responding to treatment with tyrosine kinase inhibitors: review and recommendations for harmonizing current methodology for detecting BCR-ABL transcripts and kinase domain mutations and for expressing results. Blood. 2006;108(1):28–37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Foroni L, Wilson G, Gerrard G, Mason J, Grimwade D, White HE, et al. Guidelines for the measurement of BCR-ABL1 transcripts in chronic myeloid leukaemia. Br J Haematol. 2011;153(2):179–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Cross NC. Standardisation of molecular monitoring for chronic myeloid leukaemia. Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2009;22(3):355–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. O’Brien SG, Guilhot F, Larson RA, Gathmann I, Baccarani M, Cervantes F, et al. Imatinib compared with interferon and low-dose cytarabine for newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(11):994–1004.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Hughes TP, Ross DM. Moving treatment-free remission into mainstream clinical practice in CML. Blood. 2016;128(1):17–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Ip HW, So CC. Deep molecular response in chronic myelogenous leukemia: ensuring accuracy and consistency. Leukemia. 2015;29(7):1620–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Cross NC, Müller MC, Hochhaus A. Response to Ho-Wan Ip and Chi-Chiu. Leukemia. 2015;29(7):1619.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Gabert J, Beillard E, van der Velden VH, Bi W, Grimwade D, Pallisgaard N, et al. Standardization and quality control studies of ‘real-time’ quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction of fusion gene transcripts for residual disease detection in leukemia—a Europe against cancer program. Leukemia. 2003;17(12):2318–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW. Digital PCR. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96(16):9236–41.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  102. Coccaro N, Anelli L, Zagaria A, Casieri P, Tota G, Orsini P, et al. Droplet digital PCR is a robust tool for monitoring minimal residual disease in adult Philadelphia-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Mol Diagn. 2018;20(4):474–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Della Starza I, Nunes V, Cavalli M, De Novi LA, Ilari C, Apicella V, et al. Comparative analysis between RQ-PCR and digital-droplet-PCR of immunoglobulin/T-cell receptor gene rearrangements to monitor minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Br J Haematol. 2016;174(4):541–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Franke GN, Maier J, Wildenberger K, Cross M, Giles FJ, Müller MC, et al. Comparison of real-time quantitative PCR and digital droplet PCR for BCR-ABL1 monitoring in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia. J Mol Diagn. 2020;22(1):81–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Chi J, Pierides C, Mitsidou A, Miltiadou A, Gerasimou P, Costeas P. cDNA synthesis for BCR-ABL1 detection at the MMR level: the importance of using the appropriate kit. Biol Proced Online. 2015;17(1):4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  106. Khoury JD, Solary E, Abla O, Akkari Y, Alaggio R, Apperley JF, et al. The 5th edition of the World Health Organization classification of haematolymphoid tumours: myeloid and histiocytic/dendritic neoplasms. Leukemia. 2022;36(7):1703–19.

    Google Scholar 

  107. Arber DA, Orazi A, Hasserjian RP, Borowitz MJ, Calvo KR, Kvasnicka HM, et al. International Consensus Classification of Myeloid Neoplasms and Acute Leukemias: integrating morphologic, clinical, and genomic data. Blood. 2022;140(11):1200–28.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Chen L, Sun F, Yang X, Jin Y, Shi M, Wang L, et al. Correlation between RNA-Seq and microarrays results using TCGA data. Gene. 2017;628:200–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Marioni JC, Mason CE, Mane SM, Stephens M, Gilad Y. RNA-seq: an assessment of technical reproducibility and comparison with gene expression arrays. Genome Res. 2008;18(9):1509–17.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  110. Conesa A, Madrigal P, Tarazona S, Gomez-Cabrero D, Cervera A, McPherson A, et al. A survey of best practices for RNA-seq data analysis. Genome Biol. 2016;17:13.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  111. Geiss GK, Bumgarner RE, Birditt B, Dahl T, Dowidar N, Dunaway DL, et al. Direct multiplexed measurement of gene expression with color-coded probe pairs. Nat Biotechnol. 2008;26(3):317–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Kulkarni MM. Digital multiplexed gene expression analysis using the NanoString nCounter system. Curr Protoc Mol Biol. 2011;Chapter 25:Unit25B.10.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Den Boer ML, van Slegtenhorst M, De Menezes RX, Cheok MH, Buijs-Gladdines JG, Peters ST, et al. A subtype of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia with poor treatment outcome: a genome-wide classification study. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10(2):125–34.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Harvey RC, Mullighan CG, Wang X, Dobbin KK, Davidson GS, Bedrick EJ, et al. Identification of novel cluster groups in pediatric high-risk B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia with gene expression profiling: correlation with genome-wide DNA copy number alterations, clinical characteristics, and outcome. Blood. 2010;116(23):4874–84.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  115. Roberts KG, Li Y, Payne-Turner D, Harvey RC, Yang YL, Pei D, et al. Targetable kinase-activating lesions in Ph-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(11):1005–15.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  116. Siegele BJ, Nardi V. Laboratory testing in BCR-ABL1-like (Philadelphia-like) B-lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma. Am J Hematol. 2018;93(7):971–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Harvey RC, Kang H, Roberts KG, Chen IML, Atlas SR, Bedrick EJ, et al. Development and validation of a highly sensitive and specific gene expression classifier to prospectively screen and identify B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) patients with a Philadelphia chromosome-like (“Ph-like” or “BCR-ABL1-like”) signature for therapeutic targeting and clinical intervention. Blood. 2013;122(21):826.

    Google Scholar 

  118. Reshmi SC, Harvey RC, Roberts KG, Stonerock E, Smith A, Jenkins H, et al. Targetable kinase gene fusions in high-risk B-ALL: a study from the Children’s oncology group. Blood. 2017;129(25):3352–61.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  119. Boer JM, Marchante JR, Evans WE, Horstmann MA, Escherich G, Pieters R, et al. BCR-ABL1-like cases in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a comparison between DCOG/Erasmus MC and COG/St. Jude signatures. Haematologica. 2015;100(9):e354–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  120. Valk PJ, Verhaak RG, Beijen MA, Erpelinck CA, Barjesteh van Waalwijk van Doorn-Khosrovani S, Boer JM, et al. Prognostically useful gene-expression profiles in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(16):1617–28.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Bullinger L, Döhner K, Bair E, Fröhling S, Schlenk RF, Tibshirani R, et al. Use of gene-expression profiling to identify prognostic subclasses in adult acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(16):1605–16.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Haferlach T, Kohlmann A, Wieczorek L, Basso G, Kronnie GT, Béné MC, et al. Clinical utility of microarray-based gene expression profiling in the diagnosis and subclassification of leukemia: report from the international microarray innovations in leukemia study group. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(15):2529–37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  123. Dohner H, Estey E, Grimwade D, Amadori S, Appelbaum FR, Buchner T, et al. Diagnosis and management of AML in adults: 2017 ELN recommendations from an international expert panel. Blood. 2017;129(4):424–47.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  124. Ng SW, Mitchell A, Kennedy JA, Chen WC, McLeod J, Ibrahimova N, et al. A 17-gene stemness score for rapid determination of risk in acute leukaemia. Nature. 2016;540(7633):433–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Duployez N, Marceau-Renaut A, Villenet C, Petit A, Rousseau A, Ng SWK, et al. The stem cell-associated gene expression signature allows risk stratification in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia. 2019;33(2):348–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Loose M, Malla S, Stout M. Real-time selective sequencing using nanopore technology. Nat Methods. 2016;13(9):751–4.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  127. Payne A, Holmes N, Clarke T, Munro R, Debebe BJ, Loose M. Readfish enables targeted nanopore sequencing of gigabase-sized genomes. Nat Biotechnol. 2021;39(4):442–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Jeck WR, Lee J, Robinson H, Le LP, Iafrate AJ, Nardi V. A nanopore sequencing-based assay for rapid detection of gene fusions. J Mol Diagn. 2019;21(1):58–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Cumbo C, Minervini CF, Orsini P, Anelli L, Zagaria A, Minervini A, et al. Nanopore targeted sequencing for rapid gene mutations detection in acute myeloid leukemia. Genes (Basel). 2019;10(12):1026.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  130. Hedlund E, Deng Q. Single-cell RNA sequencing: technical advancements and biological applications. Mol Asp Med. 2018;59:36–46.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Gawad C, Koh W, Quake SR. Single-cell genome sequencing: current state of the science. Nat Rev Genet. 2016;17(3):175–88.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Miles LA, Bowman RL, Merlinsky TR, Csete IS, Ooi AT, Durruthy-Durruthy R, et al. Single-cell mutation analysis of clonal evolution in myeloid malignancies. Nature. 2020;587(7834):477–82.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  133. Morita K, Wang F, Jahn K, Hu T, Tanaka T, Sasaki Y, et al. Clonal evolution of acute myeloid leukemia revealed by high-throughput single-cell genomics. Nat Commun. 2020;11(1):5327.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  134. van Galen P, Hovestadt V, Wadsworth Ii MH, Hughes TK, Griffin GK, Battaglia S, et al. Single-cell RNA-Seq reveals AML hierarchies relevant to disease progression and immunity. Cell. 2019;176(6):1265–1281.e1224.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  135. Lam ET, Hastie A, Lin C, Ehrlich D, Das SK, Austin MD, et al. Genome mapping on nanochannel arrays for structural variation analysis and sequence assembly. Nat Biotechnol. 2012;30(8):771–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Wan JCM, Massie C, Garcia-Corbacho J, Mouliere F, Brenton JD, Caldas C, et al. Liquid biopsies come of age: towards implementation of circulating tumour DNA. Nat Rev Cancer. 2017;17(4):223–38.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Short NJ, Patel KP, Albitar M, Franquiz M, Luthra R, Kanagal-Shamanna R, et al. Targeted next-generation sequencing of circulating cell-free DNA vs bone marrow in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Blood Adv. 2020;4(8):1670–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  138. Yeh P, Hunter T, Sinha D, Ftouni S, Wallach E, Jiang D, et al. Circulating tumour DNA reflects treatment response and clonal evolution in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Nat Commun. 2017;8:14756.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  139. Nakamura S, Yokoyama K, Shimizu E, Yusa N, Kondoh K, Ogawa M, et al. Prognostic impact of circulating tumor DNA status post-allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in AML and MDS. Blood. 2019;133(25):2682–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Ogawa M, Yokoyama K, Imoto S, Tojo A. Role of circulating tumor DNA in hematological malignancy. Cancers (Basel). 2021;13(9):2078.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  141. Thakral D, Gupta R, Sahoo RK, Verma P, Kumar I, Vashishtha S. Real-time molecular monitoring in acute myeloid leukemia with circulating tumor DNA. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020;8:604391.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  142. Lim JK, Kuss B, Talaulikar D. Role of cell-free DNA in haematological malignancies. Pathology. 2021;53(3):416–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  143. Tefferi A, Guglielmelli P, Nicolosi M, Mannelli F, Mudireddy M, Bartalucci N, et al. GIPSS: genetically inspired prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2018;32(7):1631–42.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  144. Elena C, Gallì A, Such E, Meggendorfer M, Germing U, Rizzo E, et al. Integrating clinical features and genetic lesions in the risk assessment of patients with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia. Blood. 2016;128(10):1408–17.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  145. Rossi D, Rasi S, Spina V, Bruscaggin A, Monti S, Ciardullo C, et al. Integrated mutational and cytogenetic analysis identifies new prognostic subgroups in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood. 2013;121(8):1403–12.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Declaration

The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Haematology, Department of Pathology, Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, China

    Ho-Wan Ip & Wing-Fai Tang

Authors
  1. Ho-Wan Ip
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wing-Fai Tang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ho-Wan Ip .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, Hongkong, Hong Kong

    Harinder Gill

  2. Department of Medicine, Queen Mary Hospital, Hongkong, Hong Kong

    Yok-Lam Kwong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ip, HW., Tang, WF. (2023). Molecular Techniques in the Diagnosis and Monitoring of Acute and Chronic Leukaemias. In: Gill, H., Kwong, YL. (eds) Pathogenesis and Treatment of Leukemia. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3810-0_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3810-0_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-99-3809-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-99-3810-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation