guest ::
| Home > Articles > Published articles > Comparison of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and next-generation flow (NGF) for minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment in multiple myeloma |
| Home > Articles > Published articles > Comparison of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and next-generation flow (NGF) for minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment in multiple myeloma |
(Hospital Universitario de Salamanca) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Institut Germans Trias i Pujol. Institut de Recerca contra la Leucèmia Josep Carreras) (Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer) (Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron) (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) (Clínica Universidad de Navarra. Centro de Investigación Médica Aplicada) (Clínica Universidad de Navarra. Centro de Investigación Médica Aplicada) (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer) (Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer)| Date: | 2020 |
| Abstract: | Detecting persistent minimal residual disease (MRD) allows the identification of patients with an increased risk of relapse and death. In this study, we have evaluated MRD 3 months after transplantation in 106 myeloma patients using a commercial next-generation sequencing (NGS) strategy (LymphoTrack®), and compared the results with next-generation flow (NGF, EuroFlow). The use of different marrow pulls and the need of concentrating samples for NGS biased the applicability for MRD evaluation and favored NGF. Despite that, correlation between NGS and NGF was high (R = 0. 905). The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates by NGS and NGF were longer for undetectable vs. positive patients (NGS: 88. 7% vs. 56. 6%; NGF: 91. 4% vs. 50%; p < 0. 001 for both comparisons), which resulted in a 3-year overall survival (OS) advantage (NGS: 96. 2% vs. 77. 3%; NGF: 96. 6% vs. 74. 9%, p < 0. 01 for both comparisons). In the Cox regression model, NGS and NGF negativity had similar results but favoring the latter in PFS (HR: 0. 20, 95% CI: 0. 09-0. 45, p < 0. 001) and OS (HR: 0. 21, 95% CI: 0. 06-0. 75, p = 0. 02). All these results reinforce the role of MRD detection by different strategies in patient prognosis and highlight the use of MRD as an endpoint for multiple myeloma treatment. |
| Grants: | Instituto de Salud Carlos III FI19/00320 Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI15/01956 Instituto de Salud Carlos III CPII18/00028 Instituto de Salud Carlos III CB16/12/00400 Instituto de Salud Carlos III CB16/12/00233 Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación CEI-2010-1-0010 |
| Rights: | Aquest document està subjecte a una llicència d'ús Creative Commons. Es permet la reproducció total o parcial, la distribució, la comunicació pública de l'obra i la creació d'obres derivades, fins i tot amb finalitats comercials, sempre i quan es reconegui l'autoria de l'obra original.  |
| Language: | Anglès |
| Document: | Article ; recerca ; Versió publicada |
| Subject: | Myeloma ; Risk factors |
| Published in: | Blood Cancer Journal, Vol. 10 Núm. 10 (january 2020) , p. 108, ISSN 2044-5385 |
