PortalPublikationenComparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple M...

Comparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple Myeloma MRD Assessment

Standard

Comparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple Myeloma MRD Assessment. / Kriegsmann, Katharina; Hundemer, Michael; Hofmeister-Mielke, Nicole; Reichert, Philipp; Manta, Calin-Petru; Awwad, Mohamed H S; Sauer, Sandra; Bertsch, Uta; Besemer, Britta; Fenk, Roland; Hänel, Mathias; Munder, Markus; Weisel, Katja C; Blau, Igor W; Neubauer, Andreas; Müller-Tidow, Carsten; Raab, Marc S; Goldschmidt, Hartmut; Huhn, Stefanie; For The German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group Gmmg.

in: CANCERS, Jahrgang 12, Nr. 8, 18.08.2020.

Publikationen: SCORING: Beitrag in Fachzeitschrift/Zeitung › SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz › Forschung › Begutachtung

Harvard

Kriegsmann, K, Hundemer, M, Hofmeister-Mielke, N, Reichert, P, Manta, C-P, Awwad, MHS, Sauer, S, Bertsch, U, Besemer, B, Fenk, R, Hänel, M, Munder, M, Weisel, KC, Blau, IW, Neubauer, A, Müller-Tidow, C, Raab, MS, Goldschmidt, H, Huhn, S & For The German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group Gmmg 2020, 'Comparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple Myeloma MRD Assessment', CANCERS, Jg. 12, Nr. 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12082322

APA

Kriegsmann, K., Hundemer, M., Hofmeister-Mielke, N., Reichert, P., Manta, C-P., Awwad, M. H. S., Sauer, S., Bertsch, U., Besemer, B., Fenk, R., Hänel, M., Munder, M., Weisel, K. C., Blau, I. W., Neubauer, A., Müller-Tidow, C., Raab, M. S., Goldschmidt, H., Huhn, S., & For The German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group Gmmg (2020). Comparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple Myeloma MRD Assessment. CANCERS, 12(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12082322

Vancouver

Kriegsmann K, Hundemer M, Hofmeister-Mielke N, Reichert P, Manta C-P, Awwad MHS et al. Comparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple Myeloma MRD Assessment. CANCERS. 2020 Aug 18;12(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12082322

Bibtex

@article{54b1de5502f94bda9a56972bf6231581,
title = "Comparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple Myeloma MRD Assessment",
abstract = "In order to meet the challenges in data evaluation and comparability between studies in multiple myeloma (MM) minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment, the goal of the current study was to provide a step-by-step evaluation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and multicolor flow cytometry (MFC) data. Bone marrow (BM) sample pairs from 125 MM patients were analyzed by NGS and MFC MM MRD methods. Tumor load (TL) and limit of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) were calculated. The best-fit MRD cut-off was chosen as 1 × 10-5, resulting in an overall 9.6% (n overall = 12 (NGS n = 2, MFC n = 10)) nonassessable cases. The overall concordance rate between NGS and MFC was 68.0% (n = 85); discordant results were found in 22.4% (11.2% (n = 14) of cases in each direction. Overall, 55.1% (n = 60/109) and 49.5% (n = 54/109) of patients with a serological response ≥ very good partial response (VGPR) showed BM MRD negativity by NGS and MFC, respectively. A good correlation in the TL assessed by both techniques was found (correlation coefficient = 0.8, n = 40, p < 0.001). Overall, our study shows good concordance between MM BM MRD status and TL when comparing NGS and MFC at a threshold of 10-5. However, a sufficient number of analyzed events and calculation of MRD key metrics are essential for the comparison of methods and evaluability of data at a specific MRD cut-off.",
author = "Katharina Kriegsmann and Michael Hundemer and Nicole Hofmeister-Mielke and Philipp Reichert and Calin-Petru Manta and Awwad, {Mohamed H S} and Sandra Sauer and Uta Bertsch and Britta Besemer and Roland Fenk and Mathias H{\"a}nel and Markus Munder and Weisel, {Katja C} and Blau, {Igor W} and Andreas Neubauer and Carsten M{\"u}ller-Tidow and Raab, {Marc S} and Hartmut Goldschmidt and Stefanie Huhn and {For The German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group Gmmg}",
year = "2020",
month = aug,
day = "18",
doi = "10.3390/cancers12082322",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
journal = "CANCERS",
issn = "2072-6694",
publisher = "Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)",
number = "8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of NGS and MFC Methods: Key Metrics in Multiple Myeloma MRD Assessment

AU - Kriegsmann, Katharina

AU - Hundemer, Michael

AU - Hofmeister-Mielke, Nicole

AU - Reichert, Philipp

AU - Manta, Calin-Petru

AU - Awwad, Mohamed H S

AU - Sauer, Sandra

AU - Bertsch, Uta

AU - Besemer, Britta

AU - Fenk, Roland

AU - Hänel, Mathias

AU - Munder, Markus

AU - Weisel, Katja C

AU - Blau, Igor W

AU - Neubauer, Andreas

AU - Müller-Tidow, Carsten

AU - Raab, Marc S

AU - Goldschmidt, Hartmut

AU - Huhn, Stefanie

AU - For The German-Speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group Gmmg, null

PY - 2020/8/18

Y1 - 2020/8/18

N2 - In order to meet the challenges in data evaluation and comparability between studies in multiple myeloma (MM) minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment, the goal of the current study was to provide a step-by-step evaluation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and multicolor flow cytometry (MFC) data. Bone marrow (BM) sample pairs from 125 MM patients were analyzed by NGS and MFC MM MRD methods. Tumor load (TL) and limit of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) were calculated. The best-fit MRD cut-off was chosen as 1 × 10-5, resulting in an overall 9.6% (n overall = 12 (NGS n = 2, MFC n = 10)) nonassessable cases. The overall concordance rate between NGS and MFC was 68.0% (n = 85); discordant results were found in 22.4% (11.2% (n = 14) of cases in each direction. Overall, 55.1% (n = 60/109) and 49.5% (n = 54/109) of patients with a serological response ≥ very good partial response (VGPR) showed BM MRD negativity by NGS and MFC, respectively. A good correlation in the TL assessed by both techniques was found (correlation coefficient = 0.8, n = 40, p < 0.001). Overall, our study shows good concordance between MM BM MRD status and TL when comparing NGS and MFC at a threshold of 10-5. However, a sufficient number of analyzed events and calculation of MRD key metrics are essential for the comparison of methods and evaluability of data at a specific MRD cut-off.

AB - In order to meet the challenges in data evaluation and comparability between studies in multiple myeloma (MM) minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment, the goal of the current study was to provide a step-by-step evaluation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) and multicolor flow cytometry (MFC) data. Bone marrow (BM) sample pairs from 125 MM patients were analyzed by NGS and MFC MM MRD methods. Tumor load (TL) and limit of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) were calculated. The best-fit MRD cut-off was chosen as 1 × 10-5, resulting in an overall 9.6% (n overall = 12 (NGS n = 2, MFC n = 10)) nonassessable cases. The overall concordance rate between NGS and MFC was 68.0% (n = 85); discordant results were found in 22.4% (11.2% (n = 14) of cases in each direction. Overall, 55.1% (n = 60/109) and 49.5% (n = 54/109) of patients with a serological response ≥ very good partial response (VGPR) showed BM MRD negativity by NGS and MFC, respectively. A good correlation in the TL assessed by both techniques was found (correlation coefficient = 0.8, n = 40, p < 0.001). Overall, our study shows good concordance between MM BM MRD status and TL when comparing NGS and MFC at a threshold of 10-5. However, a sufficient number of analyzed events and calculation of MRD key metrics are essential for the comparison of methods and evaluability of data at a specific MRD cut-off.

U2 - 10.3390/cancers12082322

DO - 10.3390/cancers12082322

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 32824635

VL - 12

JO - CANCERS

JF - CANCERS

SN - 2072-6694

IS - 8

ER -