Noninvasive Monitoring of Mantle Cell Lymphoma by Immunoglobulin Gene Next-Generation Sequencing in a Phase 2 Study of Sequential Chemoradioimmunotherapy Followed by Autologous Stem-Cell Rescue.

BACKGROUND: Minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring has been used to identify early molecular relapse and predict clinical relapse in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Few published data exist in MCL on the performance of next-generation sequencing-based assay of immunoglobulin gene rearrangements for MRD assessment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a prospective clinical trial (NCT01484093) with intensive induction chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation, posttreatment peripheral blood samples were collected from 16 MCL patients and analyzed with an earlier version of the Adaptive Biotechnologies MRD assay. RESULTS: Of the 7 patients whose disease remained in remission, the MRD test remained negative in 5 (71%). Of the 9 patients who experienced relapse, the MRD test was positive at least 3 months before relapse in 6 patients (67%) and positive at the time of relapse in 1 patient (11%). All patients with at least 2 positive MRD tests experienced relapse. CONCLUSION: The next-generation sequencing-based MRD assay identified early molecular relapse, and we observed more sensitivity in the cellular (circulating leukocytes) versus acellular (plasma cell-free DNA) compartment. This observation may be due to availability of tumor target or a limitation of the assay.

Expert second-opinion pathology review of lymphoma in the era of the World Health Organization classification.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) classification of hematologic malignancies, published in 2000, was designed to improve diagnostic accuracy by incorporating the latest in scientific understanding. The impact of the WHO classification on the frequency of diagnostic discrepancy in lymphoma is unknown. METHODS: We reviewed all second-opinion pathology of lymphoma at our National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCI-CCC) from January to June 2001 and from January to June 2006. Discrepancies between submitted and second-opinion diagnoses were scored based upon an a priori grading schema. RESULTS: Major diagnostic revision was rendered in 65 of 365 cases (17.8%) in 2001 and 58 of 354 (16.4%) in 2006 (P=NS). Including cases reviewed and revised beforehand at another NCI-CCC, rates of major diagnostic revision were 21.4% and 18.6%, respectively (P=NS). Discrepancy rates varied by diagnosis, from Hodgkin lymphoma (10%) to Burkitt's lymphoma (75%). No association was seen for age, gender, race/ethnicity, biopsy type, or nature of referring center. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically meaningful diagnostic revision occurs frequently with expert pathology review for a diagnosis of lymphoma. Despite the WHO classification, rates of diagnostic revision at our institution in 2001 and 2006 did not differ significantly. Given the potential harm from misdiagnosis, expert hematopathology review should be considered the standard of care.