Monaghan, Sara A.

Abstract Objectives Per National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for acute myeloid leukemia (AML), bone marrow (BM) evaluation is recommended after starting induction chemotherapy at 14 to 21 days (mid-induction) and 30 to 35 days (postinduction). Timely assessment of residual morphologic and molecular disease is challenging at these time points, given the low cellularity, the lack of CD34 or CD117 expression by blasts in most NPM1-mutated (NPM1mut) AML, and the longer turnaround time for molecular testing. Methods NPM1 mut AML undergoing BM evaluation at mid- and postinduction with concurrent flow cytometry and NPM1 real-time polymerase chain reaction or next-generation sequencing was evaluated. Different cell types positive by NPM1 immunohistochemistry (IHC) were enumerated, and the results were compared with flow cytometry and molecular findings. Results NPM1 IHC demonstrated a sensitivity of 78% and 41% for detecting residual mutation at mid- and postinduction, respectively, with a positive predictive value ranging from 88% to 100%. Of 16 IHC-negative cases, 3 had no residual NPM1 mutation, 12 had very low-level mutation at a variant allele frequency of less than or equal to 21 transcripts, and only 1 had a high-level mutation in a markedly hypocellular BM. Of 24 IHC-positive cases, 22 had residual NPM1 mutation, and 2 showed false-positive staining in only a single cell with no residual NPM1 mutation. The level of IHC staining was mostly proportional to the level of residual mutation. Conclusions Mutation-specific NPM1 IHC is a valuable tool for a rapid assessment of residual morphologic and molecular disease in mid- and postinduction NPM1mut AML.

Abstract Clinical flow cytometry laboratories are facing rising test volumes, greater assay complexity, and increasing requirements for quality control and assay validation. In response, the International Clinical Cytometry Society (ICCS) conducted a workload survey in early 2023 to gather updated information on assay volumes, complexity, staffing, and technology. Data analysis focused on identifying correlations between length of time to introduce new assays and other factors as a means to gain insight about laboratories that seem to be either adapting or struggling. Flow cytometry assays were categorized into 3 levels of technical/interpretative complexity: high (e.g., measurable/minimal residual disease (MRD assays)), moderate (e.g., leukemia/lymphoma assays (Assays L&L ), excluding MRD assays), and low (e.g., CD4 count). Annual assays per staff member were calculated according to staff involved in case sign‐out (Staff Signout ) or other laboratory operations (Staff LabOps ). Respondents were from 101 laboratories in the United States (69.3%), Canada (4.0%), and other countries (26.7%). Low, moderate, and high technical/interpretative complexity assays were performed in 85.1%, 97.0%, and 47.5% of all laboratories, respectively. Median annual total assays (Assays Total ) per laboratory were 3515 and, based on complexity, were 1518.5 (low), 1808.8 (moderate), and 350 (high). Among all laboratories, the median time (interquartile range) to introduce new Assays L&L was 6 mos. (4–12 mos.), to introduce MRD assays was 11 mos. (5–12 mos.), and to validate/go‐live with new cytometers was 8 mos. (4–12 mos.); these times positively correlated with each other. This study confirmed significantly increased workload since the prior ICCS 2013 workload survey with a concurrent decrease in Staff LabOps . Faster introduction of new assays correlated with other successes, including quicker validation of and going live with new cytometers. Among all laboratories, those that performed myeloid MRD assays versus those that did not were also found to be faster to introduce new assays. The need for sufficient staffing has been emphasized because laboratories with both higher annual volumes of myeloma MRD assays and higher ratios of Assays Total per Staff LabOps were slower to introduce new assays. “Lack of staff and/or time dedicated or protected for assay development” and, more generally, “staff number” were the most commonly identified major barriers for new assay development, with the former specifically linked to slower introduction of new assays among all laboratories.

AbstractThe Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) H62—Validation of Assays Performed by Flow Cytometry guideline, released in 2021, provides recommendations for platform workflow and quality system essentials, instrument setup and standardization, assay development and optimization and fit‐for‐purpose analytical method validation. In addition, CLSI H62 includes some recommendations for the validation strategies after a validated flow cytometric method has been modified. This manuscript builds on those recommendations and discusses the impact of different types of assay modifications on assay performance. Recommendations regarding which validation parameters to evaluate depending on the type of modification are provided. The impact of assay modification on the assay's intended use is discussed. When recommending minor deviations from the CLSI H62 process for a laboratory‐initiated assay revision (e.g., specimen numbers for sensitivity, specificity, or precision studies), a rationale based on expert opinion is provided with the understanding that not every laboratory, assay type, and circumstance can be comprehensively addressed in this paper. These recommendations are meant as a practical recommendation and are not intended to be restrictive, prescriptive, or understood as necessarily sufficient to meet every specific requirement from regulatory bodies (e.g., FDA or New York State Department of Health).

7533 Background: Maintenance treatment (rx) with lenalidomide (R) improves overall survival (OS) in multiple myeloma (MM). We report a retrospective cohort of patients (pts) with second primary B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) diagnosed after R-rx for MM. Methods: We included pts who were exposed to at least 1 yr of R for MM rx prior to ALL dx. After approval by institutional review board, data were collected by chart review at participating centers using Redcap. OS was the primary endpoint. We used BlueSky statistics v10.3.1 for analysis. Results: Analysis included 33 ALL pts diagnosed from 2014-2022 at 7 sites. 52% pts were female. Median follow up was 9.6 yrs (95%CI,7.6-11.8) from MM dx and 3.2 yrs (CI, 2.1-4.7) from ALL dx. Pt characteristics at MM dx are given in Table. Induction rx included: proteasome inhibitor (PI) +immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) (43%), PI+alkylator (24%), IMiD (18%) & others (15%). 50% pts received autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Median OS from MM dx was 11.2 yrs (CI, 8.9-NR). Time from MM dx and initial R rx to ALL dx were 5.0 yrs (range, 2.4-18.5) and 4.4 yrs (2.2-10.6) respectively. Median duration of R exposure before ALL dx was 3.8 yrs (1.6-10.4). Table shows characteristics of pts at B-ALL dx and genetic classification based on karyotyping (n=30), ALL FISH (n=28), chromosomal microarray (n=5) and next-generation sequencing (n=5). 31 pts received ALL-directed rx while 1 pt was initially managed with close observation as the pt attained CR on stopping R ( Lakshman et al; ASH 2019 ). Rx was unknown in 1 pt. Initial rx included: hyper-CVAD+/- rituximab- 49%, pediatric inspired protocols-18%, reduced intensity rx for frail pts- 21% and others- 12%. Response to first line rx were: CR- 56%, CRi- 28%, induction failure- 16%. 32% pts attained measurable residual disease (MRD) negativity. 48% pts underwent SCT for ALL. 14 pts died during follow up. 3-yr OS from ALL-dx was 50% (CI, 33%-76%). 3 pts required rx for MM after ALL diagnosis (2 had allo-SCT for ALL before MM relapse). Conclusions: Most pts had standard risk MM and were exposed to R for several years prior to dx of B-ALL, characterized by high incidence of hypodiploid karyotype; IKZF1 loss and TP53 deletions/mutations were detected in a subset of pts.MRD-adapted timely discontinuation of R in standard risk MM may decrease risk of second primary ALL. [Table: see text]