Baughn, Linda B

Abstract The diagnosis of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) relies on the identification of PML::RARA fusion. While the majority of APL cases harbor a typical t(15;17)(q24;q21), atypical genetic mechanisms leading to the oncogenic PML::RARA fusion have been reported yet their frequency and scope remain poorly characterized. We assessed the genetic findings of 831 cases with APL investigated with concurrent chromosome banding analysis and dual‐color dual‐fusion fluorescence in situ hybridization (D‐FISH) analysis at our institution over an 18.5‐year timeframe. Seven hundred twenty‐three (87%) cases had a typical balanced t(15;17) with both testing modalities. Atypical karyotypic results including complex translocations, unbalanced rearrangements and insertional events occurred in 50 (6%) cases, while 6 (0.7%) cases were cryptic by conventional chromosome studies despite PML::RARA fusion by D‐FISH evaluation. Atypical FISH patterns were observed in 48 (6%) cases despite apparently balanced t(15;17) on chromosome banding analysis. Two hundred fifty (30%) cases displayed additional chromosome abnormalities of which trisomy/tetrasomy 8 (37%), del(7q)/add(7q) (12%), and del(9q) (7%) were most frequent. Complex and very complex karyotypes were observed in 81 (10%) and 34 (4%) cases, respectively. In addition, 4 (0.5%) cases presented as an apparently doubled, near‐tetraploid stemline clone. This report provides the largest appraisal of cytogenetic findings in APL with conventional chromosome and PML::RARA D‐FISH analysis. By characterizing the frequency and breadth of typical and atypical results through the lens of these cytogenetic testing modalities, this study serves as a pragmatic source of information for those involved in the investigation of APL in both the clinical and research laboratory settings.

Abstract Cytogenetics has long represented a critical component in the clinical evaluation of hematologic malignancies. Chromosome banding studies provide a simultaneous snapshot of genome-wide copy number and structural variation, which have been shown to drive tumorigenesis, define diseases, and guide treatment. Technological innovations in sequencing have ushered in our present-day clinical genomics era. With recent publications highlighting novel sequencing technologies as alternatives to conventional cytogenetic approaches, we, an international consortium of laboratory geneticists, pathologists, and oncologists, describe herein the advantages and limitations of both conventional chromosome banding and novel sequencing technologies and share our considerations on crucial next steps to implement these novel technologies in the global clinical setting for a more accurate cytogenetic evaluation, which may provide improved diagnosis and treatment management. Considering the clinical, logistic, technical, and financial implications, we provide points to consider for the global evolution of cytogenetic testing.

AbstractPlasma cell neoplasms (PCN) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) can both harbor t(11;14)(q13;q32) (CCND1/IGH), usually resulting in cyclin D1 overexpression. In some cases, particularly at low levels of disease, it can be morphologically challenging to distinguish between these entities in the bone marrow (BM) since PCN with t(11;14) are often CD20‐positive with lymphoplasmacytic cytology, while MCL can rarely have plasmacytic differentiation. We compared the difference in CCND1/IGH by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in PCN and MCL to evaluate for possible differentiating characteristics. We identified 326 cases of MCL with t(11;14) and 279 cases of PCN with t(11;14) from either formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded tissue or fresh BM specimens. The “typical,” balanced CCND1/IGH FISH signal pattern was defined as three total CCND1 signals, three total IGH signals, and two total fusion signals. Any deviation from the “typical” pattern was defined as an “atypical” pattern, which was further stratified into “gain of fusion” vs “complex” patterns. There was a significantly higher proportion of cases that showed an atypical FISH pattern in PCN compared with MCL (53% vs 27%, P < .0001). There was also a significantly higher proportion of cases that showed a complex FISH pattern in PCN compared with MCL (47% vs 17%, P < .0001). We confirmed these findings using mate‐pair sequencing of 25 PCN and MCL samples. PCN more often have a complex CCND1/IGH FISH pattern compared with MCL, suggesting possible differences in the genomic mechanisms underlying these rearrangements in plasma cells compared with B cells.