Barnidge, David R.

Abstract BACKGROUND Current recommendations for screening for monoclonal gammopathies include serum protein electrophoresis (PEL), imunofixation electrophoresis (IFE), and free light chain (FLC) ratios to identify or rule out an M-protein. The aim of this study was to examine the feasibility of an assay based on immunoenrichment and MALDI-TOF-MS (MASS-SCREEN) to qualitatively screen for M-proteins. METHODS Serum from 556 patients previously screened for M-proteins by PEL and IFE were immunopurified using a κ/λ-specific nanobody bead mixture. Following purification, light chains (LC) were released from their heavy chains by reduction. MALDI-TOF analysis was performed and the mass-to-charge LC distributions were visually examined for the presence of an M-protein by both unblinded and blinded analysts. RESULTS In unblinded analysis, MASS-SCREEN detected 100% of the PEL-positive samples with an analytical sensitivity and specificity of 96% and 81% using IFE positivity as the standard. In a blinded analysis using 6 different laboratory personnel, consensus was reached in 92% of the samples. Overall analytical sensitivity and specificity were reduced to 92% and 80%, respectively. FLC ratios were found to be abnormal in 28% of MASS-SCREEN–negative samples, suggesting FLC measurements need to be considered in screening. CONCLUSIONS MASS-SCREEN could replace PEL in a panel that would include FLC measurements. Further studies and method development should be performed to validate the clinical sensitivity and specificity and to determine if this panel will suffice as a general screen for monoclonal proteins.

Abstract Therapeutic monoclonal immunoglobulins (mAbs) are used to treat patients with a wide range of disorders including autoimmune diseases. As pharmaceutical companies bring more fully humanized therapeutic mAb drugs to the healthcare market analytical platforms that perform therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) without relying on mAb specific reagents will be needed. In this study we demonstrate that liquid-chromatography?mass spectrometry (LC?MS) can be used to perform TDM of mAbs in the same manner as smaller nonbiologic drugs. The assay uses commercially available reagents combined with heavy and light chain disulfide bond reduction followed by light chain analysis by microflow-LC?electrospray ionization-quadrupole-time-of-flight mass spectrometry (ESI-Q-TOF MS). Quantification is performed using the peak areas from multiply charged mAb light chain ions using an in-house developed software package developed for TDM of mAbs. The data presented here demonstrate the ability of an LC?MS assay to quantify a therapeutic mAb in a large cohort of patients in a clinical trial. The ability to quantify any mAb in serum via the reduced light chain without the need for reagents specific for each mAb demonstrates the unique capabilities of LC?MS. This fact, coupled with the ability to phenotype a patient?s polyclonal repertoire in the same analysis further shows the potential of this approach to mAb analysis.

AbstractBACKGROUNDFor many years, basic and clinical researchers have taken advantage of the analytical sensitivity and specificity afforded by mass spectrometry in the measurement of proteins. Clinical laboratories are now beginning to deploy these work flows as well. For assays that use proteolysis to generate peptides for protein quantification and characterization, synthetic stable isotope–labeled internal standard peptides are of central importance. No general recommendations are currently available surrounding the use of peptides in protein mass spectrometric assays.CONTENTThe Clinical Proteomic Tumor Analysis Consortium of the National Cancer Institute has collaborated with clinical laboratorians, peptide manufacturers, metrologists, representatives of the pharmaceutical industry, and other professionals to develop a consensus set of recommendations for peptide procurement, characterization, storage, and handling, as well as approaches to the interpretation of the data generated by mass spectrometric protein assays. Additionally, the importance of carefully characterized reference materials—in particular, peptide standards for the improved concordance of amino acid analysis methods across the industry—is highlighted. The alignment of practices around the use of peptides and the transparency of sample preparation protocols should allow for the harmonization of peptide and protein quantification in research and clinical care.

Abstract BACKGROUND Analytically sensitive techniques for measuring minimal residual disease (MRD) in multiple myeloma (MM) currently require invasive and costly bone marrow aspiration. These methods include immunohistochemistry (IHC), flow cytometry, quantitative PCR, and next-generation sequencing. An ideal MM MRD test would be a serum-based test sensitive enough to detect low concentrations of Ig secreted from multifocal lesions. METHODS Patient serum with abundant M-protein before treatment was separated on a 1-dimensional SDS-PAGE gel, and the Ig light-chain (LC) band was excised, trypsin digested, and analyzed on a Q Exactive mass spectrometer by LC-MS/MS. We used the peptide's abundance and sequence to identify tryptic peptides that mapped to complementary determining regions of Ig LCs. The clonotypic target tryptic peptides were used to monitor MRD in subsequent serum samples with prior affinity enrichment. RESULTS Sixty-two patients were tested, 20 with no detectable disease by IHC and 42 with no detectable disease by 6-color flow cytometry. A target peptide that could be monitored was identified in 57 patients (91%). Of these 57, detectable disease by LC-MS/MS was found in 52 (91%). CONCLUSIONS The ability to use LC-MS/MS to measure disease in patients who are negative by bone marrow–based methodologies indicates that a serum-based approach has more analytical sensitivity and may be useful for measuring deeper responses to MM treatment. The method requires no bone marrow aspiration.

Rationale Use of matrix‐assisted laser desorption/ionization time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry (MALDI‐TOFMS) to monitor serum and urine samples for endogenous monoclonal immunoglobulins. MALDI‐TOFMS is faster, fully automatable, and provides superior specificity compared to protein gel electrophoresis (PEL). Methods Samples were enriched for immunoglobulins in 5 min using Melon Gel™ followed by reduction with dithiothreitol for 15 min to separate immunoglobulin light chains and heavy chains. Samples were then desalted using C4 ZipTips, mixed with sinapinic acid matrix, and analyzed on a Bruker Biflex III MALDI‐TOF mass spectrometer. Results Monoclonal immunoglobulin light chains were identified in serum and urine samples from patients with a known monoclonal gammopathy using MALDI‐TOFMS with minimal sample preparation. Conclusions MALDI‐TOFMS can identify a monoclonal immunoglobulin in serum and urine samples. The molecular mass of the monoclonal immunoglobulin light chain is obtained providing unprecedented specificity compared to PEL. In addition, the methodology can be automated, making it a practical alternative to PEL. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

AbstractBACKGROUNDMeasurement of IgG subclasses is a useful tool for investigation of humoral immune deficiency in the presence of total IgG within reference intervals and IgG4-related disease. Nephelometry has been the method of choice for quantification. We describe an LC-MS/MS method that can multiplex all 4 subclasses along with total IgG by use of either IgG subclass-specific peptide stable isotope–labeled internal standards or a surrogate digest standard for quantification and does not rely on antigen/antibody reactions.METHODSWe combined serum with labeled internal peptide standards and intact purified horse IgG. Samples were denatured, reduced, alkylated, and digested. We analyzed the digested serum by LC-MS/MS for IgG subclasses 1–4 and total IgG.RESULTSWe assayed 112 patient sera by LC-MS/MS and immunonephelometry. The mean of the slopes and R2 values for IgG1, IgG2, IgG3, IgG4, and IgG were 1.18 and 0.93, respectively. Interassay imprecision for the LC-MS/MS method was <15% for total IgG and subclasses and was slightly improved by use of a calibrator peptide from an exogenous horse IgG. Summed total IgG correlated with the measured total IgG within 10%. Reference intervals and analytical measuring range were all similar to our previous validation data for the immunonephelometry assays.CONCLUSIONSTotal IgG and IgG subclasses 1, 2, 3, and 4 can be quantified by LC-MS/MS with performance comparable to nephelometry.