Assessment of Potential Sources of Variability on the Analytical Performance of a Circulating Tumor DNA Minimal Residual Disease Test for B-Cell Lymphomas.

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY
Nina Klimova, Alanna Roff, Justine McCutcheon, Alex Aheimer, Sandra L Close, Richard D Hockett, Stephanie Meek, Laura Hyland
{"title":"Assessment of Potential Sources of Variability on the Analytical Performance of a Circulating Tumor DNA Minimal Residual Disease Test for B-Cell Lymphomas.","authors":"Nina Klimova, Alanna Roff, Justine McCutcheon, Alex Aheimer, Sandra L Close, Richard D Hockett, Stephanie Meek, Laura Hyland","doi":"10.1002/jcla.70258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To evaluate the robustness of circulating tumor DNA minimal residual disease (ctDNA-MRD) test results to common factors that could impact performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>DNA from three sample types is required: somatic, germline, and MRD monitoring. Different sample sources were evaluated for germline [whole blood, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs)] and somatic (pre-treatment plasma, tumor) samples. Extraction methods, common interfering substances, and DNA input mass were evaluated for impact on MRD determination. Each comparison was performed in isolation. Overall test variability was also evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Whole blood and PBMCs were acceptable germline sample types, with minimal differences in identification of somatic variants. Both pre-treatment plasma and tumor were acceptable somatic sample types, achieving the same 95% hit rate of three mutant molecules. Agreement between results from different extraction methods and in the presence of interfering substances was 100%. Positive percent agreement (PPA) between results from DNA input masses above and below the test upper and lower limits decreased, though PPA was 100% between 4 ng and the lower limit (5 ng). Variance in test performance fell within acceptable ranges (coefficient of variation 4.95%-10.33%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Major potential sources of variation and interference did not significantly impact ctDNA-MRD test performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":15509,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis","volume":" ","pages":"e70258"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcla.70258","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICAL LABORATORY TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate the robustness of circulating tumor DNA minimal residual disease (ctDNA-MRD) test results to common factors that could impact performance.

Methods: DNA from three sample types is required: somatic, germline, and MRD monitoring. Different sample sources were evaluated for germline [whole blood, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs)] and somatic (pre-treatment plasma, tumor) samples. Extraction methods, common interfering substances, and DNA input mass were evaluated for impact on MRD determination. Each comparison was performed in isolation. Overall test variability was also evaluated.

Results: Whole blood and PBMCs were acceptable germline sample types, with minimal differences in identification of somatic variants. Both pre-treatment plasma and tumor were acceptable somatic sample types, achieving the same 95% hit rate of three mutant molecules. Agreement between results from different extraction methods and in the presence of interfering substances was 100%. Positive percent agreement (PPA) between results from DNA input masses above and below the test upper and lower limits decreased, though PPA was 100% between 4 ng and the lower limit (5 ng). Variance in test performance fell within acceptable ranges (coefficient of variation 4.95%-10.33%).

Conclusions: Major potential sources of variation and interference did not significantly impact ctDNA-MRD test performance.

b细胞淋巴瘤循环肿瘤DNA微量残留疾病检测分析性能的潜在变异源评估
目的:评估循环肿瘤DNA微小残留病(ctDNA-MRD)检测结果对可能影响表现的常见因素的稳健性。方法:需要三种样品类型的DNA:体细胞、种系和MRD监测。不同的样本来源对种系[全血,外周血单核细胞(PBMCs)]和体细胞(预处理血浆,肿瘤)样本进行了评估。评估了提取方法、常见干扰物质和DNA输入质量对MRD测定的影响。每次比较都是单独进行的。还评估了总体测试变异性。结果:全血和pbmc是可接受的种系样本类型,在鉴定体细胞变异方面差异极小。预处理血浆和肿瘤都是可接受的体细胞样本类型,三种突变分子的命中率相同,达到95%。不同提取方法和干扰物存在下的结果一致性为100%。DNA输入质量高于和低于测试上限和下限的结果之间的正一致性百分比(PPA)下降,尽管PPA在4 ng和下限(5 ng)之间为100%。试验性能的方差在可接受范围内(变异系数4.95%-10.33%)。结论:主要的潜在变异和干扰源对ctDNA-MRD检测性能没有显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis
Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis 医学-医学实验技术
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
584
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis publishes original articles on newly developing modes of technology and laboratory assays, with emphasis on their application in current and future clinical laboratory testing. This includes reports from the following fields: immunochemistry and toxicology, hematology and hematopathology, immunopathology, molecular diagnostics, microbiology, genetic testing, immunohematology, and clinical chemistry.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书