New methods for the quantification of mixed chimerism in transplantation.

NGS (next generation sequencing) cfDNA (cell-free DNA) chimerism dPCR (digital PCR) qPCR (quantitative PCR)

Journal

Frontiers in immunology
ISSN: 1664-3224
Titre abrégé: Front Immunol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101560960

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 19 08 2022
accepted: 05 01 2023
entrez: 6 2 2023
pubmed: 7 2 2023
medline: 8 2 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Quantification of chimerism showing the proportion of the donor in a recipient is essential for the follow-up of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation but can also be useful to document an immune tolerance situation after solid organ transplantation. Historically, chimerism has been quantified from genomic DNA, but with technological advances, chimerism from donor-derived cell-free DNA seems particularly relevant in solid organ transplantation. The reference method was until recently the short tandem repeat technique, but new innovative techniques as digital PCR (dPCR) and NGS, have revolutionized the quantification of chimerism, such as the so-called microchimerism analysis. After a short review of chimerism methods, a comparison of chimerism quantification data for two new digital PCR systems (QIAcuity™ dPCR (Qiagen These new methods were correlated and concordant to routinely methods (r²=0.9978 and r²=0.9974 for dPCR methods, r²=0.9978 and r²=0.9988 for NGS methods), and had similar high performance (sensitivity, reproductibility, linearity). Finally, the choice of the innovative method of chimerism within the laboratory does not depend on the analytical performances because they are similar but mainly on the amount of activity and the access to instruments and computer services.

Sections du résumé

Background
Quantification of chimerism showing the proportion of the donor in a recipient is essential for the follow-up of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation but can also be useful to document an immune tolerance situation after solid organ transplantation. Historically, chimerism has been quantified from genomic DNA, but with technological advances, chimerism from donor-derived cell-free DNA seems particularly relevant in solid organ transplantation.
Methods
The reference method was until recently the short tandem repeat technique, but new innovative techniques as digital PCR (dPCR) and NGS, have revolutionized the quantification of chimerism, such as the so-called microchimerism analysis. After a short review of chimerism methods, a comparison of chimerism quantification data for two new digital PCR systems (QIAcuity™ dPCR (Qiagen
Results
These new methods were correlated and concordant to routinely methods (r²=0.9978 and r²=0.9974 for dPCR methods, r²=0.9978 and r²=0.9988 for NGS methods), and had similar high performance (sensitivity, reproductibility, linearity).
Conclusion
Finally, the choice of the innovative method of chimerism within the laboratory does not depend on the analytical performances because they are similar but mainly on the amount of activity and the access to instruments and computer services.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36742303
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1023116
pmc: PMC9892455
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1023116

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Picard, Frassati, Cherouat, Maioli, Moskovtchenko, Cherel, Chiaroni and Pedini.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Chimerism. 2013 Jul-Sep;4(3):102-8
pubmed: 23974275
Bone Marrow Transplant. 1995 Jul;16(1):43-55
pubmed: 7581128
Transplant Cell Ther. 2021 Jan;27(1):89.e1-89.e10
pubmed: 32980546
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2001;7(9):473-85
pubmed: 11669214
Am J Clin Pathol. 1997 Mar;107(3):292-8
pubmed: 9052379
Biotechniques. 1992 Sep;13(3):444-9
pubmed: 1389177
J Mol Diagn. 2016 Nov;18(6):890-902
pubmed: 27727019
Int J Legal Med. 2017 Jan;131(1):67-72
pubmed: 27448113
Acta Haematol. 2004;112(1-2):16-23
pubmed: 15179000
Br J Haematol. 1991 Oct;79(2):218-25
pubmed: 1958479
Transplantation. 2019 Feb;103(2):273-283
pubmed: 30308576
Mol Med Rep. 2016 Oct;14(4):2967-74
pubmed: 27499173
Exp Hematol. 2015 Jun;43(6):462-8.e1
pubmed: 25795523
Chimerism. 2014;5(2):24-39
pubmed: 24762743
PLoS One. 2018 Dec 6;13(12):e0208207
pubmed: 30521549
Crit Rev Biotechnol. 2022 Mar 15;:1-32
pubmed: 35291902
J Clin Med. 2019 Nov 28;8(12):
pubmed: 31795155
Leukemia. 2003 Jan;17(1):241-6
pubmed: 12529687
Hum Immunol. 2021 Nov;82(11):850-858
pubmed: 34600770
Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2021 Jan;21(1):3-15
pubmed: 33305634
Clin Chim Acta. 2022 Jul 1;532:123-129
pubmed: 35667475
Curr Opin Hematol. 2018 Nov;25(6):417-424
pubmed: 30148720
J Mol Diagn. 2019 May;21(3):483-490
pubmed: 30797064
Transplantation. 1987 Mar;43(3):399-407
pubmed: 2881382
Leukemia. 2003 Jan;17(1):228-31
pubmed: 12529684
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019 Apr 24;57(5):641-647
pubmed: 30457973
Blood. 1985 Dec;66(6):1436-44
pubmed: 2998513
J Am Soc Nephrol. 2017 Jul;28(7):2221-2232
pubmed: 28280140
J Clin Med. 2020 Nov 25;9(12):
pubmed: 33255857
Clin Chem Lab Med. 2017 Jul 26;55(8):1115-1121
pubmed: 28099121
Blood. 2017 Sep 7;130(10):1270-1273
pubmed: 28655779
Hum Immunol. 2021 Nov;82(11):838-849
pubmed: 34404545
Bone Marrow Transplant. 1992 Aug;10(2):165-70
pubmed: 1356057
Science. 1987 Mar 27;235(4796):1616-22
pubmed: 3029872
Ann Hematol. 2018 Sep;97(9):1731-1734
pubmed: 29651543
Transplant Proc. 2015 Oct;47(8):2400-3
pubmed: 26518940
Clin Chem. 2013 Dec;59(12):1732-41
pubmed: 24061615
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2020 Jul;55(7):1229-1239
pubmed: 32024991
Br J Haematol. 2015 Jan;168(1):26-37
pubmed: 25145701
Blood. 2002 Jun 15;99(12):4618-25
pubmed: 12036896
Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 17;12(1):10223
pubmed: 35715477
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014 Dec;20(12):1918-25
pubmed: 25087899
Leukemia. 2003 Jan;17(1):237-40
pubmed: 12529686
Genomics Inform. 2017 Mar;15(1):2-10
pubmed: 28416944
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2022 Mar;57(3):347-359
pubmed: 35082369
Leukemia. 2015 May;29(5):1143-52
pubmed: 25371177

Auteurs

Christophe Picard (C)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS PACC, Marseille, France.
CNRS, EFS, ADES, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France.

Coralie Frassati (C)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS PACC, Marseille, France.

Nicem Cherouat (N)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS PACC, Marseille, France.

Sandrine Maioli (S)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS PACC, Marseille, France.

Philippe Moskovtchenko (P)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS AURA, Lyon, France.

Mathilde Cherel (M)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS BRET, Rennes, France.

Jacques Chiaroni (J)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS PACC, Marseille, France.
CNRS, EFS, ADES, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France.

Pascal Pedini (P)

Immunogenetic Laboratory, EFS PACC, Marseille, France.
CNRS, EFS, ADES, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France.

Articles similaires

Humans Stomatitis Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Male Female

Optimal infused CD34

Oren Pasvolsky, Curtis Marcoux, Denái R Milton et al.
1.00
Humans Multiple Myeloma Middle Aged Male Female

First record and molecular diversity of haemosporidian parasites in Sula leucogaster (Boddaert, 1783) from the southeastern Brazilian coast.

Michelle Noronha da Matta Baptista, Talys Henrique Assumpção Jardim, Andresa Guimarães et al.
1.00
Animals Brazil Haemosporida Protozoan Infections, Animal Bird Diseases
Humans Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Female Male Child

Classifications MeSH