The Utility of Non‐invasive Liquid Biopsy for Mutational Analysis and Minimal Residual Disease Assessment in Extramedullary Multiple Myeloma
Xiaolu Long,Qian Xu,Yaoyao Lou,Chunrui Li,Jingmin Gu,Haodong Cai,Di Wang,Jingjing Xu,Tongjuan Li,Xiaoxi Zhou,Min Xiao,Ying Wang,Xia Mao,Jianfeng Zhou,Liting Chen
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.16440
2020-01-01
British Journal of Haematology
Abstract:Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable B cell malignancy characterized by the clonal proliferation of plasma cells (PCs). Extramedullary multiple myeloma (EMM) is an advanced subset of MM, defined by the presence of clonal PCs outside of the bone marrow, which is a multi-focal disease of great heterogeneity and linked to poor prognosis (Bolli et al., 2014; Touzeau & Moreau, 2015). Tissue biopsy is invasive and is not always feasible. In recent years, many studies have illustrated the potential of liquid biopsy in molecular profiling, tracking minimal residual disease (MRD), and assessing prognosis. Some research has indicated that circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) profiling could be adopted as an alternative to MM bone marrow (BM) aspirates (Kis et al., 2017; Oberle et al., 2017; Levin et al., 2018). In addition, an EMM study focusing on longitudinal plasma ctDNA profiling suggested that ctDNA can be used as an adjunct to currently available modalities. However, the concordance between ctDNA and extramedullary plasmacytomaderived DNA has not previously been determined. To explore the association between plasma cell-free DNA (cfDNA) quantity and MM disease advancement, we measured 22 plasma samples from 8 EMM patients and 23 plasma samples from 10 MM patients without extramedullary spread, whose median cfDNA concentrations were 43 58 ng/ml (range 3 53–313 5 ng/ml) and 16 4 ng/mL (range 4 32–214 7 ng/ml), respectively. Significantly higher quantities of cfDNA were obtained from more advanced cases who had extramedullary spread (P = 0 009) compared to patients without extramedullary spread (Figure S1). Two MM-focused sequencing panels targeting the coding sequence regions of the same 22 recurrently mutated genes were designed (Tables S1 and S2) (Egan et al., 2012; Joaquin et al., 2014; Martinez-Lopez et al., 2014; Walker et al., 2015). Their amplicon insert sizes were distributed from 59 to 104 bp (for ctDNA) and 85 to 335 bp (for genomic DNA) separately. Genes such as KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF in the MAPK pathway, TRAF3, CYLD, TLR4, RIPK4, and LTB in the NF-jB pathway as well as TP53, CCND1, and RB1 in the cell cycle pathway were included (Chapman et al., 2011; Lohr et al., 2014; Robiou et al., 2018). Overall patient characteristics are summarized in Table I. BM CD138 cells were isolated using antibody-coated magnetic microbeads for subsequent sequencing if they were flow cytometry-detectable (patients EMM-1, 5, 6). For the other five patients, who had no detectable monoclonal medullary PCs, total BM aspirate was used for sequencing. The mean target coverage of medullary DNA and extramedullary tumor DNA was over 50009 (5470–12 167). The depths of coverage for time-matched ctDNA samples were all over 20 0009 (20 723–70 659). A detailed description of the bioinformatics analyses performed is provided in the methods. A total of 17 different somatic mutations were detected (extramedullary tumor, n = 16; plasma, n = 10; BM aspirate, n = 4), among which, MGB probes for 16 (16/17, 94 12%) mutations were successfully designed and were verified using droplet digital PCR (Tables S3 and S4). The LTB p.Gln67* mutation, whose probe was not available, was validated by Sanger sequencing. False negative tests were then performed on all paired samples. Four mutation sites that were negative by next-generation sequencing methods (KRAS p.Gly12Val in plasma from EMM-4, BRAF p.Val600Glu in plasma sample from EMM-7, and TP53 p.Arg249Ser in the BM aspirate sample from patient EMM5) or excluded during analysis (KRAS p.Gly12Arg in the plasma of EMM-5) were newly identified by ddPCR (Table S5). These results suggest that ddPCR was more sensitive than NGS in our system. We then analyzed the molecular profiles of paired tissue biopsies, BM aspirates, and ctDNA samples from eight EMM patients. Out of the 16 mutations detected from the extramedullary samples, 12 (66 67%) were also detected in timematched plasma ctDNA, and only 5 (31 25%) were detected in paired BM aspirates (Fig 1B). Thus, the analytical sensitivities associated with ctDNA samples and BM aspirates were 66 67% and 31 25%, respectively. Specificity was assessed based on mutants that were detected in time-matched ctDNA samples or BM aspirates but undetectable in paired tissue biopsies (Newman et al., 2016). Only one ctDNA mutation and one BM aspirate mutation were undetectable in tissue biopsies. Negative genes were defined as those for which no mutation was detected in all three paired samples. The specificities calculated for ctDNA samples and BM aspirates were both 99 37%. The concordances of plasma ctDNA samples and BM aspirates with extramedullary tumor biopsies were assessed based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves (Fig 1C) (Kjetil, 2009). The areas under the curve (AUCs) for plasma ctDNA and BM aspirates were 0 873 (P = 8 66e 7) and Correspondence