Comparison of BCR::ABL (P210) mRNA levels detected by dPCR and qPCR methods in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.
10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2023.11.004
- Author:
Han Lin GAO
1
;
Yue HAO
1
;
Wen Min CHEN
1
;
Ling Di LI
1
;
Xu WANG
1
;
Ya Zhen QIN
1
;
Qian JIANG
1
Author Information
1. Peking University People's Hospital, Peking University Institute of Hematology, Beijing 100044, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Digital polymerase chain reaction;
Fusion proteins, BCR::ABL;
Leukemia, myeloid, chronic;
Real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction
- MeSH:
Humans;
Cross-Sectional Studies;
Cytogenetics;
Leukemia, Myelogenous, Chronic, BCR-ABL Positive/genetics*;
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction;
RNA, Messenger/genetics*
- From:
Chinese Journal of Hematology
2023;44(11):906-910
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To compare digital polymerase chain reaction (dPCR) and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) measurements of BCR::ABL (P210) mRNA expression in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) . Methods: In this non-interventional, cross-sectional study, BCR::ABL (P210) mRNA was simultaneously measured by dPCR and qPCR in peripheral blood samples collected from patients with CML who underwent tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy and who achieved at least a complete cytogenetic response from September 2021 to February 2023 at Peking University People's Hospital. The difference, correlation, and agreement between the two methods were evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Spearman's correlation, and Bland-Altman analysis, respectively. Results: In total, 459 data pairs for BCR::ABL mRNA expression measured by dPCR and qPCR from 356 patients with CML were analyzed. There was a significant difference in BCR::ABL mRNA expression between the two methods (P<0.001). When analyzed by the depth of the molecular response (MR), a significant difference only existed for patients with ≥MR4.5 (P<0.001). No significant difference was observed for those who did not achieve a major MR (no MMR; P=0.922) or for those who achieved a major MR (MMR; P=0.723) or MR4 (P=0.099). There was a moderate correlation between the BCR::ABL mRNA expression between the two methods (r=0.761, P<0.001). However, the correlation gradually weakened or disappeared as the depth of the MR increased (no MMR: r=0.929, P<0.001; MMR: r=0.815, P<0.001; MR4: r=0.408, P<0.001; MR4.5: r=0.176, P=0.176). In addition, the agreement in BCR::ABL mRNA expression between the two methods in those with MR4.5 was weaker than other groups (no MMR: ▉= 0.042, P=0.846; MMR:▉=0.054, P=0.229; MR4:▉=-0.020, P=0.399; MR4.5:▉=-0.219, P<0.001) . Conclusions: dPCR is more accurate than qPCR for measuring BCR::ABL (P210) mRNA expression in patients with CML who achieve a stable deep MR.
