Qualitative polymerase chain reaction versus quantitative polymerase chain reaction for the detection of minimal residual disease in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Immunophenotypic aberrancies in acute lymphoblastic leukemia from 282 Iraqi patients

“…However, FC has the advantage of rapid turnover time of the results, the ability to distinguish viable from apoptotic cells, and being relatively less expensive in comparison with PCR. The growing standardization of FC and above all its broad applicability make it particularly useful for the assessment of MRD since nearly all ALL are evaluated for LAIP at the time of diagnosis . Among the limitations of FC are leukemic phenotypic switches and the frequent lack of standardization of the procedure with its variable sensitivity.…”

Current Strategies for the Detection of Minimal Residual Disease in Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

“…Alternatively, some authors have proposed the detection of Ig/TCR rearrangements by conventional PCR using consensus primers and homo/heteroduplex analysis, despite its lower analytical sensitivity, considering that this approach allows identification of patients with greater residual tumor burden, and then at high risk of relapse. 22 , 27 , 49 , 50 , 78 , 79 , 87 , 88 …”

“…Although it does not identify residual leukemic cells in proportions lower than 10 −3 , it allows the identification of patients with greater residual tumor burdens and those at high risk of relapse, and can be considered a cost-effective methodology for MRD monitoring in countries with limited financial resources. 27 , 79 A qualitative MRD result (presence or absence) provides limited information and does not allow for an evaluation of tumor kinetics, making it impossible to correlate the final amount of PCR product and the initial amount of target molecules. 11 …”

“… Ig, immunoglobulin; TCR, T-cell receptor; RQ-PCR, real time quantitative polymerase chain reaction; MRD, minimal residual disease. * Based on van Dongen et al, 26 Scrideli et al, 27 Campana et al, 31 Schrappe. 40 …”

“…Less sensitive techniques (10 −2 – 10 −3 ) allow MRD detection at clinically significant levels, associated with high risk of relapse, but do not detect patients with lower levels of MRD, which also have a high risk compared to MRD-negative patients. 26 , 27 …”