No description available.

No description available.

Therapy of acute leukemia may be improved by a more accurate assessment of the effects of treatment on tumor burden and by anticipating relapse with greater precision. The sensitivity limit of assessing residual disease by morphology is usually 5%. Several alternative approaches are available to study minimal residual disease, defined as the presence of leukemic cells not detectable by morphology. These include studies of chromosomal abnormalities by conventional karyotyping, flow cytometry, in situ hybridization and polymerase chain reaction (PCR), investigation of gene rearrangements by Southern blotting and PCR, and immunological methods. Some of these techniques enable the detection of 1 leukemic cells among 10 000 or more normal cells. In the following, the advantages and limitations of sensitive methods for detecting small numbers of leukemic cells are reviewed. The rationale for monitoring residual disease in acute leukemia and the initial results of studies correlating minimal residual disease and clinical outcome are discussed.

A utilização de Inibidores da Tirosino Quinase (ITQ) alterou drasticamente a expectativa de vida do paciente com Leucemia Mielóide Crônica (LMC) e o monitoramento da expressão do oncogene BCR-ABL1 tornou-se um fator prognóstico fundamental para avaliação da resposta ao tratamento. Atualmente, a necessidade de desenvolvimento de metodologias moleculares que facilitem a quantificação rápida, barata e sensível, associada à detecção precoce de baixos níveis de BCR-ABL1, tem proporcionado o surgimento de diversos ensaios comerciais para monitoramento molecular. Entretanto, estes kits possuem uma variabilidade na sua composição, execução e parâmetros analíticos, principalmente com relação à sensibilidade, o que torna os resultados, muitas vezes, não comparáveis. Esse trabalho teve como objetivo revisar a literatura buscando identificar as diferentes opções comerciais disponíveis para o monitoramento do BCR-ABL1, além de comparar os resultados de dois destes ensaios com a metodologia de referência. A partir da revisão realizada, identificamos cinco kits comerciais como principais opções disponíveis para monitoramento de BCR-ABL1 na LMC: GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay (Cepheid), Ipsogen® BCR-ABL1 Mbcr Fusion Quant Kit (QIAGEN), BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay (Asuragen), LightCycler® t(9;22) Quantification Kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) e ODK-1201 (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.). Posteriormente, comparamos os resultados e avaliamos o desempenho dos ensaios GeneXpert® BCR-ABL e do BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ com a metodologia de referência a partir de amostras de 60 pacientes com LMC em uso de ITQ. Identificamos uma concordância global ótima, com coeficientes de correlação de 0,97 (GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay) e 0,84 (BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay). No entanto, na avaliação da concordância relacionada ao alcance ou não de uma Resposta Molecular Maior (RMM), o ensaio BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ apresentou melhores resultados, com uma menor discrepância para respostas moleculares profundas. A análise estratificada por subtipos de transcritos de BCR-ABL1 não mostrou diferença de desempenho entre os dois ensaios. A partir das análises comparativas realizadas e respectivas vantagens de cada teste, aliados aos dados obtidos a partir da revisão da literatura, sugere-se que o GeneXpert® BCR-ABL poderia ser utilizado como um teste primário, devido à rapidez do ensaio, enquanto o BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™, por apresentar resultados associados a uma maior sensibilidade, poderia ser um teste secundário, a fim de confirmar resultados abaixo de uma RMM ou resultados não detectáveis. Fica evidente que a escolha de um ensaio comercial deve atender às necessidades de cada laboratório, mas que, fundamentalmente, esteja alinhada às recomendações internacionais de quantificação. / The use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has drastically changed the life expectancy of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and monitoring the expression of the BCR-ABL1 oncogene has become a key prognostic factor for assessing treatment response. The need to development molecular methodologies that facilitate fast, cheap and sensitive quantification associated with the early detection of low levels of BCR-ABL1 has led to the emergence of several commercial assays for molecular monitoring. However, these kits have variability in their composition, performance and analytical parameters, mainly in relation to the sensitivity, which makes the results often not comparable. This work aimed to review the literature in order to identify the different commercial options available for the monitoring of BCR-ABL1, in addition to comparing the results of two of these tests with the reference methodology. From the review, we identified five commercial kits as the main options available for monitoring BCR-ABL1 in the LMC: GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay (Cepheid), Ipsogen® BCR-ABL1 Mbcr Fusion Quant Kit (QIAGEN), BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay (Asuragen), LightCycler® t (9; 22) Quantification Kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) and ODK-1201 (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.). Subsequently, we compared the results and evaluated the performance of the GeneXpert® BCR-ABL and BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ with reference methodology from samples of 60 patients with CML using TKI. We identified an optimal overall agreement for the two trials, with correlation coefficients of 0.97 and 0.84, respectively. However, in the evaluation of the agreement related to the reach of a Major Molecular Response (MMR), the BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ assay presented better results, with a smaller discrepancy for deep molecular responses. Analysis stratified by subtypes of BCR-ABL1 transcripts showed no difference in performance between the two assays. From the comparative analyzes performed and the respective advantages of each test, allied to the data obtained from the literature review, it is suggested that GeneXpert® BCR-ABL assay could be used as a primary test, due to the rapidity of the assay, while the BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™, for presenting results associated with increased sensitivity, could be a secondary test in order to confirm results below an MMR or undetected results. It is clear that the choice of a commercial assay should meet the needs of each laboratory, but that it is fundamentally in line with international quantification recommendations.

Despite high remission rate in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) after chemotherapy, relapse of the underlying disease remains a major challenge and one of the most frequent causes of treatment failure. In this study, the presence of leukaemiaassociated phenotypes (LAPs) was first studied retrospectively using our standard diagnostic protocol with 3-colour flow cytometry. LAPs were present in 54 (64%) of 84 AML patients analysed between 2002 to 2004. The presence of LAPs was correlated with failure to respond to induction chemotherapy (p <0.05) in univariate analysis. Presence of LAPs was shown to be an independent predictor for failure to respond to induction chemotherapy with a relative risk ratio of 1.6 (p < 0.05, 95% CI, 1.0-2.6) in multivariate analysis. Subsequently, in a prospective study, we used 5-colour multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) for detection of LAPs to determine if LAPs could be detected in a greater proportion of leukaemic patients and minimal residual disease (MRD) detection could therefore be applied in more patients. In 54 consecutive, newly diagnosed AML patients from 2005 to 2007, LAPs were identified in 51 (94%). Thus, MRD studies were potentially applicable to virtually all patients. The sensitivity and specificity of MFC technique was improved by analysing 10 normal and 5 regenerating bone marrows (BM) for the presence of these LAPs and by determining maximum log difference (LD). CD7, CD19, CD2, CD11b and CD56 were the most sensitive and reliable markers for MRD studies. LAPs were rarely detected in either normal or regenerating BMs. Through dilutional experiments from 50% LAPs to 0.001%, it was determined that 1 leukaemic in 104 and 105 normal cells could be detected using the improved techniques. Of the 54 patients, 31 received chemotherapy, with 27 achieving complete remission (CR). Two were LAP negative and thus 25 were evaluable for MRD post induction and 22-post consolidation chemotherapy. Detection of MRD >0.15% was able to distinguish between two groups of patients according to relapse status. Although, the number of patients was small, detection of MRD post induction > 0.15% was shown to be an independent predictor of adverse prognosis for both relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in a multivariate analysis [p = 0.037 and 0.026, 95% CI (1.1-20.5 and 1.2-22.2), hazard ratio 4.7 and 5.2 respectively]. Post consolidation, there was a trend for patients with higher MRD values to show shorter RFS (p = 0.06). MFC using 5-colour allows us to detect LAPs in virtually all AML patients and our preliminary results suggest the technique is a suitable approach for MRD analysis. However, 5-colour MFC is technically challenging, resource intensive, and may not be feasible in a routine diagnostic laboratory. This led us to assess whether we could identify other potential markers for LAPs. Interleukin-3 alpha receptor- chain IL-3_ (CD123) has been suggested to be a marker of leukaemic stem cells (LSC). These cells are thought to be responsible for initiating and maintaining leukaemic cell growth post chemotherapy and hence to give rise to relapse of the disease. Therefore, we analysed 34 AML patients for expression of CD123 in the blast population and defined a population containing leukaemic stem cells using the immunophenotypic markers CD123+/CD34+/CD38-. Thirty-two (94%) of AML patients expressed CD123. We then used a molecular marker to determine whether CD123 expression was confined to the LSC. Thirtynine patients were screened for the presence of FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 - internal tandem duplication (FLT3/ITD) as the most common molecular abnormality in AML patients. Of those, 12 (31%) were FLT3/ITD positive. In seven of them, CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ and CD34+/CD38-/CD123- populations were sorted to homogeneity by Fluorescence Activated Cell Sorting (BD FACSAriaTM Cell Sorter) and tested for FLT3/ITD. In six of seven patients with FLT3/ITD positive AML, we could not detect the mutation in the CD34+/CD38-/CD123- fraction, but the mutation was detected in the CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ fraction in all seven patients. This novel finding demonstrates that, the oncogenic event occurs in CD123 positive cells, thus supporting the concept that CD123 is a marker of the LSC in CD123 positive AML. This observation suggests novel treatment approaches employing surface marker CD123-targeting antibodies may be of use in the treatment of AML. In conclusion, we demonstrate that using five-colour MFC improves LAP detection in AML and enables MRD studies using immunophenotyping to be applied to virtually all AML patients. Additionally, it increases the sensitivity of the technique for detecting LAP populations. Moreover, evaluation of MRD post induction chemotherapy is the most sensitive time point for detection of MRD, with MRD levels >0.15% predicting relapse and worse prognosis. As an alternative to using individualised LAPs specific to each patient, CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ cells may in the future serve as a better marker for MRD studies. This marker identifies the putative LSC, which is responsible for regrowth of leukaemia and relapse of the disease. Thus, instead of looking at whole “blast” population which results in huge data analysis and interpretation for the different LAPs which may have different underlying biology, it may be more informative to look at the frequency of LSC after achieving CR using CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ as the single LAP for MRD studies. / http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1317088 / Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Medicine, 2008

Around 50% of chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML) patients who remain on imatinib treatment for more than 5 years will achieve a complete molecular response (CMR), defined by undetectable BCR-ABL mRNA in a sensitive reverse transcriptase real-time quantitative PCR (RQ-PCR) assay. Given the increasing importance of CMR on imatinib therapy the primary aim of this study was to improve the accuracy and sensitivity of MRD detection to allow a more accurate estimation of relapse risk when therapy is withdrawn. Firstly, we investigated ways of improving the sensitivity of RT-PCR methods for the detection of BCR-ABL mRNA. Secondly, we investigated the use of the patient-specific BCR-ABL gene for the detection of MRD. Thirdly, we conducted a multi-centre clinical trial of imatinib withdrawal in selected CML patients in a stable CMR. This clinical trial provided patient samples that could be used to test our optimized MRD assays, and provided clinical data on the risk and patterns of relapse after withdrawal of imatinib therapy. The trial is ongoing, but an interim analysis of the study data was performed. In 22 patients the estimated probability of molecular relapse after imatinib withdrawal was 54%, and 60% of relapses occurred within the first 4 months. The average detection limit of BCR-ABL mRNA by RQ-PCR is estimated at around 4.5 log below the level of BCR-ABL prior to commencing treatment. The number of leukaemic cells at diagnosis is around 10¹ ², so the number of residual leukaemic cells in CMR might vary from zero to over a million. We hypothesized that the amount of residual leukaemia in CMR is variable between patients, and that this heterogeneity is a determinant of the risk of relapse when treatment is withdrawn. We developed more sensitive methods for the detection of BCR-ABL and tested these methods in samples from our study patients. We showed that random pentadecamer (15-mer) primers improved the efficiency of reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR), and resulted in a lower detection limit of BCR-ABL mRNA. We also developed a novel nested RT-PCR method using real-time PCR for the second round of the reaction, and this resulted in a lower detection limit of BCR-ABL in patient samples. The utility of this nested RT-PCR method was limited by a false positive rate of 2-3% in the HeLa cell line that we used as our negative control. Consequently, we examined the detection of the patient-specific genomic BCR-ABL sequence as an alternative to RT-PCR. Breakpoints in BCR and ABL1 in CML patients are widely dispersed over 3 kb and 150 kb, respectively. Therefore, the BCR-ABL genomic sequence is essentially unique to each patient. We sequenced the genomic breakpoints of 43 CML patients. We showed that the distribution of breakpoints in BCR and ABL1 was non-random, but we were unable to identify any genomic feature that determined the specific location of individual breakpoints. We developed a novel BCR-ABL DNA Q-PCR method for 12 of the study patients, and in 11 of the patients BCR-ABL DNA was detected when the patient was in a CMR, confirming that this method was more sensitive than RQ-PCR. Contrary to our hypothesis, the detection of BCR-ABL DNA was not predictive of relapse. In most patients who relapsed there was a significant increase in BCR-ABL DNA prior to mRNA relapse. Two patients had stable levels of BCR-ABL DNA measurable on multiple occasions, but remained in remission after 6 months and 15 months, respectively. We have shown that a stable CMR after the withdrawal of imatinib therapy does not necessarily indicate the eradication of leukaemia. / Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Medicine, 2010

Despite high remission rate in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) after chemotherapy, relapse of the underlying disease remains a major challenge and one of the most frequent causes of treatment failure. In this study, the presence of leukaemiaassociated phenotypes (LAPs) was first studied retrospectively using our standard diagnostic protocol with 3-colour flow cytometry. LAPs were present in 54 (64%) of 84 AML patients analysed between 2002 to 2004. The presence of LAPs was correlated with failure to respond to induction chemotherapy (p <0.05) in univariate analysis. Presence of LAPs was shown to be an independent predictor for failure to respond to induction chemotherapy with a relative risk ratio of 1.6 (p < 0.05, 95% CI, 1.0-2.6) in multivariate analysis. Subsequently, in a prospective study, we used 5-colour multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) for detection of LAPs to determine if LAPs could be detected in a greater proportion of leukaemic patients and minimal residual disease (MRD) detection could therefore be applied in more patients. In 54 consecutive, newly diagnosed AML patients from 2005 to 2007, LAPs were identified in 51 (94%). Thus, MRD studies were potentially applicable to virtually all patients. The sensitivity and specificity of MFC technique was improved by analysing 10 normal and 5 regenerating bone marrows (BM) for the presence of these LAPs and by determining maximum log difference (LD). CD7, CD19, CD2, CD11b and CD56 were the most sensitive and reliable markers for MRD studies. LAPs were rarely detected in either normal or regenerating BMs. Through dilutional experiments from 50% LAPs to 0.001%, it was determined that 1 leukaemic in 104 and 105 normal cells could be detected using the improved techniques. Of the 54 patients, 31 received chemotherapy, with 27 achieving complete remission (CR). Two were LAP negative and thus 25 were evaluable for MRD post induction and 22-post consolidation chemotherapy. Detection of MRD >0.15% was able to distinguish between two groups of patients according to relapse status. Although, the number of patients was small, detection of MRD post induction > 0.15% was shown to be an independent predictor of adverse prognosis for both relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in a multivariate analysis [p = 0.037 and 0.026, 95% CI (1.1-20.5 and 1.2-22.2), hazard ratio 4.7 and 5.2 respectively]. Post consolidation, there was a trend for patients with higher MRD values to show shorter RFS (p = 0.06). MFC using 5-colour allows us to detect LAPs in virtually all AML patients and our preliminary results suggest the technique is a suitable approach for MRD analysis. However, 5-colour MFC is technically challenging, resource intensive, and may not be feasible in a routine diagnostic laboratory. This led us to assess whether we could identify other potential markers for LAPs. Interleukin-3 alpha receptor- chain IL-3_ (CD123) has been suggested to be a marker of leukaemic stem cells (LSC). These cells are thought to be responsible for initiating and maintaining leukaemic cell growth post chemotherapy and hence to give rise to relapse of the disease. Therefore, we analysed 34 AML patients for expression of CD123 in the blast population and defined a population containing leukaemic stem cells using the immunophenotypic markers CD123+/CD34+/CD38-. Thirty-two (94%) of AML patients expressed CD123. We then used a molecular marker to determine whether CD123 expression was confined to the LSC. Thirtynine patients were screened for the presence of FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 - internal tandem duplication (FLT3/ITD) as the most common molecular abnormality in AML patients. Of those, 12 (31%) were FLT3/ITD positive. In seven of them, CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ and CD34+/CD38-/CD123- populations were sorted to homogeneity by Fluorescence Activated Cell Sorting (BD FACSAriaTM Cell Sorter) and tested for FLT3/ITD. In six of seven patients with FLT3/ITD positive AML, we could not detect the mutation in the CD34+/CD38-/CD123- fraction, but the mutation was detected in the CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ fraction in all seven patients. This novel finding demonstrates that, the oncogenic event occurs in CD123 positive cells, thus supporting the concept that CD123 is a marker of the LSC in CD123 positive AML. This observation suggests novel treatment approaches employing surface marker CD123-targeting antibodies may be of use in the treatment of AML. In conclusion, we demonstrate that using five-colour MFC improves LAP detection in AML and enables MRD studies using immunophenotyping to be applied to virtually all AML patients. Additionally, it increases the sensitivity of the technique for detecting LAP populations. Moreover, evaluation of MRD post induction chemotherapy is the most sensitive time point for detection of MRD, with MRD levels >0.15% predicting relapse and worse prognosis. As an alternative to using individualised LAPs specific to each patient, CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ cells may in the future serve as a better marker for MRD studies. This marker identifies the putative LSC, which is responsible for regrowth of leukaemia and relapse of the disease. Thus, instead of looking at whole “blast” population which results in huge data analysis and interpretation for the different LAPs which may have different underlying biology, it may be more informative to look at the frequency of LSC after achieving CR using CD34+/CD38-/CD123+ as the single LAP for MRD studies. / http://proxy.library.adelaide.edu.au/login?url= http://library.adelaide.edu.au/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?BBID=1317088 / Thesis (Ph.D.) -- University of Adelaide, School of Medicine, 2008

A utilização de Inibidores da Tirosino Quinase (ITQ) alterou drasticamente a expectativa de vida do paciente com Leucemia Mielóide Crônica (LMC) e o monitoramento da expressão do oncogene BCR-ABL1 tornou-se um fator prognóstico fundamental para avaliação da resposta ao tratamento. Atualmente, a necessidade de desenvolvimento de metodologias moleculares que facilitem a quantificação rápida, barata e sensível, associada à detecção precoce de baixos níveis de BCR-ABL1, tem proporcionado o surgimento de diversos ensaios comerciais para monitoramento molecular. Entretanto, estes kits possuem uma variabilidade na sua composição, execução e parâmetros analíticos, principalmente com relação à sensibilidade, o que torna os resultados, muitas vezes, não comparáveis. Esse trabalho teve como objetivo revisar a literatura buscando identificar as diferentes opções comerciais disponíveis para o monitoramento do BCR-ABL1, além de comparar os resultados de dois destes ensaios com a metodologia de referência. A partir da revisão realizada, identificamos cinco kits comerciais como principais opções disponíveis para monitoramento de BCR-ABL1 na LMC: GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay (Cepheid), Ipsogen® BCR-ABL1 Mbcr Fusion Quant Kit (QIAGEN), BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay (Asuragen), LightCycler® t(9;22) Quantification Kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) e ODK-1201 (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.). Posteriormente, comparamos os resultados e avaliamos o desempenho dos ensaios GeneXpert® BCR-ABL e do BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ com a metodologia de referência a partir de amostras de 60 pacientes com LMC em uso de ITQ. Identificamos uma concordância global ótima, com coeficientes de correlação de 0,97 (GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay) e 0,84 (BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay). No entanto, na avaliação da concordância relacionada ao alcance ou não de uma Resposta Molecular Maior (RMM), o ensaio BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ apresentou melhores resultados, com uma menor discrepância para respostas moleculares profundas. A análise estratificada por subtipos de transcritos de BCR-ABL1 não mostrou diferença de desempenho entre os dois ensaios. A partir das análises comparativas realizadas e respectivas vantagens de cada teste, aliados aos dados obtidos a partir da revisão da literatura, sugere-se que o GeneXpert® BCR-ABL poderia ser utilizado como um teste primário, devido à rapidez do ensaio, enquanto o BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™, por apresentar resultados associados a uma maior sensibilidade, poderia ser um teste secundário, a fim de confirmar resultados abaixo de uma RMM ou resultados não detectáveis. Fica evidente que a escolha de um ensaio comercial deve atender às necessidades de cada laboratório, mas que, fundamentalmente, esteja alinhada às recomendações internacionais de quantificação. / The use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has drastically changed the life expectancy of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and monitoring the expression of the BCR-ABL1 oncogene has become a key prognostic factor for assessing treatment response. The need to development molecular methodologies that facilitate fast, cheap and sensitive quantification associated with the early detection of low levels of BCR-ABL1 has led to the emergence of several commercial assays for molecular monitoring. However, these kits have variability in their composition, performance and analytical parameters, mainly in relation to the sensitivity, which makes the results often not comparable. This work aimed to review the literature in order to identify the different commercial options available for the monitoring of BCR-ABL1, in addition to comparing the results of two of these tests with the reference methodology. From the review, we identified five commercial kits as the main options available for monitoring BCR-ABL1 in the LMC: GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay (Cepheid), Ipsogen® BCR-ABL1 Mbcr Fusion Quant Kit (QIAGEN), BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay (Asuragen), LightCycler® t (9; 22) Quantification Kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) and ODK-1201 (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.). Subsequently, we compared the results and evaluated the performance of the GeneXpert® BCR-ABL and BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ with reference methodology from samples of 60 patients with CML using TKI. We identified an optimal overall agreement for the two trials, with correlation coefficients of 0.97 and 0.84, respectively. However, in the evaluation of the agreement related to the reach of a Major Molecular Response (MMR), the BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ assay presented better results, with a smaller discrepancy for deep molecular responses. Analysis stratified by subtypes of BCR-ABL1 transcripts showed no difference in performance between the two assays. From the comparative analyzes performed and the respective advantages of each test, allied to the data obtained from the literature review, it is suggested that GeneXpert® BCR-ABL assay could be used as a primary test, due to the rapidity of the assay, while the BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™, for presenting results associated with increased sensitivity, could be a secondary test in order to confirm results below an MMR or undetected results. It is clear that the choice of a commercial assay should meet the needs of each laboratory, but that it is fundamentally in line with international quantification recommendations.

A utilização de Inibidores da Tirosino Quinase (ITQ) alterou drasticamente a expectativa de vida do paciente com Leucemia Mielóide Crônica (LMC) e o monitoramento da expressão do oncogene BCR-ABL1 tornou-se um fator prognóstico fundamental para avaliação da resposta ao tratamento. Atualmente, a necessidade de desenvolvimento de metodologias moleculares que facilitem a quantificação rápida, barata e sensível, associada à detecção precoce de baixos níveis de BCR-ABL1, tem proporcionado o surgimento de diversos ensaios comerciais para monitoramento molecular. Entretanto, estes kits possuem uma variabilidade na sua composição, execução e parâmetros analíticos, principalmente com relação à sensibilidade, o que torna os resultados, muitas vezes, não comparáveis. Esse trabalho teve como objetivo revisar a literatura buscando identificar as diferentes opções comerciais disponíveis para o monitoramento do BCR-ABL1, além de comparar os resultados de dois destes ensaios com a metodologia de referência. A partir da revisão realizada, identificamos cinco kits comerciais como principais opções disponíveis para monitoramento de BCR-ABL1 na LMC: GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay (Cepheid), Ipsogen® BCR-ABL1 Mbcr Fusion Quant Kit (QIAGEN), BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay (Asuragen), LightCycler® t(9;22) Quantification Kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) e ODK-1201 (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.). Posteriormente, comparamos os resultados e avaliamos o desempenho dos ensaios GeneXpert® BCR-ABL e do BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ com a metodologia de referência a partir de amostras de 60 pacientes com LMC em uso de ITQ. Identificamos uma concordância global ótima, com coeficientes de correlação de 0,97 (GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay) e 0,84 (BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay). No entanto, na avaliação da concordância relacionada ao alcance ou não de uma Resposta Molecular Maior (RMM), o ensaio BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ apresentou melhores resultados, com uma menor discrepância para respostas moleculares profundas. A análise estratificada por subtipos de transcritos de BCR-ABL1 não mostrou diferença de desempenho entre os dois ensaios. A partir das análises comparativas realizadas e respectivas vantagens de cada teste, aliados aos dados obtidos a partir da revisão da literatura, sugere-se que o GeneXpert® BCR-ABL poderia ser utilizado como um teste primário, devido à rapidez do ensaio, enquanto o BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™, por apresentar resultados associados a uma maior sensibilidade, poderia ser um teste secundário, a fim de confirmar resultados abaixo de uma RMM ou resultados não detectáveis. Fica evidente que a escolha de um ensaio comercial deve atender às necessidades de cada laboratório, mas que, fundamentalmente, esteja alinhada às recomendações internacionais de quantificação. / The use of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) has drastically changed the life expectancy of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and monitoring the expression of the BCR-ABL1 oncogene has become a key prognostic factor for assessing treatment response. The need to development molecular methodologies that facilitate fast, cheap and sensitive quantification associated with the early detection of low levels of BCR-ABL1 has led to the emergence of several commercial assays for molecular monitoring. However, these kits have variability in their composition, performance and analytical parameters, mainly in relation to the sensitivity, which makes the results often not comparable. This work aimed to review the literature in order to identify the different commercial options available for the monitoring of BCR-ABL1, in addition to comparing the results of two of these tests with the reference methodology. From the review, we identified five commercial kits as the main options available for monitoring BCR-ABL1 in the LMC: GeneXpert® BCR-ABL Assay (Cepheid), Ipsogen® BCR-ABL1 Mbcr Fusion Quant Kit (QIAGEN), BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ Assay (Asuragen), LightCycler® t (9; 22) Quantification Kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) and ODK-1201 (Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd.). Subsequently, we compared the results and evaluated the performance of the GeneXpert® BCR-ABL and BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ with reference methodology from samples of 60 patients with CML using TKI. We identified an optimal overall agreement for the two trials, with correlation coefficients of 0.97 and 0.84, respectively. However, in the evaluation of the agreement related to the reach of a Major Molecular Response (MMR), the BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™ assay presented better results, with a smaller discrepancy for deep molecular responses. Analysis stratified by subtypes of BCR-ABL1 transcripts showed no difference in performance between the two assays. From the comparative analyzes performed and the respective advantages of each test, allied to the data obtained from the literature review, it is suggested that GeneXpert® BCR-ABL assay could be used as a primary test, due to the rapidity of the assay, while the BCR-ABL1 Quant RUO™, for presenting results associated with increased sensitivity, could be a secondary test in order to confirm results below an MMR or undetected results. It is clear that the choice of a commercial assay should meet the needs of each laboratory, but that it is fundamentally in line with international quantification recommendations.

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) represent a systemic phase of the localised cancer disease. They can be distinguished and enriched from the peripheral blood and so from the surrounding leukocytes by either physical properties (e.g., density and size) or biological properties (e.g., expression of epithelial proteins such as EpCAM or cytokeratins) and are usually further characterized by immunostaining or RT-PCR assays. Selecting patients with the risk of disease relaps at the time of diagnosis is crucial for clinicians in deciding who should, and who should not, receive adjuvant chemotherapy. We know that CTCs are strong prognostic factor in patients with metastatic as well as localized breast cancer (BC). It is also known that the prognostic power of circulating tumor cells in women with BC is independent from the standard prognostic indicators. Testing of CTCs known recently as "liquid biopsy" could be informative not only as predictor of the disease relapse, but also as the predictor of therapy effectiveness. The clinical use of CTCs must be strictly encouraged by clinical trials results. Monitoring of CTCs in time could zoom in the mechanism of therapy resistance and/or may provide the identification of new druggable targets. The purpose of my work was therefore to assess the CTCs positivity rate...