Thu, May 30, 2024
In press (Jan-Feb)
Back to the articles list |
Back to browse issues page
Imran Ahmed Siddiqui 
1, Sowmya Gayatri C2 , Swati Suravaram3 , Bharat Kumar Reddy4 , Dhanalakshmi A4
1, Sowmya Gayatri C2 , Swati Suravaram3 , Bharat Kumar Reddy4 , Dhanalakshmi A4
1- ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500038- Department of Biochemistry ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Faridabad, India , write2drimran@gmail.com
2- ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500038- Central Reference lab, ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Faridabad, India
3- ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500038- Department of Microbiology, ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Faridabad, India
4- ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500038- Department of Biochemistry ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Faridabad, India
2- ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500038- Central Reference lab, ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Faridabad, India
3- ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500038- Department of Microbiology, ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Faridabad, India
4- ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad 500038- Department of Biochemistry ESIC Medical College and Superspeciality Hospital, Faridabad, India
Abstract: (219 Views)
Background: ‘M’ proteins or paraproteins refer to immunoglobulins that are produced by clonal plasma cells and are a characteristic feature of monoclonal gammopathies. Routine electrophoresis on agarose gel and immunofixation can be used to detect immunoglobulin paraprotein (M-protein). We aimed to evaluate the performance of agarose gel electrophoresis alone and in combination with immunofixation for detecting serum M-proteins.
Methods: One hundred and twenty-three patients suspected of paraproteinemia were evaluated. Routine serum protein electrophoresis (SPE) and immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE) protocols were performed. Data from SPE, and SPE-IFE (gel images and electrophoretograms) were collected and reviewed.
Results: 21% cases were confirmed using the SPE-IFE combination, and among them, 33% had positive light chain (λ) only on IFE. Similarly, nine cases with biclonal gammopathy on SPE were characterized by IFE.
Conclusion: IFE can be a confirmatory test in cases where SPE results are not reliable and it can be a complementary test when characterization of the M protein detected on SPE is required.
Methods: One hundred and twenty-three patients suspected of paraproteinemia were evaluated. Routine serum protein electrophoresis (SPE) and immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE) protocols were performed. Data from SPE, and SPE-IFE (gel images and electrophoretograms) were collected and reviewed.
Results: 21% cases were confirmed using the SPE-IFE combination, and among them, 33% had positive light chain (λ) only on IFE. Similarly, nine cases with biclonal gammopathy on SPE were characterized by IFE.
Conclusion: IFE can be a confirmatory test in cases where SPE results are not reliable and it can be a complementary test when characterization of the M protein detected on SPE is required.
References
1. Kyle RA, Steensma DP. History of Multiple Myeloma. In: Moehler T, Goldschmidt H, eds. Multiple Myeloma. Recent Results in Cancer Research. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2011. P3-23. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
2. Maniatis A. Pathophysiology of paraprotein production. Ren Fail. 1998;20(6):821-8. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
3. Pruzanski W, Katz A. Clinical and laboratory findings in primary generalized and multiple-myeloma-related amyloidosis. Can Med Assoc J. 1976;114(10):906-9. [View at Publisher] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
4. Barber FD. 2006. Multiple Myeloma Early Recognition by Primary Care Nurse Practitioners. J Nurse Pract. 2006;2(10):665-72. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
5. Katzmann JA, Kyle RA, Benson J, Larson DR, Snyder MR, Lust JA, et al. Screening panels for detection of monoclonal gammopathies. Clinical chemistry. 2009;55(8):1517-1522. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
6. Lee Adrian YS, Lin M-W. Polymeric IgA Paraprotein on Agarose Gel Electrophoresis Immunofixation Identifies a Unique Subset of IgA Myeloma Patients. Clin Chim Acta. 2021;512:112-6. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
7. Tripathy S. The role of serum protein electrophoresis in the detection of multiple myeloma: an experience of a corporate hospital. J Clin Diagn Res. 2012;6(9):1458-61. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
8. Keren DF. Procedures for the evaluation of monoclonal immunoglobulins. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999;123(2):126-32. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
9. Howerton DA, Check IJ, Hunter RL. Densitometric Quantitation of High-Resolution Agarose Gel Protein Electrophoresis. Am J Clin Pathol. 1986;85(2):213-8. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
10. Dennis PM, Biegler B, Papas R. Improved Measurement of Monoclonal Paraproteins in Serum Using Agarose Gel Electrophoresis. Annals of Clinical Biochemistry. 1987;24(1):73-6. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
11. Zahir H, Tali A, Rachidi M, Mouhib H, Daif H, Ait Ouzdi Z, Haouach K, Chabaa L. IgD-λ multiple myeloma with excessive excretion of free light chains: a diagnostic trap in the identification of monoclonal gammopathies. Ann Biol Clin (Paris). 2019;77(1):107-11. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
12. Ritchie RF, Smith R. Immunofixation. III. Application to the study of monoclonal proteins. Clin Chem. 1976;22(12):1982-5. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
13. Willrich MA, Katzmann JA. Laboratory testing requirements for diagnosis and follow-up of multiple myeloma and related plasma cell dyscrasias. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2016;54(6):907-19. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
14. Kyle RA, Gertz MA, Witzig TE, Lust JA, Lacy MQ, Dispenzieri A,et al. Review of 1027 patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Mayo Clin Proc. 2003;78(1):21-33. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
15. Rajkumar SV, Dimopoulos MA, Palumbo A, Blade J, Merlini G, Mateos MV, et al. International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12):e538-e548. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
16. Chopra GS, Gupta PK, Mishra DK. Evaluation of Suspected Monoclonal Gammopathies: Experience in a Tertiary Care Hospital. Med J Armed Forces India. 2006:62(2);134-137. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
17. Uddin MM, Rahman M, Sultana SA, Saha D. Superiority of Serum Immunofixation Electrophoresis over Serum Protein Electrophoresis in the Diagnosis of Multiple Myeloma. J Bangladesh Coll Phys Surg. 2018;36(3):95-100. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
18. Kyle RA, Robinson RA, Katzmann JA. The clinical aspects of biclonal gammopathies. Review of 57 cases. Am J Med. 1981;71(6):999-1008. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
19. Guinan JEC, Kenny DF, Gatenby PA. Detection and typing of paraproteins: Comparison of different methods in a routine diagnostic laboratory. Pathology. 1989;21(1):35-41. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
20. Roberts‐Thomson PJ, Mason DY, MacLennan ICM. Relationship between Paraprotein Polymerization and Clinical Features in IgA Myeloma. Br J Haematol. 1976;33(1):117-30. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
21. Tiselius A. Electrophoresis of serum globulin: Electrophoretic analysis of normal and immune sera. Biochem J. 1937;31(9):1464-77. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
22. Misra A, Mishra J, Chandramohan J, Sharma A, Raina V, Kumar R, et al. Old but Still Relevant: High Resolution Electrophoresis and Immunofixation in Multiple Myeloma. Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion. 2016;32(1):10-17. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
23. Enko D, Kriegshäuser G. Prozone effect observed for heavy chain α in the serum immunofixation electrophoresis of a patient with monoclonal IgA-λ gammopathy. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2019:57(6);e121-3. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
24. Attaelmannan M, Levinson SS. Understanding and identifying monoclonal gammopathies. Clin Chem. 2000;46(8 Pt 2):1230-8. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Enamad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.