International guidelines for the flow cytometric evaluation of peripheral blood for suspected Sézary syndrome or mycosis fungoides: Assay development/optimization, validation, and ongoing quality monitors

Introducing a sensitive and specific peripheral blood flow cytometric assay for Sézary syndrome and mycosis fungoides (SS/MF) requires careful selection of assay design characteristics, and translation into a laboratory developed assay through development/optimization, validation, and continual quality monitoring. As outlined in a previous article in this series, the recommended design characteristics of this assay include at a minimum, evaluation of CD7, CD3, CD4, CD8, CD26, and CD45, analyzed simultaneously, requiring at least a 6 color flow cytometry system, with both quantitative and qualitative components. This article provides guidance from an international group of cytometry specialists in implementing an assay to those design specifications, outlining specific considerations, and best practices. Key points presented in detail are: (a) Pre-analytic components (reagents, specimen processing, and acquisition) must be optimized to: (i) identify and characterize an abnormal population of T-cells (qualitative component) and (ii) quantitate the abnormal population (semi/quasi-quantitative component). (b)Analytic components (instrument set-up/acquisition/analysis strategy and interpretation) must be optimized for the identification of SS/MF populations, which can vary widely in phenotype. Comparison with expert laboratories is strongly encouraged in order to establish competency. (c) Assay performance must be validated and documented through a validation plan and report, which covers both qualitative and semi/quasi-quantitative assay components (example template provided). (d) Ongoing assay-specific quality monitoring should be performed to ensure consistency.

[1]  Thomas D. Y. Chung,et al.  A Simple Statistical Parameter for Use in Evaluation and Validation of High Throughput Screening Assays , 1999, Journal of biomolecular screening.

[2]  N. Ahmed,et al.  Polystyrene microspheres enable 10‐color compensation for immunophenotyping of primary human leukocytes , 2015, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[3]  Marina Ruggeri,et al.  Report of the European Myeloma Network on multiparametric flow cytometry in multiple myeloma and related disorders , 2008, Haematologica.

[4]  P. Wallace,et al.  ICCS/ESCCA Consensus Guidelines to detect GPI‐deficient cells in Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria (PNH) and related Disorders Part 2 – Reagent Selection and Assay Optimization for High‐Sensitivity Testing , 2018, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.

[5]  T. Kalina,et al.  EuroFlow standardization of flow cytometer instrument settings and immunophenotyping protocols , 2012, Leukemia.

[6]  F. Lacombe,et al.  Comparable flow cytometry data can be obtained with two types of instruments, Canto II, and Navios. A GEIL study , 2013, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[7]  R. Hulspas,et al.  Titration of Fluorochrome‐Conjugated Antibodies for Labeling Cell Surface Markers on Live Cells , 2010, Current protocols in cytometry.

[8]  Virginia Litwin,et al.  Recommendations for the validation of flow cytometric testing during drug development: I instrumentation. , 2011, Journal of immunological methods.

[9]  F. Craig,et al.  Use of internal control T‐cell populations in the flow cytometric evaluation for T‐cell neoplasms , 2016, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.

[10]  U. Johansson,et al.  Guidelines on the use of multicolour flow cytometry in the diagnosis of haematological neoplasms , 2014, British journal of haematology.

[11]  F Lacombe,et al.  Harmonemia: a universal strategy for flow cytometry immunophenotyping—A European LeukemiaNet WP10 study , 2016, Leukemia.

[12]  D. Jevremovic,et al.  Flow Cytometry Applications in the Diagnosis of T/NK‐Cell Lymphoproliferative Disorders , 2019, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.

[13]  M. Pulitzer,et al.  Sézary syndrome and mycosis fungoides: An overview, including the role of immunophenotyping , 2020, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.

[14]  Holden T Maecker,et al.  Flow cytometry controls, instrument setup, and the determination of positivity , 2006, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[15]  James C S Wood,et al.  Q and B values are critical measurements required for inter‐instrument standardization and development of multicolor flow cytometry staining panels , 2014, Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology.

[16]  M. Béné,et al.  Comparison of cross‐platform flow cytometry minimal residual disease evaluation in multiple myeloma using a common antibody combination and analysis strategy , 2014, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.

[17]  E. Huys,et al.  Establishment of harmonization in immunophenotyping: A comparative study of a standardized one-tube lymphocyte-screening panel. , 2014, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.

[18]  B. Wood,et al.  2006 Bethesda International Consensus recommendations on the immunophenotypic analysis of hematolymphoid neoplasia by flow cytometry: Recommendations for training and education to perform clinical flow cytometry , 2007, Cytometry. Part B, Clinical cytometry.