Identification and immunophenotypic characterization of normal and pathological mast cells

Multiparameter flow cytometry in the evaluation of myelodysplasia: Analytical issues: Recommendations from the European LeukemiaNet/International Myelodysplastic Syndrome Flow Cytometry Working Group

Multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) is one of the essential ancillary methods in bone marrow (BM) investigation of patients with cytopenia and suspected myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). MFC can also be applied in the follow-up of MDS patients undergoing treatment. This document summarizes recommendations from the International/European Leukemia Net Working Group for Flow Cytometry in Myelodysplastic Syndromes (ELN iMDS Flow) on the analytical issues in MFC for the diagnostic work-up of MDS. Recommendations for the analysis of several BM cell subsets such as myeloid precursors, maturing granulocytic and monocytic components and erythropoiesis are given. A core set of 17 markers identified as independently related to a cytomorphologic diagnosis of myelodysplasia is suggested as mandatory for MFC evaluation of BM in a patient with cytopenia. A myeloid precursor cell (CD34⁺ CD19^- ) count >3% should be considered immunophenotypically indicative of myelodysplasia. However, MFC results should always be evaluated as part of an integrated hematopathology work-up. Looking forward, several machine-learning-based analytical tools of interest should be applied in parallel to conventional analytical methods to investigate their usefulness in integrated diagnostics, risk stratification, and potentially even in the evaluation of response to therapy, based on MFC data. In addition, compiling large uniform datasets is desirable, as most of the machine-learning-based methods tend to perform better with larger numbers of investigated samples, especially in such a heterogeneous disease as MDS.

Developing a standardized approach for assessing mast cells and eosinophils on tissue biopsies: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Allergic Skin Diseases Committee

Mast cells and eosinophils are commonly found, expectedly or unexpectedly, in human tissue biopsies. Although the clinical significance of their presence, absence, quantity, and quality continues to be investigated in homeostasis and disease, there are currently gaps in knowledge related to what constitutes quantitatively relevant increases in mast cell and eosinophil number in tissue specimens for several clinical conditions. Diagnostically relevant thresholds of mast cell and eosinophil numbers have been proposed and generally accepted by the medical community for a few conditions, such as systemic mastocytosis and eosinophilic esophagitis. However, for other mast cell- and eosinophil-associated disorders, broad discrepancies remain regarding diagnostic thresholds and how samples are processed, routinely and/or specially stained, and interpreted and/or reported by pathologists. These discrepancies can obfuscate or delay a patient's correct diagnosis. Therefore, a work group was assembled to review the literature and develop a standardized consensus for assessing the presence of mast cells and eosinophils for a spectrum of clinical conditions, including systemic mastocytosis and cutaneous mastocytosis, mast cell activation syndrome, eosinophilic esophagitis, eosinophilic gastritis/enteritis, and hypereosinophilia/hypereosinophilic syndrome. The intent of this work group is to build a consensus among pathology, allergy, dermatology, hematology/oncology, and gastroenterology stakeholders for qualitatively and quantitatively assessing mast cells and eosinophils in skin, gastrointestinal, and bone marrow pathologic specimens for the benefit of clinical practice and patients.

KIT D816V Positive Acute Mast Cell Leukemia Associated with Normal Karyotype Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Introduction

Mast cell (MC) leukemia (MCL) is extremely rare. We present a case of MCL diagnosed concomitantly with acute myeloblastic leukemia (AML).

Case Report

A 41-year-old woman presented with asthenia, anorexia, fever, epigastralgia, and diarrhea. She had a maculopapular skin rash, hepatosplenomegaly, retroperitoneal adenopathies, pancytopenia, 6% blast cells (BC) and 20% MC in the peripheral blood, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, cholestasis, hypoalbuminemia, hypogammaglobulinemia, and increased serum tryptase (184 μg/L). The bone marrow (BM) smears showed 24% myeloblasts, 17% promyelocytes, and 16% abnormal toluidine blue positive MC, and flow cytometry revealed 12% myeloid BC, 34% aberrant promyelocytes, a maturation blockage at the myeloblast/promyelocyte level, and 16% abnormal CD2−CD25+ MC. The BM karyotype was normal, and the KIT D816V mutation was positive in BM cells. The diagnosis of MCL associated with AML was assumed. The patient received corticosteroids, disodium cromoglycate, cladribine, idarubicin and cytosine arabinoside, high-dose cytosine arabinoside, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). The outcome was favorable, with complete hematological remission two years after diagnosis and one year after HSCT.

Conclusions

This case emphasizes the need of an exhaustive laboratory evaluation for the concomitant diagnosis of MCL and AML, and the therapeutic options.

Diagnosis and classification of mastocytosis in non-specialized versus reference centres: a Spanish Network on Mastocytosis (REMA) study on 122 patients

The diagnosis of 'rare diseases', such as mastocytosis, remains a challenge. Despite this, the precise benefits of referral of mastocytosis patients to highly specialized reference centres are poorly defined and whether patients should be managed at non-specialized versus reference centres remains a matter of debate. To evaluate the quality and efficiency of diagnostic procedures performed at the reference centres for mastocytosis in Spain (REMA) versus other non-reference centres, we retrospectively analysed a series of 122 patients, for the overall degree of agreement obtained for the World Health Organization (WHO) diagnostic and classification criteria betwen the referring and REMA centres. Our results showed that not all WHO diagnostic criteria were frequently investigated at the referring centres. Among the five WHO diagnostic criteria, the highest degree of agreement was obtained for serum tryptase levels [median 90% (95% confidence interval 84-96%)]; in turn, the overall agreement was significantly lower for the major histopathological criterion [80% (72-89%)], and the other three minor criteria: cytomorphology [68% (56-80%)] immunophenotyping of BM mast cells [75% (62-87%)] and detection of the KIT mutation [34% (8-60%)]. Referral of patients with diagnostic suspicion of mastocytosis to a multidisciplinary reference centre improves diagnostic efficiency and quality.