4.7 Article

Evidence of serum immunoglobulin abnormalities up to 9.8 years before diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a prospective study

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 114, Issue 24, Pages 4928-4932

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2009-08-237651

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute and the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health [CA62242, CA 107476]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Immune-related deficiencies are well-known complications of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Although recent data indicate that almost all CLL patients are preceded by a monoclonal B-cell lymphocytosis precursor state, patterns of immune defects preceding CLL diagnosis are unclear. We identified 109 persons who developed CLL from the prospective and nationwide Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial with 77 469 participants, with serially collected prediagnostic serum samples. We assayed monoclonal (M)-proteins, kappa/lambda free light chains (FLCs) in prediagnostic obtained up to 9.8 years before CLL diagnosis. The prevalence of an abnormal FLC ratio, M-protein, and hypogammaglobulinemia before CLL diagnosis was 38% (95% confidence interval, 29%-47%), 13% (7%-21%), and 3% (1%-8%), respectively. M-proteins and abnormal FLC ratios were detected up to 9.8 years before CLL diagnosis in a total of 48 persons (44%). Hypogammaglobulinemia was not present until 3 years before the diagnosis of CLL. Among 37 patients with information on tumor cell immunophenotype, an association between immunophenotype and involved FLC (P = .024, Fisher exact test) was observed. Among 61 persons with a normal FLC ratio and without an M-protein, 17 had elevated kappa and/or lambda FLC levels, indicating polyclonal B-cell activation in 17 of 109 (16%) patients. These findings support a role for chronic immune stimulation in CLL genesis. (Blood. 2009; 114: 4928-4932)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available