Q & A |
July 2011 Editor: Q. What method other than gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry can be used to test methylmalonic acid, and do you know of any vendors that support the method? A. Methylmalonic acid, or MMA, is important for normal fatty acid synthesis (and, notably, maintenance of the myelin sheath that surrounds nerves in the white matter of the central nervous system as well as sensory and motor nerves in the peripheral nervous system). The important reaction is the formation of succinyl Co-enzyme A (CoA) from methylmalonyl CoA. This step is catalyzed by the enzyme methylmalonyl CoA mutase; vitamin B12 is a cofactor. Measuring elevated levels of MMA helps identify the abnormality in pediatric patients with methylmalonic acidemia due to enzyme deficiency, as well as adult patients with vitamin B12 deficiency. Tina Cowan, PhD, my colleague at Stanford who is director of biochemical genetics, reports that MMA testing for suspected enzyme deficiency is roughly equally divided between gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and tandem MS. It is likely that testing for suspected B12 deficiency is similarly divided between these two methods. We are not aware of any (potentially simpler) commercially available assays. If MMA testing for vitamin B12 deficiency becomes more widespread, this might change. But, for the moment, there is still significant controversy about this use of MMA.1 Reference 1. Solomon LR. Cobalamin-responsive disorders in the ambulatory care setting: unreliability of cobalamin, methylmalonic acid, and homocysteine testing. Blood. 2005;105:978–985. James D. Faix, MD Q. Our hematology/oncology clinicians have begun requesting that CD68 be performed on all cases of newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma. These requests stem from a March 11, 2010 article in the New England Journal of Medicine, “Tumor-associated macrophages and survival in classic Hodgkin’s lymphoma.” Though photos with the article show CD68 immunohistochemical analyses of samples obtained from a patient in each of the treatment-success and -failure groups, there is uncertainty about how to interpret the CD68 stain, specifically in cases with intermediate scores. Do you have suggestions or comments? A. The article by Steidl and colleagues demonstrated that an increased number of CD68+ macrophages correlated with a shortened progression-free survival and greater likelihood of relapse after autologous stem cell transplantation, resulting in shortened disease-specific survival. In multivariate analysis, this adverse prognostic factor outperformed the international prognostic score for disease-specific survival. The 10-year disease-specific survival rate was significantly lower among subjects with a CD68 immunohistochemistry score of three (59.6 percent) than among those with a score of two (67.4 percent) or one (88.6 percent). Secondary treatment administered with curative intent failed in only 12.5 percent of subjects with a CD68 IHC score of one, compared with a failure rate of 51.7 percent in subjects with a score of two and 62.5 percent in subjects with a score of three. In particular, there was a significant correlation between the failure of autologous stem cell transplantation and a score of more than one. The absence of CD68+ macrophages in patients with limited-stage disease defined a subgroup of patients with a long-term disease-specific survival of 100 percent with the use of current treatment strategies. According to the supplementary appendix the authors of the article provided, the scoring of CD68 was performed as follows:
The study by Steidl, et al., is promising in that it recognizes the role of the microenvironment, and specifically macrophages, in Hodgkin lymphoma prognosis. The issues regarding interpretation of CD68 staining in Hodgkin lymphoma are valid, however, and have yet to be rigorously tested in the literature. Until such time that they are tested, there are limitations on the application of this stain on routine cases. If clinicians insist on obtaining this information, it seems reasonable to provide it to them with the understanding that scoring is not straightforward, or even reproducible, in many cases. It is expected that recognition of cases with very low (<five percent) and very high (>50 percent) numbers of macrophages, as shown in the article, will be straightforward, while scoring of the intermediate cases will be problematic. On a practical level, recognition of score one, which identifies a group of patients with excellent prognosis, might be more important than making the distinction between scores two and three. This is clearly an area that warrants further investigation. At the moment, CD68 staining in Hodgkin lymphoma should be interpreted with caution, especially in cases with intermediate (five to 50 percent) numbers of macrophages Reference 1. Steidl CF, Lee T, Shah SP, et al. Tumor-associated macrophages and survival in classic Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:875–885. Randa Alsabeh, MD Dr. Kiechle is medical director of clinical pathology, Memorial Healthcare, Hollywood, Fla. |