About Critical Values

Critical Values is the go-to resource for the entire laboratory team, providing insight and information on the latest research, information, and issues within pathology and laboratory medicine. The print and online magazine invites submissions on topics including, but not limited to, advocacy, education, technology, global health, workforce, workplace best practices, and leadership.

Questions? Comments? Email us at criticalvalues@ascp.org.

ASCP Staff Advisers

E. Blair Holladay, PhD, MASCP, SCT(ASCP)CM
Chief Executive Officer 

Critical Values Staff

Molly Strzelecki  Editor 

Susan Montgomery  Contributing Editor

Martin Tyminski  Creative Director  

Jennifer Brinson  Art Direction and Design  

Our Recent Articles

Cerebrospinal Fluid Monitoring in Childhood Leukemia: Laboratory Medicine’s Central Role in an Ongoing Oncology Success Story

May 9, 2022, 10:17 AM by Alexandra E. Kovach

Cure of childhood leukemia is arguably one of the greatest medical achievements of the last century.1-3 B-lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL), the most common cancer of childhood, was previously a uniformly fatal disease. Famously, pathologist Sidney Farber’s4-6 and others’7 introduction of folate antagonists produced cures and led to the recognition of the central nervous system (CNS), specifically the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), as a sanctuary site for disease.8,9 Prophylactic intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy remains standard of care today, having largely replaced cranial irradiation.10-13 Indeed, the largest incremental improvement in leukemia outcomes over the last century, even compared to improvements in supportive therapy, is attributable to CNS therapy.8,14 Moreover, staging of CSF at initial leukemia is a significant independent prognostic factor15 that requires accurate manual CSF total nucleated cell (TNC) differential counts and blast identification.16 

Skilled clinical laboratory professionals are therefore crucial to accurate CSF staging and monitoring, the development of standardized cytocentrifugation having been fundamental to this practice.17-21 In the U.S., modern Children’s Oncology Group (COG) clinical trials as well as institutional standard-of-care (SOC) protocols for ALL (B-cell and T-cell) utilize CSF status categories based on the absence or presence of blasts on manual review of cytomorphology on concentrated CSF cytospin slides stained with Wright Giemsa and, when blasts are present, the TNC based on unconcentrated manual count by hematocytometer chamber, which has its roots in older protocols.22-24 Current categories predictive of clinical behavior are: CNS1 = no blasts present, CNS2 = blasts present in a sample with a TNC <5 cells/mL, and CNS3 = blasts present in a sample with a TNC ³5 cells/mL.25 CSF TNC and cytomorphologic evaluation is repeated at each lumbar puncture (LP) prior to intrathecal chemotherapy administration to ensure CSF clearance or maintained absence of blasts.26,27 

Lymphoblasts, while often stereotypical and reproducibly identifiable, can show significant morphologic variation, particularly in body fluid preparations such as CSF. Typical lymphoblasts (Figure 1A) are slightly larger than small mature lymphocytes with an increased nuclear:cytoplasmic ratio, smooth to notched nuclear contours, finely dispersed chromatin, and inconspicuous to absent small nucleoli.  The scant cytoplasm may show occasional small pale vacuoles and/or fine granules. However, sample centrifugation, age, temperature and staining as well as interval intrathecal therapy and leukemia genetics may affect cellular morphology of lymphoblasts (Figure 1B, 1C) as well as that of normal CSF cells, which include small mature lymphocytes (Figure 1D) and monocytes. Inherent challenges with CSF blast morphology have led many pathology groups to pair cytospin evaluation with CSF flow cytometry for immunophenotyping and therefore definite cell identification (Figure 1E-H, corresponding right panels). Some groups are utilizing flow only in morphologically challenging cases, while others are running flow by routine.28,29 Flow may also provide a prognostic staging advantage over conventional cytology.30,31 


Figure 1. Spectrum of lymphoblast morphology in cerebrospinal fluid cytomorphology preparations.  

Left column: Photomicrographs. A. B lymphoblast at diagnosis with typical morphology, B. T lymphoblast at diagnosis resembling mature lymphocyte, C. B lymphoblasts at relapse resembling abnormal immature monocytes, possible due to centrifugation and/or prior therapy, D. Normal mature lymphocyte (all images: 1,000x magnification).  
Right column: Corresponding flow cytometry data confirming the lineage of each cell population. E. B lymphoblasts, F. T lymphoblasts, G. B lymphoblasts, H. Mature T cells. Samples were stored for up to 72 hours in preservation media prior to flow cytometric acquisition. Red = abnormal populations. 


Should flow cytometry by standard of care in CSF staging and monitoring for leukemia? 
 
There are a number of clinical and technical considerations that necessitate caution given current data. First, existing COG thresholds and associated prognoses were established based on cytospin morphology assessment. Flow cytometry is known to be more sensitive than cytomorphology for lymphoblast identification,30,32,33 such that its use under the current staging system would be expected to lead to a subset of low cellularity, morphologically negative diagnostic staging samples (CNS1) being upstaged to positive (CNS2) and leading to unnecessary overtreatment.34-36 Second, cells in paucicellular samples, including CSF, tend to degenerate rapidly. Flow cytometry, which relies on intact cells for cell surface marker identification, is optimally performed on paucicellular samples shortly after sample procurement and/or following addition of cell preservation media.37-39 A prospective clinical trial utilizing sample stabilization and central flow cytometry review is needed to answer this question. If feasible, flow cytometry may provide a more reproducible method for ALL assessment in CSF compared with traditional cytomorphology.  

What about molecular assays? 
In primary large B-cell lymphoma of the central nervous system (primary CNS lymphoma), for example, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for MYD88 gene mutation in CSF is a sensitive and specific marker,40 and multiplex genomic assays incorporating MYD88 have recently been proposed.41,42 In addition to flow cytometry, PCR and next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays for clonal immunoglobulin heavy chain (IgH) and/or T-cell receptor (TCR) gene sequences, are increasingly being used for minimal/measurable residual disease monitoring of leukemia in bone marrow and peripheral blood.43 For CSF, however, IGH and/or TCR sequencing could be non-specific, showing so-called “pseudo-clonal” sequences based on amplification of rare sequences in paucicellular samples. As with applying flow cytometry to CSF samples from children who would otherwise be staged as CNS1 and do well with current therapeutic protocols, the sensitivity of molecular techniques may be inappropriately high for the clinical question at hand. Despite the available technologies, we must “first do no harm.” 

In summary, CSF evaluation in the staging, monitoring, and treatment of standard treatment of childhood leukemia is a modern medical success story highly dependent on laboratory medical professionals. Best practices for use of technologies including flow cytometry and molecular assays on CSF assessment in leukemia remain to be determined over the next, likely fewer than 100, years. 

References 

1. Pui CH, Evans WE. A 50-year journey to cure childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Semin Hematol 2013;50:185-96. 

2. Silverman LB, Weinstein HJ. Treatment of childhood leukemia. Curr Opin Oncol 1997;9:26-33. 

3. Pui CH, Mullighan CG, Evans WE, Relling MV. Pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia: where are we going and how do we get there? Blood 2012;120:1165-74. 

4. Farber S, Diamond LK. Temporary remissions in acute leukemia in children produced by folic acid antagonist, 4-aminopteroyl-glutamic acid. N Engl J Med 1948;238:787-93. 

5. Sidney Farber MD: A career in cancer research driven by the power of an idea. (Accessed November 12, 2021, at https://www.dana-farber.org/about-us/history-and-milestones/sidney-farber,-md/.) 

6. Miller D. A tribute to Sidney Farber - The father of modern chemotherapy. Br J Haematol 2006;134:20-6. 

7. Frei III E, Freireich EJ, Gehan E, et al. Studies of sequential and combination antimetabolite therapy in acute leukemia: 6-mercaptopurine and methotrexate. Blood 1961;18:431-54. 

8. Burchenal JH. History of intrathecal prophylaxis and therapy of meningeal leukemia. Cancer Drug Deliv 1983;1:87-92. 

9. Broder LE, Carter SK. Meningeal Leukaemia. New York and London: Plenum Press; 1972. 

10. Conter V, Aricò M, Valsecchi MG, et al. Extended intrathecal methotrexate may replace cranial irradiation for prevention of CNS relapse in children with intermediate-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated with Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster-based intensive chemotherapy. The Associazione Italiana di Ematologia ed Oncologia Pediatrica. J Clin Oncol 1995;13:2497-502. 

11. Aur RJ, Simone J, Hustu HO, et al. Central nervous system therapy and combination chemotherapy of childhood lymphocytic leukemia. Blood 1971;37:272-81. 

12. Hustu HO, Aur RJ, Verzosa MS, Simone JV, Pinkel D. Prevention of central nervous system leukemia by irradiation. Cancer 1973;32:585-97. 

13. Freeman AI, Weinberg V, Brecher ML, et al. Comparison of intermediate-dose methotrexate with cranial irradiation for the post-induction treatment of acute lymphocytic leukemia in children. N Engl J Med 1983;308:477-84. 

14. Pui CH, Mahmoud HH, Rivera GK, et al. Early intensification of intrathecal chemotherapy virtually eliminates central nervous system relapse in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 1998;92:411-5. 

15. Smith M, Arthur D, Camitta B, et al. Uniform approach to risk classification and treatment assignment for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:18-24. 

16. Nies BA, Malmgren RA, Chu EW, Del Vecchio PR, Thomas LB, Freireich EJ. Cerebrospinal fluid cytology in patients with acute leukemia. Cancer 1965;18:1385-91. 

17. Addiego JE, Jr., Woodruff K. Cytocentrifugation in central nervous system leukemia. J Pediatr 1973;82:891-2. 

18. Chu JY, Freiling P, Wassilak S. Simple method for the cytological examination of cerebrospinal fluid. J Clin Pathol 1977;30:486-7. 

19. Evans DI, O'Rouke C, Jones PM. The cerebrospinal fluid in acute leukaemia of childhood: studies with the Cytocentrifuge. J Clin Pathol 1974;27:226-30. 

20. Drewinko B, Sullivan MP, Martin T. Use of the cytocentrifuge in the diagnosis of meningeal leukemia. Cancer 1973;31:1331-6. 

21. Del Vecchio PR, De Witt SH, Borelli JI, Ward JB, Wood TA, Jr., Malmgren RA. Application of millipore filtration technique to cytologic material. J Natl Cancer Inst 1959;22:427-31. 

22. Aronson AS, Garwicz S, Sörnäs R. Cytology of the cerebrospinal fluid in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Pediatr 1974;85:222-4. 

23. Castleberry RP, Moreno H, Wallace LS. Letter: Cytologic analysis of cerebrospinal fluid. J Pediatr 1975;86:989-90. 

24. Sörnäs R. A new method for the cytological examination of the cerebrospinal fluid. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1967;30:568-77. 

25. Winick N, Devidas M, Chen S, et al. Impact of Initial CSF Findings on Outcome Among Patients With National Cancer Institute Standard- and High-Risk B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:2527-34. 

26. Burger B, Zimmermann M, Mann G, et al. Diagnostic cerebrospinal fluid examination in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: significance of low leukocyte counts with blasts or traumatic lumbar puncture. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:184-8. 

27. Popov A, Henze G, Verzhbitskaya T, et al. Absolute count of leukemic blasts in cerebrospinal fluid as detected by flow cytometry is a relevant prognostic factor in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2019;145:1331-9. 

28. de Graaf MT, de Jongste AH, Kraan J, Boonstra JG, Sillevis Smitt PA, Gratama JW. Flow cytometric characterization of cerebrospinal fluid cells. Cytometry B Clin Cytom 2011;80:271-81. 

29. Kovach AE, DeLelys ME, Kelliher AS, et al. Diagnostic utility of cerebrospinal fluid flow cytometry in patients with and without prior hematologic malignancy. Am J Hematol 2014;89:978-84. 

30. Thastrup M, Marquart HV, Levinsen M, et al. Flow cytometric detection of leukemic blasts in cerebrospinal fluid predicts risk of relapse in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a Nordic Society of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology study. Leukemia 2020;34:336-46. 

31. Ranta S, Nilsson F, Harila-Saari A, et al. Detection of central nervous system involvement in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia by cytomorphology and flow cytometry of the cerebrospinal fluid. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2015;62:951-6. 

32. Levinsen M, Marquart HV, Groth-Pedersen L, et al. Leukemic blasts are present at low levels in spinal fluid in one-third of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia cases. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2016;63:1935-42. 

33. Jaime-Pérez JC, Borrego-López MF, Jiménez-Castillo RA, et al. Comparison of conventional cytomorphology, flow cytometry immunophenotyping, and automated cell counting of CSF for detection of CNS involvement in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Int J Lab Hematol 2018;40:169-74. 

34. Gilchrist GS, Tubergen DG, Sather HN, et al. Low numbers of CSF blasts at diagnosis do not predict for the development of CNS leukemia in children with intermediate-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a Childrens Cancer Group report. J Clin Oncol 1994;12:2594-600. 

35. Tubergen DG, Cullen JW, Boyett JM, et al. Blasts in CSF with a normal cell count do not justify alteration of therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia in remission: a Childrens Cancer Group study. J Clin Oncol 1994;12:273-8. 

36. Mahmoud HH, Rivera GK, Hancock ML, et al. Low leukocyte counts with blast cells in cerebrospinal fluid of children with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 1993;329:314-9. 

37. de Graaf MT, van den Broek PD, Kraan J, et al. Addition of serum-containing medium to cerebrospinal fluid prevents cellular loss over time. J Neurol 2011;258:1507-12. 

38. de Jongste AH, Kraan J, van den Broek PD, et al. Use of TransFix™ cerebrospinal fluid storage tubes prevents cellular loss and enhances flow cytometric detection of malignant hematological cells after 18 hours of storage. Cytometry B Clin Cytom 2014;86:272-9. 

39. Mai QS, He JX, Qin JL, et al. [Detection Rate of Central Nervous System Leukemia Can Be Improved by Cell Preservation Solution]. Zhongguo Shi Yan Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi 2019;27:14-9. 

40. Hiemcke-Jiwa LS, Minnema MC, Radersma-van Loon JH, et al. The use of droplet digital PCR in liquid biopsies: A highly sensitive technique for MYD88 p.(L265P) detection in cerebrospinal fluid. Hematol Oncol 2018;36:429-35. 

41. Gupta M, Burns EJ, Georgantas NZ, et al. A rapid genotyping panel for detection of primary central nervous system lymphoma. Blood 2021;138:382-6. 

42. Ferreri AJM, Calimeri T, Lopedote P, et al. MYD88 L265P mutation and interleukin-10 detection in cerebrospinal fluid are highly specific discriminating markers in patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma: results from a prospective study. Br J Haematol 2021;193:497-505. 

43. Kovach AE, Raca G, Bhojwani D, Wood BL. Next-Generation Sequencing for Measurable Residual Disease Assessment in Acute Leukemia. Advances in Molecular Pathology 2021;4:49-63.