MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2983701330 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-122187

Peripheral Blood Cell Sorting Strategies for Transcriptomic Analysis in Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia

2019· article· en· W2983701330 on OpenAlexaff
Moritz Binder, Ryan M. Carr, Nathalie Droin, Abhishek A. Mangaonkar, Giacomo Coltro, Luciana L. Almada, David L. Marks, Kurt Berger, Terra L. Lasho, Naseema Gangat, Christopher L. Pin, Martín E. Fernández-Zapico, Éric Solary, Mrinal M. Patnaik

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronic myelomonocytic leukemiaBiologyCD34TranscriptomeHaematopoiesisMyeloidImmunologyStem cellCancer researchMolecular biologyComputational biologyBone marrowGeneticsGeneMyelodysplastic syndromesGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) is a clonal hematopoietic neoplasm characterized by sustained peripheral blood (PB) monocytosis and an inherent risk for leukemic transformation. Clonal origins of the disease can be detected in hematopoietic progenitor cells (CD34+/CD38-), while the complete spectrum of mutational evolution can be seen in circulating monocytes (CD14+). Cell sorting strategies have been employed to select cells in CMML, and while there are adequate monocyte numbers in the PB, there are very few circulating progenitor cells. In addition, attrition related to the selection process significantly depletes primary cells available for biological experiments and multiomics studies such as RNA-seq, ChIP-seq, ATAC-seq, and DIP-seq. While single-cell methods may be able to overcome this challenge, bulk sequencing methods remain a robust and cost-effective approach. We hypothesized that, secondary to the stem cell origin of this disease and significant myeloproliferation, PB mononuclear cells (MNC) would provide comparable results with regards to transcriptomic analysis, in comparison to cell selection procedures. Methods: Peripheral blood obtained from 15 molecularly annotated patients with WHO-defined CMML was ACK-lysed and subjected to a Ficoll procedure for collection of MNC. MNC were left unsorted (n=5) or further selected for CD34+/CD38- (n=5) and CD14+ (n=5) using a fully automated RoboSep-S (StemCell Technologies) protocol. All samples were then subjected to bulk whole transcriptome shotgun sequencing (using Illumina TruSeq and an Illumina HiSeq 4000). After data quality control, counts of detectable transcripts were log2-normalized and Pearson's product-moment correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate the correlation between the two cell-sorting strategies and unsorted cells in terms of detectable transcripts. To visualize sample differences log2-normalized transcripts counts were centered and scaled per gene for a select number of genes relevant to myeloid biology as well as a number of housekeeping genes. Results: Fifteen patients with WHO-defined CMML, median age 69 years (55-73 years), 66% male, were included. Next generation sequencing for somatic mutations was performed on PB MNC obtained at CMML diagnosis (Figure 1, top heatmap). Considering the small sample size, mutations were evenly distributed among groups with the exception of ASXL1 (higher frequency in CD14+ and CD34+/CD38- cells), ZRSR2 (higher frequency in unsorted cells), and TET2 (lower frequency in CD14+ cells). The three groups were also well matched with regards to other CMML-related variables such as WHO and FAB morphological subtypes, cytogenetic abnormalities, and risk stratification by the Mayo Molecular Model. Transcriptomic analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between the median number of log2-normalized detectable transcripts in unsorted cells and CD34+/CD38- cells (ρ = 0.96, p < 0.001, top scatterplot). Likewise, there was a strong positive correlation between the median number of log2-normalized detectable transcripts in unsorted cells and CD14+ cells (ρ = 0.91, p < 0.001, bottom scatterplot). The latter correlation was marginally lower, which was explained by increased global gene expression in 3 of the 5 CD14+ samples (bottom heatmap). Increased gene expression in these 3 samples involved key myeloid genes and housekeeping genes known to have stable expression across human tissues alike. In comparison to PB MNC, both cell sorting strategies resulted in significant depletion of primary cells required for other experiments, and for procedures such as ChIP-seq, DIP-seq and ATAC-seq (CD34+/CD38- had greater depletion than CD14+). Additional experiments to assess this strategy for the above mentioned epigenetic studies are currently being planned. Conclusions: Accounting for sample differences, different cell sorting strategies (unsorted, CD34+/CD38- selection, and CD14+ selection) yielded similar results when performing bulk transcriptomic assessments on PB MNC from patients with CMML. For the purpose of gene expression profiling there was no clear advantage with CD34+/CD38- or CD14+ selection. These results support the use of unsorted cells for bulk transcriptomic analysis in CMML. Figure 1 Disclosures Patnaik: Stem Line Pharmaceuticals.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→