[Novel T-cell clonality assessment using T-cell receptor beta constant region 1 and 2 antibodies in T-cell lymphoproliferative disorders].

INTRODUCTION

T-cell receptor clonality testing is a routine diagnostic method based on the detection of T-cell receptor gene rearrangements. Its advantage is the molecular confirmation of clonality, but its disadvantage - compared to flow cytometry - is the lower sensitivity, the actual long testing duration, and the lack of phenotypic information. More recently, T-cell receptor clonality testing can also be performed using a new, internationally recommended flow cytometry method. A simplified and efficient approach was previously not available in routine clinical diagnostics.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to collect the experiences gained from the combined use of antibodies designed for the constant beta-chain of the T-cell receptor based on the latest recommendations described in the literature and to compare them with the results of conventional T-cell receptor clonality testing method.

METHOD: The test is based on the use of two types of monoclonal antibodies conjugated with a fluorescent dye designed for the constant beta-chain of the T-cell receptor and investigates the deviations from normal expression ratios, similar to the testing of kappa-lambda immunoglobulin light chains used in the diagnosis of B-cell neoplasias.

RESULTS

Among the 54 samples analyzed, no lymphoproliferative disorder was detected in 20 cases. In 11 cases, a clonal population was identified, showing good concordance with the results of conventional diagnostic methods. In the remaining 23 cases, minor phenotypic abnormalities, shifts in cell population ratios, and the presence of minor monoclonal populations were observed.

DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of the 54 samples, the test proved to be suitable not only for the identification of clear T and NKT cell clones, but also for the identification of minor clonal populations, furthermore, it may offer faster diagnosis of T-cell diseases. Orv Hetil. 2026; 167(15): 576-584.