4.7 Review

Understanding the Bioactivity and Prognostic Implication of Commonly Used Surface Antigens in Multiple Myeloma

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
Volume 11, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm11071809

Keywords

surface antigens; multiple myeloma; markers; flow cytometry

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The progression of multiple myeloma relies on its interaction with the bone marrow microenvironment and the immune system, which are mediated by specific surface antigens. This review focuses on commonly used surface antigens in flow cytometry analysis to identify and distinguish malignant and normal plasma cells, as well as their implications in prognosis and treatment.
Multiple myeloma (MM) progression is dependent on its interaction with the bone marrow microenvironment and the immune system and is mediated by key surface antigens. Some antigens promote adhesion to the bone marrow matrix and stromal cells, while others are involved in intercellular interactions that result in differentiation of B-cells to plasma cells (PC). These interactions are also involved in malignant transformation of the normal PC to MM PC as well as disease progression. Here, we review selected surface antigens that are commonly used in the flow cytometry analysis of MM for identification of plasma cells (PC) and the discrimination between normal and malignant PC as well as prognostication. These include the markers: CD38, CD138, CD45, CD19, CD117, CD56, CD81, CD27, and CD28. Furthermore, we will discuss the novel marker CD24 and its involvement in MM. The bioactivity of each antigen is reviewed, as well as its expression on normal vs. malignant PC, prognostic implications, and therapeutic utility. Understanding the role of these specific surface antigens, as well as complex co-expressions of combinations of antigens, may allow for a more personalized prognostic monitoring and treatment of MM patients.

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