Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 167

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

High-throughput VDJ sequencing for quantification of minimal residual disease in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and immune reconstitution assessment

Open access
Logan, Aaron C., Gao, Hong, Wang, Chunlin, Sahaf, Bita, Jones, Carol D., Marshall, Eleanor L., Buño, Ismael, Armstrong, Randall, Fire, Andrew Z., Weinberg, Kenneth I., Mindrinos, Michael, Zehnder, James L., Boyd, Scott D., Xiao, Wenzhong, Davis, Ronald W., Miklos, David B.·2011·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The primary cause of poor outcome following allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is disease recurrence. Detection of increasing minimal residual disease (MRD) following HCT may permit early intervention to prevent clinical relapse; however, MRD quantification remains an uncommon diagnostic test because of logistical and financial barriers to widespread use. Here we describe a method for quantifying CLL MRD using widely available consensus primers for amplification of all Ig heavy chain (IGH) genes in a mixture of peripheral blood mononuclear cells, followed by high-throughput sequencing (HTS) for disease-specific IGH sequence quantification. To achieve accurate MRD quantification, we developed a systematic bioinformatic methodology to aggregate cancer clone sequence variants arising from systematic and random artifacts occurring during IGH-HTS. We then compared the sensitivity of IGH-HTS, flow cytometry, and allele-specific oligonucleotide PCR for MRD quantification in 28 samples collected from 6 CLL patients following allogeneic HCT. Using amplimer libraries generated with consensus primers from patient blood samples, we demonstrate the sensitivity of IGH-HTS with 454 pyrosequencing to be 10 −5 , with a high correlation between quantification by allele-specific oligonucleotide PCR and IGH-HTS ( r = 0.85). From the same dataset used to quantify MRD, IGH-HTS also allowed us to profile IGH repertoire reconstitution after HCT—information not provided by the other MRD methods. IGH-HTS using consensus primers will broaden the availability of MRD quantification in CLL and other B cell malignancies, and this approach has potential for quantitative evaluation of immune diversification following transplant and nontransplant therapies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1118357109

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 167

Metadata

Authors
Logan, A. C., Gao, H., Wang, C., Sahaf, B., Jones, C. D., Marshall, E. L., Buño, I., Armstrong, R., Fire, A. Z., Weinberg, K. I., Mindrinos, M., Zehnder, J. L., Boyd, S. D., Xiao, W., Davis, R. W., & Miklos, D. B.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2011-12-12
Volume
108
Issue
52
Pages
21194-21199
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2171240476
Cited by
167
References
0
FWCI
7.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: High-throughput VDJ sequencing for quantification of minimal residual disease in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and immune reconstitution assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1118357109
The paper
Logan, A. C., Gao, H., Wang, C., Sahaf, B., Jones, C. D., Marshall, E. L., Buño, I., Armstrong, R., Fire, A. Z., Weinberg, K. I., Mindrinos, M., Zehnder, J. L., Boyd, S. D., Xiao, W., Davis, R. W., & Miklos, D. B. (2011). High-throughput VDJ sequencing for quantification of minimal residual disease in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and immune reconstitution assessment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118357109

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.