Abstract Background Serum protein electrophoresis (SPEP) and serum immunofixation electrophoresis (IFE) analyses are mainstays in the initial diagnosis, risk stratification, and evaluating treatment response in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in accordance with the International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Published reports have demonstrated that therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) used to treat MM (e.g. anti-CD38 IgG-kappa) are detectable by SPEP and IFE, which may interfere with accurate evaluation of complete response. Recently, Teclistamab (Tecvayli®; Janssen Biotech, Horsham Township, PA), a humanized bispecific IgG-lambda mAb targeting B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) and CD3 on T cells was approved for treating patients with penta-refractory MM. In contrast with other IgG-kappa therapeutic mAbs, the degree to which Teclistamab may interfere with detection and quantification of monoclonal proteins is unknown. Therefore, we sought to assess the interference of Teclistamab therapy on routine SPEP and IFE analysis. Methods Patients treated with Teclistamab were identified by retrospective review of electronic medical records. Teclistamab (90 mg/mL) was spiked into a remnant patient sample with IgG lambda MM at a final concentration of 10 μg/mL, which corresponds to ½Cmax values in patients infused with Teclistamab. SPEP and IFE were performed using the Helena SPIFE Touch instrument. Computer-assisted densitometry was used to quantify monoclonal proteins in the gamma region of SPEP gels. Results In several patients with refractory MM treated with Teclistamab, IFE analysis revealed IgG lambda or lambda light chain monoclonal proteins, which were inconsistent with previously-identified monoclonal proteins (e.g. IgG kappa). In one patient diagnosed with IgG lambda MM, spiking 10 μg/mL Teclistamab increased M-spike abundance by approximately 0.15 g/dL when quantified by SPEP. Conclusions In patients with relapsed or refractory MM, treatment with Teclistamab may confound accurate clinical assessment of complete response by SPEP and IFE methods. Increased awareness of this preanalytical interference is necessary to guide clinical decision making.