Literature DB >> 11494114

Evaluation of breast cancer polyclonality by combined chromosome banding and comparative genomic hybridization analysis.

M R Teixeira1, H Tsarouha, S M Kraggerud, N Pandis, E Dimitriadis, J A Andersen, R A Lothe, S Heim.   

Abstract

Cytogenetically unrelated clones have been detected by chromosome banding analysis in many breast carcinomas. Because these karyotypic studies were performed on short-term cultured samples, it may be argued that in vitro selection occurred or that small clones may have arisen during culturing. To address this issue, we analyzed 37 breast carcinomas by G-banding and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), a fluorescent in situ hybridization--based screening technique that does not require culturing or tumor metaphases. All but two of the 37 karyotypically abnormal cases presented copy number changes by CGH. The picture of genomic alterations revealed by the two techniques overlapped only partly. Sometimes the CGH analysis revealed genomic imbalances that belonged to cell populations not picked up by the cytogenetic analysis and in other cases, especially when the karyotypes had many markers and chromosomes with additional material of unknown origin, CGH gave a more reliable overall picture of the copy number gains and losses. However, besides sometimes revealing cell populations with balanced chromosome aberrations or unbalanced changes that nevertheless remained undetected by CGH, G-banding analysis was essential to understand how the genomic imbalances arose in the many cases in which both techniques detected the same clonal abnormalities. Furthermore, because CGH pictures only imbalances present in a significant proportion of the test sample, the very detection by this technique of imbalances belonging to apparently small, cytogenetically unrelated clones of cells proves that these clones must have been present in vivo. This constitutes compelling evidence that the cytogenetic polyclonality observed after short-term culturing of breast carcinomas is not an artifact.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11494114      PMCID: PMC1505591          DOI: 10.1038/sj.neo.7900152

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neoplasia        ISSN: 1476-5586            Impact factor:   5.715


  18 in total

1.  The clonal evolution of tumor cell populations.

Authors:  P C Nowell
Journal:  Science       Date:  1976-10-01       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Karyotypic evolution in breast carcinomas with i(1)(q10) and der(1;16)(q10;p10) as the primary chromosome abnormality.

Authors:  H Tsarouha; N Pandis; G Bardi; M R Teixeira; J A Andersen; S Heim
Journal:  Cancer Genet Cytogenet       Date:  1999-09

3.  Comparative genomic hybridization for molecular cytogenetic analysis of solid tumors.

Authors:  A Kallioniemi; O P Kallioniemi; D Sudar; D Rutovitz; J W Gray; F Waldman; D Pinkel
Journal:  Science       Date:  1992-10-30       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Clonal heterogeneity in breast cancer: karyotypic comparisons of multiple intra- and extra-tumorous samples from 3 patients.

Authors:  M R Teixeira; N Pandis; G Bardi; J A Andersen; F Mitelman; S Heim
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1995-09-27       Impact factor: 7.396

5.  Improved technique for short-term culture and cytogenetic analysis of human breast cancer.

Authors:  N Pandis; S Heim; G Bardi; J Limon; N Mandahl; F Mitelman
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 5.006

6.  Correlation between karyotypic pattern and clincopathologic features in 125 breast cancer cases.

Authors:  N Pandis; I Idvall; G Bardi; Y Jin; L Gorunova; F Mertens; H Olsson; C Ingvar; K Beroukas; F Mitelman; S Heim
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1996-04-10       Impact factor: 7.396

7.  Chromosome analysis of 97 primary breast carcinomas: identification of eight karyotypic subgroups.

Authors:  N Pandis; Y Jin; L Gorunova; C Petersson; G Bardi; I Idvall; B Johansson; C Ingvar; N Mandahl; F Mitelman
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.006

8.  Karyotypic comparisons of multiple tumorous and macroscopically normal surrounding tissue samples from patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  M R Teixeira; N Pandis; G Bardi; J A Andersen; S Heim
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1996-02-15       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 9.  Optimizing comparative genomic hybridization for analysis of DNA sequence copy number changes in solid tumors.

Authors:  O P Kallioniemi; A Kallioniemi; J Piper; J Isola; F M Waldman; J W Gray; D Pinkel
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 5.006

10.  Genetic alterations on chromosome 16 and 17 are important features of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast and are associated with histologic type.

Authors:  C B Vos; N T ter Haar; C Rosenberg; J L Peterse; A M Cleton-Jansen; C J Cornelisse; M J van de Vijver
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Use of Breast-Specific PET Scanners and Comparison with MR Imaging.

Authors:  Deepa Narayanan; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.266

2.  Evaluation of paediatric osteosarcomas by classic cytogenetic and CGH analyses.

Authors:  J R Batanian; L R Cavalli; N M Aldosari; E Ma; C Sotelo-Avila; M B Ramos; J D Rone; C M Thorpe; B R Haddad
Journal:  Mol Pathol       Date:  2002-12

Review 3.  Clonal diversity in carcinomas: its implications for tumour progression and the contribution made to it by epithelial-mesenchymal transitions.

Authors:  J Guy Lyons; Erwin Lobo; Anna M Martorana; Mary R Myerscough
Journal:  Clin Exp Metastasis       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 5.150

4.  Telomerase activity and genetic alterations in primary breast carcinomas.

Authors:  Anna Papadopoulou; Theoni Trangas; Manuel R Teixeira; Sverre Heim; Euthimios Dimitriadis; Haroula Tsarouha; Johan A Andersen; Evangelos Evangelou; Panayiotis Ioannidis; Niki J Agnantis; Nikos Pandis
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.715

5.  Analysis of gene alterations of mitochondrial DNA D-loop regions to determine breast cancer clonality.

Authors:  S Masuda; T Kadowaki; N Kumaki; X Tang; Y Tokuda; S Yoshimura; S Takekoshi; R Y Osamura
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Copy number amplification of ENSA promotes the progression of triple-negative breast cancer via cholesterol biosynthesis.

Authors:  Yi-Yu Chen; Jing-Yu Ge; Si-Yuan Zhu; Zhi-Ming Shao; Ke-Da Yu
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-02-10       Impact factor: 17.694

7.  Profile of Chromosomal Alterations, Chromosomal Instability and Clonal Heterogeneity in Colombian Farmers Exposed to Pesticides.

Authors:  María Paula Meléndez-Flórez; Duvan Sebastián Valbuena; Sebastián Cepeda; Nelson Rangel; Maribel Forero-Castro; María Martínez-Agüero; Milena Rondón-Lagos
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 4.599

8.  On the Power of Additional and Complex Chromosomal Aberrations in CML.

Authors:  Karin M Greulich-Bode; Barbara Heinze
Journal:  Curr Genomics       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.236

9.  Assessment of clonal relationships in ipsilateral and bilateral multiple breast carcinomas by comparative genomic hybridisation and hierarchical clustering analysis.

Authors:  M R Teixeira; F R Ribeiro; L Torres; N Pandis; J A Andersen; R A Lothe; S Heim
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-08-16       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Examining metastatic behavior within 3D bioprinted vasculature for the validation of a 3D computational flow model.

Authors:  W F Hynes; M Pepona; C Robertson; J Alvarado; K Dubbin; M Triplett; J J Adorno; A Randles; M L Moya
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 14.136

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.