BACKGROUND: Cytogenetic aberrations are of prognostic significance in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemias and a high detection rate could improve the biological understanding and classification of these diseases. METHODS: Bone-marrow samples from 92 children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia were studied by high-resolution comparative genomic hybridisation (HRCGH) using dynamic standard reference intervals that enhance both specificity and sensitivity in the detection of aberrations. RESULTS: In 80 patients (87%) HRCGH revealed a total of 405 aberrations, mostly whole chromosome gains (n = 265) and partial losses (n = 80). The 25 leukaemias with a gain of more than five whole chromosomes by HRCGH harboured only 7% of all losses. With G-band karyotyping 59 patients (64%) had aberrations. HRCGH revealed more aberrations per patient than did G-band karyotyping (median: 3 vs. 1, P = 0.005), revealed aberrations in 27 of the 34 patients for whom the G-band karyotyping failed or was found to be normal, and specifically revealed more 9p losses (21% vs. 5%, P < 0.005), 12p losses (12% vs. 2%, P < 0.05) and 17q gains (11% vs. 1%, P < 0.01). Compared to the present study, the frequency of patients with aberrant karyotypes was significantly lower in previous conventional CGH studies (64% vs. 87%, P < 0.0001), as was the rate of partial aberrations per patient (1.1% vs. 1.7, P < 0.001), particularly with fewer 6q losses, 9p losses and 17q gains detected. CONCLUSION: HRCGH is superior to conventional CGH as an adjunct to G-band karyotyping as it detects recurrent aberrations at a significantly higher rate than both these techniques.
BACKGROUND: Cytogenetic aberrations are of prognostic significance in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemias and a high detection rate could improve the biological understanding and classification of these diseases. METHODS: Bone-marrow samples from 92 children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia were studied by high-resolution comparative genomic hybridisation (HRCGH) using dynamic standard reference intervals that enhance both specificity and sensitivity in the detection of aberrations. RESULTS: In 80 patients (87%) HRCGH revealed a total of 405 aberrations, mostly whole chromosome gains (n = 265) and partial losses (n = 80). The 25 leukaemias with a gain of more than five whole chromosomes by HRCGH harboured only 7% of all losses. With G-band karyotyping 59 patients (64%) had aberrations. HRCGH revealed more aberrations per patient than did G-band karyotyping (median: 3 vs. 1, P = 0.005), revealed aberrations in 27 of the 34 patients for whom the G-band karyotyping failed or was found to be normal, and specifically revealed more 9p losses (21% vs. 5%, P < 0.005), 12p losses (12% vs. 2%, P < 0.05) and 17q gains (11% vs. 1%, P < 0.01). Compared to the present study, the frequency of patients with aberrant karyotypes was significantly lower in previous conventional CGH studies (64% vs. 87%, P < 0.0001), as was the rate of partial aberrations per patient (1.1% vs. 1.7, P < 0.001), particularly with fewer 6q losses, 9p losses and 17q gains detected. CONCLUSION: HRCGH is superior to conventional CGH as an adjunct to G-band karyotyping as it detects recurrent aberrations at a significantly higher rate than both these techniques.
Authors: Norma J Nowak; Sheila N J Sait; Amer Zeidan; George Deeb; Dan Gaile; Song Liu; LaurieAnn Ford; Paul K Wallace; Eunice S Wang; Meir Wetzler Journal: Cancer Genet Cytogenet Date: 2010-05
Authors: Alison Walker; Krzysztof Mrózek; Jessica Kohlschmidt; Kathleen W Rao; Mark J Pettenati; Lisa J Sterling; Guido Marcucci; Andrew J Carroll; Clara D Bloomfield Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 2012-12-10 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: S R Lalani; J V Thakuria; G F Cox; X Wang; W Bi; M S Bray; C Shaw; S W Cheung; A C Chinault; B A Boggs; Z Ou; E K Brundage; J R Lupski; J Gentile; S Waisbren; A Pursley; L Ma; M Khajavi; G Zapata; R Friedman; J J Kim; J A Towbin; P Stankiewicz; S Schnittger; I Hansmann; T Ai; S Sood; X H Wehrens; J F Martin; J W Belmont; L Potocki Journal: J Med Genet Date: 2008-09-23 Impact factor: 6.318
Authors: Kjeld Schmiegelow; Ibrahim Al-Modhwahi; Mette Klarskov Andersen; Mikael Behrendtz; Erik Forestier; Henrik Hasle; Mats Heyman; Jon Kristinsson; Jacob Nersting; Randi Nygaard; Anne Louise Svendsen; Kim Vettenranta; Richard Weinshilboum Journal: Blood Date: 2009-02-17 Impact factor: 22.113