BACKGROUND & AIMS: Pathogenesis of gastric cancer is driven by an accumulation of genetic changes that to a large extent occur at the chromosomal level. In order to investigate the patterns of chromosomal aberrations in gastric carcinomas, we performed genome-wide microarray based comparative genomic hybridisation (microarray CGH). With this recently developed technique chromosomal aberrations can be studied with high resolution and sensitivity. METHODS: Array CGH was applied to a series of 35 gastric adenocarcinomas using a genome-wide scanning array with 2275 BAC and P1 clones spotted in triplicate. Each clone contains at least one STS for linkage to the sequence of the human genome. These arrays provide an average resolution of 1.4 Mb across the genome. DNA copy number changes were correlated with clinicopathological tumour characteristics as well as survival. RESULTS: All thirty-five cancers showed chromosomal aberrations and 16 of the 35 tumours showed one or more amplifications. The most frequent aberrations are gains of 8q24.2, 8q24.1, 20q13.12, 20q13.2, 7p11.2, 1q32.3, 8p23.1-p23.3, losses of 5q14.1, 18q22.1, 19p13.12-p13.3, 9p21.3-p24.3, 17p13.1-p13.3, 13q31.1, 16q22.1, 21q21.3, and amplifications of 7q21-q22, and 12q14.1-q21.1. These aberrations were correlated to clinicopathological characteristics and survival. Gain of 1q32.3 was significantly correlated with lymph node status (p=0.007). Tumours with loss of 18q22.1, as well as tumours with amplifications were associated with poor survival (p=0.02, both). CONCLUSIONS: Microarray CGH has revealed several chromosomal regions that have not been described before in gastric cancer at this frequency and resolution, such as amplification of at 7q21-q22 and 12q14.1-q21.1, as well gains at 1q32.3, 7p11.2, and losses at 13q13.1. Interestingly, gain of 1q32.3 and loss of 18q22.1 are associated with a bad prognosis indicating that these regions could harbour gene(s) that may determine aggressive tumour behaviour and poor clinical outcome.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Pathogenesis of gastric cancer is driven by an accumulation of genetic changes that to a large extent occur at the chromosomal level. In order to investigate the patterns of chromosomal aberrations in gastric carcinomas, we performed genome-wide microarray based comparative genomic hybridisation (microarray CGH). With this recently developed technique chromosomal aberrations can be studied with high resolution and sensitivity. METHODS: Array CGH was applied to a series of 35 gastric adenocarcinomas using a genome-wide scanning array with 2275 BAC and P1 clones spotted in triplicate. Each clone contains at least one STS for linkage to the sequence of the human genome. These arrays provide an average resolution of 1.4 Mb across the genome. DNA copy number changes were correlated with clinicopathological tumour characteristics as well as survival. RESULTS: All thirty-five cancers showed chromosomal aberrations and 16 of the 35 tumours showed one or more amplifications. The most frequent aberrations are gains of 8q24.2, 8q24.1, 20q13.12, 20q13.2, 7p11.2, 1q32.3, 8p23.1-p23.3, losses of 5q14.1, 18q22.1, 19p13.12-p13.3, 9p21.3-p24.3, 17p13.1-p13.3, 13q31.1, 16q22.1, 21q21.3, and amplifications of 7q21-q22, and 12q14.1-q21.1. These aberrations were correlated to clinicopathological characteristics and survival. Gain of 1q32.3 was significantly correlated with lymph node status (p=0.007). Tumours with loss of 18q22.1, as well as tumours with amplifications were associated with poor survival (p=0.02, both). CONCLUSIONS: Microarray CGH has revealed several chromosomal regions that have not been described before in gastric cancer at this frequency and resolution, such as amplification of at 7q21-q22 and 12q14.1-q21.1, as well gains at 1q32.3, 7p11.2, and losses at 13q13.1. Interestingly, gain of 1q32.3 and loss of 18q22.1 are associated with a bad prognosis indicating that these regions could harbour gene(s) that may determine aggressive tumour behaviour and poor clinical outcome.
Authors: Anna Maria Chiaravalli; Catherine Klersy; Alessandro Vanoli; Andrea Ferretti; Carlo Capella; Enrico Solcia Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2012-03-07 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Tineke E Buffart; Beatriz Carvalho; Nicole C T van Grieken; Wessel N van Wieringen; Marianne Tijssen; Elma Meershoek-Klein Kranenbarg; Henk M W Verheul; Heike I Grabsch; Bauke Ylstra; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Gerrit A Meijer Journal: Oncologist Date: 2012-04-24
Authors: Christine L O'Keefe; Ramon Tiu; Lukasz P Gondek; Jennifer Powers; Karl S Theil; Matt Kalaycio; Alan Lichtin; Mikkael A Sekeres; Jaroslaw P Maciejewski Journal: Exp Hematol Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Tineke E Buffart; Marianne Tijssen; Jamila El-Bchiri; Alex Duval; Mark A van de Wiel; Bauke Ylstra; Gerrit A Meijer; Beatriz Carvalho Journal: BMC Med Genomics Date: 2009-06-29 Impact factor: 3.063
Authors: Ja Seong Bae; Jin Soo Choi; Seung Ho Baik; Woo Chan Park; Byung Joo Song; Jeong Soo Kim; Young Lim; Sang Seol Jung Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2010-04-21 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Omar Kabbarah; Cristina Nogueira; Bin Feng; Rosalynn M Nazarian; Marcus Bosenberg; Min Wu; Kenneth L Scott; Lawrence N Kwong; Yonghong Xiao; Carlos Cordon-Cardo; Scott R Granter; Sridhar Ramaswamy; Todd Golub; Lyn M Duncan; Stephan N Wagner; Cameron Brennan; Lynda Chin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-05-24 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ji Un Kang; Jason Jongho Kang; Kye Chul Kwon; Jong Woo Park; Tae Eun Jeong; Seung Mu Noh; Sun Hoe Koo Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Tineke E Buffart; Nicole C T van Grieken; Marianne Tijssen; Jordy Coffa; Bauke Ylstra; Heike I Grabsch; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Beatriz Carvalho; Gerrit A Meijer Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2009-08-21 Impact factor: 4.064