BACKGROUND: Array comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) is a powerful method for the genetic analysis of lesional and normal tissues to identify genomic imbalances associated with malignancies. However, the use of this technique with DNA extracted from archival formalin fixed, paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens, the most widely available resource for retrospective studies, is subject to quantitative and qualitative limitations. In this report, the suitability and integrity of the DNA extracted from FFPE MCF7 breast cancer cells fixed for different periods of time for array CGH applications were examined. RESULTS: Using our established cDNA microarray protocol in conjunction with whole genome amplification methods, the genetic profiles of freshly harvested MCF7 cells and their matched FFPE counterparts were analysed. Congruent profiles between FFPE MCF7 cells and their fresh counterpart and between amplified and non-amplified FFPE MCF7 cells were observed. Our results demonstrate that formalin fixation of <20 hours has no significant adverse effect on the integrity of DNA for array CGH studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings attest to the fidelity of our array CGH methods to effectively examine material recovered from FFPE tissue specimens for microarray applications. This in turn has great potential to identify novel diagnostic and prognostic markers for human disease.
BACKGROUND: Array comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) is a powerful method for the genetic analysis of lesional and normal tissues to identify genomic imbalances associated with malignancies. However, the use of this technique with DNA extracted from archival formalin fixed, paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens, the most widely available resource for retrospective studies, is subject to quantitative and qualitative limitations. In this report, the suitability and integrity of the DNA extracted from FFPE MCF7 breast cancer cells fixed for different periods of time for array CGH applications were examined. RESULTS: Using our established cDNA microarray protocol in conjunction with whole genome amplification methods, the genetic profiles of freshly harvested MCF7 cells and their matched FFPE counterparts were analysed. Congruent profiles between FFPE MCF7 cells and their fresh counterpart and between amplified and non-amplified FFPE MCF7 cells were observed. Our results demonstrate that formalin fixation of <20 hours has no significant adverse effect on the integrity of DNA for array CGH studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings attest to the fidelity of our array CGH methods to effectively examine material recovered from FFPE tissue specimens for microarray applications. This in turn has great potential to identify novel diagnostic and prognostic markers for human disease.
Authors: S Kösel; E M Grasbon-Frodl; K Arima; L Chimelli; M Hahn; Y Hashizume; C Hulette; K Ikeda; P F Jacobsen; M Jones; M Kobayashi; S Love; T Mizutani; S Rosemberg; A Sasaki; T W Smith; H Takahashi; A O Vortmeyer; M B Graeber Journal: Neurogenetics Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 2.660
Authors: John W Gillespie; Carolyn J M Best; Verena E Bichsel; Kristina A Cole; Susan F Greenhut; Stephen M Hewitt; Mamoun Ahram; Yvonne B Gathright; Maria J Merino; Robert L Strausberg; Jonathan I Epstein; Stanley R Hamilton; Gallya Gannot; Galina V Baibakova; Valerie S Calvert; Michael J Flaig; Rodrigo F Chuaqui; Judi C Herring; John Pfeifer; Emmanuel F Petricoin; W Marston Linehan; Paul H Duray; G Steven Bova; Michael R Emmert-Buck Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Nikolas H Stoecklein; Andreas Erbersdobler; Oleg Schmidt-Kittler; Joachim Diebold; Julian A Schardt; Jakob R Izbicki; Christoph A Klein Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: P C Burger; A Y Minn; J S Smith; T J Borell; A E Jedlicka; B K Huntley; P T Goldthwaite; R B Jenkins; B G Feuerstein Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: F Forozan; E H Mahlamäki; O Monni; Y Chen; R Veldman; Y Jiang; G C Gooden; S P Ethier; A Kallioniemi; O P Kallioniemi Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2000-08-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: S Kytölä; J Rummukainen; A Nordgren; R Karhu; F Farnebo; J Isola; C Larsson Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 2000-07 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Fengfei Wang; Lilin Wang; Christine Briggs; Ewa Sicinska; Sandra M Gaston; Harvey Mamon; Matthew H Kulke; Raffaella Zamponi; Massimo Loda; Elizabeth Maher; Shuji Ogino; Charles S Fuchs; Jin Li; Carlos Hader; G Mike Makrigiorgos Journal: J Mol Diagn Date: 2007-08-09 Impact factor: 5.568
Authors: Arezou A Ghazani; Nona Arneson; Keisha Warren; Melania Pintilie; Jane Bayani; Jeremy A Squire; Susan J Done Journal: Neoplasia Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 5.715
Authors: Adam Kotorashvili; Andrew Ramnauth; Christina Liu; Juan Lin; Kenny Ye; Ryung Kim; Rachel Hazan; Thomas Rohan; Susan Fineberg; Olivier Loudig Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-04-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Wim Ammerlaan; Johanna Trouet; Michael C Sachs; Ping Guan; Latarsha Carithers; Pauline Lambert; Sonia Frasquilho; Laurent Antunes; Olga Kofanova; Daniel Rohrer; Dana R Valley; Alex Blanski; Scott Jewell; Helen Moore; Fay Betsou Journal: Biopreserv Biobank Date: 2018-09-19 Impact factor: 2.300