BACKGROUND: According to the scientific literature, less than 30 borderline ovarian tumors have been karyotyped and less than 100 analyzed for genomic imbalances by CGH. METHODS: We report a series of borderline ovarian tumors (n = 23) analyzed by G-banding and karyotyping as well as high resolution CGH; in addition, the tumors were analyzed for microsatellite stability status and by FISH for possible 6q deletion. RESULTS: All informative tumors were microsatellite stable and none had a deletion in 6q27. All cases with an abnormal karyotype had simple chromosomal aberrations with +7 and +12 as the most common. In three tumors with single structural rearrangements, a common breakpoint in 3q13 was detected. The major copy number changes detected in the borderline tumors were gains from chromosome arms 2q, 6q, 8q, 9p, and 13q and losses from 1p, 12q, 14q, 15q, 16p, 17p, 17q, 19p, 19q, and 22q. The series included five pairs of bilateral tumors and, in two of these pairs, informative data were obtained as to their clonal relationship. In both pairs, similarities were found between the tumors from the right and left side, strongly indicating that bilaterality had occurred via a metastatic process. The bilateral tumors as a group showed more aberrations than did the unilateral ones, consistent with the view that bilaterality is a sign of more advanced disease. CONCLUSION: Because some of the imbalances found in borderline ovarian tumors seem to be similar to imbalances already known from the more extensively studied overt ovarian carcinomas, we speculate that the subset of borderline tumors with detectable imbalances or karyotypic aberrations may contain a smaller subset of tumors with a tendency to develop a more malignant phenotype. The group of borderline tumors with no imbalances would, in this line of thinking, have less or no propensity for clonal evolution and development to full-blown carcinomas.
BACKGROUND: According to the scientific literature, less than 30 borderline ovarian tumors have been karyotyped and less than 100 analyzed for genomic imbalances by CGH. METHODS: We report a series of borderline ovarian tumors (n = 23) analyzed by G-banding and karyotyping as well as high resolution CGH; in addition, the tumors were analyzed for microsatellite stability status and by FISH for possible 6q deletion. RESULTS: All informative tumors were microsatellite stable and none had a deletion in 6q27. All cases with an abnormal karyotype had simple chromosomal aberrations with +7 and +12 as the most common. In three tumors with single structural rearrangements, a common breakpoint in 3q13 was detected. The major copy number changes detected in the borderline tumors were gains from chromosome arms 2q, 6q, 8q, 9p, and 13q and losses from 1p, 12q, 14q, 15q, 16p, 17p, 17q, 19p, 19q, and 22q. The series included five pairs of bilateral tumors and, in two of these pairs, informative data were obtained as to their clonal relationship. In both pairs, similarities were found between the tumors from the right and left side, strongly indicating that bilaterality had occurred via a metastatic process. The bilateral tumors as a group showed more aberrations than did the unilateral ones, consistent with the view that bilaterality is a sign of more advanced disease. CONCLUSION: Because some of the imbalances found in borderline ovarian tumors seem to be similar to imbalances already known from the more extensively studied overt ovarian carcinomas, we speculate that the subset of borderline tumors with detectable imbalances or karyotypic aberrations may contain a smaller subset of tumors with a tendency to develop a more malignant phenotype. The group of borderline tumors with no imbalances would, in this line of thinking, have less or no propensity for clonal evolution and development to full-blown carcinomas.
Authors: Francesca Micci; Manuel R Teixeira; Lisbeth Haugom; Gunnar Kristensen; Vera M Abeler; Sverre Heim Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: R S Cornelis; S L Neuhausen; O Johansson; A Arason; D Kelsell; B A Ponder; P Tonin; U Hamann; A Lindblom; P Lalle Journal: Genes Chromosomes Cancer Date: 1995-07 Impact factor: 5.006
Authors: Katherine Stemke-Hale; Kristy Shipman; Isidora Kitsou-Mylona; David G de Castro; Vicky Hird; Robert Brown; James Flanagan; Hani Gabra; Gordon B Mills; Roshan Agarwal; Mona El-Bahrawy Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2012-11-23 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Sithara Aravind; Sangeetha K Nayanar; R Varadharajaperumal; T V Satheeshbabu; Satheesan Balasubramanian Journal: J Clin Diagn Res Date: 2017-06-01
Authors: Tobias Bürger; Hans-Ulrich Schildhaus; Reinhard Inniger; Joachim Hansen; Peter Mayer; Stefan Schweyer; Heinz Joachim Radzun; Philipp Ströbel; Felix Bremmer Journal: Diagn Pathol Date: 2015-07-22 Impact factor: 2.644
Authors: Francesca Micci; Lisbeth Haugom; Vera M Abeler; Ben Davidson; Claes G Tropé; Sverre Heim Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2014-05-05 Impact factor: 4.430