BACKGROUND: Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) is a widely used technique to assess chromosomal copy number alterations. Chromosomal content, however, is often not uniform throughout cell populations. Here we evaluated to what extent aCGH can detect DNA copy number alterations in heterogeneous cell populations. A systematic evaluation is currently lacking, despite its importance in diagnostics and research. The detection limits reported are a compound of analytical software and laboratory techniques and do not account for the number of probes in relation to sample homogeneity. METHODS: Detection limits were explored with DNA isolated from a patient with intellectual disability (ID) and from tumor cell line BT474. Both were diluted with increasing amounts of normal DNA to simulate different levels of cellularity. Samples were hybridized on microarrays containing 180,880 oligonucleotides evenly distributed over the genome (spacing ~17 kb). RESULTS: Single copy number alterations, represented by down to 249 probes (4 Mb) and present in 10 % of a cell population, could be detected. Alterations encompassing as few as 14 probes (~238 Kb) could also be detected, but for this a 35 % mosaic level was required. CONCLUSIONS: DNA copy number alterations can be detected in cell populations containing 10 % abnormal cells. Detection of sub-megabase alterations requires a higher percentage of abnormal cells or microarrays with a higher probe density.
BACKGROUND: Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) is a widely used technique to assess chromosomal copy number alterations. Chromosomal content, however, is often not uniform throughout cell populations. Here we evaluated to what extent aCGH can detect DNA copy number alterations in heterogeneous cell populations. A systematic evaluation is currently lacking, despite its importance in diagnostics and research. The detection limits reported are a compound of analytical software and laboratory techniques and do not account for the number of probes in relation to sample homogeneity. METHODS: Detection limits were explored with DNA isolated from a patient with intellectual disability (ID) and from tumor cell line BT474. Both were diluted with increasing amounts of normal DNA to simulate different levels of cellularity. Samples were hybridized on microarrays containing 180,880 oligonucleotides evenly distributed over the genome (spacing ~17 kb). RESULTS: Single copy number alterations, represented by down to 249 probes (4 Mb) and present in 10 % of a cell population, could be detected. Alterations encompassing as few as 14 probes (~238 Kb) could also be detected, but for this a 35 % mosaic level was required. CONCLUSIONS: DNA copy number alterations can be detected in cell populations containing 10 % abnormal cells. Detection of sub-megabase alterations requires a higher percentage of abnormal cells or microarrays with a higher probe density.
Authors: Blake C Ballif; Emily A Rorem; Kyle Sundin; Matt Lincicum; Shannon Gaskin; Justine Coppinger; Catherine D Kashork; Lisa G Shaffer; Bassem A Bejjani Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2006-12-15 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: K Jong; E Marchiori; A van der Vaart; S-F Chin; B Carvalho; M Tijssen; P P Eijk; P van den Ijssel; H Grabsch; P Quirke; J J Oudejans; G A Meijer; C Caldas; B Ylstra Journal: Oncogene Date: 2006-08-28 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Rebecca J Leary; Jimmy C Lin; Jordan Cummins; Simina Boca; Laura D Wood; D Williams Parsons; Siân Jones; Tobias Sjöblom; Ben-Ho Park; Ramon Parsons; Joseph Willis; Dawn Dawson; James K V Willson; Tatiana Nikolskaya; Yuri Nikolsky; Levy Kopelovich; Nick Papadopoulos; Len A Pennacchio; Tian-Li Wang; Sanford D Markowitz; Giovanni Parmigiani; Kenneth W Kinzler; Bert Vogelstein; Victor E Velculescu Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-10-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Christina Curtis; Andy G Lynch; Mark J Dunning; Inmaculada Spiteri; John C Marioni; James Hadfield; Suet-Feung Chin; James D Brenton; Simon Tavaré; Carlos Caldas Journal: BMC Genomics Date: 2009-12-08 Impact factor: 3.969
Authors: D Pinkel; R Segraves; D Sudar; S Clark; I Poole; D Kowbel; C Collins; W L Kuo; C Chen; Y Zhai; S H Dairkee; B M Ljung; J W Gray; D G Albertson Journal: Nat Genet Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Stuart A Scott; Ninette Cohen; Tracy Brandt; Gokce Toruner; Robert J Desnick; Lisa Edelmann Journal: Genet Med Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Wilma E Mesker; Jan M C Junggeburt; Karoly Szuhai; Pieter de Heer; Hans Morreau; Hans J Tanke; Rob A E M Tollenaar Journal: Cell Oncol Date: 2007 Impact factor: 6.730
Authors: Rosalind J Hastings; Nick Bown; Maria G Tibiletti; Maria Debiec-Rychter; Roberta Vanni; Blanca Espinet; Nadine van Roy; Paul Roberts; Eva van den Berg-de-Ruiter; Alain Bernheim; Jacqueline Schoumans; Steve Chatters; Zuzana Zemanova; Marian Stevens-Kroef; Annet Simons; Sverre Heim; Marta Salido; Bauke Ylstra; David R Betts Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2015-03-25 Impact factor: 4.246
Authors: Leonie J M Mekenkamp; Josien C Haan; Daniëlle Israeli; Hendrik F B van Essen; Jeroen R Dijkstra; Patricia van Cleef; Cornelis J A Punt; Gerrit A Meijer; Iris D Nagtegaal; Bauke Ylstra Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ilari Scheinin; Daoud Sie; Henrik Bengtsson; Mark A van de Wiel; Adam B Olshen; Hinke F van Thuijl; Hendrik F van Essen; Paul P Eijk; François Rustenburg; Gerrit A Meijer; Jaap C Reijneveld; Pieter Wesseling; Daniel Pinkel; Donna G Albertson; Bauke Ylstra Journal: Genome Res Date: 2014-09-18 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Hinke F van Thuijl; Ilari Scheinin; Daoud Sie; Agusti Alentorn; Hendrik F van Essen; Martijn Cordes; Ruth Fleischeuer; Anja M Gijtenbeek; Guus Beute; Wimar A van den Brink; Gerrit A Meijer; Miek Havenith; Ahmed Idbaih; Khê Hoang-Xuan; Karima Mokhtari; Roel Gw Verhaak; Paul van der Valk; Mark A van de Wiel; Jan J Heimans; Eleonora Aronica; Jaap C Reijneveld; Pieter Wesseling; Bauke Ylstra Journal: Genome Biol Date: 2014-09-23 Impact factor: 13.583
Authors: Askar Obulkasim; Bauke Ylstra; Hendrik F van Essen; Christian Benner; Sally Stenning; Ruth Langley; William Allum; David Cunningham; Imran Inam; Lindsay C Hewitt; Nicolas P West; Gerrit A Meijer; Mark A van de Wiel; Heike I Grabsch Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-07-12