Literature DB >> 24324169

Whole chromosome gain does not in itself confer cancer-like chromosomal instability.

Anders Valind1, Yuesheng Jin, Bo Baldetorp, David Gisselsson.   

Abstract

Constitutional aneuploidy is typically caused by a single-event meiotic or early mitotic error. In contrast, somatic aneuploidy, found mainly in neoplastic tissue, is attributed to continuous chromosomal instability. More debated as a cause of aneuploidy is aneuploidy itself; that is, whether aneuploidy per se causes chromosomal instability, for example, in patients with inborn aneuploidy. We have addressed this issue by quantifying the level of somatic mosaicism, a proxy marker of chromosomal instability, in patients with constitutional aneuploidy by precise background-filtered dual-color FISH. In contrast to previous studies that used less precise methods, we find that constitutional trisomy, even for large chromosomes that are often trisomic in cancer, does not confer a significantly elevated rate of somatic chromosomal mosaicism in individual cases. Constitutional triploidy was associated with an increased level of somatic mosaicism, but this consisted mostly of reversion from trisomy to disomy and did not correspond to a proportionally elevated level of chromosome mis-segregation in triploids, indicating that the observed mosaicism resulted from a specific accumulation of cells with a hypotriploid chromosome number. In no case did the rate of somatic mosaicism in constitutional aneuploidy exceed that of "chromosomally stable" cancer cells. Our findings show that even though constitutional aneuploidy was in some cases associated with low-level somatic mosaicism, it was insufficient to generate the cancer-like levels expected if aneuploidy single-handedly triggered cancer-like chromosomal instability.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Down syndrome; Edwards syndrome; Patau syndrome; neoplasia

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24324169      PMCID: PMC3876223          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1311163110

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  30 in total

1.  Refined characterisation of chromosome aberrations in tumours by multicolour banding and electronic mapping resources.

Authors:  D Gisselsson
Journal:  Methods Cell Sci       Date:  2001

Review 2.  Multistep carcinogenesis: a chain reaction of aneuploidizations.

Authors:  Peter Duesberg; Ruhong Li
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.534

3.  Chromosome transfer induced aneuploidy results in complex dysregulation of the cellular transcriptome in immortalized and cancer cells.

Authors:  Madhvi B Upender; Jens K Habermann; Lisa M McShane; Edward L Korn; J Carl Barrett; Michael J Difilippantonio; Thomas Ried
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 12.701

4.  Inactivation of hCDC4 can cause chromosomal instability.

Authors:  Harith Rajagopalan; Prasad V Jallepalli; Carlo Rago; Victor E Velculescu; Kenneth W Kinzler; Bert Vogelstein; Christoph Lengauer
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-03-04       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  Microcell-mediated chromosome transfer provides evidence that polysomy promotes structural instability in tumor cell chromosomes through asynchronous replication and breakage within late-replicating regions.

Authors:  Maria Kost-Alimova; Ludmila Fedorova; Ying Yang; George Klein; Stefan Imreh
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.006

Review 6.  Losing balance: the origin and impact of aneuploidy in cancer.

Authors:  Andrew J Holland; Don W Cleveland
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 8.807

7.  Frequent aneuploidy among normal human hepatocytes.

Authors:  Andrew W Duncan; Amy E Hanlon Newell; Leslie Smith; Elizabeth M Wilson; Susan B Olson; Matthew J Thayer; Stephen C Strom; Markus Grompe
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 22.682

8.  Aneuploidy vs. gene mutation hypothesis of cancer: recent study claims mutation but is found to support aneuploidy.

Authors:  R Li; A Sonik; R Stindl; D Rasnick; P Duesberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2000-03-28       Impact factor: 11.205

9.  Karyotypic determinants of chromosome instability in aneuploid budding yeast.

Authors:  Jin Zhu; Norman Pavelka; William D Bradford; Giulia Rancati; Rong Li
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 5.917

10.  Artificially introduced aneuploid chromosomes assume a conserved position in colon cancer cells.

Authors:  Kundan Sengupta; Madhvi B Upender; Linda Barenboim-Stapleton; Quang Tri Nguyen; Stephen M Wincovitch; Susan H Garfield; Michael J Difilippantonio; Thomas Ried
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2007-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  12 in total

1.  Does aneuploidy destabilize karyotypes automatically?

Authors:  Peter H Duesberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Distinguishing constitutional and acquired nonclonal aneuploidy.

Authors:  Henry H Heng
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-01-31       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Reply to Duesberg: Stability of peritriploid and triploid states in neoplastic and nonneoplastic cells.

Authors:  Anders Valind; David Gisselsson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Reply to Heng: Inborn aneuploidy and chromosomal instability.

Authors:  Anders Valind; David Gisselsson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Living in CIN: Mitotic Infidelity and Its Consequences for Tumor Promotion and Suppression.

Authors:  Laura C Funk; Lauren M Zasadil; Beth A Weaver
Journal:  Dev Cell       Date:  2016-12-19       Impact factor: 12.270

6.  Aneuploidy and chromosomal instability in cancer: a jackpot to chaos.

Authors:  Maybelline Giam; Giulia Rancati
Journal:  Cell Div       Date:  2015-05-20       Impact factor: 5.130

7.  Chromosome mis-segregation and cytokinesis failure in trisomic human cells.

Authors:  Joshua M Nicholson; Joana C Macedo; Aaron J Mattingly; Darawalee Wangsa; Jordi Camps; Vera Lima; Ana M Gomes; Sofia Dória; Thomas Ried; Elsa Logarinho; Daniela Cimini
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2015-05-05       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 8.  The impact of mitotic errors on cell proliferation and tumorigenesis.

Authors:  Michelle S Levine; Andrew J Holland
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 11.361

9.  The fetal thymus has a unique genomic copy number profile resulting from physiological T cell receptor gene rearrangement.

Authors:  Anders Valind; C Haikal; M E K Klasson; M C Johansson; J Gullander; M Soller; B Baldetorp; David Gisselsson
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  Understanding aneuploidy in cancer through the lens of system inheritance, fuzzy inheritance and emergence of new genome systems.

Authors:  Christine J Ye; Sarah Regan; Guo Liu; Sarah Alemara; Henry H Heng
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 2.009

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.