Patrick R Gonzales1, Fady M Mikhail2. 1. Department of Genetics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA. 2. Department of Genetics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA. fmikhail@uab.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a hematologic neoplasia consisting of incompletely differentiated hematopoietic cells of the myeloid lineage that proliferate in the bone marrow, blood, and/or other tissues. Clinical implementation of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in cytogenetic laboratories allows for high-resolution analysis of recurrent structural chromosomal rearrangements specific to AML, especially in AML with normal karyotypes, which comprises approximately 33-50% of AML-positive specimens. Here, we review the use of several FISH probe strategies in the diagnosis of AML. We also review the standards and guidelines currently in place for use by clinical cytogenetic laboratories in the evaluation of AML. RECENT FINDINGS: Updated standards and guidelines from the WHO, ACMG, and NCCN have further defined clinically significant, recurring cytogenetic anomalies in AML that are detectable by FISH. FISH continues to be a powerful technique in the diagnosis of AML, with higher resolution than conventional cytogenetic analysis, rapid turnaround time, and a considerable diagnostic and prognostic utility.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a hematologic neoplasia consisting of incompletely differentiated hematopoietic cells of the myeloid lineage that proliferate in the bone marrow, blood, and/or other tissues. Clinical implementation of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in cytogenetic laboratories allows for high-resolution analysis of recurrent structural chromosomal rearrangements specific to AML, especially in AML with normal karyotypes, which comprises approximately 33-50% of AML-positive specimens. Here, we review the use of several FISH probe strategies in the diagnosis of AML. We also review the standards and guidelines currently in place for use by clinical cytogenetic laboratories in the evaluation of AML. RECENT FINDINGS: Updated standards and guidelines from the WHO, ACMG, and NCCN have further defined clinically significant, recurring cytogenetic anomalies in AML that are detectable by FISH. FISH continues to be a powerful technique in the diagnosis of AML, with higher resolution than conventional cytogenetic analysis, rapid turnaround time, and a considerable diagnostic and prognostic utility.
Authors: Rachel Barrett; Barbara Morash; David Roback; Chantale Pambrun; Lesley Marfleet; Rhett P Ketterling; Karen Harrison; Jason N Berman Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: James W Vardiman; Jüergen Thiele; Daniel A Arber; Richard D Brunning; Michael J Borowitz; Anna Porwit; Nancy Lee Harris; Michelle M Le Beau; Eva Hellström-Lindberg; Ayalew Tefferi; Clara D Bloomfield Journal: Blood Date: 2009-04-08 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Daniel A Arber; Attilio Orazi; Robert Hasserjian; Jürgen Thiele; Michael J Borowitz; Michelle M Le Beau; Clara D Bloomfield; Mario Cazzola; James W Vardiman Journal: Blood Date: 2016-04-11 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Elaine R Mardis; Li Ding; David J Dooling; David E Larson; Michael D McLellan; Ken Chen; Daniel C Koboldt; Robert S Fulton; Kim D Delehaunty; Sean D McGrath; Lucinda A Fulton; Devin P Locke; Vincent J Magrini; Rachel M Abbott; Tammi L Vickery; Jerry S Reed; Jody S Robinson; Todd Wylie; Scott M Smith; Lynn Carmichael; James M Eldred; Christopher C Harris; Jason Walker; Joshua B Peck; Feiyu Du; Adam F Dukes; Gabriel E Sanderson; Anthony M Brummett; Eric Clark; Joshua F McMichael; Rick J Meyer; Jonathan K Schindler; Craig S Pohl; John W Wallis; Xiaoqi Shi; Ling Lin; Heather Schmidt; Yuzhu Tang; Carrie Haipek; Madeline E Wiechert; Jolynda V Ivy; Joelle Kalicki; Glendoria Elliott; Rhonda E Ries; Jacqueline E Payton; Peter Westervelt; Michael H Tomasson; Mark A Watson; Jack Baty; Sharon Heath; William D Shannon; Rakesh Nagarajan; Daniel C Link; Matthew J Walter; Timothy A Graubert; John F DiPersio; Richard K Wilson; Timothy J Ley Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-08-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Fady M Mikhail; Nyla A Heerema; Kathleen W Rao; Rachel D Burnside; Athena M Cherry; Linda D Cooley Journal: Genet Med Date: 2016-04-28 Impact factor: 8.822