Literature DB >> 32425379

Conventional Cytogenetics and Interphase Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Results in Multiple Myeloma: A Turkey Laboratory Analysis of 381 Cases.

Cigdem Aydin1, Turgay Ulas2, Ceren Hangul3, Orhan Kemal Yucel4, Utku Iltar5, Ozan Salim4, Deniz Ekinci4, Sibel Berker Karauzum3.   

Abstract

Multiple myeloma (MM) is an uncontrolled proliferation of plasma cells and these cells play an important role in the immune system. In this research, we retrospectively analyzed cytogenetic abnormalities in 381 patients with MM. Conventional cytogenetic analysis was successful in 354 patients (92.9%). Chromosomal abnormalities were detected in 31.9% (113/354) and 45.8% (116/253) of patients screened with conventional cytogenetics and FISH, respectively. Of 113 patients with chromosomal abnormalities, 31 patients (27.4%) had hyperdiploid and 26 of 31 patients with hyperdiploidy had both numerical and structural anomalies. On the other hand, non-hyperdiploidy was observed in 62 patients (54.8%). The most common gains of chromosomes were 15, 9, 19 followed by 3, 5, 11, and 21. Whole chromosome losses were also frequent involving Y, 13 and 22 chromosomes. In our patients, 1q gain was determined in a total of 25 patients (22%), including 7 structural abnormalities and 19 unbalanced translocations causing complete or partial duplication of the long arm of chromosome 1. Although the breakpoints were different, t(1;5) balanced translocation and unbalanced translocations of t(1;2), t(1;3), t(1;7), t(1;16) and t(1;19) were observed twice. The most common structural abnormality was the deletion of the short arm of chromosome 13 (13q) or monosomy of chromosome 13 (-13) (24.1%, 61/253) in patients evaluated by FISH. Deletion involving chromosome 17p (del 17p) or monosomy of chromosome 17 (-17) were found in 31 (12.3%) patients. Translocations involving IgH regions were as follows: t(11;14)(q13;q32.33) in 22 (8.7%), t(4;14)(p16.3;q32.33) in 22 (8.7%) and t(14;16)(q32.33;q23.1) in 2 (0.8%) patients. In addition, t(14;17)(q32;q21) translocation was detected in a multiple myeloma patient for the first time in this study. There are a limited number of large study groups including both cytogenetic and FISH findings in MM patients. As the number of these studies increases, it is thought that new cytogenetic data can be guiding especially in clinical risk determination. © Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion 2019.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chromosomal abnormalities; Cytogenetics; FISH; Multiple myeloma

Year:  2019        PMID: 32425379      PMCID: PMC7229081          DOI: 10.1007/s12288-019-01215-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus        ISSN: 0971-4502            Impact factor:   0.900


  47 in total

1.  Genomic profiling of myeloma: the best approach, a comparison of cytogenetics, FISH and array-CGH of 112 myeloma cases.

Authors:  Katrina Rack; Sébastien Vidrequin; Jean-Louis Dargent
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2015-09-03       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 2.  Sex chromosome aneuploidy and aging.

Authors:  J F Stone; A A Sandberg
Journal:  Mutat Res       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 2.433

3.  Analysis of genetic abnormalities provides insights into genetic evolution of hyperdiploid myeloma.

Authors:  Wee J Chng; Rhett P Ketterling; Rafael Fonseca
Journal:  Genes Chromosomes Cancer       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.006

4.  Clinical and biologic implications of recurrent genomic aberrations in myeloma.

Authors:  Rafael Fonseca; Emily Blood; Montserrat Rue; David Harrington; Martin M Oken; Robert A Kyle; Gordon W Dewald; Brian Van Ness; Scott A Van Wier; Kimberly J Henderson; Richard J Bailey; Philip R Greipp
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2003-02-06       Impact factor: 22.113

5.  Criteria for the classification of monoclonal gammopathies, multiple myeloma and related disorders: a report of the International Myeloma Working Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Br J Haematol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 6.998

6.  IGF2BP1: a novel IGH translocation partner in B acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Authors:  Guangyu Gu; Maria C Sederberg; Milton R Drachenberg; Sarah T South
Journal:  Cancer Genet       Date:  2014-07-23

7.  Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the International Myeloma Working Group.

Authors:  Pieter Sonneveld; Hervé Avet-Loiseau; Sagar Lonial; Saad Usmani; David Siegel; Kenneth C Anderson; Wee-Joo Chng; Philippe Moreau; Michel Attal; Robert A Kyle; Jo Caers; Jens Hillengass; Jesús San Miguel; Niels W C J van de Donk; Hermann Einsele; Joan Bladé; Brian G M Durie; Hartmut Goldschmidt; María-Victoria Mateos; Antonio Palumbo; Robert Orlowski
Journal:  Blood       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 22.113

8.  Impact of genetic abnormalities on the prognoses and clinical parameters of patients with multiple myeloma.

Authors:  Dong Wook Jekarl; Chang-Ki Min; Ahlm Kwon; Hyunjung Kim; Hyojin Chae; Myungshin Kim; Jihyang Lim; Yonggoo Kim; Kyungja Han
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.464

9.  Prognostic Impact of Cytogenetic Abnormalities in Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Analysis of 229 Patients.

Authors:  Yuan Jian; Xiaolei Chen; Huixing Zhou; Wanqiu Zhu; Nian Liu; Chuanying Geng; Wenming Chen
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 1.889

10.  Clinical Utility of a Diagnostic Approach to Detect Genetic Abnormalities in Multiple Myeloma: A Single Institution Experience.

Authors:  Hyun Ae Jung; Mi Ae Jang; Kihyun Kim; Sun Hee Kim
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 3.464

View more
  1 in total

1.  Pros and Cons for Fluorescent in Situ Hybridization, Karyotyping and Next Generation Sequencing for Diagnosis and Follow-up of Multiple Myeloma.

Authors:  E Ikbal Atli; H Gurkan; H Onur Kirkizlar; E Atli; S Demir; S Yalcintepe; R Kalkan; A M Demir
Journal:  Balkan J Med Genet       Date:  2021-03-23       Impact factor: 0.519

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.