scholarly journals O16 Comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH) to identify unbalanced products associated with specific chromosomal rearrangements

2010 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. S20
Author(s):  
A. Thornhill ◽  
A. Gordon ◽  
J. Taylor ◽  
K. Bennett ◽  
C. Emmerson ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trayan Nedyalkov Delchev ◽  
Savina Hadjidekova ◽  
Hadil Kathom ◽  
Stoyan Bichev ◽  
Tsvetina Veleva ◽  
...  

Abstract Syndromic craniosynostosis (SC) is a genetically determined premature closure of one or more of the cranial sutures, which may result in severe dysmorphism, increased intracranial pressure along with many other clinical manifestations. The considerable risk of complications along with significant incidence makes these cranial deformations an important medical problem. Despite the efforts to clarify the pathogenesis of SC in recent years, its genetic aspects remain largely unknown.Aiming to elucidate the complex genetic etiology of syndromic craniosynostosis, we conducted an investigation of 39 children, screened systematically with a combination of conventional cytogenetic analysis, multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) and array-based comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH).Pathological findings were established in 15.3% (6/39) of the cases using aCGH, in 7.7% (3/39) using MLPA and 2.5% (1/39) using conventional karyotyping. About 12.8% (5/39) of the patients with normal karyotype carried submicroscopic chromosomal rearrangements. Duplications were found to be more common than deletions.Conclusion: The systematic genetic evaluation of children with SC revealed a high prevalence of submicrosopic chromosomal rearrangements (most commonly duplications and gain-of-function variations). This suggests the leading role of those defects in the pathogenesis of syndromic craniosynostosis. The genetic complexity of SC was reaffirmed by the discovery of pathological findings in various chromosomal regions. Certain genes were discussed in conjunction with craniosynostosis.


2006 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 206-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Brisset ◽  
Serdar Kasakyan ◽  
Aurore Coulomb L'Herminé ◽  
Valérie Mairovitz ◽  
Evelyne Gautier ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. jclinpath-2020-207346
Author(s):  
Inês Tavares ◽  
Ricardo Martins ◽  
Ilda Patrícia Ribeiro ◽  
Luísa Esteves ◽  
Francisco Caramelo ◽  
...  

AimsCholangiocarcinoma (CC) is a rare tumour arising from the biliary tract epithelium. The aim of this study was to perform a genomic characterisation of CC tumours and to implement a model to differentiate extrahepatic (ECC) and intrahepatic (ICC) cholangiocarcinoma.MethodsDNA extracted from tumour samples of 23 patients with CC, namely 10 patients with ECC and 13 patients with ICC, was analysed by array comparative genomic hybridisation. A support vector machine algorithm for classification was applied to the genomic data to distinguish between ICC and ECC. A survival analysis comparing both groups of patients was also performed.ResultsWith these whole genome results, we observed several common alterations between tumour samples of the same CC anatomical type, namely gain of Xp and loss of 3p, 11q11, 14q, 16q, Yp and Yq in ICC tumours, and gain of 16p25.3 and loss of 3q26.1, 6p25.3–22.3, 12p13.31, 17p, 18q and Yp in ECC tumours. Gain of 2q37.3 was observed in the samples of both tumour subtypes, ICC and ECC. The developed genomic model comprised four chromosomal regions that seem to enable the distinction between ICC and ECC, with an accuracy of 71.43% (95% CI 43% to 100%). Survival analysis revealed that in our cohort, patients with ECC survived on average 8 months less than patients with ICC.ConclusionsThis genomic characterisation and the introduction of genomic models to clinical practice could be important for patient management and for the development of targeted therapies. The power of this genomic model should be evaluated in other CC populations.


2006 ◽  
Vol 87 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edurne Arriola ◽  
Maryou B K Lambros ◽  
Chris Jones ◽  
Tim Dexter ◽  
Alan Mackay ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 116 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 83-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina Prescott ◽  
Kathryn Woodfine ◽  
Paula Stubbs ◽  
Maurice Super ◽  
Bronwyn Kerr ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document