Novel DNA Copy Number Changes in Hematological Malignancies: A cDNA-Based CGH Microarray Screening of CML, AML and CLL Cases without Chromosomal Imbalances in G-Banding.

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 4418-4418
Author(s):  
Tuija Lundan ◽  
Anne Oikarainen ◽  
Lena Hafren ◽  
Maija Wolf ◽  
Erkki Elonen ◽  
...  

Abstract Copy number changes, such as small single allele losses and gains, have important roles in the mechanisms of cancer development. These alterations also have often prognostic significance. Genome wide screening of DNA copy number losses previously conducted by extensive LOH analyses can now be performed with array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH). We assessed the utility of array CGH in the detection of single allele deletions and gains in a cohort of seven patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), seven patients with chronic lymphatic leukemia (CLL) and three patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). All the CLL and AML patients had a normal karyotype as assessed by standard G-banding. In CML patients the only clonal abnormality detected by cytogenetics was the reciprocal Philadelphia translocation, t(9;22)(q34;q11). The derivative chromosome 9 [der(9)] deletion status of the CML patients was determined using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis. Four patients did not have the deletion, two had a der(9) deletion spanning both 5′ABL and 3′BCR regions and one patient had a deletion of the 5′ABL region alone. The array CGH experiments were performed using Agilent Technologies Human 1 cDNA microarray slides consisting of 13,000 clones. A total of 6 ug of fluorescently labeled DNA extracted from bone marrow samples was hybridized on cDNA array. Normal male or female DNA was used as the reference sample in the hybridization. The slides were scanned with the Agilent fluorescent scanner and intensity ratio data between the tumor and reference sample was processed using Feature Extraction software. The data was filtered and analyzed using SPSS (version 11) and Origin 7.0 softwares. The processed, untransformed red-to-green fluorescence signal ratio was used for evaluating gene dosage. Ratios greater than 1.1 were considered to indicate DNA copy number gains and ratios below 0.9 DNA copy number losses in tumor samples. In two CML patients who had deletions covering both the 5′ABL and 3′BCR regions in the translocation breakpoint of der(9), the deletion was detectable with the array CGH. In four patients with no deletion the red-to-green ratio profile for der(9) was 1. However, in one patient with an isolated 5′ABL deletion, the deletion was not visible in array CGH. No other obvious DNA copy number alterations were seen in CML patients. Array CGH detected deletions in three of the seven CLL patients. Deletions were found in 13q14, 2q32-33 and 14q24. One of the three AML patients studied showed an amplification in chromosome 9p. No alterations were seen in the other two AML patients. The FISH and array studies are being done on larger set of patient samples to confirm the results. We conclude that array CGH provides new information in patients without chromosomal imbalances in standard cytogenetics and enables the detection of novel small submicroscopic copy number alterations. Furthermore, a cDNA-based array platform can be used both for studies of DNA copy number alterations and gene expression analyses.

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 142-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Walter ◽  
Rhonda E. Ries ◽  
Jon Armstrong ◽  
Brian O’Gara ◽  
James W. Vardiman ◽  
...  

Abstract Cytogenetics and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) have been used to identify large genomic amplifications and deletions in all subtypes of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Up to 15–20% of AML patients have a normal karyotype at diagnosis. While cytogenetic abnormalities confer important prognostic information for patients with AML, there remain differences in the therapeutic response and outcome among patients with the same cytogenetic profile, implying that other, more subtle, genetic abnormalities may exist. We hypothesized that a subset of AML patients with normal cytogenetics may contain genomic DNA copy number changes that are too small to be detected using standard cytogenetic techniques. To address this possibility, we used high-resolution bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) array CGH technology to examine 31 AML patients with normal cytogenetics. The BAC arrays contain 2,464 BAC clones spotted in triplicate on glass slides, and provide a 1 Mb resolution of the entire human genome. Technical generation of the arrays, hybridization parameters, and analysis were similar to that reported for murine BAC array CGH (Nat Genet. 2001 Dec;29(4):459–64). The 31 AML samples included 4 M0, 8 M1, 10 M2, and 9 M4 patients. Array CGH experiments were performed using 500 nanograms of Cyanine 5 labeled genomic DNA from unmanipulated AML bone marrow, mixed with an equal amount of control DNA (a pool of DNA from 4 cancer-free individuals) labeled with Cyanine 3. Using the human 1 Mb BAC arrays, we identified amplifications and deletions from multiple samples that were confirmed with G-banding cytogenetics [del(7)(q31), del(7)(p11.2), +8, del(11)(q13q23), +21, add(21)(q22), −X, −Y, +Y]. In addition, BAC arrays robustly detected copy number alterations that were identified in as few as 4/21 metaphases. We identified 5/31 (16%) patients with normal cytogenetics that contained altered genomic DNA copy numbers using BAC array CGH. Copy number changes were confirmed for several of these genomic loci using a dye-swap experiment, where the AML DNA was labeled with Cyanine 3, and the control DNA with Cyanine 5. Two of the 5 patients with abnormalities detected using array CGH would be reclassified from “intermediate” to “unfavorable” cytogenetics [del(7)(q31.31q34), add(11)(q23.3qter), and 17(p12pter)]. These results suggest that a subset of AML patients with normal cytogenetics contain genomic copy number alterations that may effect treatment and outcome. Patient # FAB subtype Genomic location Gain or loss Size (Megabase) Dye-Swap confirmed 1 M0 7(q31.31q34) loss 2.0 Not done 1 11(q23.3qter) gain 16.5 Not done 2 M1 11(p14) loss 7.4 Yes 3 M1 11(q13.2q14.1) gain 15.8 Yes 3 19(p) gain 64.0 Yes 4 M2 17(p12pter) gain 8.6 Not Done 5 M2 19(p13.1pter) loss 14.8 Yes 5 12(q13) loss 5.0 Yes


2007 ◽  
Vol 23 (13) ◽  
pp. i450-i458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sohrab P. Shah ◽  
Wan L. Lam ◽  
Raymond T. Ng ◽  
Kevin P. Murphy

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 105-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Roumier ◽  
Sandrine Geffroy ◽  
Olivier Nibourel ◽  
Sabine Quief ◽  
Celine Villenet ◽  
...  

Abstract Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is an heterogeneous disease. Cytogenetic findings are one of the main prognosis criteria beside age, leucocytosis, and antecedent of previous hemopathy. More than 50% of AML patients, mainly with normal cytogenetic, belong to the intermediate cytogenetic risk group. Even in this group, cryptic molecular abnormalities as mutation are frequent with prognosis value. In this work we have studied 31 AML patients (Pts) with normal caryotype by high resolution comparative genomic hybridization array CGH using agilent 185k chips to detect gene copy number alterations (CNA). Tumor DNA was obtained from bone marrow diagnosis samples (>60% of blasts) and control DNA from pooled blood samples obtained from 30 healthy donors or from AML patients in CR during the follow up. The design of the study was first to hybridize tumor DNA from the 31 patients against pooled control DNA to detect both copy number polymorphisms (CNP) and acquired CNA in AML and in a second time to hybridize tumor DNA from the 10 pts with the greater number of abnormalities against autologous DNA obtained at CR time to distinguish acquired CNA from CNP. Briefly DNA labelling was performed using Cy3dUTP and Cy5 dUTP respectively for control and tumor samples. Fluorescence ratios were normalized and spots with value that deviated significantly from background were retained as significant evidence of DNA copy number alterations after statistical analysis using Feature Extraction and CGH Analytics AGILENT software. BAC from the Human Genome Center (Wellcome Trust Sanger) were used to obtain FISH probes to confirm abnormalities observed by CGH arrays on metaphase spreads obtained from bone marrow diagnosis sample when available. In each case, two colour FISH was performed by the simultaneous hybridization on a green BAC probe located in the CNA regions and a red control BAC probe located in the vicinity of the CNA regions obtained from the UCSC genome browser data. Results 98 DNA copy number alterations were observed with 56 losses and 42 gains cases. Those CNA were variable in size from 8,6 Mb to <100 Kb. 8 CNA regions were recurrent (5 losses in 7q31 (12pts), 4q13 (3pts), 1q31 (4pts), 2q37 (2pts) et 22q13 (3pts) and 3 gains in 1q23 (3pts), 2p11(2pts) et 17q21(2pts). Non recurrent CNA were located in 1p36.2, 1p34.3, 1p21.1, 1p22, 1q31.2, 3q12.2, 4p13, 5p15.3, 5q14.1, 6p22.1, 7p22.1, 7q11.23, 10q26.3, 11q13.2, 15q11.2, 15q15.3, 15q25.3, 15q26.1, 16q24.2, 17p13.2, 17p11.2, 22q13,33 for gains and in 1p33, 1q32.1, 1q32.2, 3p14.1, 3p13-p12.3, 4q26, 7p11.2, 7p14.3, 7q35, 8p23.2, 8q23.1, 9p24.1, 9p13.1-p12, 9q34.11-q34.12, 12p13.31, 13q14.2, 14q21.2, 14q22.1, 14q23.2, 15q22.31, 16q22.1, 21q21.2, 21q22.12 for losses. No one of the patients had a genome without CNA and 6 patients (20%) had more than 5 CNAs. The CGH data showed clearly that 80% of the CNA observed with pool control DNA were not present when tumor DNA was hybridized against the autologous CR DNA confirming the high frequency of CNP as reported on http://projects.tcag.ca/variation website. All of the acquired CNA regions observed were concordant with the FISH results involving genes known to be crucial in leukemia as RUNX1, Abl, CEBPa but also many other genes. In conclusion cryptic abnormalities are frequent in normal caryotype AML and 20% of the patients studied had more than 5 CNA traducing a great instability of the genome of leukemic cells.


2012 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bing-ji WEN ◽  
Wen-ming CONG ◽  
Ai-zhong WANG ◽  
Song-qin HE ◽  
Hong-mei JIANG ◽  
...  

Medicina ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
pp. 502
Author(s):  
Georgiana Gug ◽  
Caius Solovan

Background and Objectives: Mycosis fungoides (MF) and large plaque parapsoriasis (LPP) evolution provide intriguing data and are the cause of numerous debates. The diagnosis of MF and LPP is associated with confusion and imprecise definition. Copy number alterations (CNAs) may play an essential role in the genesis of cancer out of genes expression dysregulation. Objectives: Due to the heterogeneity of MF and LPP and the scarcity of the cases, there are an exceedingly small number of studies that have identified molecular changes in these pathologies. We aim to identify and compare DNA copy number alterations and gene expression changes between MF and LPP to highlight the similarities and the differences between these pathologies. Materials and Methods: The patients were prospectively selected from University Clinic of Dermatology and Venereology Timișoara, Romania. From fresh frozen skin biopsies, we extracted DNA using single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data. The use of SNP array for copy number profiling is a promising approach for genome-wide analysis. Results: After reviewing each group, we observed that the histograms generated for chromosome 1–22 were remarkably similar and had a lot of CNAs in common, but also significant differences were seen. Conclusions: This study took a step forward in finding out the differences and similarities between MF and LPP, for a more specific and implicitly correct approach of the case. The similarity between these two pathologies in terms of CNAs is striking, emphasizing once again the difficulty of approaching and differentiating them.


2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 1172-1183.e7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara B. Shih ◽  
May Tassabehji ◽  
James S. Watson ◽  
Angus D. McGrouther ◽  
Ardeshir Bayat

2001 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 272-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maarit I. Tiirikainen ◽  
Brian P. Mullaney ◽  
Elizabeth A. Holly ◽  
Maria G. Pallavicini ◽  
Ronald H. Jensen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document