Haematologica · 2000
Detection of inv(16) and t(16;16) by fluorescence in situ hybridization in acute myeloid leukemia M4Eo.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hernández J M, González M B, Granada I, Gutiérrez N, Chillón C, Ramos F, Ribera J M, González M, Feliu E, San Miguel J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: It has been established that cytogenetic findings at the time of diagnosis of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are powerful prognostic indicators. Pericentric inversion of chromosome 16 and translocation t(16;16) resulting in chimeric fusion of CBFB and MYH11 genes are typically seen in the M4-Eo FAB classification subset of AML and are associated with low-risk disease. These subtle chromosomal abnormalities may be difficult to detect in poor-quality metaphase preparations and if missed could lead to incorrect assignment to risk groups and influence the therapy decision-making process.
DESIGN AND METHODS: We prospectively studied, at diagnosis, 10 patients with AML-M4 Eo by cytogenetics and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) with two cosmids (36 and 40). As a control group, 7 patients (5 with a diagnosis of AML other than M4 Eo and two cases of reactive eosinophilia) were analyzed. In addition reverse transcriptase chain reaction (RT-PCR) studies were carried out in 6 cases.
RESULTS: Karyotypic analysis detected the inv(16) in all but one of the patients with M4-Eo while none of the control cases showed any abnormality on chromosome 16. FISH studies showed that all 10 patients had abnormalities on chromosome 16; the patient with normal karyotype showed an inv(16) by FISH, while a case with inv(16) by cytogenetics had a t(16;16) by FISH. RT-PCR demonstrated amplification of the CBFB/MYH11 product in all cases analyzed.
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: In patients with M4Eo and rearrangements of chromosome 16, FISH studies may afford more complete information than conventional cytogenetics and can be an alternative to RT-PCR studies.
DESIGN AND METHODS: We prospectively studied, at diagnosis, 10 patients with AML-M4 Eo by cytogenetics and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) with two cosmids (36 and 40). As a control group, 7 patients (5 with a diagnosis of AML other than M4 Eo and two cases of reactive eosinophilia) were analyzed. In addition reverse transcriptase chain reaction (RT-PCR) studies were carried out in 6 cases.
RESULTS: Karyotypic analysis detected the inv(16) in all but one of the patients with M4-Eo while none of the control cases showed any abnormality on chromosome 16. FISH studies showed that all 10 patients had abnormalities on chromosome 16; the patient with normal karyotype showed an inv(16) by FISH, while a case with inv(16) by cytogenetics had a t(16;16) by FISH. RT-PCR demonstrated amplification of the CBFB/MYH11 product in all cases analyzed.
INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: In patients with M4Eo and rearrangements of chromosome 16, FISH studies may afford more complete information than conventional cytogenetics and can be an alternative to RT-PCR studies.