Application of Interphase Fluorescent in Situ Hybridization: a Screening Tool for the Diagnosis of Microdeletion Syndrome.

BACKGROUND

Most laboratories adopt the results of metaphase fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for the diagnosis of microdeletion syndromes. To investigate the discrepancy between the results of interphase and metaphase, we compared the quantitative results of FISH for 5 kinds of microdeletion syndrome and gender determination disorders (SDD).

METHODS

A total of 282 (135 for DiGeorge syndrome, 20 for Kalmann syndrome, 7 for Miller-Dieker syndrome, 38 for Prader Willi/Angelman syndrome, 62 for Williams syndrome, and 20 for SDD (SRY FISH)) were enrolled. For SRY FISH, we artificially mixed fresh blood of male and female with various ratios and then compared the results of metaphase and interphase SRY FISH. Using a bio-cell chip, we performed interphase FISH in 168 patients with microdeletion syndromes and compared the results with manual interphase.

RESULTS

The concordance rate between the results of metaphase and interphase was 100% in microdeletion syndrome. In the disorders of gender development, SRY FISH showed 100% concordance between interphase and metaphase when we counted 50 metaphase cells and 100 interphase cells. Comparison with mixtures of male and female blood at various ratios also showed 100% concordance. The results of bio-cell chip showed 100% concordance between previous interphase FISH results.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the complete concordance between interphase and metaphase in microdeletion syndrome, the application of interphase FISH without performing metaphase FISH can be a screening test for microdeletion syndrome. Confirmation by metaphase FISH can be performed only in cases with abnormal results by interphase FISH.