4.4 Article

Molecular characterization of human multiple myeloma cell lines by integrative genomics: Insights into the biology of the disease

Journal

GENES CHROMOSOMES & CANCER
Volume 46, Issue 3, Pages 226-238

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gcc.20404

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To investigate the patterns of genetic lesions in a panel of 23 human multiple myeloma cell lines (HMCLs), we made a genomic integrative analysis involving FISH, and both gene expression and genome-wide profiling approaches. The expression profiles of the genes targeted by the main IGH translocations showed that the WHSCI/MMSET gene involved in t(4; 14)(p 16;q32) was expressed at different levels in all of the HMCL; and that the expression of the MAF gene was not restricted to the HMCLs carrying t(14;16)(q32;q23). Supervised analyses identified a limited number of genes specifically associated with t(4;14) and involved in different biological processes. The signature related to MAF/MAFB expression included the known MAF target genes CCND2 and ITGB7, as well as genes controlling cell shape and cell adhesion. Genome-wide DNA profiling allowed the identification of a gain on chromosome arm I q in 88% of the analyzed cell lines, together with recurrent gains on 8q, 18q, 7q, and 20q; the most frequent deletions affected I p, 13q, 17p, and 14q; and almost all of the cell lines presented LOH on chromosome 13. Two hundred and twenty-two genes were found to be simultaneously overexpressed and amplified in our panel, including the BCL2 locus at 18q21.33. Our data further support the evidence of the genomic complexity of multiple myeloma and reinforce the role of an integrated genomic approach in improving our understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of the disease. This article contains Supplementary Material available at http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/1045-2257/ suppmat. (c) 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available