4.7 Review

Genome-wide profiling of genetic alterations in acute lymphoblastic leukemia: recent insights and future directions

期刊

LEUKEMIA
卷 23, 期 7, 页码 1209-1218

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/leu.2009.18

关键词

acute lymphoblastic leukemia; SNP; microarray; relapse; PAX5; IKAROS

资金

  1. Haematology Society of Australasia
  2. Royal Australasian College of Physicians
  3. National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia)
  4. American Lebanese and Syrian Associated Charities of St Jude Children's Research Hospital

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Until recently, our understanding of the genetic factors contributing to the pathogenesis of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has relied on the detection of gross chromosomal alterations and mutational analysis of individual genes. Although these approaches have identified many important abnormalities, they have been unable to identify the full repertoire of genetic alterations in ALL. The advent of high-resolution, microarray-based techniques to identify DNA copy number alterations and loss-of-heterozygosity in a genome-wide fashion has enabled the identification of multiple novel genetic alterations targeting key cellular pathways, including lymphoid differentiation, cell cycle, tumor suppression, apoptosis and drug responsiveness. Recent studies have extended these approaches to examine the biologic basis of high-risk ALL and treatment relapse. As these techniques continue to evolve and are integrated with genome-wide epigenetic and transcriptomic data, we will obtain a comprehensive understanding of the genetic and epigenetic alterations in ALL, and ultimately will be able to translate these findings into the development of novel therapeutic approaches directed against rational therapeutic targets. Here, we review recent data obtained from genome-wide profiling studies in ALL, and discuss potential avenues for future investigation. Leukemia (2009) 23, 1209-1218; doi: 10.1038/leu.2009.18; published online 26 February 2009

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据