3.8 Article

Stimulation of chronic lymphocytic leukemia cells with CpG oligodeoxynucleotide gives consistent karyotypic results among laboratories: a CLL Research Consortium (CRC) Study

期刊

CANCER GENETICS AND CYTOGENETICS
卷 203, 期 2, 页码 134-140

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cancergencyto.2010.07.128

关键词

-

资金

  1. CLL Research Consortium [P01 CA081534-07A1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cytogenetic abnormalities are important prognostic indicators in CLL. Historically, only interphase cytogenetics was clinically useful in CLL, because traditional mitogens are not effective mitotic stimulants. Recently, CpG-oligodeoxynucleotide (ODN) stimulation has shown effectiveness in CLL cells. The CLL Research Consortium tested the effectiveness and reproducibility of CpG-ODN stimulation for detecting chromosomally abnormal clones by five laboratories. More clonal abnormalities were observed after culture of CLL cells with CpG-ODN than with the traditional pokeweed mitogen plus 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (PWM+TPA). All clonal abnormalities in PWM+TPA cultures were observed in CpG-ODN cultures, whereas CpG-ODN identified some clones not found by PWM+TPA. CpG-ODN stimulation of one normal control sample and 12 CLL samples showed that, excepting clones of del(13q) in low frequencies and one translocation, results in all five laboratories were consistent, and all abnormalities were concordant with FISH. Abnormal clones in CLL were more readily detected with CpG-ODN stimulation than with traditional B-cell mitogens. With CpG-ODN stimulation, abnormalities were reproducible among cytogenetic laboratories. CpG-ODN did not appear to induce aberrations in cell culture, but did enhance detection of abnormalities and complexity in CLL. Because karyotypic complexity is prognostic and is not detectable by standard FISH analyses, stimulation with CpG-ODN is useful for identifying this additional prognostic factor in CLL. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

3.8
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