4.6 Article

Multicolour spectral karyotyping identifies new translocations and a recurring pathway for chromosome loss in multiple myeloma

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 112, 期 1, 页码 167-174

出版社

BLACKWELL SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2001.02546.x

关键词

multiple myeloma; cytogenetics; spectral karyotyping; chromosome instability; novel translocations

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA55819] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [P01CA055819] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multicolour spectral karyotyping (SKY) was performed on primary tumour specimens from 100 patients with multiple myeloma (MM) that showed complex clonal chromosome aberrations not fully characterized by G-banding. In this study, SKY was able to identify or revise translocations with breakpoints involving 14q32, 11q13 or 8q24 in 32 patients (32%). Five new recurring translocations were identified, two of which involved chromosome 22. A subtle reciprocal translocation t(14;22) (q32;q11 similar to 12) was identified using SKY in two patients and a second, much larger, translocation t(11;22)(q13;q13) was identified using G-banding in three patients. A third new translocation was identified in two patients using SKY and G-banding as der(7)t(7;7)(p15 similar to 22;q22 similar to 32). Twenty-three patients (23%) showed the loss of 8p by whole-arm translocations with different whole-arm donor chromosomes. Among this group, two new recurring whole-arm translocations involving the centromeric breakpoint 8q10 were identified as der(8;20)(q10;q10) and der(8;18) (q10;q10) in three patients each. In addition, a novel pattern of three-way translocations involving the clonal evolution of the t(8;22)(q24;q11) by the subsequent loss of 8p by whole-arm translocations was found in three patients. The chromosome instability identified here demonstrates that the loss of 8p can occur by multiple whole-arm translocations, indicating a new pathway for the loss of a specific chromosome region in MM.

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

4.6
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