PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11304566

Small marker chromosome identification in metaphase and interphase using centromeric multiplex fish (CM-FISH).

Abstract

Multicolor karyotyping procedures, such as multiplex fluorescence in situ hybridization (M-FISH), spectral karyotyping, or color-changing karyotyping, can be used to detect chromosomal rearrangements and marker chromosomes in prenatal diagnosis, peripheral blood cultures, leukemia, and solid tumors, especially in cases where G-banding is not sufficient. A regular M-FISH analysis requires relatively large amounts of labeled DNA (microgram quantities), is not informative in interphase nuclei, hybridization can take up to 2 to 3 days, and unlabeled human chromosome-painting probes are not available commercially. Unique probes (plasmids, PAC), specific for centromeric or subtelomeric chromosomal regions, can replace the painting probes in M-FISH to address specific issues, such as the identification of marker chromosomes and aneuploidies. A set of plasmid probes carrying repetitive sequences specific for the alpha-satellite region of all human chromosomes were combined in a metaphase assay and an interphase assay, allowing identification of aneuploidies in one hybridization step, on a single cytogenetic slide. The fluorophore-dUTP and the labeled antibodies required to label and detect the DNA probes can be prepared in any laboratory. All DNA probes can be easily isolated and labeled using common molecular cytogenetic procedures. Because of the repetitive nature of the probes, hybridization time is short, usually less than 1 hour, and the analysis can be performed with nonspecialized image-processing software.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

O Henegariu, P Bray-Ward, S Artan, G H Vance, M Qumsyieh, D C Ward. 2001. Small marker chromosome identification in metaphase and interphase using centromeric multiplex fish (CM-FISH).. https://doi.org/10.1038/labinvest.3780255

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Maternal age as a driver of genome instability: mechanisms linking aneuploidy, mutagenesis and mitochondrial dysfunction.

Advanced maternal age is a well-established risk factor for adverse reproductive outcomes due to increased rates of aneuploidy. However, emerging evidence indicates that the genetic consequences of maternal aging extend well beyond chromosome mis-segregation. Aging oocytes acquire a broad spectrum of genetic abnormalities, including maternally derived nuclear de novo mutations (DNMs) and mitochondrial DNA mutations, together with epigenetic dysregulation of DNA methylation and post-translational modification levels. These changes reflect the unique biology of the female germline in which oocytes remain arrested in meiotic prophase I for decades. Age-related deterioration of key processes, such as erosion of cohesion complexes, altered meiotic recombination, and weakened spindle assembly checkpoint surveillance collectively destabilize meiotic chromosome architecture, directly driving chromosome mis-segregation. At the same time, accumulation of endogenous DNA damage and declining DNA damage and repair processes increase the chances of transmitting lesions that can be converted into sequence-level mutations during the earliest embryonic divisions, when genome maintenance relies exclusively on maternal factors. High-resolution sequencing studies further demonstrate that maternal aging is associated with increased DNMs burden in both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA. Together, these findings support a model in which maternal aging is a driver of genome-wide instability that links aneuploidy and mutagenesis through shared defects in meiotic surveillance, declining DNA repair efficiency, and mitochondrial function. This framework positions delayed childbearing as a multifaceted genetic risk factor that extend beyond aneuploidy to include mutations and other genomic alterations that can impact intergenerational genetic risk.

Aneuploidy↗

Modeling and targeting general and chromosome-specific aneuploidy in cancer.

Throughout the last century, aneuploidy has been cemented as a hallmark of cancer. Although the association of aneuploidy with tumorigenesis has been well established, the role of these genetic imbalances in tumor formation has only recently begun to be elucidated. Advancements in genomics have revealed the complexity and context dependence of the effect of aneuploidy on cancer growth, while developments in genetic editing have allowed for proper modeling of specific aneuploidies. In this review, we discuss the key factors to consider when studying the role of aneuploidy in cancer and the tools that are available to do so. We then highlight recent studies that establish phenotypic contributions of aneuploidy to tumorigenicity. In particular, we highlight how general aneuploidy and chromosomal instability affect the tumor microenvironment and how specific chromosomal alterations, including the loss of chromosome 9p and the gain of chromosomes 8q and 1q, influence tumor behavior and therapeutic responses. Finally, we emphasize the potential of targeting aneuploidy-induced vulnerabilities to improve cancer treatment outcomes.

Aneuploidy↗