The role of comparative genomic hybridisation in prenatal diagnosis

British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 108, Issue 6, 2001, Pages 642-648

  Thein, Angela ^b   Charles, Adrian ^c   Davies, Teresa ^a   Newbury Ecob, Ruth ^c   Soothill, Peter ^c  

^a SOUTHMEAD HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ARTICLE; CHROMOSOME ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEASIBILITY STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MONOSOMY; NUCLEIC ACID HYBRIDIZATION; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARD; TRISOMY;

CYTOGENETIC ANALYSIS; DNA; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MONOSOMY; NUCLEIC ACID HYBRIDIZATION; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRISOMY;

EID: 0035375803     PISSN: 03065456     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0306-5456(00)00139-X     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Ried T, Landes G, Dackowski W, Klinger K, Ward DC. Multicolour fluorescence in situ hybridization for simultaneous detection of probes sets for chromosomes 13, 18, 21, X and Y in uncultured amniotic fluid cells. Hum Mol Genet 1992;1(5):307-313.
2. Jala SM, Law ME, Carlson RO, Dewald GW. Prenatal detection of aneuploidy by directly labelled multicoloured probes and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization. Mayo Clin Proc 1998;73:132-137.
3. Thein ATA, Han X, Heyderman E, Fox M, Steele SJ, Parrington JM. Molecular cytogenetic analysis of five newly established cervical cancer cell lines using G banding and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 1996;91:28-36.
4. Schröck E, du Manoir S, Veldman T, et al. Multicolour spectral karyotyping of human chromosomes. Science 1996;273:494-497.
5. Kallioniemi A, Kallioniemi O-P, Sudar D, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization for molecular cytogenetic analysis of solid tumours. Science 1992;258:818-821.
6. Kallioniemi O-P, Kallioniemi A, Sudar D, Rutovitz D, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization: a rapid new method for detecting and mapping DNA amplification in tumours. Cancer Biology 1993;4:41-46.
7. Kallioniemi O-P, Kallioniemi A, Piper J, Isola J, et al. Optimising Comparative Genomic Hybridization for analysis of DNA sequence copy number changes in solid tumours. Genes Chrom Cancer 1994;10:231-243.
8. du Manoir S, Speicher MR, Joos S, et al. Detection of complete and partial chromosome gains and losses by comparative genomic in situ hybridization. Hum Genet 1993;90:590-610.
9. Breen CJ, Barton L, Carey A, et al. Applications of comparative genomic hybridization in constitutional chromosome studies. J Med Genet 1999;36:511-517.
10. Wells D, Sherlock JK, Handyside AH, Delhanty JD. Detailed chromosomal and molecular genetic analysis of single cells by whole genome amplification and comparative genomic hybridisatiuon. Nucleic Acids Res 1999;27:1214-1218.
11. Bryndorf T, Kirchhoff M, Rose H, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization in Clinical cytogenetics. Am J Hum Genet 1995;57:1211-1220.
12. Yu LC, Moore DH, Magrane G, et al. Objective aneuploidy detection for fetal and neonatal screening using comparative genomic hybridization (CGH). Cytometry 1997;28(3):191-197.
13. Nacheva EP, Grace CD, Bittner M, Ledbetter DH, Jenkins RB, Green AR. Comparative genomic hybridization: a comparison with molecular and cytogenetic analysis. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 1998;100(2):93-105.
14. Lapierre JM, Cacheux V, Collot N, et al. Comparison of comparative genomic hybridization with conventional karyotype and classical fluorescence in situ hybridization for prenatal and postnatal diagnosis of unbalanced chromosome abnormalities. Ann Genet 1998;41(3):133-140.
15. Bentz M, Plesch A, Stilgenbauer S, Dohner H, Lichter P. Minimal sizes of deletions detected by Comparative Genomic Hybridization. Genes Chrom Cancer 1998;21(2):172-175.
16. Daniely M, Aviram-Goldring A, Barkai G, Goldman B. Detection of chromosomal aberrationin fetuses arising from recurrent spontaneous abortion by comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Reprod 1998;13(4):805-809.