Comparison of chromosome analysis and chromosomal microarray analysis: What is the value of chromosome analysis in today's genomic array era?

Genetics in Medicine

Volumn 15, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 450-457

  Bi, Weimin ^a   Borgan, Caroline ^a   Pursley, Amber N ^a   Hixson, Patricia ^a   Shaw, Chad A ^a   Bacino, Carlos A ^a,b   Lalani, Seema R ^a,b   Patel, Ankita ^a   Stankiewicz, Pawel ^a   Lupski, James R ^a,b   Beaudet, Arthur L ^a,b   Cheung, Sau Wai ^a  

^a BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b TEXAS CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

array CGH; chromosome analysis; chromosome structural rearrangement; developmental disability; FISH; mosaicism

Indexed keywords

GENOMIC DNA;

ANEUPLOIDY; ARTICLE; CHROMOSOMAL MICROARRAY ANALYSIS; CHROMOSOME 17; CHROMOSOME 2; CHROMOSOME 6; CHROMOSOME ABERRATION; CHROMOSOME ANALYSIS; CHROMOSOME MOSAICISM; CHROMOSOME STRUCTURE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MICROARRAY ANALYSIS;

CHROMOSOME ABERRATIONS; CHROMOSOME BANDING; CYTOGENETIC ANALYSIS; DNA COPY NUMBER VARIATIONS; GENOMICS; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; KARYOTYPING; MOSAICISM; OLIGONUCLEOTIDE ARRAY SEQUENCE ANALYSIS; TRANSLOCATION, GENETIC;

EID: 84878892869     PISSN: 10983600     EISSN: 15300366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2012.152     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Kang SH, Shaw C, Ou Z, et al. Insertional translocation detected using FISH confirmation of array-comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) results. Am J Med Genet A 2010;152A:1111-1126.
2. Neill NJ, Ballif BC, Lamb AN, et al. Recurrence, submicroscopic complexity, and potential clinical relevance of copy gains detected by array CGH that are shown to be unbalanced insertions by FISH. Genome Res 2011;21:535-544.
3. Lu X, Shaw CA, Patel A, et al. Clinical implementation of chromosomal microarray analysis: summary of 2513 postnatal cases. PLoS ONE 2007;2:e327.
4. Miller DT, Adam MP, Aradhya S, et al. Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies. Am J Hum Genet 2010;86:749-764.
5. Ballif BC, Rorem EA, Sundin K, et al. Detection of low-level mosaicism by array CGH in routine diagnostic specimens. Am J Med Genet A 2006;140:2757-2767. (Pubitemid 44865062)
6. Cheung SW, Shaw CA, Scott DA, et al. Microarray-based CGH detects chromosomal mosaicism not revealed by conventional cytogenetics. Am J Med Genet A 2007;143A:1679-1686. (Pubitemid 47217264)
7. Bui TH, Vetro A, Zuffardi O, Shaffer LG. Current controversies in prenatal diagnosis 3: is conventional chromosome analysis necessary in the post-array CGH era? Prenat Diagn 2011;31:235-243.
8. Cheung SW, Shaw CA, Yu W, et al. Development and validation of a CGH microarray for clinical cytogenetic diagnosis. Genet Med 2005;7:422-432. (Pubitemid 41139627)
9. Ou Z, Kang SH, Shaw CA, et al. Bacterial artificial chromosome-emulation oligonucleotide arrays for targeted clinical array-comparative genomic hybridization analyses. Genet Med 2008;10:278-289. (Pubitemid 351544130)
10. El-Hattab AW, Smolarek TA, Walker ME, et al. Redefined genomic architecture in 15q24 directed by patient deletion/duplication breakpoint mapping. Hum Genet 2009;126:589-602.
11. Boone PM, Bacino CA, Shaw CA, et al. Detection of clinically relevant exonic copy-number changes by array CGH. Hum Mutat 2010;31:1326-1342.
12. Bruno DL, White SM, Ganesamoorthy D, et al. Pathogenic aberrations revealed exclusively by single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping data in 5000 samples tested by molecular karyotyping. J Med Genet 2011;48:831-839.
13. Hoang S, Ahn J, Mann K, et al. Detection of mosaicism for genome imbalance in a cohort of 3,042 clinical cases using an oligonucleotide array CGH platform. Eur J Med Genet 2011;54:121-129.
14. Neill NJ, Torchia BS, Bejjani BA, Shaffer LG, Ballif BC. Comparative analysis of copy number detection by whole-genome BAC and oligonucleotide array CGH. Mol Cytogenet 2010;3:11.
15. Conlin LK, Thiel BD, Bonnemann CG, et al. Mechanisms of mosaicism, chimerism and uniparental disomy identified by single nucleotide polymorphism array analysis. Hum Mol Genet 2010;19:1263-1275.
16. Papenhausen P, Schwartz S, Risheg H, et al. UPD detection using homozygosity profiling with a SNP genotyping microarray. Am J Med Genet A 2011;155A:757-768.
17. Shao L, Shaw CA, Lu XY, et al. Identification of chromosome abnormalities in subtelomeric regions by microarray analysis: a study of 5,380 cases. Am J Med Genet A 2008;146A:2242-2251.
18. Liu P, Erez A, Nagamani SC, et al. Chromosome catastrophes involve replication mechanisms generating complex genomic rearrangements. Cell 2011;146:889-903.
19. De Gregori M, Ciccone R, Magini P, et al. Cryptic deletions are a common finding in "balanced" reciprocal and complex chromosome rearrangements: a study of 59 patients. J Med Genet 2007;44:750-762. (Pubitemid 350275048)
20. Schluth-Bolard C, Delobel B, Sanlaville D, et al. Cryptic genomic imbalances in de novo and inherited apparently balanced chromosomal rearrangements: array CGH study of 47 unrelated cases. Eur J Med Genet 2009;52:291-296.
21. Warburton D. De novo balanced chromosome rearrangements and extra marker chromosomes identified at prenatal diagnosis: clinical significance and distribution of breakpoints. Am J Hum Genet 1991;49:995-1013. (Pubitemid 21891747)