Huang NFT, Gupta M, Varghese S, Rao S, Luke S. Detection of numerical chromosomal abnormalities in epithelial ovarian neoplasms by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and a review of the current literature.
Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2002;
10:187-93. [PMID:
12051640 DOI:
10.1097/00129039-200206000-00016]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
Preliminary retrospective chromosomal analysis was performed using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) with alphoid DNA probes for chromosomes 1, 3, 6, 8, 12, 17, and X. Twenty-four epithelial ovarian tumors were examined in this pilot study, including 8 borderline (LMP) serous tumors, 9 serous carcinoma, and 7 mucinous carcinoma. Hybridization signals were counted to demonstrate the frequency of aneusomy, trace chromosomal progression, and identify the predominance of chromosome copy number abnormalities that are specific to a particular histotype. The preliminary results revealed almost an equal number of mean aneusomies in serous (58.13 +/- 13%) and mucinous (64.33 +/- 10%) carcinoma, both of which were slightly higher than borderline serous tumors (50.57 +/- 17%). Hyposomies 3 and X were significantly higher in mucinous than in serous ovarian carcinomas, and lowest in borderline serous tumors (P<0.05 and P<0.01). Signal losses were a more frequent abnormality in all three histologic subtypes. Mucinous carcinomas showed a loss of chromosomes 8 (45.00 +/- 28%) and 3 (43.14 +/- 16%), in addition to a loss of chromosome X (56.29 +/- 12%). Serous carcinomas showed a gain of chromosome 1 (39.44 +/- 32%), followed by losses of chromosomes 6 (37.00 +/- 20%), 17 (36.44 +/- 19%), and 8 (36.89 +/- 19%). In borderline serous tumors, the most frequent findings were losses of chromosomes 6 (38.00 +/- 17%), 12 (36.88 +/- 17%), and 3 (36.13 +/- 21%). However, further research is necessary to substantiate these preliminary results and elucidate their clinical significance. A brief review of the literature pertaining to interphase cytogenetics in ovarian epithelial tumors is discussed also.
Collapse