Cargando…

染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cytogenetic response detected by conventional banding analysis (CBA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and to explore the correlation between the cytogenetic and molecular response in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients during tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7342782/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29224320
http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2017.11.012
_version_ 1783555590205734912
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare the cytogenetic response detected by conventional banding analysis (CBA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and to explore the correlation between the cytogenetic and molecular response in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients during tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. METHODS: CBA, FISH and real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) methods were performed to detect the cytogenetic and molecular response simultaneously in 504 bone marrow samples from 367 CML patients who received TKI treatment. RESULTS: Among 504 samples, 344 were detected to reach complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) by CBA, while 297 samples reached CCyR by FISH which were considered to carry BCR-ABL positive cells<1%. When the results of CBA, FISH and RQ-PCR were compared in 493 samples at the same time, it showed that in 337 samples with CBA-CCyR, 273 (81.0%) reached FISH-CCyR and 289 (85.8%) were BCR-ABL(IS) (International Scale, IS) ≤1% by RQ-PCR, compared to 9.0 (261/290) were BCR-ABL(IS) ≤1% among 290 samples with FISH-CCyR. There was no significant difference in the median value of BCR-ABL(IS) between samples in CBA-CCyR and FISH-CCyR (0.21% vs 0.13%, z=−1.875, P=0.061). Furthermore, when the samples were divided into three groups according to BCR-ABL positive cells (0,>0~<1%, 1%~5%) by FISH, the statistical difference was observed, the proportion of samples with BCR-ABL(IS) ≤1% in the three groups were 94.1%, 57.6% and 27.7% respectively (χ(2)=43.499, P<0.001; χ(2)=9.734, P=0.003), while the median value of BCR-ABL(IS) were 0.10%, 0.64% and 1.80% respectively (z=−5.864, P<0.001; z=−4.787, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: FISH results were in good concordance with CBA in identify samples in CCyR, FISH was more sensitive and had better correlation with RQ-PCR results than CBA, but how to define FISH-CCyR need further study.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7342782
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73427822020-07-16 染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较 Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi 论著 OBJECTIVE: To compare the cytogenetic response detected by conventional banding analysis (CBA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and to explore the correlation between the cytogenetic and molecular response in chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients during tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment. METHODS: CBA, FISH and real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) methods were performed to detect the cytogenetic and molecular response simultaneously in 504 bone marrow samples from 367 CML patients who received TKI treatment. RESULTS: Among 504 samples, 344 were detected to reach complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) by CBA, while 297 samples reached CCyR by FISH which were considered to carry BCR-ABL positive cells<1%. When the results of CBA, FISH and RQ-PCR were compared in 493 samples at the same time, it showed that in 337 samples with CBA-CCyR, 273 (81.0%) reached FISH-CCyR and 289 (85.8%) were BCR-ABL(IS) (International Scale, IS) ≤1% by RQ-PCR, compared to 9.0 (261/290) were BCR-ABL(IS) ≤1% among 290 samples with FISH-CCyR. There was no significant difference in the median value of BCR-ABL(IS) between samples in CBA-CCyR and FISH-CCyR (0.21% vs 0.13%, z=−1.875, P=0.061). Furthermore, when the samples were divided into three groups according to BCR-ABL positive cells (0,>0~<1%, 1%~5%) by FISH, the statistical difference was observed, the proportion of samples with BCR-ABL(IS) ≤1% in the three groups were 94.1%, 57.6% and 27.7% respectively (χ(2)=43.499, P<0.001; χ(2)=9.734, P=0.003), while the median value of BCR-ABL(IS) were 0.10%, 0.64% and 1.80% respectively (z=−5.864, P<0.001; z=−4.787, P<0.001). CONCLUSION: FISH results were in good concordance with CBA in identify samples in CCyR, FISH was more sensitive and had better correlation with RQ-PCR results than CBA, but how to define FISH-CCyR need further study. Editorial office of Chinese Journal of Hematology 2017-11 /pmc/articles/PMC7342782/ /pubmed/29224320 http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2017.11.012 Text en 2017年版权归中华医学会所有 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (CC-BY-NC). The Copyright own by Publisher. Without authorization, shall not reprint, except this publication article, shall not use this publication format design. Unless otherwise stated, all articles published in this journal do not represent the views of the Chinese Medical Association or the editorial board of this journal.
spellingShingle 论著
染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较
title 染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较
title_full 染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较
title_fullStr 染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较
title_full_unstemmed 染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较
title_short 染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较
title_sort 染色体核型分析和荧光原位杂交技术监测慢性髓性白血病患者细胞遗传学反应的比较
topic 论著
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7342782/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29224320
http://dx.doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2727.2017.11.012
work_keys_str_mv AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào
AT rǎnsètǐhéxíngfēnxīhéyíngguāngyuánwèizájiāojìshùjiāncèmànxìngsuǐxìngbáixuèbìnghuànzhěxìbāoyíchuánxuéfǎnyīngdebǐjiào