Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of invasive ductal breast carcinomas in the Chinese population

Zhang,Jianwei; Zhang,Hongyan; Xu,Xin; Wang,Mingrong; Yu,Zhonghe

doi:10.3892/ol.2015.3608

Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of invasive ductal breast carcinomas in the Chinese population

Authors:
- Jianwei Zhang
- Hongyan Zhang
- Xin Xu
- Mingrong Wang
- Zhonghe Yu
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Oncology, Beijing Army General Hospital, Beijing 100700, P.R. China, National Laboratory of Molecular Oncology, Cancer Institute, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, P.R. China
Published online on: August 14, 2015 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2015.3608
Pages: 2100-2106
Copyright: © Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in Chinese women. The aim of the present study was to investigate the genetic alterations that occur in breast cancer cells in Chinese women. Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis was performed on 34 tumors obtained from patients with primary invasive ductal breast carcinoma (IDC). Recurrent genetic alterations in breast cancer include gains on chromosomes 1q (59%), 16p (50%), 17q (44%), 8q (38%), 11q (32%), 20q (32%), 1p (24%), 20p (24%), 19q (21%) and 19p (18%). Losses are common on chromosomes 6q (15%), 8p (12%), 18 (12%), 4q (9%), X (9%) and 17p (9%). In the present study, high‑level amplifications were observed on chromosomes 1q32, 8p, 11q13, 17q and 20q. Overall, the chromosomal DNA gains observed were consistent with the changes reported in Caucasian populations. However, the incidence of chromosomal DNA loss was lower in the present study compared with the incidence reported in the literature. The present results demonstrate the pattern of chromosomal imbalances in the invasive ductal breast carcinomas of Chinese females.

View Figures

View References

1	Kallioniemi A, Kallioniemi OP, Sudar D, et al: Comparative genomic hybridization for molecular cytogenetic analysis of solid tumors. Science. 258:818–821. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Weiss MM, Hermsen MA, Meijer GA, et al: Comparative genomic hybridisation. Mol Pathol. 52:243–251. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Pinkel D and Albertson DG: Array comparative genomic hybridization and its applications in cancer. Nat Genet. 37 Suppl:S11–S17. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Forozan F, Karhu R, Kononen J, Kallioniemi A and Kallioniemi OP: Genome screening by comparative genomic hybridization. Trends Genet. 13:405–409. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Oostlander AE, Meijer GA and Ylstra B: Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization and its applications in human genetics. Clin Genet. 66:488–495. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Yang L, Parkin DM, Ferlay J, Li L and Chen Y: Estimates of cancer incidence in China for 2000 and projections for 2005. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 14:243–250. 2005.PubMed/NCBI
7	Stratton MR and Rahman N: The emerging landscape of breast cancer susceptibility. Nat Genet. 40:17–22. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Kallioniemi A, Kallioniemi OP, Piper J, Tanner M, Stokke T, Chen L, Smith HS, Pinkel D, Gray JW and Waldman FM: Detection and mapping of amplified DNA sequences in breast cancer by comparative genomic hybridization. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 91:2156–2160. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Abulhasan SJ, Tayel SM and Al-Awadi SA: Mosaic Turner syndrome: cytogenetics versus FISH. Ann Hum Genet 63 (Pt 3). 199–206. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar
10	Wei F, Ni J, Wu SS, Liu H, Xu X, Han YL, Cai Y, Zhang JW, Chen XJ, Pang H, et al: Cytogenetic studies of esophageal squamous cell carcinomas in the northern Chinese population by comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 138:38–43. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	du Manoir S, Schröck E, Bentz M, Speicher MR, Joos S, Ried T, Lichter P and Cremer T: Quantitative analysis of comparative genomic hybridization. Cytometry. 19:27–41. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Stacher E, Boldt V, Leibl S, Halbwedl I, Popper HH, Ullmann R, Tavassoli FA and Moinfar F: Chromosomal aberrations as detected by array comparative genomic hybridization in early low-grade intraepithelial neoplasias of the breast. Histopathology. 59:549–555. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Yang XR, Killian JK, Hammond S, et al: Characterization of genomic alterations in radiation-associated breast cancer among childhood cancer survivors, using comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) arrays. PLoS One. 10:e01160782015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Bonnet F, Guedj M, Jones N, et al: An array CGH based genomic instability index (G2I) is predictive of clinical outcome in breast cancer and reveals a subset of tumors without lymph node involvement but with poor prognosis. BMC Med Genomics. 5:542012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Arnedos M, Scott V, Job B, et al: Array CGH and PIK3CA/AKT1 mutations to drive patients to specific targeted agents: a clinical experience in 108 patients with metastatic breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 48:2293–2299. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	du Manoir S, Speicher MR, Joos S, Schröck E, Popp S, Döhner H, Kovacs G, Robert-Nicoud M, Lichter P and Cremer T: Detection of complete and partial chromosome gains and losses by comparative genomic in situ hybridization. Hum Genet. 90:590–610. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Kim SW, Kim JW, Kim YT, Kim JH, Kim S, Yoon BS, Nam EJ and Kim HY: Analysis of chromosomal changes in serous ovarian carcinoma using high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization: Potential predictive markers of chemoresistant disease. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 46:1–9. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Corrêa NC, Kuasne H, Faria JA, Seixas CC, Santos IG, Abreu FB, Nonogaki S, Rocha RM, Aparecida Borges Silva G, Gobbi H, et al: Genomic and phenotypic profiles of two Brazilian breast cancer cell lines derived from primary human tumors. Oncol Rep. 29:1299–1307. 2013.PubMed/NCBI
19	Ross JS and Fletcher JA: The HER-2/neu oncogene in breast cancer: Prognostic factor, predictive factor, and target for therapy. Stem Cells. 16:413–428. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Han W, Woo JH, Jeon YK, Yang SJ, Cho J, Ko E, Kim TY, Im SA, Oh DY, Park IA, et al: 17p12 deletion in breast cancer predicts resistance to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Exp Ther Med. 2:799–804. 2011.PubMed/NCBI
21	Al Kuraya K, Schraml P, Torhorst J, Tapia C, Zaharieva B, Novotny H, Spichtin H, Maurer R, Mirlacher M, Köchli O, et al: Prognostic relevance of gene amplifications and coamplifications in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 64:8534–8540. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Sun Q, Yang YM, Yu SH, Zhang YX, He XG, Sun SS, Liang XS and Pang D: Covariation of copy number located at 16q22.1: New evidence in mammary ductal carcinoma. Oncol Rep. 28:2156–2162. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
23	Larramendy ML, Lushnikova T, Björkqvist AM, Wistuba II, Virmani AK, Shivapurkar N, Gazdar AF and Knuutila S: Comparative genomic hybridization reveals complex genetic changes in primary breast cancer tumors and their cell lines. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 119:132–138. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Nishizaki T, DeVries S, Chew K, et al: Genetic alterations in primary breast cancers and their metastases: Direct comparison using modified comparative genomic hybridization. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 19:267–272. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Nishizaki T, Chew K, Chu L, Isola J, Kallioniemi A, Weidner N and Waldman FM: Genetic alterations in lobular breast cancer by comparative genomic hybridization. Int J Cancer. 74:513–517. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Yeatman TJ, Cantor AB, Smith TJ, et al: Tumor biology of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. Implications for management. Ann Surg. 222:549–561. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Richard F, PacynaGengelbach M, Schlüns K, Fleige B, Winzer KJ, Szymas J, Dietel M, Petersen I and Schwendel A: Patterns of chromosomal imbalances in invasive breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 89:305–310. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	MalamouMitsi VD, Syrrou M, Georgiou I, Pagoulatos G and Agnantis NJ: Analysis of chromosomal aberrations in breast cancer by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH). Correlation with histoprognostic variables and c-erbB-2 immunoexpression. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 18:357–361. 1999.PubMed/NCBI
29	Fung LF, Wong N, Tang N, Lau A, Wong V, Pang CP, Suen M, King W and Johnson PJ: Genetic imbalances in pT2 breast cancers of southern Chinese women. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 124:56–61. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
30	Mertens F, Johansson B, Höglund M and Mitelman F: Chromosomal imbalance maps of malignant solid tumors: A cytogenetic survey of 3185 neoplasms. Cancer Res. 57:2765–2780. 1997.PubMed/NCBI