Javascript is not activated in your browser. This website needs javascript activated to work properly.
You are here

Chromosomal aberrations in breast cancer: a comparison between cytogenetics and comparative genomic hybridization

  • Karin Persson
  • Nikos Pandis
  • Fredrik Mertens
  • Åke Borg
  • Bo Baldetorp
  • Dick Killander
  • Jorma Isola
Publishing year: 1999
Language: English
Pages: 115-122
Publication/Series: Genes, Chromosomes and Cancer
Volume: 25
Issue: 2
Document type: Journal article
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons

Abstract english

The analysis of chromosomal imbalances in solid tumors using comparative genetic hybridization (CGH) has gained much attention. A survey of the literature suggests that CGH is more sensitive in detecting copy number aberrations than is karyotyping, although careful comparisons between CGH and cytogenetics have not been performed. Here, we compared cytogenetics and CGH in 29 invasive breast cancers after converting the karyotypes into net copy number gains and losses. We found 15 tumors (56%) with a significant agreement between the two methods and 12 tumors (44%) where the methods were in disagreement (two cases failed CGH analysis). Interestingly, in 13 of the 15 tumors where the two methods were concordant, there was also a strong correlation between chromosome index and DNA index by flow cytometry. In the opposite situation, i.e., when chromosome and DNA indices were not matching, there was disagreement between cytogenetics and CGH in 10 of the 12 tumors. Of the discordant cases, all except one had a "simple" abnormal karyotype. Unresolved chromosomal aberrations (marker chromosomes, homogeneously staining regions, double minutes) could not completely explain the differences between CGH and karyotyping. A likely explanation for the discrepancies is that the methods analyzed different cell populations. Gains and losses found by CGH represented the predominant (often aneuploid) clone, whereas the abnormal, near-diploid karyotypes represented minor cell clone(s), which, for unknown reasons, had a growth advantage in vitro.


  • Cancer and Oncology
  • Medical Genetics


  • ISSN: 1045-2257
Åke Borg
Åke Borg
E-mail: ake [dot] borg [at] med [dot] lu [dot] se

Principal investigator

Oncology and Pathology, MV

+46 46 275 25 52

MV 404 C21B2


Project manager

Familial Breast Cancer



Oncology and Pathology, MV

MV 404 C21C2