Hepatic mesenchymal hamartoma with translocation involving chromosome band 19q13.4: a recurrent abnormality.

We report a case of mesenchymal hamartoma of the liver in an 8-month-old male child, in which the cytogenetic analysis revealed a balanced translocation, t(11;19)(q13;q13.4). This is the fifth description of a cytogenetic abnormality in mesenchymal hamartoma and is similar to the four cases reported previously in that one of the breakpoints involved chromosome band 19q13.4.

Translocation (10;17)(q22;p13): a recurring translocation in clear cell sarcoma of kidney.

A clear cell sarcoma from the kidney of a 12-month-old male child manifested a balanced translocation, t(10;17)(q22;p13). This is the second report of this cytogenetic abnormality in renal clear cell sarcoma.

Proficiency testing for laboratories performing fluorescence in situ hybridization with chromosome-specific DNA probes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess laboratory performance, use, and limitations in the joint College of American Pathologists and American College of Medical Genetics proficiency testing program for laboratories performing cytogenetic tests based on fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). DATA SOURCES: Eight proficiency surveys dealing with FISH detection of microdeletions or microduplications, aneuploidy in interphase cells, gene amplification, and neoplasm-specific translocations. Participating laboratories used their own DNA probes (commercial or home-brew), hybridization methods, and analytic criteria to answer clinical questions about cases represented by slides included in the survey materials. They also described their test results according to the International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature (ISCN) and answered supplementary questions relating to their experience with the subject test systems. DATA EXTRACTION: In addition to evaluating diagnostic accuracy, we evaluated survey use, laboratory experience, variation in methodologic approach, and the practicality of using ISCN nomenclature for describing test results. SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of one challenge, at least 80% of the participants reached the correct diagnostic conclusion. In the sole exception, there was still a consensus of 91.7% of participants with the same (albeit erroneous) diagnostic conclusion. The overall outstanding performance of participating laboratories clearly shows the reliability of current FISH methods. Despite the fact that a large number of laboratories reported little or no experience with the specific test systems, the overwhelming majority performed very well. This result shows that the program's strategy of targeting classes of abnormalities (vs a single abnormality associated with a specific disease) did not put at a disadvantage participants who did not routinely perform all of the potential tests in the class. The extraordinary variation in ISCN descriptions submitted by participants showed that the existing system for human cytogenetic nomenclature is not suitable for facile communication of FISH test results.

Specific extra chromosomes occur in a modal number dependent pattern in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

Children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and high hyperdiploidy (>50 chromosomes) are considered to have a relatively good prognosis. The specific extra chromosomes are not random; extra copies of some chromosomes occur more frequently than those of others. We examined the extra chromosomes present in high hyperdiploid ALL to determine if there were a relation of the specific extra chromosomes and modal number (MN) and if the extra chromosomes present could differentiate high hyperdiploid from near-triploid and near-tetraploid cases. Karyotypes of 2,339 children with ALL and high hyperdiploidy at diagnosis showed a distinct nonrandom sequential pattern of gain for each chromosome as MN increased, with four groups of gain: chromosomes 21, X, 14, 6, 18, 4, 17, and 10 at MN 51-54; chromosomes 8, 5, 11, and 12 at MN 57-60; chromosomes 2, 3, 9,16, and 22 at MN 63-67; chromosomes 1, 7 13, 15, 19, and 20 at MN 68-79, and Y only at MN >or=80. Chromosomes gained at lower MN were retained as the MN increased. High hyperdiploid pediatric ALL results from a single abnormal mitotic division. Our results suggest that the abnormal mitosis involves specific chromosomes dependent on the number of chromosomes aberrantly distributed, raising provocative questions regarding the mitotic mechanism. The patterns of frequencies of tetrasomy of specific chromosomes differs from that of trisomies with the exception of chromosome 21, which is tetrasomic in a high frequency of cases at all MN. These results are consistent with different origins of high hyperdiploidy, near-trisomy, and near-tetrasomy.

Cytogenetic heteromorphisms: survey results and reporting practices of giemsa-band regions that we have pondered for years.

CONTEXT: Cytogenetic heteromorphisms (normal variants) pose diagnostic dilemmas. Common Giemsa-band heteromorphisms are not described in the literature, although Giemsa-banding is the method most frequently used in cytogenetic laboratories. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the responses from more than 200 cytogeneticists concerning the definition and reporting of cytogenetic heteromorphisms, to offer these responses as a reference for use in clinical interpretations, and to provide guidance for interpretation of newly defined molecular cytogenetic heteromorphisms. DESIGN: The Cytogenetics Resource Committee of the College of American Pathologists and the American College of Medical Genetics administered a proficiency testing survey in 1997 to 226 participant cytogenetic laboratories. Supplemental questions asked whether participants considered particular Giemsa-banded chromosomal features to be heteromorphisms and if these would be described in a cytogenetic clinical report. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 99% of participants; 61% stated they would include selected heteromorphism data in a clinical report. More than 90% considered prominent short arms, large or double satellites, or increased stalk length on acrocentric chromosomes to be heteromorphisms; 24% to 36% stated that they would include these in a clinical report. Heterochromatic regions on chromosomes 1, 9, 16, and Y were considered heteromorphisms by 97% of participants, and 24% indicated they would report these findings. Pericentric inversions of chromosomes 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 10, 16, and Y were considered heteromorphisms with more than 75% of respondents indicating they would report these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Responses were not unanimous, but a clear consensus is presented describing which Giemsa-band regions were considered heteromorphisms and which would be reported.

Cytogenetic evaluation of a large series of hepatoblastomas: numerical abnormalities with recurring aberrations involving 1q12-q21.

Hepatoblastoma is a malignant embryonal liver tumor that occurs almost exclusively in infants and very young children. Previous cytogenetic studies of hepatoblastoma have investigated small series or individual cases. This report is on the cytogenetics of a large series of 111 hepatoblastoma specimens, with cytogenetic results consecutively karyotyped over a 12-year period. Abnormal karyotypes were observed in 55 cases (approximately 50% of the total). Numerical aberrations were observed in 41 cases (36% of the total), particularly trisomies of chromosomes 2, 8, and 20. Chromosome losses were less common than chromosome gains. Structural abnormalities were observed in 43 cases (39% of the total). Unbalanced translocations resulting in trisomy 1q and involving breakpoints at 1q12-21 were the most common structural abnormality, observed in 20 tumors (18% of total cases); the corresponding translocated chromosome was highly varied. The previously reported t(1;4) was observed in seven cases. Most tumors with translocations involving 1q12-21 also displayed numerical chromosome aberrations, the most common of which were chromosomal trisomies, whereas tumors with other structural rearrangements had fewer numerical abnormalities.

Primary effusion lymphomas exhibit complex and recurrent cytogenetic abnormalities.

Cytogenetic findings in a few primary effusion lymphoma (PEL) cell lines have been reported, but only three complete karyotypes of primary specimens from patients with this neoplasm have been published. In this study, cytogenetic analysis was performed on 11 effusion specimens from 10 patients with PEL. We corroborate data obtained from the cell line studies that trisomy 7, trisomy 12 and aberrations in the proximal long arm of chromosome 1 (1q) are recurring cytogenetic aberrations in PEL and also identify breakpoints at 3q23, 7p22, 7q22, 10q24, 12q24, 13q22, 14q24, 14q32, 15p11.2 and Xq22 as well as +8, +15, +19, +X and -Y as recurring chromosome abnormalities. The identification of recurring cytogenetic aberrations may lead to delineation of the genetic events in PEL.

Problems with ISCN FISH Nomenclature make it not practical for use in clinical test reports or cytogenetic databases [corrected].

PURPOSE: To assess the extent and the sources of variation in ISCN nomenclature used by participants in CAP/ACMG surveys dealing with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). METHODS: Over 1600 nomenclature strings from 15 challenges in seven surveys were evaluated for the contributions of diagnostic errors, syntax errors, methodological differences, and technical factors not foreseen by ISCN 1995. RESULTS: Although diagnostic errors were uncommon, syntax errors were numerous, approaching 50% of the responses for several challenges. Their frequency varied with the complexity of the nomenclature required to describe a test condition. Variation attributable to probe selection and band designation correlated with the number of probes available for addressing the diagnostic issue at hand. In the most dramatic example of this effect, a survey simulating diagnosis of trisomy 21 in uncultured amniocytes, there were 66 participants (of 99) who used the same general form for their nomenclature, but only 8 of the 66 had exactly the same nomenclature string. Participants used proprietary names, created their own nomenclature, or ignored the true complexity of probe systems when trying to describe conditions not foreseen by ISCN 1995. CONCLUSION: The use of current ISCN FISH nomenclature resulted in survey participants describing unique biological conditions in a multitude of different ways. In addition to making the nomenclature unsuitable for proficiency test purposes, this heterogeneity makes it impractical for clinical test reporting and for cytogenetic database management. Because methodological information contributes a large amount of variability, adds complexity, and increases opportunities for syntax errors, a system that excludes such information would be more effective.