PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic Hybridization

Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) represents a powerful method for screening the entire genome of solid tumors for chromosomal imbalances. Particularly it enabled the molecular cytogenetic analysis of archival, formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) tissue. A well‐known dilemma, however, is...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dirk Korinth, Konrad Donhuijsen, Ulrike Bockmühl, Iver Petersen
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Hindawi Limited 2004-01-01
Series:Cellular Oncology
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2004/847515
id doaj-325f487ae4364daa89bf52c8ceb2e8c9
record_format Article
spelling doaj-325f487ae4364daa89bf52c8ceb2e8c92020-11-24T23:13:43ZengHindawi LimitedCellular Oncology1570-58701875-86062004-01-01265-632933410.1155/2004/847515PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic HybridizationDirk Korinth0Konrad Donhuijsen1Ulrike Bockmühl2Iver Petersen3Institute of Pathology, University Hospital Charité, Berlin, GermanyInstitute of Pathology, Urban Hospital Braunschweig, GermanyClinic of Head and Neck Diseases, Hospital Fulda, GermanyInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Charité, Berlin, GermanyComparative genomic hybridization (CGH) represents a powerful method for screening the entire genome of solid tumors for chromosomal imbalances. Particularly it enabled the molecular cytogenetic analysis of archival, formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) tissue. A well‐known dilemma, however, is the poor DNA quality of this material with fragment sizes below 1000 bp. Nick translation, the conventionally used enzymatic DNA labeling method in CGH, leads to even shorter fragments often below a critical limit for successful analysis. In this study we report the alternative application of non‐enzymatic, PHOTOPROBE® biotin labeling for conjugation of the hapten to the DNA prior to in situ hybridization and fluorescence detection. We analyzed 51 FFPE tumor samples mainly from the upper respiratory tract by both labeling methods. In 19 cases, both approaches were successful. The comparison of hybridized metaphases showed a distinct higher fluorescence signal of the PHOTOPROBE® samples sometimes with a discrete cytoplasm background which however did not interfere with specificity and sensitivity of the detected chromosomal imbalances. For further 32 cases characterized by an average DNA fragment size below 1000 bp, PHOTOPROBE® biotin was the only successful labeling technique thus offering a new option for CGH analysis of highly degraded DNA from archival material.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2004/847515
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Dirk Korinth
Konrad Donhuijsen
Ulrike Bockmühl
Iver Petersen
spellingShingle Dirk Korinth
Konrad Donhuijsen
Ulrike Bockmühl
Iver Petersen
PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic Hybridization
Cellular Oncology
author_facet Dirk Korinth
Konrad Donhuijsen
Ulrike Bockmühl
Iver Petersen
author_sort Dirk Korinth
title PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic Hybridization
title_short PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic Hybridization
title_full PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic Hybridization
title_fullStr PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic Hybridization
title_full_unstemmed PHOTOPROBER® Biotin: An Alternative Method for Labeling Archival DNA for Comparative Genomic Hybridization
title_sort photoprober® biotin: an alternative method for labeling archival dna for comparative genomic hybridization
publisher Hindawi Limited
series Cellular Oncology
issn 1570-5870
1875-8606
publishDate 2004-01-01
description Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) represents a powerful method for screening the entire genome of solid tumors for chromosomal imbalances. Particularly it enabled the molecular cytogenetic analysis of archival, formalin‐fixed, paraffin‐embedded (FFPE) tissue. A well‐known dilemma, however, is the poor DNA quality of this material with fragment sizes below 1000 bp. Nick translation, the conventionally used enzymatic DNA labeling method in CGH, leads to even shorter fragments often below a critical limit for successful analysis. In this study we report the alternative application of non‐enzymatic, PHOTOPROBE® biotin labeling for conjugation of the hapten to the DNA prior to in situ hybridization and fluorescence detection. We analyzed 51 FFPE tumor samples mainly from the upper respiratory tract by both labeling methods. In 19 cases, both approaches were successful. The comparison of hybridized metaphases showed a distinct higher fluorescence signal of the PHOTOPROBE® samples sometimes with a discrete cytoplasm background which however did not interfere with specificity and sensitivity of the detected chromosomal imbalances. For further 32 cases characterized by an average DNA fragment size below 1000 bp, PHOTOPROBE® biotin was the only successful labeling technique thus offering a new option for CGH analysis of highly degraded DNA from archival material.
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2004/847515
work_keys_str_mv AT dirkkorinth photoproberbiotinanalternativemethodforlabelingarchivaldnaforcomparativegenomichybridization
AT konraddonhuijsen photoproberbiotinanalternativemethodforlabelingarchivaldnaforcomparativegenomichybridization
AT ulrikebockmuhl photoproberbiotinanalternativemethodforlabelingarchivaldnaforcomparativegenomichybridization
AT iverpetersen photoproberbiotinanalternativemethodforlabelingarchivaldnaforcomparativegenomichybridization
_version_ 1725596892073558016