Search

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.

Objective: To assemble and interpret karyotype data provided as part of the College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics Cytogenetics Proficiency Testing Program., Data Sources, Extraction, and Synthesis: The Cytogenetics Resource Committee requested data on all cells analyzed in a 1994 whole-blood specimen challenge. In that study, 287 participating laboratories analyzed a total of 14297 cells derived from a sample drawn from an adult donor with Turner syndrome. This individual had previously been found to have mosaicism, including cell lines with X structural anomalies along with monosomy X, making this an excellent challenge for a multicenter cytogenetic survey., Results and Conclusions: Analysis of the data from this extensive study revealed mosaicism of up to 10 different sex chromosome complements involving the X chromosome with and without a small ring X or a derivative X chromosome. In the routine cytogenetic analysis performed by the participating laboratories, cell lines observed, in decreasing order of prevalence, included 45,X (n = 8357 cells), 46,X,r(X) (n = 3597), 46,X,der(X)t(X;X) (n = 2237), 46,XX (n = 93), 47,X,r(X),r(X) (n = 5), 47,X,der (X)t(X;X),der(X)t(X;X) (n = 3), 47,XX,r(X) (n = 2), and one observation each of 47,XX,der(X)t(X;X), 47,X,der(X)t (X;X),r(X), and 47,XXX. Our molecular cytogenetic data, as well as detailed analysis of G-banded chromosomes, suggest the nomenclature for these 2 abnormal X chromosomes as r(X)(p11.3q21.3) and der(X)t(X;X)(p11.3;q21.3), and we discuss models for the concomitant formation of these 2 entities. Both the degree of analysis and the extensive mosaicism that was discovered in this study are exceptional, and similar reported cases as well as possible mechanisms for the observed X chromosome instability are reviewed.

Fluorescence in situ hybridization using chromosome-specific DNA probes is rapidly becoming part of clinical laboratory practice for certain congenital and neoplastic disorders. Current legislation requires proficiency testing for clinical laboratory studies. To evaluate the efficacy of fluorescence in situ hybridization proficiency testing, we invited 19 representative institutions to participate in three pilot studies. One study used probes for the X and Y chromosomes to evaluate metaphase spreads and interphase nuclei. Another study used probes for bcr and abl to detect bcr/abl fusion in interphase nuclei in chronic myelogenous leukemia. The third study used a D22S75 probe to detect microdeletions in metaphase spreads from a patient with velocardiofacial syndrome. The results of these studies demonstrate that proficiency testing with fluorescence in situ hybridization is attainable using either metaphase or interphase preparations, and that either microscope slides or fixed cell pellets are suitable.

The cytogenetics of childhood neoplasms are reviewed. Chromosome abnormalities specific for various pediatric neoplasms can provide diagnostic, prognostic, and scientific information of value to the pathologist, clinician, and molecular biologist. Karyotypes of acute leukemia have independent prognostic significance. Chromosome aberrations associated with several of the small round blue-cell tumors of childhood can clarify the diagnosis. Recurring abnormalities in several tumors, such as hepatoblastomas, primitive neuroectodermal tumors, fibrosarcomas, and other tumor types, suggest interesting questions about pathogenesis and histogenetic relationships. Several tumor-specific chromosome aberrations, mostly in the acute leukemias, have been characterized at a molecular level.

The College of American Pathologists and the American Society of Human Genetics offer a proficiency testing program in clinical cytogenetics. Two hundred twenty-five laboratories now provide data for this survey, which was begun in 1986. Challenges have consisted of photographed metaphases, fixed lymphoblastoid cell suspensions, fresh peripheral blood, and disarranged karyotypes. The "correct" response was based on 80% or greater consensus among either the referees or the participants. Referee laboratories performed better than participants. More laboratories were able to report accurate recognition of abnormalities by using a coded list than could write the interpretation in standardized nomenclature. Deletions, unbalanced translocations, and inversions were more difficult challenges than balanced translocations or trisomies. Prenatal and lymphocyte challenges were more likely to result in consensus than were bone marrow challenges. Participants performed best on whole-blood challenges. Fixed cell suspensions were less satisfactory. Excellent quality case material is essential for a successful challenge. A grading system has been devised to separate artifacts of the survey process from proficiency variables.

Cytogenetic, immunocytochemical, and ultrastructural studies were performed on a large congenital fibrosarcoma. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a congenital fibrosarcoma characterized by all of these techniques. The findings of immunochemical and electron microscopic studies supported the suggestion that the tumor is of fibroblastic origin. The karyotype of the tumor (48,XY,+11,+20) is similar to that observed in previously reported cases and substantiates the hypothesis that congenital fibrosarcoma is characterized by nonrandom gain of chromosomes.