Abstract
High-resolution array comparative genomic hybridisation (aCGH) analysis of DNA copy number aberrations (CNAs) was performed on breast carcinomas in premenopausal women from Western New York (WNY) and from Gomel, Belarus, an area exposed to fallout from the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident. Genomic DNA was isolated from 47 frozen tumour specimens from 42 patients and hybridised to arrays spotted with more than 3000 BAC clones. In all, 20 samples were from WNY and 27 were from Belarus. In total, 34 samples were primary tumours and 13 were lymph node metastases, including five matched pairs from Gomel. The average number of total CNAs per sample was 76 (range 35–134). We identified 152 CNAs (92 gains and 60 losses) occurring in more than 10% of the samples. The most common amplifications included gains at 8q13.2 (49%), at 1p21.1 (36%), and at 8q24.21 (36%). The most common deletions were at 1p36.22 (26%), at 17p13.2 (26%), and at 8p23.3 (23%). Belarussian tumours had more amplifications and fewer deletions than WNY breast cancers. HER2/neu negativity and younger age were also associated with a higher number of gains and fewer losses. In the five paired samples, we observed more discordant than concordant DNA changes. Unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis revealed two distinct groups of tumours: one comprised predominantly of Belarussian carcinomas and the other largely consisting of WNY cases. In total, 50 CNAs occurred significantly more commonly in one cohort vs the other, and these included some candidate signature amplifications in the breast cancers in women exposed to significant radiation. In conclusion, our high-density aCGH study has revealed a large number of genetic aberrations in individual premenopausal breast cancer specimens, some of which had not been reported before. We identified a distinct CNA profile for carcinomas from a nuclear fallout area, suggesting a possible molecular fingerprint of radiation-associated breast cancer.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
More From: British Journal of Cancer
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.