Risk of false positive results in comparative genomic hybridization.
Comparative genomic hybridization, a widely used method for screening for genomic imbalances, suffers from a lack of standardized evaluation. In order to compare a recently proposed data-driven procedure with the commonly used fixed cutoff values, we tested 257 events by both procedures as well as by fluorescence in situ hybridization using selected probes. With the data-driven procedure, a much higher fraction (42/218 vs. 8/218) of false positive results was obtained, whereas a higher sensitivity with respect to the detection of imbalances (30/39 vs. 19/39) was reached. Based on the significantly higher positive likelihood ratios and the positive predictive value, we strongly recommend the use of fixed diagnostic thresholds, because the alternative procedure generates an unacceptably high portion of incorrectly scored chromosomal imbalances. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 28:353-357, 2000.
Barth
T F
TF
Pathologisches Institut der Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Benner
A
A
Bentz
M
M
Döhner
H
H
Möller
P
P
Lichter
P
P
D002869:Chromosome Aberrations / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000235:genetics*; D025063:Chromosome Disorders; D005189:False Positive Reactions; D015698:Genomic Library; D006801:Humans; D017404:In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence; D015451:Leukemia, Lymphocytic, Chronic, B-Cell / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000235:genetics; D016393:Lymphoma, B-Cell / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000235:genetics; D009693:Nucleic Acid Hybridization / Q000235:genetics / Q000379:methods; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D012307:Risk Factors