title: Validation and implementation of array comparative genomic hybridisation as a first line test in place of postnatal karyotyping for genome imbalance.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Several studies have demonstrated that array comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) for genome-wide imbalance provides a substantial increase in diagnostic yield for patients traditionally referred for karyotyping by G-banded chromosome analysis. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of and strategies for, the use of array CGH in place of karyotyping for genome imbalance, and to report on the results of the implementation of this approach.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Following a validation period, an oligoarray platform was chosen. In order to minimise costs and increase efficiency, a patient/patient hybridisation strategy was used, and analysis criteria were set to optimise detection of pathogenic imbalance. A customised database application with direct links to a number of online resources was developed to allow efficient management and tracking of patient samples and facilitate interpretation of results. Following introduction into our routine diagnostic service for patients with suspected genome imbalance, array CGH as a follow-on test for patients with normal karyotypes (n = 1245) and as a first-line test (n = 1169) gave imbalance detection rates of 26% and 22% respectively (excluding common, benign variants). At least 89% of the abnormalities detected by first line testing would not have been detected by standard karyotype analysis. The average reporting time for first-line tests was 25 days from receipt of sample.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Array CGH can be used in a diagnostic service setting in place of G-banded chromosome analysis, providing a more comprehensive and objective test for patients with suspected genome imbalance. The increase in consumable costs can be minimised by employing appropriate hybridisation strategies; the use of robotics and a customised database application to process multiple samples reduces staffing costs and streamlines analysis, interpretation and reporting of results. Array CGH provides a substantially higher diagnostic yield than G-banded chromosome analysis, thereby alleviating the burden of further clinical investigations.
authors.affiliation: Cytogenetics Department, Guy's & St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London SE1 9RT, UK. caroline.ogilvie@genetics.kcl.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Joo Wook
authors.initials: JW
authors.lastname: Ahn
authors.forename: Kathy
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Mann
authors.forename: Sally
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Walsh
authors.forename: Marwa
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Shehab
authors.forename: Sarah
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Hoang
authors.forename: Zoe
authors.initials: Z
authors.lastname: Docherty
authors.forename: Shehla
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Mohammed
authors.forename: Caroline
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Mackie Ogilvie
references.citation: Trends Genet. 1991 May;7(5):149-54
references.pmid: 2068787
references.citation: BMC Genomics. 2008 Sep 10;9:407
references.pmid: 18783624
references.citation: Am J Med Genet A. 2007 Nov 1;143A(21):2523-33
references.pmid: 17910064
references.citation: Genet Med. 2009 Mar;11(3):139-46
references.pmid: 19367186
references.citation: Nat Genet. 2006 Sep;38(9):1038-42
references.pmid: 16906162
references.citation: Semin Cancer Biol. 1993 Feb;4(1):41-6
references.pmid: 8448377
references.citation: Hum Mutat. 2007 Nov;28(11):1124-32
references.pmid: 17621639
references.citation: J Med Genet. 2010 Mar;47(3):195-203
references.pmid: 19755429
references.citation: Genet Med. 2008 Apr;10(4):262-6
references.pmid: 18414209
references.citation: Genomic Med. 2007;1(1-2):35-45
references.pmid: 18923927
references.citation: BMC Med Genet. 2007 Mar 05;8:9
references.pmid: 17338807
references.citation: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 Jan;1151:157-66
references.pmid: 19154522
references.citation: PLoS One. 2007 Mar 28;2(3):e327
references.pmid: 17389918
references.citation: Clin Chem. 2007 Dec;53(12):2051-9
references.pmid: 17901113
references.citation: Am J Hum Genet. 2005 Oct;77(4):606-16
references.pmid: 16175506
references.citation: Nucleic Acids Res. 2002 Jun 15;30(12):e57
references.pmid: 12060695
references.citation: Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 1997 Dec;20(4):399-407
references.pmid: 9408757
references.citation: Eur J Med Genet. 2010 Mar-Apr;53(2):66-75
references.pmid: 19878743
references.citation: BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Nov 19;10:380
references.pmid: 19925645
references.citation: Am J Med Genet A. 2003 Aug 1;120A(4):483-9
references.pmid: 12884426
references.citation: J Med Genet. 2006 Aug;43(8):625-33
references.pmid: 16490798
references.citation: J Histochem Cytochem. 2005 Mar;53(3):285-8
references.pmid: 15750003
references.citation: Nat Genet. 1998 Oct;20(2):207-11
references.pmid: 9771718
references.citation: Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2007 Nov 15;145C(4):335-45
references.pmid: 17910076
references.citation: Nat Genet. 2004 Sep;36(9):949-51
references.pmid: 15286789