Linked Life Data

10219063

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/10219063

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
5
pubmed:dateCreated
1999-6-8
pubmed:abstractText
Decalcification is routinely performed for histological studies of bone-containing tissue. Although DNA in situ hybridization (ISH) and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) have been successfully employed on archival material, little has been reported on the use of these techniques on archival decalcified bony material. In this study we compared the effects of two commonly used decalcifiers, i.e. , one proprietary, acid-based agent (RDO) and one chelating agent (EDTA), in relation to subsequent DNA ISH and CGH to bony tissues (two normal vertebrae, six prostate tumor bone metastases with one sample decalcified by both EDTA and RDO). We found that RDO-decalcified tissue was not suited for DNA ISH in tissue sections with centromere-specific probes, whereas we were able to adequately determine the chromosomal status of EDTA-decalcified material of both control and tumor material. Gel electrophoresis revealed that no DNA could be successfully retrieved from RDO-treated material. Moreover, in contrast to RDO-decalcified tumor material, we detected several chromosomal imbalances in the EDTA-decalcified tumor tissue by CGH analysis. Furthermore, it was possible to determine the DNA ploidy status of EDTA- but not of RDO-decalcified material by DNA flow cytometry. Decalcification of bony samples by EDTA is highly recommended for application in DNA ISH and CGH techniques.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
May
pubmed:issn
0022-1554
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
47
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
703-10
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
1999
pubmed:articleTitle
Effect of bone decalcification procedures on DNA in situ hybridization and comparative genomic hybridization. EDTA is highly preferable to a routinely used acid decalcifier.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Pathology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Alers@PATH.FGG.EUR.NL
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't