Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 231–237 | Cite as

Digital Karyotyping

An Update of its Applications in Cancer
  • Ritu Salani
  • Chao-Ling Chang
  • Leslie Cope
  • Tian-Li Wang


DNA copy number alterations, including entire chromosomal changes and small interstitial DNA amplifications and deletions, characterize the development of cancer. These changes usually affect the expression of target genes and subsequently the function of the target proteins. Since the completion of the human genome project, the capacity to comprehensively analyze the human cancer genome has expanded significantly. Techniques such as digital karyotyping have been developed to allow for the detection of DNA copy number alterations in cancer at the whole-genome scale. When compared with conventional methods such as spectral karyotyping, representational difference analysis, comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), or the more recent array CGH; digital karyotyping provides an evaluation of copy number of genetic material at higher resolution. Digital karyotyping has therefore promised to enhance our understanding of the cancer genome. This article provides an overview of digital karyotyping including the principle of the technology and its applications in identifying potential oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes.


Medulloblastoma Homozygous Deletion Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Array Ovarian Serous Carcinoma 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This study was supported by the US Department of Defense grant (W81XWH-05-1-0004).

The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.


  1. 1.
    Wang TL, Maierhofer C, Speicher MR, et al. Digital karyotyping. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002; 99(25): 16156–61PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Velculescu VE, Zhang L, Vogelstein B, et al. Serial analysis of gene expression. Science 1995 Oct 20; 270(5235): 484–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Parrett TJ, Yan H. Digital karyotyping technology: exploring the cancer genome. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2005 Nov; 5(6): 917–25PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feuk L, Carson AR, Scherer SW. Structural variation in the human genome. Nat Rev Genet 2006 Feb; 7(2): 85–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Margulies M, Egholm M, Altman WE, et al. Genome sequencing in microfabricated high-density picolitre reactors. Nature 2005 Sep 15; 437(7057): 376–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shendure J, Porreca GJ, Reppas NB, et al. Accurate multiplex polony sequencing of an evolved bacterial genome. Science 2005 Sep 9; 309(5741): 1728–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    The Cancer Genome Anatomy Project. Digital karyotyping data viewer [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2006 Jun 9]
  8. 8.
    Hu M, Yao J, Cai L, et al. Distinct epigenetic changes in the stromal cells of breast cancers. Nat Genet 2005 Aug; 37(8): 899–905PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hahn SA, Hoque AT, Moskaluk CA, et al. Homozygous deletion map at 18q21.1 in pancreatic cancer. Cancer Res 1996 Feb 1; 56(3): 490–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schutte M, da Costa LT, Hahn SA, et al. Identification by representational difference analysis of a homozygous deletion in pancreatic carcinoma that lies within the BRCA2 region. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995 Jun 20; 92(13): 5950–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kamb A, Gruis NA, Weaver-Feldhaus J, et al. A cell cycle regulator potentially involved in genesis of many tumor types. Science 1994 Apr 15; 264(5157): 436–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Teng DH, Perry WL, Hogan JK, et al. Human mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 4 as a candidate tumor suppressor. Cancer Res 1997 Oct 1; 57(19): 4177–82PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Su GH, Hilgers W, Shekher MC, et al. Alterations in pancreatic, biliary, and breast carcinomas support MKK4 as a genetically targeted tumor suppressor gene. Cancer Res 1998 Jun 1; 58(11): 2339–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nakayama K, Nakayama N, Davidson B, et al. Homozygous deletion of MKK4 in ovarian serous carcinoma. Cancer Biol Ther 2006 Jun 9, 5 (6) Epub ahead of printGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boon K, Eberhart CG, Riggins GJ. Genomic amplification of orthodenticle homologue 2 in medulloblastomas. Cancer Res 2005 Feb 1; 65(3): 703–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Di C, Liao S, Adamson DC, et al. Identification of OTX2 as a medulloblastoma oncogene whose product can be targeted by all-trans retinoic acid. Cancer Res 2005 Feb 1; 65(3): 919–24PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shih IeM, Sheu JJ, Santillan A, et al. Amplification of a chromatin remodeling gene, Rsf-1/HBXAP, in ovarian carcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005 Sep 27; 102(39): 14004–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang TL, Diaz LA, Romans K, et al. Digital karyotyping identifies thymidylate synthase amplification as a mechanism of resistance to 5-fluorouracil in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004 Mar 2; 101(9): 3089–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ritu Salani
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chao-Ling Chang
    • 2
  • Leslie Cope
    • 2
  • Tian-Li Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of GynecologyJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of OncologyJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations