A method for accurate detection of translocation junctions in ewing family of tumors
- 99 Downloads
The Ewing family of tumors (ET) generally contain translocations involving the EWS gene and the FLI or ERG genes. Identification of the translocation confirms the diagnosis of ET. Currently, diagnosis of the translocation is made by several methods. In general, these methods require different primer sets for amplifying different translocations and subsequent efforts to identify the amplified product. The need to employ different sets of primers to amplify different translocation junctions presents some limitations. We have developed a method based on PCR with consensus primers followed by direct automated sequencing of the amplified product. With this method we have correctly determined known as well as unknown ET-associated EWS-FLI and EWS-ERG translocations in appropriate specimens. Use of our consensus primers eliminates the need for separate PCRs to amplify EWS-FLI and EWS-ERG translocation junctions, and because direct sequencing is used for confirming the identity of the amplification product, the accuracy of detection becomes 100%. The method might also accurately diagnose ET-associated translocations other than EWS-FLI and EWS-ERG translocations.
Index EntriesEwing’ tumor RT-PCR automated sequencing translocation consensus primer
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Unni, K. K. (1996) Dahlin’s Bone Tumors, Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 249–261.Google Scholar
- 7.Adamas, V., Hany, M. A., Schmid, M., Hassam, S., Brinter, J., and Niggli, F. K. (1996) Detection of t(11;22)(q24; q12) translocation breakpoint in paraffin-embedded tissue of the Ewing’s sarcoma family by nested reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. Diagn. Mol. Path. 5, 107–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Barr, F. G., Xiong, Q. B., and Kelly, K. A. (1995) Consensus polymerase chain reaction, oligonucleotide hybridization approach for the detection of chromosomal translocations in pediatric bone and soft tissue sarcomas. Anat. Path. 104, 627–633.Google Scholar