In Situ Hybridization: Principles and Applications

  • Kevin C. Halling
  • Amy J. Wendel
Part of the Molecular Pathology Library book series (MPLB, volume 2)


In situ hybridization (ISH) has become an extremely useful tool for the clinical pathology laboratory to aid oncologists, geneticists, and infectious disease specialists in the diagnosis and treatment of their patients. ISH utilizes nucleic acid (DNA or RNA) probes to assess intact cells for various types of genetic alterations. Common applications of in situ hybridization include its use to detect cancer cells in cytological specimens, chromosomal alterations in resected tumor specimens that predict prognosis, and response to therapy of certain cancer types and microorganisms in various specimen types. ISH is typically performed either with fluorescently labeled probes or with probes that are subsequently visualized with a chromogen such as diaminobenzidine. If performed with fluorescently labeled probes, the technique is referred to as Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization, or FISH. Alternatively, if the technique is performed with a probe that requires subsequent visualization with a chemical reaction that produces a colored chemical at the site of the probe (a chromogen), the technique is referred to as Chromogenic In Situ Hybridization, or CISH.


Chromosomal Paint Metaphase Spread Hybridization Temperature Telomeric Probe Conventional Karyotyping 
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.


  1. 1.
    Beltz GA, Jacobs KA, Eickbush TH, et al Isolation of multigene families and determination of homologies by filter hybridization methods. Methods Enzymol. 1983;100:266–285.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee C, Wevrick R, Fisher RB, et al. Human centromeric DNAs. Hum Genet. 1997;100:291–304.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Knight SJ, Flint J. Perfect endings: a review of subtelomeric probes and their use in clinical diagnosis. J Med Genet. 2000;37:401–409.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Moog U, Arens YH, van Lent-Albrechts JC, et al. Subtelomeric chromosome aberrations: still a lot to learn. Clin Genet. 2005;68:397–407.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Morrison LE, Ramakrishnan R, Ruffalo TM, et al Labeling fluorescence in situ hybridization probes for genomic targets. In: Fan Y-S, ed. Molecular Cytogenetics: Protocols and Applications. Vol 204. Totowa: Humana Press; 2002:21–40.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wiktor AE, Van Dyke DL, Stupca PJ, et al. Preclinical validation of fluorescence in situ hybridization assays for clinical practice. Genet Med. 2006;8:16–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Petersen BL, Sorensen MC, Pedersen S, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization on formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue: optimizing the method. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2004;12:259–265.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schurter MJ, LeBrun DP, Harrison KJ. Improved technique for fluorescence in situ hybridisation analysis of isolated nuclei from archival, B5 or formalin fixed, paraffin wax embedded tissue. Mol Pathol. 2002;55:121–124.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tubbs RR, Hsi ED, Hicks D, et al. Molecular pathology testing of tissues fixed in prefer solution. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28:417–419.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van Stedum S, King W. Basic FISH techniques and troubleshooting. In: Fan Y-S, ed. Molecular Cytogenetics: Protocols and Applications. Vol 204. Totowa: Humana Press; 2002:51–63.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Solovei I, Walter J, Cremer C, et al FISH on three-dimensionally preserved nuclei. In: Beatty B, Mai S, Squire J, eds. FISH: A Practical Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2002:119–158.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McNicol AM, Farquharson MA. In situ hybridization and its diagnostic applications in pathology. J Pathol. 1997;182:250–261.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Florijn RJ, Bonnet J, Vrolijk H, et al. Effect of chromatic errors in microscopy on the visualization of multi-color fluorescence in situ hybridization. Cytometry. 1996;23:8–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
     Tanke HJ. Fluorescence microscopy for quantitative fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis. In: Andreeff M, Pinkel D, eds. Introduction to Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization: Principles and Clinical Applications. New York: Wiley-Liss; 1999:33–52.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Downs-Kelly E, Pettay J, Hicks D, et al. Analytical validation and interobserver reproducibility of EnzMet GenePro: a second-generation bright-field metallography assay for concomitant detection of HER2 gene status and protein expression in invasive carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29:1505–1511.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sokolova IA, Halling KC, Jenkins RB, et al. The development of a multitarget, multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization assay for the detection of urothelial carcinoma in urine. J Mol Diagn. 2000;2:116–123.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
     Lapierre JM, Tachdjian G. Detection of chromosomal abnormalities by comparative genomic hybridization. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2005;17:171–177.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kallioniemi OP, Kallioniemi A, Sudar D, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization: a rapid new method for detecting and mapping DNA amplification in tumors. Semin Cancer Biol. 1993;4:41–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vissers LE, Veltman JA, van Kessel AG, et al. Identification of disease genes by whole genome CGH arrays. Hum Mol Genet. 2005;14(Spec. No. 2):R215–R223.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim TM, Yim SH, Lee JS, et al. Genome-wide screening of genomic alterations and their clinicopathologic implications in non-small cell lung cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:8235–8242.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peng WX, Shibata T, Katoh H, et al. Array-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis of high-grade neuroendocrine tumors of the lung. Cancer Sci. 2005;96:661–667.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shibata T, Uryu S, Kokubu A, et al. Genetic classification of lung adenocarcinoma based on array-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis: its association with clinicopathologic features. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:6177–6185.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
     Tonon G, Wong KK, Maulik G, et al. High-resolution genomic profiles of human lung cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:9625–9630.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Petersen I. Comparative genomic hybridization of human lung cancer. Methods Mol Med. 2003;75:209–237.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ashman JN, Brigham J, Cowen ME, et al. Chromosomal alterations in small cell lung cancer revealed by multicolour fluorescence in situ hybridization. Int J Cancer. 2002;102:230–236.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chujo M, Noguchi T, Miura T, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization analysis detected frequent overrepresentation of chromosome 3q in squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. Lung Cancer. 2002;38:23–29.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Massion PP, Kuo WL, Stokoe D, et al. Genomic copy number analysis of non-small cell lung cancer using array comparative genomic hybridization: implications of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase pathway. Cancer Res. 2002;62:3636–3640.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lindstrom I, Nordling S, Nissen AM, et al. DNA copy number changes in lung adenocarcinoma in younger patients. Mod Pathol. 2002;15:372–378.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Goeze A, Schluns K, Wolf G, et al. Chromosomal imbalances of primary and metastatic lung adenocarcinomas. J Pathol. 2002;196:8–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pei J, Balsara BR, Li W, et al. Genomic imbalances in human lung adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2001;31:282–287.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mertens F, Johansson B, Hoglund M, et al. Chromosomal imbalance maps of malignant solid tumors: a cytogenetic survey of 3185 neoplasms. Cancer Res. 1997;57:2765–2780.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Petersen I, Bujard M, Petersen S, et al. Patterns of chromosomal imbalances in adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the lung. Cancer Res. 1997;57:2331–2335.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Balsara BR, Sonoda G, du Manoir S, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization analysis detects frequent, often high-level, overrepresentation of DNA sequences at 3q, 5p, 7p, and 8q in human non-small cell lung carcinomas. Cancer Res. 1997;57:2116–2120.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Petersen I, Langreck H, Wolf G, et al. Small-cell lung cancer is characterized by a high incidence of deletions on chromosomes 3p, 4q, 5q, 10q, 13q and 17p. Br J Cancer. 1997;75:79–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Levin NA, Brzoska PM, Warnock ML, et al. Identification of novel regions of altered DNA copy number in small cell lung tumors. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 1995;13:175–185.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Levin NA, Brzoska P, Gupta N, et al. Identification of frequent novel genetic alterations in small cell lung carcinoma. Cancer Res. 1994;54:5086–5091.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ried T, Petersen I, Holtgreve-Grez H, et al. Mapping of multiple DNA gains and losses in primary small cell lung carcinomas by comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Res. 1994;54:1801–1806.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schrock E, du Manoir S, Veldman T, et al. Multicolor spectral karyotyping of human chromosomes. Science. 1996;273:494–497.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Speicher MR, Gwyn Ballard S, Ward DC. Karyotyping human chromosomes by combinatorial multi-fluor FISH. Nat Genet. 1996;12:368–375.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kevin C. Halling
    • 1
  • Amy J. Wendel
    • 2
  1. 1.Molecular Cytology and Imaging Laboratory, Department of Laboratory Medicine and PathologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Department of Laboratory Medicine and PathologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations