U.S. patent number RE40,494 [Application Number 11/398,456] was granted by the patent office on 2008-09-09 for chromosome-specific staining to detect genetic rearrangements associated with chromosome 3 and/or chromosome 17.
This patent grant is currently assigned to The Regents of the University of California. Invention is credited to Joe W. Gray, Anne Kallioniemi, Olli-Pekka Kallioniemi, Daniel Pinkel, Masaru Sakamoto.
United States Patent |
RE40,494 |
Gray , et al. |
September 9, 2008 |
**Please see images for:
( Certificate of Correction ) ** |
Chromosome-specific staining to detect genetic rearrangements
associated with chromosome 3 and/or chromosome 17
Abstract
Methods and compositions for staining based upon nucleic acid
sequence that employ nucleic acid probes are provided. Said methods
produce staining patterns that can be tailored for specific
cytogenetic analyses. Said probes are appropriate for in situ
hybridization and stain both interphase and metaphase chromosomal
material with reliable signals. The nucleic acid probes are
typically of a complexity greater than 50 kb, the complexity
depending upon the cytogenetic application. Methods and reagents
are provided for the detection of genetic rearrangements. Probes
and test kits are provided for use in detecting genetic
rearrangements, particularly for use in tumor cytogenetics, in the
detection of disease related loci, specifically cancer, such as
chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), retinoblastoma, ovarian and
uterine cancers, and for biological dosimetry. Methods and reagents
are described for cytogenetic research, for the differentiation of
cytogenetically similar but genetically different diseases, and for
many prognostic and diagnostic applications.
Inventors: |
Gray; Joe W. (San Francisco,
CA), Pinkel; Daniel (Lafayette, CA), Kallioniemi;
Olli-Pekka (Turku, FI), Kallioniemi; Anne
(Tampere, FI), Sakamoto; Masaru (Tokyo,
JP) |
Assignee: |
The Regents of the University of
California (Oakland, CA)
|
Family
ID: |
27580677 |
Appl.
No.: |
11/398,456 |
Filed: |
April 4, 2006 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
Issue Date |
|
|
08312914 |
Sep 30, 1994 |
|
|
|
|
08137745 |
Oct 19, 1993 |
|
|
|
|
08015390 |
Feb 8, 1993 |
|
|
|
|
07670242 |
Mar 15, 1991 |
|
|
|
|
07659974 |
Feb 22, 1991 |
|
|
|
|
07537305 |
Jun 12, 1990 |
|
|
|
|
07497098 |
Mar 20, 1990 |
|
|
|
|
07444669 |
Dec 1, 1989 |
|
|
|
|
07382094 |
Jul 19, 1989 |
|
|
|
|
06937793 |
Dec 4, 1986 |
|
|
|
|
06819314 |
Jan 16, 1986 |
|
|
|
Reissue of: |
08477316 |
Jun 7, 1995 |
06344315 |
Feb 5, 2002 |
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
435/6.14;
436/501; 536/24.3 |
Current CPC
Class: |
C12Q
1/6827 (20130101); C12Q 1/6841 (20130101); C12Q
1/6876 (20130101); C12Q 1/6879 (20130101); C12Q
1/6886 (20130101); C12Q 1/6841 (20130101); C12Q
1/6841 (20130101); C12Q 2563/107 (20130101); C12Q
2563/131 (20130101); C12Q 2563/107 (20130101); C12Q
2525/151 (20130101) |
Current International
Class: |
C12Q
1/68 (20060101) |
References Cited
[Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
Foreign Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
690 32 920 |
|
Sep 1999 |
|
DE |
|
0 430 402 |
|
Jun 1991 |
|
EP |
|
0 430 402 |
|
Jan 1999 |
|
EP |
|
WO 90/05789 |
|
May 1990 |
|
WO |
|
Other References
US. Appl. No. 07/444,669, Gray et al. cited by other .
U.S. Appl. No. 07/497,098, Gray et al. cited by other .
Albertson, D. G., "Mapping Muscle Protein Genes by In Situ
Hybridization Using Blotin-Labeled Probes," The EMBO Journal, 1985,
pp. 2493-2498, vol. 4, No. 10. cited by other .
Angerer, R. C., et al., "In Situ Hybridization to Cellular RNAs,"
Genetic Engineering: Principles and Methods, 1985, pp. 43-65, vol.
7, Plenum Press, New York. cited by other .
Arnoldus, E. P. J., et al., "Detection of the Philadelphia
Chromosome in Interphase Nuclei," Cytogenetics and Cell Genetics,
1990, pp. 108-111, vol. 54. cited by other .
Bartram, C., R., et al., "Translocation of c-abl Oncogene
Correlates with the Presence of a Philadelphia Chromosome in
Chronic Myelocytic Leukaemia," Nature, Nov. 17, 1983, pp. 277-280,
vol. 306. cited by other .
Berezuk, M., et al., "Adjusting Interphase FISH Results in
Epithelial Tissue Sections to Whole Cell Complement," Analytical
and Quantitative Cytology and Histology, Apr. 2001, pp. 93-100,
vol. 23, No. 2. cited by other .
Brigati, D. J., et al., "Detection of Viral Genomes in Cultured
Cells and Paraffin-Embedded Tissue Sections Using Biotin-Labeled
Hybridization Probes," Virology, 1983, pp. 32-50, vol. 126. cited
by other .
Brison, O., et al., "General Method for Cloning Amplified DNA by
Differential Screening with Genomic Probes," Molecular and Cellular
Biology, May 1982, pp. 578-587, vol. 2, No. 5. cited by other .
Britten, R. J. et al., "Analysis of Repeating DNA Sequences by
Reassociation," Methods of Enzymol, 1974, pp. 363-418, vol. 29.
cited by other .
Buongiorno-Nardelli, M., et al., "Autoradiographic Detection of
Molecular Hybrids between rRNA and DNA in Tissue Sections," Nature,
Mar. 7, 1970, pp. 946-948, vol. 225, No. 5236. cited by other .
Buroker, N. E., et al., "Four Restriction Fragment Length
Polymorphisms Revealed by Probes from a Single Cosmid Map to Human
Chromosome 12q," Human Genetics, 1986, pp. 86-94, vol. 72. cited by
other .
Cannizzaro, L. A., et al., "In Situ Hybridization and Translocation
Breakpoint Mapping," Cytogenetics and Cell Genetics, 1985, pp.
173-178, vol. 39. cited by other .
Coghlan, J. P., et al., "Hybridization Histochemistry," Analytical
Biochemistry, 1985, pp. 1-28, vol. 149. cited by other .
Cote, B. D., et al., "Quantitation of In Situ Hybridization of
Ribosomal Ribonucleic Acids to Human Diploid Cells," Chromosoma,
1980, pp. 349-367, vol. 80. cited by other .
Cremer, T., et al., "Detection of Chromosome Aberrations in the
Human Interphase Nucleus by Visualization of Specific Target DNAs
with Radioactive and Non-Radioactive In Situ Hybridization
Techniques: Diagnosis of Trisomy 18 with Probe L1.84," Human
Genetics, 1986, pp. 346-352, vol. 74. cited by other .
Cremer, T., et al., "Detection of Chromosome Aberrations in
Metaphase and Interphase Tumor Cells by In Situ Hybridization Using
Chromosome-Specific Library Probes," Human Genetics, 1988, pp.
235-246, vol. 80. cited by other .
Decision of the Technical Board of Appeal, Case No. T
0083/01-3.3.2, Boards of Appeal of The European Patent Office, Aug.
10, 2004, pp. 1-8. cited by other .
"Declaration of Dr. John H. Proffitt Supporting Plaintiffs' Motion
to Re-Open Discovery," The Regents of the University of California,
v. Oncor, Inc., No. C-95-3084, (VRW), pp. 1-4. cited by other .
Donlon, T. A., "Cytologic Characterization of Human Constitutive
Heterochromatin," Thesis for the Master of Science in Biology,
1981, pp. 1-57. cited by other .
Egholm, M., et al., "PNA Hybridizes to Complementary
Oligonucleotides Obeying the Watson-Crick Hydrogen-Bonding Rules,"
Nature, Oct. 7, 1993, pp. 566-568; vol. 365. cited by other .
Erikson, J., et al., "Heterogeneity of Chromosome 22 Breakpoint in
Philadelphia-Positive (Ph+) Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia,"
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, Mar. 1986, pp.
1807-1811, vol. 83. cited by other .
Gall, J. G., et al., "Formation and Detection of RNA-DNA Hybrid
Molecules in Cytological Preparations," Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences USA, 1969, pp. 378-383, vol. 63. cited by other
.
Gall, J. G., et al., "Nucleic Acid Hybridization in Cytological
Preparations," Methods in Enzymology, 1971, pp. 470-480, vol. 21 D.
cited by other .
Gambino, R., et al., "A Limited Number of Globin Genes in Human
DNA," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, Oct.
1974, pp. 3966-3970, vol. 71, No. 10. cited by other .
Golfier, G., et al., "The 200-kb Segmental Duplication on Human
Chromosome 21 Originates from a Pericentrometric Dissemination
Involving Human Chromosomes 2, 18 and 13," Gene, 2003, pp. 51-59,
vol. 312. cited by other .
Harper, M. E., et al., "Localization of Single Copy DNA Sequences
on G-Banded Human Chromosomes by In Situ Hybridization,"
Chromosoma, 1981, pp. 431-439, vol. 83. cited by other .
Hattori, M., et al., "The DNA Sequence of Human Chromosome 21,"
Nature, May 18, 2000, pp. 311-319, vol. 405. cited by other .
Henderson, A. S., "Cytological Hybridization to Mammalian
Chromosomes," International Review of Cytology, 1982, pp. 1-46,
vol. 76. cited by other .
Heng, H. H. Q., et al., "Fish Technology in Chromosome and Genome
Research," BioEssays, Oct. 9, 1996, pp. 75-84, vol. 19, No. 1.
cited by other .
Hood, L. E., et al., "Structure and Organization of Eucaryotic
Chromosomes," Molecular Biology of Eucaryotic Cells, Chapter 2,
1978, pp. 47-51, Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co., Menlo Park, CA.
cited by other .
Hopman, A. H. N., et al., "Bi-Color Detection of Two Target DNAs by
Non-Radioactive In Situ Hybridization," Histochemistry, 1986, pp.
1-4, vol. 85. cited by other .
Ivanov I. G., et al., "On the Heterogeneity of the Slow
Reassociating ("Unique") DNA," Molecular & Cellular
Biochemistry, Jun. 28, 1978, pp. 111-118, vol. 20, No. 2. cited by
other .
Jenson, K. K., et al., "Kinetics for Hybridization of the Peptide
Nucleic Acids (PNA) with DNA and RNA Studied with the BIAcore
Technique," Biochemistry, 1997, pp. 5072-5077, vol. 36. cited by
other .
Kallioniemi, O., et al., "ERBB2 Amplification in Breast Cancer
Analyzed by Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization," Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences USA, Jun. 1992, pp. 5321-5325, vol.
89. cited by other .
Landegent, J. E., et al., "2-Acetylaminofluorene-Modified Probes
for the Indirect Hybridocytochemical Detection of Specific Nucleic
Acid Sequences," Experimental Cell Research, 1984, pp. 61-72, vol.
153. cited by other .
Landegent, J. E., et al., "Fine Mapping of the Huntington Disease
Linked D4S10 Locus by Non-Radioactive In Situ Hybridization," Human
Genetics, 1986, pp. 354-357, vol. 73. cited by other .
Landegent, J. E., et al., "Use of Whole Cosmid Cloned Genomic
Sequences for Chromosomal Localization by Non-Radioactive In Situ
Hybridization," Human Genetics, 1987, pp. 366-370, vol. 77. cited
by other .
Le Beau, M. M., "One FISH, Two FISH, Red FISH, Blue FISH," Nature
Genetics, Apr. 1996, pp. 341-344, vol. 12. cited by other .
Lichter, P., et al., "Delineation of Individual Human Chromosomes
in Metaphase and Interphase Cells by In Situ Suppression
Hybridization Using Recombinant DNA Libraries," Human Genetics,
1988, pp. 224-234, vol. 80. cited by other .
Lichter, P., et al., "Rapid Detection of Human Chromosome 21
Aberrations by In Situ Hybridization," Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences USA, Dec. 1988, pp. 9664-9668, vol. 85. cited
by other .
Litt, M., et al., "A Highly Polymorphic Locus in Human DNA Revealed
by Cosmid-Derived Probes," Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences USA, Sep. 1985, pp. 6206-6210, vol. 82. cited by other
.
"Memorandum & Order Re: Motion for Preliminary Injunction," The
Regents of the University of California et al. v. Dakocytomation
California, Inc., No. C 05-03955 MHP, Mar. 10, 2006, pp. 1-16.
cited by other .
"Memorandum & Order Re: Amendment of Basis for Preliminary
Injunction," The Regents of the University of California et al. v.
Dakocytomation California, Inc., No. C 05-03955 MHP, May 17, 2006,
pp. 1-3. cited by other .
Nederlof, P. M., et al., "Three-Color Fluorescence In Situ
Hybridization for the Simultaneous Detection of Multiple Nucleic
Acid Sequences," Cytometry, 1989, pp. 20-27, vol. 10. cited by
other .
Nielsen, P. E., et al., "Sequence-Selective Recognition of DNA by
Strand Displacement with a Thymine-Substituted Polyamide," Science,
Dec. 6, 1991, pp. 1497-1500, vol. 254, No. 5037. cited by other
.
Old, J., "A Direct Estimate of the Number of Human .gamma.-Globin
Genes," Cell, May 1976, pp. 13-18, vol. 8. cited by other .
Pardue, M. L., et al., "Nucleic Acid Hybridization to the DNA of
Cytological Preparations," Methods in Cell Biology, Chapter 1,
1975, pp. 1-16, Academic Press, New York. cited by other .
Pinkel, D., et al., "Cytogenic Analysis Using Quantitative,
High-Sensitivity, Fluorescence Hybridization," Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences USA, May 1986, pp. 2934-2938, vol. 83.
cited by other .
Pinkel, D., et al., "Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization with Human
Chromosome-Specific Libraries: Detection of Trisomy 21 and
Translocations of Chromosome 4," Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences USA, Dec. 1988, pp. 9138-9142, vol. 85. cited
by other .
Pirastu, M., et al., "Hemolytic Disease of the Newborn Caused by a
New Deletion of the Entire .beta.-Globin Cluster," The Journal of
Clinical Investigation, Aug. 1983, pp. 602-609, vol. 72. cited by
other .
Raap, A. K., et al., "Denaturation, Renaturation, and Loss of DNA
During In Situ Hybridization Procedures," Cytometry, May 1986, pp.
235-242, vol. 7, No. 3. cited by other .
Rappold, G. A., et al., "Sex Chromosome Positions in Human
Interphase Nuclei as Studied by In Situ Hybridization with
Chromosome Specific DNA Probes," Human Genetics, 1984, pp. 317-322,
vol. 67. cited by other .
Ray, A., et al., "Peptide Nucleic Acid (PNA): Its Medical and
Biotechnical Applications and Promise for the Future," The FASEB
Journal, Jun. 2000, pp. 1041-1060, vol. 14. cited by other .
Ruault, M., et al., "New BAGE (B Melanoma Antigen) Genes Mapping to
the Juxtacentromeric Regions of Human Chromosomes 13 and 21 Have a
Cancer/Testis Expression Profile," European Journal of Human
Genetics, 2002, pp. 833-840, vol. 10. cited by other .
Sealey, P. G., et al., "Removal of Repeated Sequences from
Hybridisation Probes," Nucleic Acids Research, 1985, pp. 1905-1922,
vol. 13, No. 6. cited by other .
Selypes et al., "A Noninvasive Method for Determination of the Sex
and Karyotype of the Fetus from the Maternal Blood," Human
Genetics, 1988, pp. 357-359, vol. 79. cited by other .
Steffensen, D. M., "Partial Trisomy of the Long Arm of Human
Chromosome 1 as Demonstrated by In Situ Hybridization with 5S
Ribosomal RNA," Human Genetics, 1977, pp. 25-33, vol. 36, No. 1.
cited by other .
The Regents of the University of California v. Oncor, Inc., No.
C-95-3084-VRW, U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1321 (N.D. Cal. 1977). cited by
other .
Tkachuk, D. C., et al., "Detection of bcr-abl Fusion in Chronic
Myelogeneous Leukemia by In Situ Hybridization," Science, Oct. 26,
1990, pp. 559-562, vol. 250. cited by other .
Traut, W., et al., "An Extra Segment in Chromosome 1 of Wild Mus
Musculus: a C-Band Positive Homogeneously Staining Region,"
Cytogenetics and Cell Genetics, 1984, pp. 290-297, vol. 38. cited
by other .
Van Der Burg, M., et al., "Split-Signal FISH for Detection of
Chromosome Aberrations in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia," Leukemia,
2004, pp. 895-908, vol. 18. cited by other .
Van Der Plas, D. C., et al., "Cytogentic and Molecular Analysis in
Philadelphia Negative CML," Blood, Mar. 1989, pp. 1038-1044, vol.
73, No. 4. cited by other .
Wahl, G. M., et al., "Efficient Transfer of Large DNA Fragments
from Agarose Gels to Diazobenzyloxymethyl-Paper and Rapid
Hybridization by Using Dextran Sulfate," Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences USA, Aug. 1979, pp. 3683-3687, vol.
76, No. 8. cited by other .
Webb, G. C., et al., "Probing Murine Male Melosis Using DNA
Flanking the Immunolobulin Heavy Chain Genes," Cytobios, 1985, pp.
159-165, vol. 43. cited by other .
Wetmur, J. G., "Acceleration of DNA Renaturation Rates,"
Biopolymers, 1975, pp. 2517-2524, vol. 14. cited by other .
Wolff, D. J., et al., "Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization," The
Principles of Clinical Cytogenetics, Second Edition, 2005, pp.
455-489. cited by other .
Xi, C., et al., "Use of DNA and Peptide Nucleic Acid Molecular
Beacons for Detection and Quantification of rRNA in Solution and in
Whole Cells," Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Sep. 2003,
pp. 5673-5678, vol. 69, No. 9. cited by other .
Yunis, J. J., et al., "Localization of Sequences Specifying
Messenger RNA to Light-Staining G-Bands of Human Chromosomes,"
Chromosoma, 1977, pp. 335-344, vol. 61. cited by other .
"BCL 10 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code Y5418," Dako Denmark
A/S, feb. 14, 2006, 2 pages. cited by other .
"BCL2 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5407," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Nov. 24, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other .
"BCL3 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5411," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 14, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"BCL6 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5408," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 14, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"BCR FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5403," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 26, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other .
"CCND1 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal Code No. Y5414," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Dec. 1, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other .
"Cytology FISH Accessory Kit," Code K5499, DakoCytomation Danmark
A/S, Mar. 25, 2004, 12 pages. cited by other .
"EGFR/CEN-7 FISH Probe Mix, Code No. Y5500," DakoCytomation Denmark
A/S, Aug. 16, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"EMSY/CEN-11 FISH Probe Mix, Code No. Y5505," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S. Oct. 31, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"ETV6 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y 5400,"
DakoCytomation Denmark A/S, Apr. 2, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other
.
"HER2 FISH phamDx.TM. Kit, Code K5331," DakoCytomation Denmark A/S,
May 19, 2005, 24 pages. cited by other .
"Hybridizer Instrument for In Situ Hybridization," IVD S2450,
S2451, www.DakoCytomation.com, p. 38. cited by other .
"IGH FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5406," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Nov. 24, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other .
"IGK FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5416," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Jul. 19, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"IGL FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code Y5412," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Nov. 24, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other .
"MALT1 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5409,"
DakoCytomation Denmark A/S, Nov. 24, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other
.
"MLL FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y 5401," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 26, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other .
"MYC FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5410," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 31, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"MYC/CEN-8 FISH Probe Mix, Code Y5504," DakoCytomation Denmark A/S,
Aug. 16, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"PAX5 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code Y5413," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 14, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"SIL-TAL1 FISH DNA Probe, Sub-Deletion Signal, Code No. Y5405,"
DakoCytomation Denmark A/S, Mar. 25, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other
.
"TCF-3 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code Y5402," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 26, 2004, 2 pages. cited by other .
"TLX1 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y5415," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Mar. 14, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
"TLX3 FISH DNA Probe, Split Signal, Code No. Y 5404,"
DakoCytomation Denmark A/S, Oct. 14, 2003, 2 pages. cited by other
.
"TOP2A/CEN-17 FISH Probe Mix, Code No. Y5596," DakoCytomation
Denmark A/S, Feb. 17, 2005, 2 pages. cited by other .
Arnoldus, E.P.J. et al., "Feasibility of In Situ Hybridisation with
Chromosome Specific DNA Probes on Paraffin Wax Embedded Tissue," J.
Clin. Pathol., 1991, pp. 900-904, vol. 44. cited by other .
De Wit, P.E. J. et al., "In Situ Detection of Supemumerary
Aberrations of Chromosome-Specific Repetitive DNA Targets in
Interphase Nuclei in Human Melanoma Cell Lines and Tissue
Sections," J. Invest. Dermatol., Apr. 1992, pp. 450-458, vol. 98,
No. 4. cited by other .
Emmerich, P. et al., "Interphase Cytogenetics in Paraffin Embedded
Sections from Human Testicular Germ Cell Tumor Xenografts and in
Corresponding Cultured Cells," Lab. Invest., 1989, pp. 235-242,
vol. 61, No. 2. cited by other .
Gray, J.W. et al., "Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization in Cancer
and Radiation Biology," Rad. Res., 1994, pp. 275-289, vol. 137.
cited by other .
Gray, J.W. et al., "Molecular Cytogenetics in Human Cancer
Diagnosis," Cancer, Mach 15, 1992, pp. 1536-1542, vol. 69, No. 6.
cited by other .
Hyytinen, E. et al., "Improved Technique for Analysis of
Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Tumors by Fluorescence In Situ
Hybridization," Cytometry, 1994, pp. 93-99, vol. 16. cited by other
.
Kim, S. Y. et al., "Interphase Cytogenetics in Paraffin Sections of
Lung Tumors by Non-Isotopic In Situ Hybridzation," Am. J. Path.,
Jan. 1993, pp. 307-317, vol. 142, No. 1. cited by other .
Lee, W. et al., "Detection of Aneupioidy and Possible Deletion in
Paraffin-Embedded Rhabdomyosarcoma Cells with FISH," Cancer Genet.
Cytogenet. 1993, pp. 99-103, vol. 68. cited by other .
Nederlof, P.M. et al., "Detection of Chromosome Aberrations in
Interphase Tumor Nuclei by Nonradioactive In Situ Hybridization,"
Cancer Genet. Cytogenet., 1989, pp. 87-98, vol. 42. cited by other
.
Pinkel, D. et al., "Cytogenetic Analysis by In Situ Hybridization
with Fluorescently Labeled Nucleic Acid Probes," Cold Spring Harbor
Symposium on Quantitative Biology, 1986, pp. 151-157, vol. LI.
cited by other .
Sasaki, K. et al., "Detection of a Human Chromosomal Translocation
t(8;9) in a Baby with Multiple Malformations Using Two-Color
Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization," Path. Intl., 1994, pp.
145-150, vol. 44. cited by other .
Thompson, C.T. et al., Cytogenetic Profiling Using Fluorescence In
Situ Hybridization (FISH) and Comparative Genomic Hybridization
(CGH), J. Cell. Biochem., 1993, pp. 139-143, vol. 17G. cited by
other .
Thompson, C.T. et al., "Thick-Section Fluorescence In Situ
Hybridization on Formalin-Fixed, Paraffin-Embedded Archival Tissue
Provides a Histogenetic Profile," Am. J. Path., Feb. 1994, pp.
237-243, vol. 144, No. 2. cited by other .
Walt, H. et al., "Supernumerary Chromosome 1 in Interphase Nuclei
of Atypical Germ Cells in Paraffin-Embedded Human Seminiferous
Tubules," Lab. Invest., 1989, pp. 527-531, vol. 61, No. 5. cited by
other .
Werner, M. et al., "Interphase Cytogenetics in Pathology:
Principles, Methods, and Applications of Fluorescence In Situ
Hybridization (FISH)," Histochem. Cell. Biol., 1997, pp. 381-390,
vol. 108. cited by other .
Le Beau et al., Nature, vol. 316, pp. 826-828, 1985. cited by
examiner .
Drabkin et al., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
(USA), vol. 82, pp. 6980-6984, 1985. cited by examiner .
Bauman et al., "A New Method for Fluorescence Microscopial
Localization of Specific DNA Sequences by In Situ Hybridization of
Fluorochrome-labelled RNA," Exp Cell Res, vol. 128, 1980, pp.
485-490. cited by examiner .
Boyle et al., "Differential Distribution of Long and Short
Interspersed Element Sequences in the Mouse Genome: Chromosome
Karyotyping By Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization," PNAS(USA), vol.
87, Oct. 1990, pp. 7577-7761. cited by examiner .
Brock et al., "Quanitative in situ Hybridization Reveals Extent of
Sequence Homology Between Related DNA Sequences in Drosophila
melanogaster", Chromosoma (Berl.) vol. 83, 1981, pp. 159-168. cited
by examiner .
Bufton et al, "A Highly Polymorphic Locus On Chromosome 16q
Revealed By A Probe From a Chromosome-Specific Cosmid Library,"
Human Genetics, vol. 74, 1986, pp. 425-431. cited by examiner .
Bufton et al., "Four Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms
Revealed By Probes From a Single Cosmid Map to Human Chromosome
19," Am J Hum Genet, vol. 38, 1896, pp. 447-460. cited by examiner
.
Burk et al, "Organization and Chromosomal Specificity of Autosomal
Homologs of Human Y Chromosome Repeated DNA," Chromosoma, vol. 92,
1985, pp. 225-233. cited by examiner .
Cremer et al, "Preparative Dual-Beam Sorting of the Human Y
Chromosome and In Situ Hybridization of Cloned DNA Probes,"
Cytometry, vol. 5, 1984, pp. 572-579. cited by examiner .
Davies, "The Application of DNA Recombinant Technology to the
Analysis of the Human Genome and Genetic Disease," Human Genetics,
vol. 58, 1981, pp. 351-357. cited by examiner .
Dennis et al, "Cytogenetics of the Parthenogenetic Grasshopper
Warramaba virgo and Its Bisexual Relatives," Chromosoma, vol. 82,
1981, pp. 453-469. cited by examiner .
Dutrillaux et al, "Characterization of Chromosomal Anomalies in
Human Breast Cancer," Cancer Genet. Cytogenet., vol. 49, (1990),
pp. 203-217. cited by examiner .
Gerhard et al., "Localization of a Unique Gene By Direct
Hybridization in situ," PNAS, vol. 78, 1981, pp. 3755-3759. cited
by examiner .
Haase et al, "Detection of Two Viral Genomes in Single Cells by
Double-Label Hybridization in situ and Color Microradioautography,"
Science, vol. 227, 1985, pp. 189-192. cited by examiner .
Holden et al, "Amplified Sequences from Chromosome 15, Including
Centromeres, Nucleolar Organizer Regions, and Centromeric
Heterochromatin, in Homogeneously Staining Regions in the Human
Melanoma Cell Line MeWo" Cancer Genet. & Cytogenet., vol. 14,
1985, pp. 131-146. cited by examiner .
Houldsworth et al, "Comparative Genomic Hybridization: An
Overview," Am. J. Pathology, vol. 145, No. 6, 1994, pp. 1253-1260.
cited by examiner .
Kallioniemi et al, "Comparative Genomic Hybridization for Molecular
Cytogenetic Analysis of Solid Tumors," Science, vol. 258, 1992, pp.
818-821. cited by examiner .
Kallioniemi et al, "Optimizing Comparative Genomic Hybridization
for Analysis of DNA Sequence Copy Number Changes in Solid Tumors,"
Gene, Chromosomes & Cancer, vol. 10, 1994, pp. 231-243. cited
by examiner .
Krumlauf et al, "Construction and Characterization of Genomic
Libraries from Specific Human Chromosomes," PNAS, vol. 79, 1982,
pp. 2971-2975. cited by examiner .
Kunkel et al, "Organization and Heterogeneity of Sequences Within a
Repeating Unit of Human Y Chromosome Deoxyribonucleic Acid,"
Biochem, vol. 18, 1979, pp. 3343-3353. cited by examiner .
Lichter et al, "Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization with Alu and L1
Polymerase Chain Reaction Probes for Rapid Characterization of
Human Chromosome in Hybrid Cell Lines," PNAS(USA), vol. 87, Sep.
1990, pp. 6634-6638. cited by examiner .
Litt et al, "A Highly Polymorphic Locus in Human DNA Revealed by
Probes From Cosmid 1-5 Maps to Chromosome 2q35.fwdarw.37," Am J Hum
Genet, vol. 38, 1986, pp. 288-296. cited by examiner .
Litt et al, "A Polymorphic Locus On the Long Arm of Chromosome 20
Defined by Two Probes From a Single Cosmid," Human Genetics, vol.
73, 1986, pp. 340-345. cited by examiner .
Lux et al, "Hereditary spherocytosis associated with deletion of
human erythocyte ankyrin gene on chromosome 8," Nature, vol. 345,
1990, pp. 736-739. cited by examiner .
Malcolm et al, "Chromosomal Localization of a Single Copy Gene By
in situ Hybridization--Human .beta. Globin Genes On the Short Arm
of Chromosome 11," Ann. Hum. Genet., vol. 45, 1981, pp. 134-141.
cited by examiner .
Moyzis et al, "Human Chromsome-specific repetitive DNA Sequences:
Novel Markers for Genetic Analysis", Chromosoma (Berl.), vol. 95,
1987, pp. 375-386. cited by examiner .
Nelson et al, "Genomic Mismatch Scanning: A New Approach To Genetic
Linkage Mapping," Nature Genetics, vol. 4, 1993, pp. 11-18. cited
by examiner .
Park et al, "Amplification, Overexpression, and Rearrangement of
the erbB-2 Protooncogene in Primary Human Stomach Carcinomas,"
Cancer Research, 49, Dec. 1989, pp. 6605-6609. cited by examiner
.
Pierce et al, "Analysis of a Dispersed Repetitive DNA Sequence In
Isogenic Lines of Drosophila," Chromosome, vol. 82, 1981, pp.
471-492. cited by examiner .
Rabin, "Mapping Minimally Reiterated Genes On Diploid Chromosomes
by In Situ Hybridization," thesis, Dept. of Biochemistry, Univ.
III., 1982. cited by examiner .
Rabin et al, "Two Homoeo Box Loci Mapped in Evolutionary Related
Mouse and Human Chromosomes," Nature, vol. 314, 1985, pp. 175-178.
cited by examiner .
Ried et al, "Direct carrier detection by in situ suppression
hybridization with cosmid clones of the Duchenne/Becker muscular
dystrophy locus," Hum. Genet., vol. 85, 1990, pp. 581-586. cited by
examiner .
Ried et al, "Simultaneous Visualization of Seven Different DNA
Probes by In Situ Hybridization Using Combinatorial Fluorescence
and Digital Imaging Microscopy," PNAS (USA), vol. 89, Feb. 1992,
pp. 1388-1392. cited by examiner .
Ruddle, "A New Era In Mammalian Gene Mapping: Somatic Cell Genetics
and Recombinant DNA Methodologies," Nature, vol. 294, 1981, pp.
115-120. cited by examiner .
Saint-Ruf et al, "Protol-Oncogene Amplification and Homogeneously
Staining Regions in Human Breast Carcinomas," Genes, Chromosomes
& Cancer, vol. 2, (1990), pp. 18-26. cited by examiner .
Siracusa et al, "Use of Repetitive DNA Sequences to Distinguish Mus
musculus and Mus caroli Cells by in situ Hybridization," J.
Embroyl. exp. Morp., vol. 73, 1983, pp. 163-178. cited by examiner
.
Sondermeijer et al, "The Activity of Two Heat Shock Loci of
Drosphila hydei In Tissue Culture Cells and Salivary Gland Cells as
Analyzed by in situ Hybridization of Complementary DNA,"
Chromosoma, vol. 72, 1979, pp. 281-291. cited by examiner .
Steinemann, "Multiple Sex Chromosomes in Drosphila miranda: A
System to Study the Degeneration of a Chromosome," Chromosoma, vol.
86, 1982, pp. 59-76. cited by examiner .
Szabo et al, "Quantitative in Situ Hybridization of Ribosomal RNA
Species to Polytene Chromosomes of Drosphila melanogaster," J. Mol.
Biol., vol. 115, 1977, pp. 539-563. cited by examiner .
Bayer et al, "The Use of the Avidin-Biotin Complex as a Tool in
Molecular Biology," Method of Biochemical Analysis, vol. 26, pp.
1-45 (1980). cited by examiner .
Broker et al, "Electron Microscopic Visualization of tRNA Genes
with Ferritin-Avidin: Biotin Labels," Nucleic Acids Research, vol.
5, No. 2, pp. 363-384 (1978). cited by examiner .
Connolly et al, "Chemical Synthesis of Oligonucleotides Containing
a Free Sulphyrdryl Group and Subsequent Attachment of Thiol
Specific Probes," Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 13, No. 12, pp.
4485-4502 (1985). cited by examiner .
Fuscoe et al, "Construction of Fifteen Human Chromosome-Specific
DNA Libraries from Flow-Purified Chromosomes," Cytogenetic Cell
Genetics, vol. 43, pp. 79-86 (1986). cited by examiner .
Kuhlmann, Immuno Enzyme Techniques in Cytochemistry, Verlag Chemie,
Weinheim, Basel (1984) (table of contents only). cited by examiner
.
Lawn et al, "The Isolation and Characterization of Linked
.delta.-and .beta.-Globin Genes from a Cloned Library of Human
DNA," Cell, vol. 15, pp. 1157-1174 (1978). cited by examiner .
Maniatis et al, "In Vitro Packaging of Bacteriophage .lamda. DNA,"
Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, Cold Spring Harbor
Laboratory, pp. 256-307 (1982). cited by examiner .
Mamur, "A Procedure for the Isolation of Deoxyribonucleic Acid from
Micro-organisms," J. Mol. Biol., vol. 3, pp. 208-218 (1961). cited
by examiner .
Richardson et al, "Biotin and Fluorescent Labeling of RNA Using T4
RNA Ligase," Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 11, No. 18, pp. 6167-6184
(1983). cited by examiner .
Smith et al, "The Synthesis of Oligonucleotides Containing an
Aliphatic Amino Group at the 5' Terminus: Synthesis of Fluorescent
DNA Primers For Use in DNA Sequence Analysis," Nucleic Acids
Research, vol. 13, No. 7, pp. 2399-2412 (1985). cited by examiner
.
Tchen et al, "Chemically Modified Nucleic Acdis as Immunodetectable
Probes in Hybridization Experiments," PNAS, vol. 81, pp. 3466-3470
(1984). cited by examiner.
|
Primary Examiner: Martinell; James
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Fenwick & West LLP
Government Interests
The United States Government has rights in this invention pursuant
to Contract No. W-7405-ENG48 between the U.S. Department of Energy
and the University of California, for the operation of Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory.
Parent Case Text
RELATED APPLICATION
This application is .[.a divisional, of application.]. .Iadd.a
Reissue application of U.S. Ser. No. 08/477,316, filed Jun. 7,
1995, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,344,315, granted Feb. 5, 2002, which is a
continuation of U.S. .Iaddend.Ser. No. 08/312,914, filed Sep. 30,
1994, now abandoned.[.;.]. .Iadd., .Iaddend.which is a continuation
of .[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser. No. 08/137,745, filed
Oct. 19, 1993, now abandoned, which is a continuation of
.[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser. No. 08/015,390, filed
Feb. 8, 1993, now abandoned, which is a continuation of
.[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser. No. 07/670,242, filed
Mar. 15, 1991, now abandoned, which is a continuation-in-part of
.[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser. No. 07/659,974, filed
Feb. 22, 1991, now abandoned, which is a continuation-in-part of
.[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser. No. 07/537,305, filed
Jun. 12, 1990.[.;.]. .Iadd., .Iaddend.now abandoned, which is a
continuation-in-part of .[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser.
No. 07/497,098, filed Mar. 20, 1990, now abandoned, which is a
.[.continuation of application.]. .Iadd.continuation-in-part of
U.S. .Iaddend.Ser. No. 07/444,669, filed Dec. 1, 1989, now
abandoned, .[.which is a continuation of application Ser. No.
07/382,094, filed Jul. 19, 1989, now abandoned,.]. which is a
continuation-in-part of .[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser.
No. 06/937,793, filed Dec. 4, 1986, now abandoned, which is a
continuation-in-part of .[.application.]. .Iadd.U.S. .Iaddend.Ser.
No. 06/819,314, filed Jan. 16, 1986, now abandoned.
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A method of staining targeted interphase chromosomal material
based upon a nucleic acid segment employing a unique sequence high
complexity nucleic acid probe of greater than about 50,000 bases,
wherein said targeted chromosomal material is a genetic
rearrangement associated with at least one chromosome in humans,
said method comprising employing said chromosomal material and a
unique sequence high complexity nucleic acid probe of greater than
about 50,000 bases in in situ hybridization, wherein the
chromosomal material is present in a morphologically identifiable
cell nucleus; allowing said probe to bind to said targeted
chromosomal material; and detecting said bound probe, wherein bound
probe is indicative of the presence of target chromosomal
material.
2. A method of staining targeted interphase chromosomal material
based upon a nucleic acid segment employing a unique sequence high
complexity nucleic acid probe of greater than about 40 kb, wherein
said targeted chromosomal material is a genetic rearrangement
associated with at least one chromosome in humans, said method
comprising contacting said chromosomal material with a unique
sequence high complexity nucleic acid probe of greater than about
40 kb, wherein the chromosomal material is present in a
morphologically identifiable cell nucleus; allowing said probe to
bind to said targeted chromosomal material; and detecting said
bound probe, wherein bound probe is indicative of the presence of
target chromosomal material.
3. A method of staining targeted interphase chromosomal material
based upon a nucleic acid segment employing a unique sequence high
complexity nucleic acid probe of greater than about 50,000 bases,
wherein said targeted interphase chromosomal material is a genetic
rearrangement associated with at least one chromosome in humans,
said method comprising contacting said interphase chromosomal
material with a unique sequence high complexity nucleic acid probe
of greater than about 50,000 bases, wherein the chromosomal
material is present in a morphologically identifiable cell nucleus;
allowing said probe to bind to said targeted interphase chromosomal
material; and detecting said bound probe, wherein bound probe is
indicative of the presence of target interphase chromosomal
material.
4. The method of claim 2, wherein the genetic rearrangement is a
translocation or an inversion.
5. The method of claim 2, wherein the unique sequence high
complexity nucleic acid probe is labeled.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein said labeled unique sequence high
complexity nucleic acid probe comprises fragments complementary to
a single chromosome, fragments complementary to a subregion of a
single chromosome, fragments complementary to a genome or fragments
complementary to a subregion of a genome.
7. The method of claim 2, wherein the interphase chromosomal
material is interphase chromosomal DNA.
8. The method of claim 3, wherein the genetic rearrangement is a
translocation or an inversion.
9. The method of claim 3, wherein the unique sequence high
complexity nucleic acid probe is labeled.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein said labeled unique sequence
high complexity nucleic acid probe comprises fragments
complementary to a single chromosome, fragments complementary to a
subregion of a single chromosome, fragments complementary to a
genome or fragments complementary to a subregion of a genome.
11. The method of claim 3, wherein the interphase chromosomal
material is interphase chromosomal DNA.
12. The method of claim 2, wherein complexity of the unique
sequence high complexity nucleic acid probe is greater than about
100,000 bases.
13. The method of claim 3, wherein complexity of the unique
sequence high complexity nucleic acid probe is greater than about
100,000 bases.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The invention relates generally to the field of cytogenetics, and
more particularly, to the field of molecular cytogenetics. The
invention concerns methods for identifying and classifying
chromosomes. Still more particularly, this invention concerns
nucleic acid probes which can be designed by the processes
described herein to produce staining distributions that can extend
along one or more whole chromosomes, and/or along a region or
regions on one or more chromosomes, including staining patterns
that extend over the whole genome. Staining patterns can be
tailored for any desired cytogenetic application, including
prenatal, tumor and disease related cytogenetic applications, among
others. The invention provides for compositions of nucleic acid
probes and for methods of staining chromosomes therewith to
identify normal chromosomes and chromosomal abnormalities in
metaphase spreads and in interphase nuclei. The probe-produced
staining patterns of this invention facilitate the microscopic
and/or flow cytometric identification of normal and abnormal
chromosomes and the characterization of the genetic nature of
particular abnormalities. The particular focus of this application
is that wherein the abnormalities are genetic rearrangements.
Although most of the examples herein concern human chromosomes and
much of the language herein is directed to human concerns, the
concept of using nucleic acid probes for staining or painting
chromosomes is applicable to chromosomes from any source including
both plants and animals.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Chromosome abnormalities are associated with genetic disorders,
degenerative diseases, and exposure to agents known to cause
degenerative diseases, particularly cancer, German, "Studying Human
Chromosomes Today," American Scientist Vol. 58, pgs. 182-201
(1970); Yunis, "The Chromosomal Basis of Human Neoplasia," Science
Vol. 221, pgs. 227-236 (1983); and German, "Clinical Implication of
Chromosome Breakage," in Genetic Damage in Man Caused by
Environmental Agents, Berg, Ed., pgs. 65-86 (Academic Press, New
York, 1979). Chromosomal abnormalities can be of several types,
including: extra or missing individual chromosomes, extra or
missing portions of a chromosome (segmental duplications or
deletions), breaks, rings and chromosomal rearrangements, among
others. Chromosomal or genetic rearrangements include
translocations (transfer of a piece from one chromosome onto
another chromosome), dicentrics (chromosomes with two centromeres),
inversions (reversal in polarity of a chromosomal segment),
insertions, amplifications, and deletions.
Detectable chromosomal abnormalities occur with a frequency of one
in every 250 human births. Abnormalities that involve deletions or
additions of chromosomal material alter the gene balance of an
organism and generally lead to fetal death or to serious mental and
physical defects. Down syndrome can be caused by having three
copies of chromosome 21 instead of the normal 2. This syndrome is
an example of a condition caused by abnormal chromosome number, or
aneuploidy. Down syndrome can also be caused by a segmental
duplication of a subregion on chromosome 21 (such as, 21q22), which
can be present on chromosome 21 or on another chromosome. Edward
syndrome (18+), Patau syndrome (13+), Turner syndrome (XO) and
Kleinfelter syndrome (XXY) are among the most common numerical
aberrations. [Epstein, The Consequences of Chromosome Imbalance:
Principles, Mechanisms and Models (Cambridge Univ. Press 1986);
Jacobs, Am. J. Epidemiol, 105:180 (1977); and Lubs et al., Science,
169:495 (1970).]
Retinoblastoma (del 13q14), Prader-Willi syndrome (del 15q11-q13),
Wilm's tumor (del 11p13) and Cri-du-chat syndrome (del 5p) are
examples of important disease linked structural aberrations. [Nora
and Fraser, Medical Genetics: Principles and Practice. (Lea and
Febiger 1989).]
Measures of the frequency of structurally aberrant chromosomes, for
example, dicentric chromosomes, caused by clastogenic agents, such
as, ionizing radiation or chemical mutagens, are widely used as
quantitative indicators of genetic damage caused by such agents,
Biochemical Indicators of Radiation Injury in Man (International
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 1971); and Berg, Ed. Genetic Damage
in Man Caused by Environmental Agents (Academic Press, New York,
1979). A host of potentially carcinogenic and teratogenic chemicals
are widely distributed in the environment because of industrial and
agricultural activity. These chemicals include pesticides, and a
range of industrial wastes and by-products, such as halogenated
hydrocarbons, vinyl chloride, benzene, arsenic, and the like,
Kraybill et al., Eds., Environmental Cancer (Hemisphere Publishing
Corporation, New York, 1977). Sensitive measures of chromosomal
breaks and other abnormalities could form the basis of improved
dosimetric and risk assessment methodologies for evaluating the
consequences of exposure to such occupational and environmental
agents.
Current procedures for genetic screening and biological dosimetry
involve the analysis of karyotypes. A karyotype is the particular
chromosome complement of an individual or of a related group of
individuals, as defined both by the number and morphology of the
chromosomes usually in mitotic metaphase. It includes such things
as total chromosome number, copy number of individual chromosome
types (e.g., the number of copies of chromosome X), and chromosomal
morphology, e.g., as measured by length, centromeric index,
connectedness, or the like. Chromosomal abnormalities can be
detected by examination of karyotypes. Karyotypes are
conventionally determined by staining an organism's metaphase, or
otherwise condensed (for example, by premature chromosome
condensation) chromosomes. Condensed chromosomes are used because,
until recently, it has not been possible to visualize interphase
chromosomes due to their dispersed condition and the lack of
visible boundaries between them in the cell nucleus.
A number of cytological techniques based upon chemical stains have
been developed which produce longitudinal patterns on condensed
chromosomes, generally referred to as bands. The banding pattern of
each chromosome within an organism usually permits unambiguous
identification of each chromosome type, Latt, "Optical Studies of
Metaphase Chromosome Organization," Annual Review of Biophysics and
Bioengineering, Vol. 5, pgs. 1-37 (1976). Accurate detection of
some important chromosomal abnormalities, such as translocations
and inversions, has required such banding analysis.
Unfortunately, such conventional banding analysis requires cell
culturing and preparation of high quality metaphase spreads, which
is time consuming and labor intensive, and frequently difficult or
impossible. For example, cells from many tumor types are difficult
to culture, and it is not clear that the cultured cells are
representative of the original tumor cell population. Fetal cells
capable of being cultured need to be obtained by invasive means and
need to be cultured for several weeks to obtain enough metaphase
cells for analysis. In many cases, the banding patterns on the
abnormal chromosomes do not permit unambiguous identification of
the portions of the normal chromosomes that make them up. Such
identification may be important to indicate the location of
important genes involved in the abnormality. Further, the
sensitivity and resolving power of current methods of karyotyping
are limited by the fact that multiple chromosomes of chromosomal
regions have highly similar staining characteristics, and that
abnormalities (such as deletions) which involve only a fraction of
a band are not detectable. Therefore, such methods are
substantially limited for the diagnosis and detailed analysis of
contiguous gene syndromes, such as partial trisomy, Prader-Willi
syndrome [Emanuel, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 43:575 (1988); Schmickel, J.
Pediatr., 109:231 (1986)] and retinoblastoma [Sparkes, Biochem.
Biophys. Acta., 780:95 (1985)].
Thus, conventional banding analysis has several important
limitations, which include the following. 1) It is labor intensive,
time consuming, and requires a highly trained analst. 2) It can be
applied only to condensed chromosomes. 3) It does not allow for the
detection of structural aberrations involving less than 3-15
megabases (Mb), depending upon the nature of the aberration and the
resolution of the banding technique [Landegren et al., Science
242:229 (1988)]. This invention provides for probe compositions and
methods to overcome such limitations of conventional banding
analysis.
The chemical staining procedures of the prior art provide patterns
over a genome for reasons not well understood and which cannot be
modified as required for use in different applications. Such
chemical staining patterns were used to map the binding site of
probes. However, only occasionally, and with great effort, was in
situ hybridization used to obtain some information about the
position of a lesion, for example, a breakpoint relative to a
particular DNA sequence. The present invention overcomes the
inflexibility of chemical staining in that it stains a genome in a
pattern based upon nucleic acid sequence; therefore the pattern can
be altered as required by changing the nucleic acid sequence of the
probe. The probe-produced staining patterns of this invention
provide reliable fundamental landmarks which are useful in
cytogenetic analysis.
Automated detection of structural abnormalities of chromosomes with
image analysis of chemically stained bands would require the
development of a system that can detect and interpret the banding
patterns produced on metaphase chromosomes by conventional
techniques. It has proven to be very difficult to identify reliably
by automated means normal chromosomes that have been chemically
stained; it is much more difficult to differentiate abnormal
chromosomes having structural abnormalities, such as,
translocations. Effective automated detection of translocations in
conventionally banded chromosomes has not been accomplished after
over a decade of intensive work. The probe-produced banding
patterns of this invention are suitable for such automated
detection and analysis.
In recent years rapid advances have taken place in the study of
chromosome structure and its relation to genetic content and DNA
composition. In part, the progress has come in the form of improved
methods of gene mapping based on the availability of large
quantities of pure DNA and RNA fragments for probes produced by
genetic engineering techniques, e.g., Kao, "Somatic Cell Genetics
and Gene Mapping," International Review of Cytology Vol. 85, pgs.
109-146 (1983), and D'Eustachio et al., "Somatic Cell Genetics in
Gene Families," Science, Vol. 220, pgs. 9, 19-924 (1983). The
probes for gene mapping comprise labeled fragments of
single-stranded or double stranded DNA or RNA which are hybridized
to complementary sites on chromosomal DNA. With such probes it has
been crucially important to produce pure, or homogeneous, probes to
minimize hybridizations at locations other than at the site of
interest, Henderson, "Cytological Hybridization to Mammalian
Chromosomes," International Review of Cytology Vol. 76, pgs. 1-46
(1982).
The hybridization process involves unravelling, or melting, the
double-stranded nucleic acids of the probe and target by heating,
or other means (unless the probe and target are single-stranded
nucleic acids). This step is sometimes referred to as denaturing
the nucleic acid. When the mixture of probe and target nucleic
acids cool, strands having complementary bases recombine, or
anneal. When a probe anneals with a target nucleic acid, the
probe's location on the target can be detected by a label carried
by the probe or by some intrinsic characteristics of the probe or
probe-target duplex. When the target nucleic acid remains in its
natural biological setting, e.g., DNA in chromosomes, mRNA in
cytoplasm, portions of chromosomes or cell nuclei (albeit fixed or
altered by preparative techniques), the hybridization process is
referred to as in situ hybridization.
In situ hybridization probes were initially limited to identifying
the location of genes or other well defined nucleic acid sequences
on chromosomes or in cells. Comparisons of the mapping of
single-copy probes to normal and abnormal chromosomes were used to
examine chromosomal abnormalities. Cannizzaro et al., Cytogenetics
and Cell Genetics, 39:173-178 (1985). Distribution of the multiple
binding sites of repetitive probes could also be determined.
Hybridization with probes which have one target site in a haploid
genome, single-copy or unique sequence probes, has been used to map
the locations of particular genes in the genome [Harper and
Saunders, "Localization of the Human Insulin Gene to the Distal End
of the Short Arm of Chromosome 11," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., Vol.
78, pgs. 4458-4460 (1981); Kao et al., "Assignment of the
Structural Gene Coding for Albumin to Chromosome 4," Human
Genetics, Vol. 62, pgs. 337-341 (1982)]; but such hybridizations
are not reliable when the size of the target site is small. As the
amount of target sequence for low complexity single-copy probes is
small, only a portion of the potential target sites in a population
of cells form hybrids with the probe. Therefore, mapping the
location of the specific binding site of the probe has been
complicated by background signals produced by non-specific binding
of the probe and also by noise in the detection system (for
example, autoradiography or immunochemistry). The unreliability of
signals for such prior art single-copy probes has required
statistical analysis of the positions of apparent hybridization
signals in multiple cells to map the specific binding site of the
probe.
Wallace et al., in "The Use of Synthetic Oligonucleotides as
Hybridization Probes. II. Hybridization of Oligonudeotides of Mixed
Sequence to Rabbit Beta-Globin DNA," Nucleic Acids Research, Vol.
9, pgs. 879-894 (1981), disclose the construction of synthetic
oligonucleotide probes having mixed base sequences for detecting a
single locus corresponding to a structural gene. The mixture of
base sequences was determined by considering all possible
nucleotide sequences which could code for a selected sequence of
amino acids in the protein to which the structural gene
corresponded.
Olsen et al., in "Isolation of Unique Sequence Human X Chromosomal
Deoxyribonucleic Acid," Biochemistry, Vol. 19, pgs. 2419-2428
(1980), disclose a method for isolating labeled unique sequence
human X chromosomal DNA by successive hybridizations: first, total
genomic human DNA against itself so that a unique sequence DNA
fraction can be isolated; second, the isolated unique sequence
human DNA fraction against mouse DNA so that homologous mouse/human
sequences are removed; and finally, the unique sequence human DNA
not homologous to mouse against the total genomic DNA of a
human/mouse hybrid whose only human chromosome is chromosome X, so
that a fraction of unique sequence X chromosomal DNA is isolated.
Individual clones are then isolated from this fraction and are
candidates for human X chromosome specific DNA sequences.
Manuelidis et al., in "Chromosomal and Nuclear Distribution of the
Hind III 1.9-KB Human DNA Repeat Segment," Chromosoma Vol. 91, pp.
28-38 (1984), disclose the construction of a single kind of DNA
probe for detecting multiple loci on chromosomes corresponding to
the location of members of a family of repeated DNA sequences. Such
probes are herein termed repetitive probes.
Different repetitive sequences may have different distributions on
chromosomes. They may be spread over all chromosomes as in the just
cited reference, or they may be concentrated in compact regions of
the genome, such as, on the centromeres of the chromosomes, or they
may have other distributions. In some cases, such a repetitive
sequence is predominantly located on a single chromosome, and
therefore is a chromosome-specific repetitive sequence. [Willard et
al., "Isolation and Characterization of a Major Tandem Repeat
Family from the Human X Chromosome," Nucleic Acids Research, Vol.
11, pgs. 2017-2033 (1983).]
A probe for repetitive sequences shared by all chromosomes can be
used to discriminate between chromosomes of different species if
the sequence is specific to one of the species. Total genomic DNA
from one species which is rich in such repetitive sequences can be
used in this manner. [Pinkel et al. (III), PNAS USA, 83:2934
(1986); Manuelidis, Hum. Genet., 71:288 (1985) and Durnam et al.,
Somatic Cell Molec. Genet., 11:571 (1985.]
Recently, there has been an increased availability of probes for
repeated sequences (repetitive probes) that hybridize intensely and
specifically to selected chromosomes. [Trask et al., Hum. Genet.,
78:251 (1988) and references cited therein.] Such probes are now
available for over half of the human chromosomes. In general, they
bind to repeated sequences on compact regions of the target
chromosome near the centromere. However, one probe has been
reported that hybridizes to human chromosome 1p36, and there are
several probes that hybridize to human chromosome Yq. Hybridization
with such probes permits rapid identification of chromosomes in
metaphase spreads, determination of the number of copies of
selected chromosomes in interphase nuclei [Pinkel et al. (I), PNAS
USA, 83:2934 (1986); Pinkel et al. (II), Cold Spring Harbor Symp.
Quant. Biol., 51:151 (1986) and Cremer et al., Hum. Genet, 74:346
(1986)] and determination of the relative positions of chromosomes
in interphase nuclei [Trask et al., supra; Pinkel et al. (I),
supra; Pinkel et al. (II), supra; Manuelidis, PNAS USA, 81:3123
(1984); Rappold et al., Human Genet., 67:317 (1984); Schardin et
al., Hum. Genet., 71:282 (1985); and Manuelidis, Hum. Genet.,
71:288 (1985)].
However, many applications are still limited by the lack of
appropriate probes. For example, until the methods described herein
were invented, probes with sufficient specificity for prenatal
diagnosis were not available for chromosome 13 or 21. Further,
repetitive probes are not very useful for detection of structural
aberrations since the probability is low that the aberrations will
involve the region to which the probe hybridizes.
This invention overcomes the prior art limitations on the use of
probes and dramatically enhances the application of in situ
hybridization for cytogenetic analysis. As indicated above, prior
art probes have not been useful for in-depth cytogenetic analysis.
Low complexity single-copy probes do not at this stage of
hybridization technology generate reliable signals. Although
repetitive probes do provide reliable signals, such signals cannot
be tailored for different applications because of the fixed
distribution of repetitive sequences in a genome. The probes of
this invention combine the hybridization reliability of repetitive
probes with the flexibility of being able to tailor the binding
pattern of the probe to any desired application.
The enhanced capabilities of the probes of this invention come from
their increased complexity. Increasing the complexity of a probe
increases the probability, and therefore the intensity, of
hybridization to the target region, but also increases the
probability of non-specific hybridizations resulting in background
signals. However, within the concept of this invention, it was
considered that such background signals would be distributed
approximately randomly over the genome. Therefore, the net result
is that the target region could be visualized with increased
contrast against such background signals.
Exemplified herein are probes in an approximate complexity range of
from about 50,000 bases (50 kb) to hundreds of millions of bases.
Such representative probes are for compact loci and whole human
chromosomes. Prior to this invention, probes employed for in situ
hybridization techniques had complexities below 40 kb, and more
typically on the order of a few kb.
Staining chromosomal material with the probes of this invention is
significantly different from the chemical staining of the prior
art. The specificity of the probe produced staining of this
invention arises from an entirely new source--the nucleic acid
sequences in a genome. Thus, staining patterns of this invention
can be designed to highlight fundamental genetic information
important to particular applications.
The procedures of this invention to construct probes of any desired
specificity provide significant advances in a broad spectrum of
cytogenetic studies. The analysis can be carried out on metaphase
chromosomes and interphase nuclei. The techniques of this invention
can be especially advantageous for applications where high-quality
banding by conventional methods is difficult or suspected of
yielding biased information, e.g., in tumor cytogenetics. Reagents
targeted to sites of lesions known to be diagnostically or
prognostically important, such as tumor type-specific
translocations and deletions, among other tumor specific genetic
arrangements, permit rapid recognition of such abnormalities. Where
speed of analysis is the predominant concern, e.g., detection of
low-frequency chromosomal aberrations induced by toxic
environmental agents, the compositions of this invention permit a
dramatic increase in detection efficiency in comparison to previous
techniques based on conventional chromosome banding.
Further, prenatal screening for disease-linked chromosome
aberrations (e.g., trisomy 21) is enhanced by the rapid detection
of such aberrations by the methods and compositions of this
invention. Interphase aneuploidy analysis according to this
invention is particularly significant for prenatal diagnosis in
that it yields more rapid results than are available by cell
culture methods. Further, fetal cells separated from maternal
blood, which cannot be cultured by routine procedures and therefore
cannot be analysed by conventional karyotyping techniques, can be
examined by the methods and compositions of this invention. In
addition, the intensity, contrast and color combinations of the
staining patterns, coupled with the ability to tailor the patterns
for particular applications, enhance the opportunities for
automated cytogenetic analysis, for example, by flow cytometry or
computerized microscopy and image analysis.
This application specifically claims chromosome specific reagents
for the detection of genetic rearrangements and methods of using
such reagents to detect such rearrangements. Representative genetic
rearrangements so detected are those that produce a fusion
gene--BCR-ABL--that is diagnostic for chronic myelogenous leukemia
(CML) and those associated with chromosomes 3, 13 (retinoblastoma
gene therein), and 17, such as, deletions, amplifications and
translocations thereof.
Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) is a neoplastic proliferation of
the bone marrow cells genetically characterized by the fusion of
the BCR and ABL genes on chromosomes 9 and 22. The fusion usually
involves a reciprocal translocation t(9;22)(q34;q11), which
produces the cytogenetically distinctive Philadelphia chromosome
(Ph.sup.1). However, more complex rearrangements may cause BCR-ABL
fusion. At the molecular level, fusion can be detected by Southern
analysis or by in vitro amplification of the mRNA from the fusion
gene using the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Those techniques
are sensitive but cannot be applied to single cells.
Clearly, a sensitive method for detecting chromosomal abnormalities
and, more specifically, genetic rearrangements, such as, for
example, the tumor specific arrangements associated with CML, the
chromosome 3 and 17 deletions, amplifications and translocations
associated with various cancers, and those associated with the
retinoblastoma gene, would be a highly useful tool for genetic
screening. This invention provides such tools.
The following references are indicated in the ensuing text by
numbers as indicated or by author(s) and year of publication: 1. de
Klein et al., Nature, 300:765 (1982). 2. Groffen et al., Cell,
36:93 (1984). 3. Heisterkamp et al., Nature, 306:239 (1983). 4.
Shtivelman et al., Blood, 69:971 (1987). 5. Konopka, et al., Cell,
37:1035 (1984). 6. Ben-Neriah et al., Science, 233:212 (1986). 7.
Nowell and Hungerford, Science, 132:1497 (1960). 8. Rowley, Nature,
243:290 (June 1973). 9. Grosveld et al., Mol Cell Biol, 6:607
(1986). 10. Canani et al., Lancet, 1:593 (1984). 11. Gale and
Canani, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 81:5648 (1984). 12. Konopka et al.,
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 81:1810 (1985). 13. Benn et al., Cancer
Genet Cytogenet, 29:1 (1987). 14. Abe et al., Cancer Genet
Cytogenet, 38:61 (1989) 15. Shtalrid et al., Blood, 72:485 (1988).
16. Dube et al., Genes Chromosomes and Cancer, 1:106 (1989). 17.
Fishleder et al., Leukemia, 3:10,746 (1989) 18. Bartram et al., J
Exp Med, 164 (5):1389 (1986). 19. Hiroswa et al., Am L Hematol,
28P:133 (1988). 20. Lee et al., Blood, 73 (8):2165 (1989). 21.
Kawasaki et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 85:5698 (1988). 22. Roth
et al., Blood 74:882 (1989). 23. Hooberman et al., Blood, 74:1101
(1989). 24. Westbrook et al., Blood, 71 (3):697-702 (1988). 25.
Trask et al., Genomics 5:710 (1989). 26. Collins and Groudine, Proc
Natl Acad Sci USA, 80:4813 (1983). 27. Pinkel et al., Proc Natl
Acad Sci USA, 83:2934 (1986). 28. Pinkel, et al., Proc Natl Acad
Sci USA, 85: 9138 (1988). 29. Trask and Hamlin, Genes and
Development, 3:1913 (1989). 30. Lawrence et al., Cell, 42:51
(1988). 31. Johnson and Nogueria, J. Immunol. Methods, 43:349
(1981). 32. Hegewisch-Becker et al., J. Cell. Biochem. (Suppl.),
13E:289 (1989). 33. Kohler et al., "Expression of BCR-ABL from
Transcripts Following Bone Marrow Transplant for Philadelphia
Chromosome Positive Leukemias", Leukemia, 4(8): 541-547 (August
1990). 34. Heisterkamp et al., Nature, 315:758 (1985). 35.
Heisterkamp et al, J. Molec. Appl. Genet., 2:57 (1983). 36.
Bookstein et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 85:2210-2214 (1988). 37.
Bowcock et al., Am J. Hum Genet, 46:12-17 (1990). 38. Canning and
Dryja, Proc Natl Acad Sci, 86:5044-5048 (1989). 39. Cherif et al.,
Hum Genet, 81:358-362 (1989). 40. Cremer et al., Hum Genet,
74:346-352 (1986). 41. Cremer et al., Exp Cell Res, 176:199-220
(1988). 42. Devilee et al., Cancer Res, 48:5325-5830 (1988). 43.
Fan et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 87:6223-6227 (1990). 44. Friend
et al., Nature, 323:643-646 (1986). 45. Fung et al. Science,
236:1657-1661 (1987). 46. Hensel et al., Cancer Res, 50:3067-3072
(1990). 47. Hopman et al., Histochem J, 89:307-316 (1988). 48.
Howe, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 87:5883-5887 (1990). 49. Kievits et
al., Cytogenet Cell Genet, 53:134-136 (1990). 50. Lee et al.,
Science, 241:218-221 (1988). 51. Lee et al., Science, 235:1394-1399
(1987). 52. Lee et al., Nature, 329:642-645 (1987). 53. Lichter et
al., Science, 247:64-69 (1990). 54. Lux et al., Nature, 345:736-739
(1990). 55. Nederlof et al., Cancer Genet Cytogenet, 42:87-98
(1989). 56. Pinkel et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 83:2934-2938
(1986). 57. Rygaard et al., Cancer Res, 50:5312-5317 (1990). 58.
Sparkes et al., Science, 208:1042-1044 (1980). 59. T'Ang et al.,
Science, 242:263-266 (1988). 60. Trask et al., Genomics, 5:710-717
(1989). 61. Varley et al., Oncogene, 4:725-729 (1989). 62.
Viegas-Pequignot et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 86:582-586 (1989).
63. Van Dekken et al., Cancer, 66:491-497 (1990). 64. Waldman et
al., Cancer Res, 51(14):3807-3813 (1991).
Fusion of the proto-oncogene c-ABL from the long arm of chromosome
9 with the BCR gene of chromosome 22 is a consistent finding in CML
(1-3). That genetic change leads to formation of a BCR-ABL
transcript that is translated to form a 210 kd protein present in
virtually all cases of CML (46). In 90% of the cases, the fusion
gene results from a reciprocal translocation involving chromosomes
9 and 22 producing a cytogenetically distinct small acrocentric
chromosome called the Philadelphia (Ph.sup.1) chromosome (7-12),
FIG. 8. However, standard cytogenetics does not have the resolution
to distinguish closely spaced breakpoints, such as those
characteristic of CML and acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), and
misses fusions produced by more complex rearrangements. Mapping and
cloning of the breakpoint regions in both genes has lead to
molecular techniques capable of demonstrating BCR-ABL fusion in CML
cases where the Ph.sup.1 chromosome could not be detected
cytogenetically (13-16). Southern analysis for BCR rearrangements
has become the standard for diagnosis of CML. More recently, fusion
has been detected by in vitro amplification of a cDNA transcript
copied from CML mRNA using reverse transcriptase (17-23). That
technique permits detection of BCR-ABL transcript from CML cells
present at low frequencies. Both of those techniques utilize
nucleic acid obtained from cell populations so that correlation
between genotype and phenotype for individual cells is not
possible.
Chromosomal deletions involving tumor suppressor genes may play an
important role in the development and progression of solid tumors.
The retinoblastoma gene (Rb-1), located in chromosome 13q14, is the
most extensively characterized tumor suppressor gene (Friend et
al., 1986; Lee et al., 1987; Fung et al., 1987). The Rb-1 gene
product, a 105 kDa nuclear phosphoprotein, apparently plays an
important role in cell cycle regulation (Lee et al., 1987; Howe et
al., 1990). Altered or lost expression of the Rb protein is caused
by inactivation of both gene alleles either through a point
mutation or a chromosomal deletion. Rb-1 gene alterations have been
found not only in retinoblastomas (Friend et al., 1986; Lee et al.,
1987; Fung et al., 1987) but also in other malignancies such as
osteosarcomas (Friend et al. 1986), small cell lung cancer (Hensel
et al., 1990; Rygaard et al., 1990) and breast cancer (Lee et al.,
1988; T'Ang et al., 1988; Varley et al., 1989). Restriction
fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) studies have indicated that
such tumor types have frequently lost heterozygosity at 13q
suggesting that one of the Rb-1 gene alleles has been lost due to a
gross chromosomal deletion (Lundberg et al., 1987; Bowcock et al.,
1990).
Section IX infra describes the use of fourteen lambda phage clones
spanning all the exons of the Rb-1 gene region, about 150 kb of
genomic DNA, as a high complexity probe for chromosome-specific
painting. An intense signal produced in metaphase chromosomes
confirmed the location of the Rb-1 gene at chromosome 13q14. Two
Rb-1 hybridization signals were detected in about 90% of normal
interphase nuclei, whereas two cell lines having a cytogenetically
defined deletion involving the Rb-1 gene region showed only one
hybridization signal. Gene deletion was confirmed by analyzing
metaphase spreads from these cell lines cohybridized with
chromosome 13/21 alpha satellite probe. Also analyzed were touch
preparations and fine needle aspirates of breast carcinomas;
heterogeneity was shown in Rb-1 gene copy number both within and
between tumors.
Genetic rearrangements involving only subregions of the Rb-1 gene
have been described (Bookstein et al., 1988; Canning and Dryja,
1989). The inventors hereof, to detect such subregions of the Rb-1
gene, used smaller probes comprising 1-5 contiguous lambda phage
clones to stain specific subregions within the Rb-1 gene thus
allowing detection of aberrations within that tumor suppressor
gene. Such representative examples of the chromosome-specific
staining methods of this invention provide information on actual
gene copy numbers and rearrangements from individual
morphologically defined tumor cells useful in the evaluation of
neoplasia-associated gene aberrations as well as intratumor genetic
heterogeneity.
The deletion of the short arm of chromosome 3 has been associated
with several cancers, for example, small cell lung cancer, renal
and ovarian cancers; it has been postulated that one or more
putative tumor suppressor genes is or are located in the p region
of chromosome 3 (ch. 3p) [Minna et al., Symposia on Quantitative
Biology, Vol. L1:843-853 (CSH Lab 1986); Cohen et al., N. Eng. J.
Med., 301:592-595 (1979); Bergerham et al., Cancer Res.,
49:1390-1396 (1989); Whang-Peng et al., Can. Genet. Cytogenet,
11:91-106 (1984); and Trent et al., Can. Genet. Cytogenet,
14:153-161 (1985)]. As shown in Section X infra chromosome-specific
staining according to this invention can be used to create bands of
stained nucleic acid that detect structural aberrations, for
example, those of chromosome 3. The examples of Section X
demonstrate the initial stages of a probe-based banding pattern to
detect genetic rearrangements of chromosome 3.
Described herein are chromosome-specific reagents and methods to
detect genetic rearrangements, such as those exemplified herein for
the BCR-ABL fusion, deletions, amplifications, and translocations
of chromosomes 3, 17 and 13, that supply information unavailable by
existing techniques.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
This invention concerns methods of staining chromosomal material
based upon nucleic acid sequence that employ one or more nucleic
acid probes. Said methods produce staining patterns that can be
tailored for specific cytogenetic analyses. It is further an object
of this invention to produce nucleic acid probes that are useful
for cytogenetic analysis, that stain chromosomal material with
reliable signals. Such probes are appropriate for in situ
hybridization. Preferred nucleic acid probes for certain
applications of this invention are those of sufficient complexity
to stain reliably each of two or more target sites.
The invention provides methods and compositions for staining
chromosomal material. The probe compositions of this invention at
the current state of hybridization techniques are typically of high
complexity, usually greater than about 50 kb of complexity, the
complexity depending upon the application for which the probe is
designed. In particular, chromosome specific staining reagents are
provided which comprise heterogeneous mixtures of nucleic acid
fragments, each fragment having a substantial fraction of its
sequences substantially complementary to a portion of the nucleic
acid for which specific staining is desired--the target nucleic
acid, preferably the target chromosomal material. In general, the
nucleic acid fragments are labeled by means as exemplified herein
and indicated infra. However, the nucleic acid fragments need not
be directly labeled in order for the binding of probe fragments to
the target to be detected; for example, such nucleic acid binding
can be detected by anti-RNA/DNA duplex antibodies and antibodies to
thymidine dimers. The nucleic acid fragments of the heterogenous
mixtures include double-stranded or single-stranded RNA or DNA.
This invention concerns chromosome specific reagents and methods of
staining targeted chromosomal material that is in the vicinity of a
suspected genetic earrangement. Such genetic rearrangement include
but are not limited to translocations, inversions, insertions,
amplifications and deletions. Aneuploidy is included herein in the
term "amplifications". When such a genetic rearrangement is
associated with a disease, such chromosome specific reagents are
referred to as disease specific reagents or probes. When such a
genetic rearrangement is associated with cancer, such reagents are
referred to as tumor specific reagents or probes.
This invention provides for nucleic acid probes that reliably stain
targeted chromosomal materials in the vicinity of one or more
suspected genetic rearrangements. Such nucleic acid probes useful
for the detection of genetic rearrangements are typically of high
complexity. Such nucleic acid probes preferably comprise nucleic
acid sequences that are substantially homologous to nucleic acid
sequences in chromosomal regions that flank and/or extend partially
or fully across breakpoints associated with genetic
rearrangements.
This invention further provides for methods and reagents to
distinguish between cytogenetically similar but genetically
different chromosomal rearrangements.
Specifically herein exemplified are chromosome specific regents and
methods to detect genetic rearrangements, e.g., translocations,
amplifications and insertions, that produce the BCR-ABL fusion
which is diagnostic for chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). Such
chromosome specific reagents for the diagnosis of CML contain
nucleic acid sequences which are substantially homologous to
chromosomal sequences in the vicinity of the translocation
breakpoint regions of chromosomal regions 9q34 and 22q11 associated
with CML.
Those reagents produce a staining pattern which is distinctively
altered when the BCR-ABL fusion characteristic of CML occurs. FIG.
11 graphically demonstrates a variety of staining patterns which,
along with other potential staining patterns, are altered in the
presence of a genetic rearrangement, such as, the BCR-ABL
fusion.
The presence of a genetic rearrangement can be determined by
applying the reagents of this invention according to methods herein
described and observing the proximity of and/or other
characteristics of the signals of the staining patterns
produced.
Preferably, the chromosome specific reagents used to detect CML of
this invention comprise nucleic acid sequences having a complexity
of from about 50 kilobases (kb) to about 1 megabase (Mb), more
preferably from about 50 kb to about 750 kb, and still more
preferably from about 200 kb to about 400 kb.
This invention further provides for methods of distinguishing
between suspected genetic rearrangements that occur in relatively
close proximity in a genome wherein the chromosome specific
reagents comprise nucleic acid sequences substantially homologous
to nucleic acid sequences in the vicinity of said suspected genetic
rearrangements. An example of such a differentiation between two
potential genetic rearrangements is the differential diagnosis of
CML from acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL).
This invention still further provides methods and reagents for
producing staining patterns in a patient who is afflicted with a
disease associated genetic rearrangement, such as those associated
with the BCR-ABL fusion in CML, wherein said staining patterns are
predictive and/or indicative of the response of a patient to
various therapeutic regimens, such as chemotherapy, radiation,
surgery, and transplantation, such as bone marrow transplantation.
Such staining patterns can be useful in monitoring the status of
such a patient, preferably on a cell by cell basis, and can be
predictive of a disease recurrence for a patient that is in
remission. Computer assisted microscopic analysis can assist in the
interpretation of staining patterns of this invention, and the
invention provides for methods wherein computer assisted
microscopic analysis is used in testing patient cells on a call by
cell basis, for e.g., to search for residual disease in a
patient.
Still further, this invention provides for methods and reagents to
determine the molecular basis of genetic disease, and to detect
specific genetically based diseases.
Still further, this invention provides for methods and reagents for
detecting contiguous gene syndromes comprising the in situ
hybridization of nucleic acid probes which comprise sequences which
are substantially homologous to nucleic acid sequences
characteristic of one or more components of a contiguous gene
syndrome. Representative of such a contiguous gene syndrome is Down
syndrome.
Also provided are methods of simultaneously detecting genetic
rearrangements of multiple loci in a genome comprising in situ
hybridization of high complexity nucleic acid probes comprising
nucleic acid sequences that are substantially homologous to nucleic
acid sequences in multiple loci in a genome.
Still further provided are methods of searching for genetic
rearrangements in a genome. For example, conventional banding
analysis may indicate an abnormality in a chromosomal region of a
genome under examination. Methods of this invention may include the
application of nucleic acid probes, produced from the vicinity of
that chromosomal region of a normal genome, by in situ
hybridization to cells containing the abnormality to detail the
exact location and kind of genetic rearrangement of said
abnormality by observation of the staining patterns so
produced.
The invention still further provides for high complexity nucleic
acid probes which have been optimized for rapid, efficient and
automated detection of genetic rearrangements.
One way to produce a probe of high complexity is to pool several or
many clones, for example, phage, plasmid, cosmid, and/or YAC
clones, among others, wherein each clone contains an insert that is
capable of hybridizing to some part of the target in a genome.
Another way to produce such a probe is to use the polymerase chain
reaction (PCR).
Heterogeneous in reference to the mixture of labeled nucleic acid
fragments means that the staining reagents comprise many copies
each of fragments having different sequences and/or sizes (e.g.,
from the different DNA clones pooled to make the probe). In
preparation for use, these fragments may be cut, randomly or
specifically, to adjust the size distribution of the pieces of
nucleic acid participating in the hybridization reaction.
As discussed more fully below, preferably the heterogenous probe
mixtures are substantially free from nucleic acid sequences with
hybridization capacity to non-target nucleic acid. Most of such
sequences bind to repetitive sequences which are shared by the
target and non-target nucleic acids, that is, shared repetitive
sequences.
Methods to remove undesirable nucleic acid sequences and/or to
disable the hybridization capacity of such sequences are discussed
more fully below. [See Section II]. Such methods include but are
not limited to the selective removal or screening of shared
repetitive sequences from the probe; careful selection of nucleic
acid sequences for inclusion in the probe; blocking shared
repetitive sequences by the addition of unlabeled genomic DNA, or,
more carefully selecting nucleic acid sequences for inclusion in
the blocking mixture; incubating the probe mixture for sufficient
time for reassociation of high copy repetitive sequences, or the
like.
Preferably, the staining reagents of the invention are applied to
interphase or metaphase chromosomal DNA by in situ hybridization,
and the chromosomes are identified or classified, i.e., karyotyped,
by detecting the presence of the label, such as biotin or .sup.3H,
on the nucleic acid fragments comprising the staining reagent.
The invention includes chromosome staining reagents for the total
genomic complement of chromosomes, staining reagents specific to
single chromosomes, staining reagents specific to subsets of
chromosomes, and staining reagents specific to subregions within
single or multiple chromosomes. The term "chromosome-specific," is
understood to encompass all of these embodiments of the staining
reagents of the invention. The term is also understood to encompass
staining reagents made from and directed against both normal and
abnormal chromosome types.
A preferred method of making the chromosome-specific staining
reagents of the invention includes: 1) isolating chromosomal DNA
from a particular chromosome type or target region or regions in
the genome, 2) amplifying the isolated DNA to form a heterogenous
mixture of nucleic acid fragments, 3) disabling the hybridization
capacity of or removing shared repeated sequences in the nucleic
acid fragments, and 4) labeling the nucleic acid fragments to form
a heterogenous mixture of labeled nucleic acid fragments. As
described more fully below, the ordering of the steps for
particular embodiments varies according to the particular means
adopted for carrying out the steps.
The present invention addresses problems associated with
karyotyping chromosomes, especially for diagnostic and dosimetric
applications. In particular, the invention overcomes problems which
arise because of the lack of stains that are sufficiently
chromosome-specific by providing reagents comprising heterogeneous
mixtures of nucleic acid fragments that can be hybridized to the
target DNA and/or RNA, e.g., the target chromosomes, target subsets
of chromosomes, or target regions of specific chromosomes. The
staining technique of the invention opens up the possibility of
rapid and highly sensitive detection of chromosomal abnormalities,
particularly genetic rearrangements, in both metaphase and
interphase cells using standard clinical and laboratory equipment
and improved analysis using automated techniques. It has direct
application in genetic screening, cancer diagnosis, and biological
dosimetry.
This invention further specifically provides for methods and
nucleic acid probes for staining fetal chromosomal material,
whether condensed, as in metaphase, or dispersed as in interphase.
Still further, the invention provides for a non-embryo-invasive
method of karyotyping the chromosomal material of fetal cells,
wherein the fetal cells have been separated from maternal blood.
Such fetal cells are preferably leukocytes and/or cytotrophoblasts.
Exemplary nucleic acid probes are high complexity probes
chromosome-specific for chromosome types 13, 18 and/or 21.
Representative probes comprise chromosome-specific Bluescribe
plasmid libraries from which a sufficient number of shared
repetitive sequences have been removed or the hybridization
capacity thereof has been disabled prior to and/or during
hybridization with the target fetal chromosomes.
This invention still further provides for test kits comprising
appropriate nucleic acid probes for use in tumor cytogenetics, in
the detection of disease related loci, in the analysis of
structural abnormalities, for example translocuations, among other
genetic rearrangements, and for biological dosimetry.
This invention further provides for prenatal screening kits
comprising appropriate nucleic acid probes of this invention. This
invention also provides for test kits comprising high complexity
probes for the detection of genetic rearrangements, and
specifically for those producing the BCR-ABL fusion characteristic
of CML.
The methods and compositions of this invention permit staining of
chromosomal material with patterns appropriate for a desired
application. The pattern may extend over some regions of one or
more chromosomes, or over some or all the chromosomes of a genome
and may comprise multiple distinguishable sections,
distinguishable, for example, by multiple colors. Alternatively,
the pattern may be focused on a particular portion or portions of a
genome, such as a portion or portions potentially containing a
deletion or breakpoint that is diagnostically or prognostically
important for one or more tumors, or on those portions of
chromosomes having significance for prenatal diagnosis.
The staining patterns may be adjusted for the analysis method
employed, for example, either a human observer or automated
equipment, such as, flow cytometers or computer assisted
microscopy. The patterns may be chosen to be appropriate for
analysis of condensed chromosomes or dispersed chromosomal
material.
It is further an object of the instant invention to detect small
specific deletions invisible by conventional banding analyses,
including subregion deletions within a gene, for example, the Rb-1
gene.
It is still further an object of this invention to provide methods
of studying the genetic heterogeneity of cancers, such as, solid
tumors, and of gene copy numbers and structural abnormalities from
morphologically defined individual tumor cells.
The invention further provides for automated means of detecting and
analyzing chromosomal abnormalities, particularly genetic
rearrangements, as indicated by the staining patterns produced
according to this invention.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
FIGS. 1A, B and C and FIGS. 2A and 2B illustrate the hybridization
of a chromosome-specific 21 library to human metaphase spread
wherein the inserts were cloned in Lambda phage Charon 21A. The
hybridization capacity of the high copy repetitive sequences in the
library was reduced by the addition of unlabeled genomic DNA to the
hybridization mixture. The probe was labeled with biotin, which was
detected with green FITC-avidin (fluorescein isothiocyanate
avidin). All of the DNA in the chromosomes was stained with the
blue fluorescent dye DAPI (4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole).
FIG. 1A is a binary image of the DAPI stain in the human metaphase
spread obtained by using a TV camera attached to a fluorescence
microscope. Filters appropriate for DAPI visualization were used.
Computer processing of the image shows all portions above a chosen
threshold intensity as white, and the rest as black.
FIG. 1B is a binary image of the FITC staining of the same human
metaphase spread as in FIG. 1A. The image was processed as in FIG.
1A but the filter was changed in the microscope such that the FITC
attached to the probe is visible rather than the DAPI.
FIG. 1C is a binary image of the chromosome 21s alone,
nonspecifically stained objects (which are smaller) having been
removed by standard image processing techniques on the binary image
of FIG. 1B.
FIG. 2A is a color photograph of the DAPI stain in a human
metaphase spread which was prepared and hybridized
contemporaneously with the spread shown in the computer generated
binary images of FIGS. 1A, B and C.
FIG. 2B is a color photograph of the fluorescein attached to the
DNA probe in the same human metaphase spread as shown in FIG. 2A.
It was obtained by changing the filters in the fluorescence
microscope to excite fluorescein rather than DAPI. The photograph
is comparable to the binary image of FIG. 1B.
FIG. 3 is a photograph of a human metaphase spread prepared and
hybridized contemporaneously with the spreads shown in FIGS. 1A, B
and C and 2A and B. The procedures used were the same except that
PI (propidium iodide) instead of DAPI, was used to stain all the
chromosomes. Both PI and fluorescein stains can be viewed with the
same microscope filters. Color film was used such that the
propidium iodide counterstain appears red and the fluorescein of
the probe appears yellow on the color film.
FIG. 4A shows the hybridization of the chromosome 4-specific
library in Bluescribe plasmids (the library pBS-4) to a human
metaphase spread wherein no unlabeled human genomic DNA was used,
and wherein the hybridization mixture was applied immediately after
denaturation. Both copies of chromosome 4 are seen as slightly
brighter than the other chromosomes. The small arrows indicate
regions that are unstained with the probe. As in FIG. 3 and as in
the rest of the FIGS. below, PI is the counterstain and fluorescein
is used to label the probe.
FIG. 4B shows the hybridization of pBS-4 to a human metaphase
spread wherein unlabeled human genomic DNA was used during the
hybridization (Q=2 of genomic DNA; the meaning of Q is explained
infra). Quantitative image analysis shows that the intensity per
unit length of the chomosome 4s is about 20X that of the other
chromosomes. The chromosome 4s are yellow; the other chromosomes
are red due to the propidium iodide counterstain. Two layers of
avidin-fluorescein isothiocyanate have been used to make the target
chromosomes sufficiently bright to be measured accurately. However,
the number 4 chromosomes can be recognized easily after a single
layer is applied.
FIG. 4C shows the same spread as in FIG. 4B but through a filter
that passes only the fluorescein isothiocyanate fluorescence.
FIG. 4D shows the detection of a radiation-induced translocation
(arrows) involving chromosome 4s in a human metaphase spread
wherein pBS-4 specific libraries are used. The contrast ratio is
about 5X.
FIG. 4E shows that normal and two derivative chromosomes resulting
from a translocation between chromosome 4 and 11 (in cell line
RS4;11) can be detected by the compositions and methods of this
invention in interphase nuclei. They appear as three distinct
domains.
FIG. 4F shows the hybridization of the chromosome 21-specific
library in Bluescribe plasmids (the library pBS-21) to a metaphase
spread of a trisomy 21 cell line. A small amount of hybridization
is visible near the centromeres of the other acrocentric
chromosomes.
FIG. 4G shows the same hybridization as in FIG. 4F but with
interphase nuclei. Clearly shown are the three chromosome 21
domains.
FIG. 4H shows the hybridization with a pool of 120 single copy
probes from chromosome 4 to a human metaphase spread. The number 4
chromosomes are indicated by arrows.
FIG. 5 shows the hybridization of a yeast artificial chromosome
(YAC) clone containing a 580 kb insert of human DNA to a human
metaphase spread. A yellow fluorescein band on each of the
chromosome 12s (at 12q21.1) is visible against the propidium iodide
counterstain.
FIG. 6 shows the hybridization of DNA from a human/hamster hybrid
cell containing on e copy of human chromosome 19 to a human
metaphase spread. A little to the right of the photograph's center
are the two chromosome 19s which are brighter than the other
chromosomes in the spread.
FIG. 7 illustrates a representative method of using the polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) to produce probes of this invention which are
reduced in repetitive sequence.
FIG. 8 illustrates the locations of probes to the CML breakpoint
and corresponding pattern of staining in both normal and CML
metaphase and interphase nuclei.
The left side shows schematic representations of the BCR gene on
chromosome 22, the ABL gene of chromosome 9, and the BCR-ABL fusion
gene on the Philadelphia chromosome. Also show n are the locations
of CML breakpoints and their relation to the probes (32). The right
shows hybridization patterns expected for the c-hu-ABL and PEM12
probes to normal and CML metaphase spreads and interphase
nuclei.
FIG. 9 shows fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) in metaphase
spreads and interphase nuclei. Panels A and B show ABL and BCR
hybridization to normal metaphase spreads. The ABL signal (A) is
localized to the telomeric portion of 9q and the BCR signal (B) is
localized near the centromere of 22q. Panel C shows that abl
staining is localized to the telomeric region of Philadelphia
chromosome in a case of CML with 46XY, t (9:22) (q34;q11). Panel D
shows that abl staining is interstitial on the derivative 22
chromosome arising from an insertional event in a case of CML with
46XY ins (22:9)(q11;q34). Panel E illustrates that the K562 cell
line presents multiple signals localized to a region of the
interphase nucleus. Identical staining pattern was seen with BCR
probe indicating BCR-ABL fusion gene amplification. Panel F
presents a metaphase spread from the K562 cell line showing fusion
gene amplification localized to a single chromosome.
FIG. 10 illustrates fluorescence in-situ hybridization in CML
interphase nuclei with ABL (red) and BCR (green) probes visualized
simultaneously through a double band pass filter. Cells from a CML
patient show the red-green (yellow) signals resulting from the
hybridization to the BCR-ABL fusion gene and single red and green
hybridization signals to the normal BCR and ABL genes on
chromosomes 22 and 9.
FIG. 11 illustrates some exemplary probe strategies for detection
of structural aberrations. The design of the binding pattern,
colors etc., of the probe can be optimized for detection of genetic
abnormalities in metaphase and/or interphase cells. Different
patterns may have advantages for particular applications. The
drawings in FIG. 11 illustrate some of the patterns useful for
detection of some abnormalities. The examples are representative
and not meant to be exhaustive; different patterns can be combined
to allow for the detection of multiple abnormalities in the same
cell.
In the drawings of FIG. 11, the metaphase chromosomes are shown
with probe bound to both chromatids. The interphase nuclei are
pictured to be in a stage of the cell cycle prior to replication of
the portion of the chromosome to which the probe binds; thus there
is only one chromatid for each interphase chromosome. When the
probe binding is restricted to only a portion of a chromosome, the
signal is indicated as either a black or white circle. Such a
representation is employed to indicate different colors or
otherwise distinguishable characteristics of the staining. Patterns
containing more than two distinguishable characteristics (three
colors, different ratios of colors etc.) permit more complex
staining patterns than those illustrated. Chromosomal locations of
the breakpoints in the DNA are indicate with horizontal lines next
to the abnormal chromosomes.
a. Section (a) represents the use of a probe which stains a whole
chromosome. Such a probe can be used to detect a translocation that
occurs anywhere along the chromosome. The color photograph of FIG.
12 shows use of such a stain for chromosome 22 to detect a
translocation, in this case that which occurs with CML. Such an
approach to staining is not very useful in interphase nuclei since
the region of the nucleus that is stained is relatively large;
overlaps in the stained regions can make interpretation difficult
in many nuclei.
b. Section (b) represents the reduction of the stained region of
the chromosome shown in a) to that in the vicinity of a breakpoint,
providing information focused on events in that region. The
staining pattern can be continuous or discontinuous across the
breakpoint, just so that some binding is on both sides of the
breakpoint. Such a stainless pattern requires only one "color", but
gives no information about which other genomic region may be
involved in the exchange.
c. Section (c) represents the use of a probe which binds to
sequences which come together as a result of the rearrangement and
allows for the detection in a metaphase and interphase cells. In
this case the different sequences are stained with different
"colors". Such a staining pattern is that used in the examples of
Section VIII of the this application.
d. Section (d) represents an extension of (c) by including staining
of both sides of both breakpoints involved in the rearrangement.
Different "colors" are used as indicated. The additional
information supplied by the more complex staining pattern may
assist with interpretation of the nuclei. It might also permit
recognition of an apparent insertional event as discussed
herein.
e. Section (e) represents the detection of an inversion in one
homologue of a chromosome.
f. Section (f) represents a staining pattern useful in the
detection of a deletion. A deletion could also be detected with a
probe that stains only the deleted region; however, lack of probe
binding may be due to reasons other than deletion of the target
sequence. The flanking regions stained a different "color" serve as
controls for hybridization.
FIG. 12 illustrates a staining pattern to detect a rearrangement by
staining a whole chromosome, in this case a rearrangement of
chromosome 22 associated with CML. The metaphase spread of this
figure is from a CML cell that has been stained with a probe which
binds all along chromosome 22. Probe-stained regions appear yellow.
The rest of the DNA has been stained with the red-fluorescing
chemical stain propidium iodide. The entirely yellow chromosome is
a normal copy of chromosome 22. Just below said normal chromosome
22 is the Philadelphia chromosome, a small part yellow and part red
chromosome. Below and to the right of the Philadelphia chromosome
is the abnormal chromosome 9 (red) with the distal part of
chromosome 22 (yellow) attached. The photograph of this figure
illustrates the staining pattern represented in part a) of the
previous figure.
FIG. 13 shows FISH with fourteen Rb-1 lambda phage clones (Rb-1
probe) in normal and abnormal metaphase spreads and interphase
nuclei Panels A and B show two pairs of bright and specific
hybridization signals on normal lymphocyte metaphase preparations
in the mid-region of the q-arm of chromosome 13. Panel B further
shows cohybridization with a 13/21 centromeric probe. Panel C shows
a digital image analysis of the mapping of the Rb-1 gene on a
metaphase chromosome using both the Rb-1 probe and the 13/21
centromeric-specific repeat probe. Panel D shows two bright and
specific hybridization domains in interphase nuclei of normal
lymphocytes. Panel E shows cohybridization of the Rb-i probe and a
13/21 centromeric-specific repeat probe to metaphase spreads of a
fibroblast cell line (GM05877) derived from a sporadic
retinoblastoma patient. Intact chromosome 13s show both Rb-1 and
centromere signals; whereas chromosome 13s with a Rb-1 deletion are
slightly shortened and hybridize only with the centromeric probe.
Panel F shows a digital image analysis of the GM05887 cell line
metaphase showing both the normal and shortened chromosome 13 and
wherein cohybridization was effected with both the Rb-1 and 13/21
centromeric probe. Panel G shows hybridization of the Rb-1 probe to
a GM05887 cell line interphase. Panel H shows hybridization of the
Rb-1 probe to a clinical breast cancer specimen. Panel I shows a
digital image analysis of a dual color hybridization to a normal
interphase nucleus; differently labeled protions of the Rb-1
probe--a 3'(green) portion and a 5' (red) portion--were hybridized
to the normal interphase nucleus.
FIG. 14 graphically illustrates the distribution of Rb-1 gene
hybridization signals in (A) interphase nuclei of normal peripheral
blood lymphocytes and fibroblasts; and in (B) two cell lines with a
cytogenetically defined deletion involving the Rb-1 gene at 13q.
The results represent the mean (+S.D.) of 3-5 different
hybridization experiments. At least 150 nuclei were scored from
each slide.
FIG. 15 shows FISH with chromosome 17 centromeric-specific alpha
satellite probe. Panel A shows such hybridization to normal
lymphocytes wherein in metaphase chromosomes, two chromosome 17
centromere-specific bright signals are seen and in interphase
nuclei, corresponding bright and tight hybridization domains are
visible. Panel B shows such hybridization to an ovarian cancer cell
line (RMUG-L) wherein in both metaphase and interphase, four
signals are visible, indicating aneuploidy of chromosome 17.
FIG. 16 shows FISH with a whole chromosome composite probe for
chromosome 3. Panel A shows such a hybridization to normal
lymphocytes wherein the whole body of chromosome 3 was
homogeneously painted with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC). Panel
B shows such a hybridization to an ovarian cancer cell line
(RMUG-L) wherein four chromosome 3s are specifically stained with
FITC and wherein two (to which short arrows point) out of the four
are apparently shorter than the intact chromosome 3s (to which long
arrows point). The shorter chromosomes are considered to correspond
to those with a 3p deletion.
FIG. 17 shows simultaneous hybridization with a chromosome 3
centromeric-specific probe generated by the polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) and a chromosome 3 locus-specific cosmid probe
(mapped to ch. 3q26 by digital image analysis). Panel A shows such
a hybridization to metaphase spreads and interphase nuclei from
normal lymphocytes wherein two chromosome 3 centromeric-specific
signals (indicated by short arrows) and two pairs of chromosome 3q
cosmid signals (indicated by long arrows) are clearly visible in
the metaphase spreads; and wherein two large hybridization domains
for the chromosome 3 centromere and two small domains for the
chromosome 3q locus-specific probe are visible in the interphase
nuclei. Panel B shows such a hybridization to a uterine cervical
adenocarcinoma cell line (TMCC-1) wherein two chromosome 3
centromere-specific (indicated by short arrows) and two chromosome
3q locus-specific cosmid (indicated by long arrows) signals are
clearly visible in metaphase spreads whereas a pair of cosmid
signals specific to chromosome 3q are found to be translocated to
another chromosome.
FIG. 18 shows the simultaneous dual color hybridization with a
chromosome 3 centromeric-specific probe (green) and a chromosome 3
locus-specific cosmid probe mapped to 3p21 (red) to (A) metaphase
spreads and (B) interphase nuclei of normal lymphocytes.
FIG. 19 shows hybridization corresponding to those shown in FIG. 18
wherein the metaphase spreads (A) and interphase nucleus (B) are
from an ovarian cancer cell line (RMUG-S). In Panel A, the
metaphase chromosome on the right exhibits an apparent 3p deletion
whereas the metaphase chromosome on the left appears intact. In
Panel B, chromosome 3 aneuploidy is demonstrated by the four green
centromeric domains; two intact chromosome 3s are indicated by two
pairs of adjacent green and red dots; and two 3p deleted chromosome
3s are indicated by the two single green domains.
FIG. 20 shows the simultaneous hybridizations of an AAF-labeled
chromosome 3 centromere-specific probe (from H. Willard at
Stanford) and a biotinylated chromosome 3q cosmid probe (J14R1A12;
probes described infra under Section X) to a metaphase spread and
interphase nucleus of normal lymphocytes. A normal pattern is
shown, that is, two green and two pairs of red signals per
cell.
FIG. 21 shows hybridization comparable to that shown in FIG. 20
except that the interphase nucleus is from an ovarian cancer cell
line (RMUG-S). An abnormal pattern is shown, that is, four
chromosome 3 centromere-specific green signals and four chromosome
3q cosmid red signals, indicating that the nucleus contains four
long arms of chromosome 3.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
This invention concerns the use of nucleic acid probes to stain
targeted chromosomal material in patterns which can extend along
one or more whole chromosomes, and/or along one or more regions on
one or more chromosomes, including patterns which extend over an
entire genome. The staining reagents of this invention facilitate
the microscopic and/or flow cytometric identification of normal and
aberrant chromosomes and provide for the characterization of the
genetic nature of particular abnormalities, such as, genetic
rearrangements. The term "chromosome-specific" is herein defined to
encompass the terms "target specific" and "region specific", that
is, when the staining composition is directed to one chromosome, it
is chromosome-specific, but it is also chromosome-specific when it
is directed, for example, to multiple regions on multiple
chromosomes, or to a region of only one chromosome, or to regions
across the entire genome. The term chromosome-specific originated
from the use of recombinant DNA libraries made by cloning DNA from
a single normal chromosome type as the source material for the
initial probes of this invention. Libraries made from DNA from
regions of one or more chromosomes are sources of DNA for probes
for that region or those regions of the genome. The probes produced
from such source material are region-specific probes but are also
encompassed within the broader phrase "chromosome-specific" probes.
The term "target specific" is interchangeably used herein with the
term "chromosome-specific".
The word "specific" as commonly used in the art has two somewhat
different meanings. The practice is followed herein. "Specific" may
refer to the origin of a nucleic acid sequence or to the pattern
with which it will hybridize to a genome as part of a staining
reagent. For example, isolation and cloning of DNA from a specified
chromosome results in a "chromosome-specific library". [Eg., Van
Dilla et al., "Human Chromosome-Specific DNA Libraries:
Construction and Availability," Biotechnology, 4:537 (1986).]
However, such a library contains sequences that are shared with
other chromosomes. Such shared sequences are not
chromosome-specific to the chromosome from which they were derived
in their hybridization properties since they will bind to more than
the chromosome of origin. A sequence is "chromosome-specific" if it
binds only to the desired portion of a genome. Such sequences
include single-copy sequences contained in the target or repetitive
sequences, in which the copies are contained predominantly in the
target.
"Chromosome-specific" in modifying "staining reagent" refers to the
overall hybridization pattern of the nucleic acid sequences that
comprise the reagent. A staining reagent is chromosome-specific if
useful contrast between the target and non-target chromosomal
material is achieved (that is, that the target can be adequately
visualized).
A probe is herein defined to be a collection of nucleic acid
fragments whose hybridization to the target can be detected. The
probe is labeled as described below so that its binding to the
target can be visualized. The probe is produced from some source of
nucleic acid sequences, for example, a collection of clones or a
collection of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) products. The source
nucleic add may then be processed in some way, for example, by
removal of repetitive sequences or blocking them with unlabeled
nucleic add with complementary sequence, so that hybridization with
the resulting probe produces staining of sufficient contrast on the
target. Thus, the word probe may be used herein to refer not only
to the detectable nucleic acid, but also to the detectable nucleic
acid in the form in which it is applied to the target, for example,
with the blocking nucleic acid, etc. The blocking nucleic acid may
also be mentioned separately. What "probe" refers to specifically
should be clear from the context in which the word is used.
When two or more nucleic acid probes of this invention are mixed
together, they produce a new probe which when hybridized to a
target according to the methods of this invention, produces a
staining pattern that is a combination of the staining patterns
individually produced by the component probes thereof. Thus, the
terms "probe" and "probes" (that is, the singular and plural forms)
can be used interchangeably within the context of a staining
pattern produced. For example, if one probe of this invention
produces a dot on chromosome 9, and another probe produces a band
on chromosome 11, together the two probes form a probe which
produces a dot/band staining pattern.
The term "labeled" is herein used to indicate that there is some
method to visualize the bound probe, whether or not the probe
directly carries some modified constituent. Section III infra
describes various means of directly labeling the probe and other
labeling means by which the bound probe can be detected.
The terms "staining" or "painting" are herein defined to mean
hybridizing a probe of this invention to a genome or segment
thereof, such that the probe reliably binds to the targeted
chromosomal material therein and the bound probe is capable of
being visualized. The terms "staining" or "painting" are used
interchangeably. The patterns resulting from "staining" or
"painting" are useful for cytogenetic analysis, more particularly,
molecular cytogenetic analysis. The staining patterns facilitate
the microscopic and/or flow cytometric identification of normal and
abnormal chromosomes and the characterization of the genetic nature
of particular abnormalities. Section III infra describes methods of
rendering the probe visible. Since multiple compatible methods of
probe visualization are available, the binding patterns of
different components of the probe can be distinguished--for
example, by color. Thus, this invention is capable of producing any
desired staining pattern on the chromosomes visualized with one or
more colors (a multi-color staining pattern) and/or other indicator
methods. The term "staining" as defined herein does not include the
concept of staining chromosomes with chemicals as in conventional
karotyping methods although such conventional stains may be used in
conjunction with the probes of this invention to allow
visualization of those parts of the genome where the probe does not
bind. The use of DAPI and propidium iodide for such a purpose is
illustrated in the figures.
The phrase "high complexity" is defined herein to mean that the
probe, thereby modified contains on the order of 50,000 (50 kb) or
greater, up to many millions or several billions, of bases of
nucleic acid sequences which are not repeated in the probe. For
example, representative high complexity nucleic acid probes of this
invention can have a complexity greater than 50 kb, greater than
100,000 bases (100 kb), greater than 200,000 (200 kb), greater than
500,000 bases (500 kb), greater than one million bases (1 Mb),
greater than 2 Mb, greater than 10 Mb, greater than 100 Mb, greater
than 500 Mb, greater than 1 billion bases and still further greater
than several billion bases.
The term "complexity" is defined herein according to the standard
for nucleic acid complexity as established by Britten et al.,
Methods of Enzymol., 29:363 (1974). See also Cantor and Schimmel,
Biophysical Chemistry: Part III: The Behavior of Biological
Macromolecules, at 1228-1230 (Freeman and Co. 1980) for further
explanation and exemplification of nucleic acid complexity.
The complexity preferred for a probe composition of this invention
is dependent upon the application for which it is designed. In
general, the larger the target area, the more complex is the probe.
It is anticipated that the complexity of a probe needed to produce
a desired pattern of landmarks on a chromosome will decrease as
hybridization sensitivity increases, as progress is made in
hybridization technology. As the sensitivity increases, the
reliability of the signal from smaller target sites will increase.
Therefore, whereas from about a 40 kb to about a 100 kb target
sequence may be presently necessary to provide a reliable, easily
detectable signal, smaller target sequences should provide reliable
signals in the future. Therefore, as hybridization sensitivity
increases, a probe of a certain complexity, for example, 100 kb,
should enable the user to detect considerably more loci in a genome
than are presently reliably detected; thus, more information will
be obtained with a probe of the same complexity. The term
"complexity" therefore refers to the complexity of the total probe
no matter how many visually distinct loci are to be detected, that
is, regardless of the distribution of the target sites over the
genome.
As indicated above, with current hybridization techniques it is
possible to obtain a reliable, easily detectable signal with a
probe of about 40 kb to about 100 kb (eg. the probe insert capacity
of one or a few cosmids) targeted to a compact point in the genome.
Thus, for example, a complexity in the range of approximately 100
kb now permits hybridization to both sides of a tumor-specific
translocation. The portion of the probe targeted to one side of the
breakpoint can be labeled differently from that targeted to the
other side of the breakpoint so that the two sides can be
differentiated with different colors, for example. Proportionately
increasing the complexity of the probe permits analysis of multiple
compact regions of the genome simultaneously. The conventional
banding patterns produced by chemical stains may be replaced
according to this invention with a series of probe-based, color
coded (for example), reference points along each chromosome or
significant regions thereof.
Uniform staining of an extended contiguous region of a genome, for
example, a whole chromosome, requires a probe complexity
proportional to but substantially less than, the complexity of the
target region. The complexity required is only that necessary to
provide a reliable, substantially uniform signal on the target.
Section V.B, infra, demonstrates that fluorescent staining of human
chromosome 21, which contains about 50 megabases (Mb) of DNA, is
sufficient with a probe complexity of about 1 Mb. FIG. 4H
illustrates hybridization of about 400 kb of probe to human
chromosome 4, which contains about 200 Mb of DNA. In that case,
gaps between the hybridization of individual elements of the probe
are visible. FIGS. 4B and 4F demonstrate the results achieved with
probes made up of entire libraries for chromosomes 4 and 21,
respectively. The chromosomes are stained much more densely as
shown in FIGS. 4B and 4F than with the lower complexity probe
comprising single-copy nucleic acid sequences used to produce the
pattern of FIG. 4H.
Increasing the complexity beyond the minimum required for adequate
staining is not detrimental as long as the total nucleic acid
concentration in the probe remains below the point where
hybridization is impaired. The decrease in concentration of a
portion of a sequence in the probe is compensated for by the
increase in the number of target sites. In fact, when using
double-stranded probes, it is preferred to maintain a relatively
low concentration of each portion of sequence to inhibit
reassociation before said portion of sequence can find a binding
site in the target.
The stained patterns of this invention comprise one or more
"bands". The term "band" is herein defined as a reference point in
a genome which comprises a target nucleic acid sequence bound to a
probe component, which duplex is detectable by some indicator
means, and which at its narrowest dimension provides for a reliable
signal under the conditions and protocols of the hybridization and
the instrumentation, among other variables, used. A band can extend
from the narrow dimension of a sequence providing a reliable signal
to a whole chromosome to multiple regions on a number of
chromosomes.
The probe-produced bands of this invention are to be distinguished
from bands produced by chemical staining as indicated above in the
Background. The probe-produced bands of this invention are based
upon nucleic acid sequence whereas the bands produced by chemical
staining depend on natural characteristics of the chromosomes, but
not the actual nucleic add sequence. Further, the banding patterns
produced by chemical staining are only interpretable in terms of
metaphase chromosomes whereas the probe-produced bands of this
invention are useful both for metaphase and interphase
chromosomes.
One method of forming the probes of the present invention is to
pool many different low complexity probes. Such a probe would then
comprise a "heterogenous mixture" of individual cloned sequences.
The number of clones required depends on the extent of the target
area and the capacity of the cloning vector. If the target is made
up of several discrete, compact loci, that is, single spots at the
limit of microscopic resolution, then about 40 kb, more preferably
100 kb, for each spot gives a reliable signal given current
techniques. The portion of the probe for each spot may be made up
from, for example, a single insert from a yeast artificial
chromosome (YAC), from several cosmids each containing 35-40 kb or
probe sequence, or from about 25 plasmids each with 4 kb of
sequence.
Representative heterogeneous mixtures of clones exemplified herein
include phage (FIGS. 1, 2 and 3), and plasmids (FIG. 4). Yeast
artificial chromosomes (YACS) (FIG. 5), and a single human
chromosome in an inter-species hybrid cell (FIG. 6) are examples of
high complexity probes for single loci and an entire chromosome
that can be propagated as a single clone.
A base sequence at any point in the genome can be classified as
either "single-copy" or "repetitive". For practical purposes the
sequence needs to be long enough so that a complementary probe
sequence can form a stable hybrid with the target sequence under
the hybridization conditions being used. Such a length is typically
in the range of several tens to hundreds of nucleotides.
A "single-copy sequence" is that wherein only one copy of the
target nucleic acid sequence is present in the haploid genome.
"Single-copy sequences" are also known in the art as "unique
sequences". A "repetitive sequence" is that wherein there are more
than one copy of the same target nucleic acid sequence in the
genome. Each copy of a repetitive sequence need not be identical to
all the others. The important feature is that the sequence be
sufficiently similar to the other members of the family of
repetitive sequences such that under the hybridization conditions
being used, the same fragment of probe nucleic acid is capable of
forming stable hybrids with each copy. A "shared repetitive
sequence" is a sequence with some copies in the target region of
the genome, and some elsewhere.
When the adjectives "single-copy", "repetitive", "shared
repetitive", among other such modifiers, are used to describe
sequences in the probe, they refer to the type of sequence in the
target to which the probe sequence will bind. Thus, "a repetitive
probe" is one that binds to a repetitive sequence in the target;
and "a single-copy probe" binds to a single-copy target
sequence.
Repetitive sequences occur in multiple copies in the haploid
genome. The number of copies can range from two to hundreds of
thousands, wherein the Alu family of repetitive DNA are exemplary
of the latter numerous variety. The copies of a repeat may be
clustered or interspersed throughout the genome. Repeats may be
clustered in one or more locations in the genome, for example,
repetitive sequences occurring near the centromeres of each
chromosome, and variable number tandem repeats (VNTRs) [Nakamura et
al, Science, 235:1616 (1987)]; or the repeats may be distributed
over a single chromosome [for example, repeats found only on the X
chromosome as described by Bardoni et al., Cytogenet. Cell Genet.,
46:575 (1987)]; or the repeats may be distributed over all the
chromosomes, for example, the Alu family of repetitive
sequences.
Herein, the terms repetitive sequences, repeated sequences and
repeats are used interchangeably.
Shared repetitive sequences can be clustered or interspersed.
Clustered repetitive sequences include tandem repeats which are so
named because they are contiguous on the DNA molecule which forms
the backbone of a chromosome. Clustered repeats are associated with
well-defined regions of one or more chromosomes, e.g., the
centromeric region. If one or more clustered repeats form a sizable
fraction of a chromosome, and are shared with one or more
non-target regions of the genome and are consequently removed from
the heterogenous mixture of fragments employed in the invention or
the hybridization capacity thereof is disabled, perfect uniformity
of staining of the target region may not be possible. That
situation is comprehended by the use of the term "substantially
uniform" in reference to the binding of the heterogenous mixture of
labeled nucleic acid fragments to the target.
Chromosome-specific staining of the current invention is
accomplished by using nucleic acid fragments that hybridize to
sequences specific to the target. These sequences may be either
single-copy or repetitive, wherein the copies of the repeat occur
predominantly in the target area. FIG. 4H and the results of the
work detailed in section V infra indicate that probes can be made
of single-copy sequences. However, in probes such as that of FIG.
4B, low-copy chromosome-specific repeats [Nakamura et al., and
Bardoni et al., supra] may contribute to the hybridization as
well.
If nucleic acid fragments complementary to non-target regions of
the genome are included in the probe, for example, shared
repetitive sequences or non-specific sequences, their hybridization
capacity needs to be sufficiently disabled or their prevalence
sufficiently reduced, so that adequate staining contrast can be
obtained. Section V and FIG. 4H show examples of hybridization with
probes that contain pools of clones in which each clone has been
individually selected so that it hybridizes to single-copy
sequences or very low copy repetitive sequences. The remaining
figures illustrate use of probes that contain fragments that could
have hybridized to high-copy repetitive sequences, but which have
had the hybridization capacity of such sequences disabled.
The nucleic acid probes of this invention need not be absolutely
specific for the targeted portion of the genome. They are intended
to produce "staining contrast". "Contrast" is quantified by the
ratio of the stain intensity of the target region of the genome to
that of the other portions of the genome. For example, a DNA
library produced by cloning a particular chromosome, such as those
listed in Table I, can be used as a probe capable of staining the
entire chromosome. The library contains sequences found only on
that chromosome, and sequences shared with other chromosomes. In a
simplified (approximately true to life) model of the human genome,
about half of the chromosomal DNA falls into each class. If
hybridization with the whole library were capable of saturating all
of the binding sites, the target chromosome would be twice as
bright (contrast ratio of 2) as the others since it would contain
signal from the specific and shared sequences in the probe, whereas
the other chromosome would only have signal from the shared
sequences. Thus, only a modest decrease in hybridization of the
shared sequences in the probe would substantially enhance the
contrast. Contaminating sequences which only hybridize to
non-targeted sequences, for example, impurities in a library, can
be tolerated in the probe to the extent that said sequences do not
reduce the staining contrast below useful levels.
In reality all of the target sites may not be saturated during the
hybridization, and many other mechanisms contribute to producing
staining contrast, but this model illustrates one general
consideration in using probes targeted at a large portion of a
genome.
The required contrast depends on the application for which the
probe is designed. When visualizing chromosomes and nuclei, etc.,
microscopically, a contrast ratio of two or greater is often
sufficient for identifying whole chromosomes. In FIGS. 4D-F, the
contrast ratio is 3-5. The smaller the individual segments of the
target region, the greater the contrast needs to be to permit
reliable recognition of the target relative to the fluctuations in
staining of the non-targeted regions. When quantifying the amount
of target region present in a cell nucleus by fluorescence
intensity measurements using flow cytometry or quantitative
microscopy, the required contrast ratio is on the order of 1/T or
greater on average for the genome, where T is the fraction of the
genome contained in the targeted region. When the contrast ratio is
equal to 1/T, half of the total fluorescence intensity comes from
the target region and half from the rest of the genome. For
example, when using a high complexity probe for chromosome 1, which
comprises about 10% of the genome, the required contrast ratio is
on the order of 10, that is, for the chromosome 1 fluorescence
intensity to equal that of the rest of the genome.
Background staining by the probe, that is, to the non-target region
of the genome, may not be uniform. FIG. 4F shows that a chromosome
21 specific probe contains probe fragments that hybridize weakly to
compact regions near the centromeres of other acrocentric human
chromosomes. This degree of non-specificity does not inhibit its
use in the illustrated applications. For other applications,
removal of or further disabling the hybridization capacity of the
probe fragments that bind to these sequences may be necessary.
For other applications, repetitive sequences that bind to
centromeres, for example, alpha-satellite sequences, and/or
telomeres can be part of the chromosome-specific staining reagents
wherein the target includes some or all of the centromeres and/or
telomeres in a genome along with perhaps other chromosomal regions.
Exemplary of such an application would be that wherein the staining
reagent is designed to detect random structural aberrations caused
by clastogenic agents that result in dicentric chromosomes and
other structural abnormalities, such as translocations. Addition of
sequences which bind to all centromeres in a genome, for example to
the probe used to create the staining pattern of FIG. 4D, would
allow more reliable distinguishing between dicentrics and
translocations.
Application of staining reagents of this invention to a genome
results in a substantially uniform distribution of probe hybridized
to the targeted regions of a genome. The distribution of bound
probe is deemed "substantially uniform" if the targeted regions of
the genome can be visualized with useful contrast. For example, a
target is substantially uniformly stained in the case wherein it is
a series of visually separated loci if most of the loci are visible
in most of the cells.
"Substantial proportions" in reference to the base sequences of
nucleic acid fragments that are complementary to chromosomal DNA
means that the complementarity is extensive enough so that the
fragments form stable hybrids with the chromosomal DNA under the
hybridization conditions used. In particular, the term comprehends
the situation where the nucleic acid fragments of the heterogenous
mixture possess some regions of sequence that are not perfectly
complementary to target chromosomal material. The stringency can be
adjusted to control the precision of the complementarity required
for hybridization.
The phrase "metaphase chromosomes" is herein defined to mean not
only chromosomes condensed in the metaphase stage of mitosis but
includes any condensed chromosomes, for example, those condensed by
premature chromosome condensation.
To disable the hybridization capacity of a nucleic acid sequence is
herein sometimes abbreviated as "disabling the nucleic acid
sequence".
The methods and reagents of this invention find a particularly
appropriate application in the field of diagnostic cytogenetics,
particularly in the field of diagnostic interphase cytogenetics.
Detecting genetic rearrangements that are associated with a
disease, such as cancer, are a specific application of the
chromosome specific reagents and staining methods of this
invention.
Contiguous gene syndromes are an example of the genetic
rearrangements that the probes and methods of this invention can
identify. Contiguous gene syndromes are characterized by the
presence of several closely spaced genes which are in multiple
and/or reduced copy number. Down syndrome is an example of a
contiguous gene syndrome wherein an extra copy of a chromosomal
region containing several genes is present.
Particularly described herein is the application of chromosome
specific reagents and methods for detecting genetic rearrangements
that produce the BCR-ABL fusion associated with CML. Such reagents
are exemplary of disease specific, in this case tumor specific,
probes which can be labeled, directly and/or indirectly, such that
they are visualizable when bound to the targeted chromosomal
material, which in the case of CML, is the vicinity of the
translocation breakpoint regions of chromosomal regions 9q34 and
22q11 known to be associated with CML. In the examples provided in
Section VIII of this application, the probes are labeled such that
a dual color fluorescence is produced in the staining pattern of
said probes upon in situ hybridization [fluorescent in situ
hybridization (FISH)]; however, staining patterns can be produced
in many colors as well as other types of signals, and any
visualization means to signal the probe bound to its target can be
used in the methods of this invention.
Section VIII herein describes representative methods and reagents
of this invention to detect genetic rearrangements. The examples of
Section VIII concern genetic rearrangements that produce the
BCR-ABL fusion that is characteristic of CML. The approach in such
examples is based on FISH with probes from chromosomes 9 and 22
that flank the fused BCR and ABL sequences in essentially all cases
of CML (FIG. 8). The probes when hybridized to the chromosomal
material of both normal and abnormal cells produce staining
patterns that are different as illustrated in FIGS. 8-12. The
staining patterns produced by such exemplary probes are different
in normal and abnormal cells; the staining pattern present when the
genetic rearrangement occurs is distinctively altered from that of
the staining pattern shown by hybridizing the probes to chromosomal
material that does not contain the genetic rearrangement. Further,
staining patterns are distinctively different for one type of
genetic rearrangement versus another. For example, the staining
patterns produced upon hybridization of nucleic acid probes of this
invention to chromosomal material containing a genetic
rearrangement associated with ALL is distinctively different from
that produced upon hybridization of such probes to chromosomal
material containing the BCR-ABL fusion characteristic of CML. Thus,
the methods and reagents of this invention provide for differential
diagnosis of related diseases.
The examples of Section VIII provide for the diagnosis of CML based
upon the proximity of the fluorescent signals in the staining
patterns, and rely upon a 1 micron cutoff point for determination
of the presence of a fusion. The proximity distance of signals is
only one characteristic, among many others, of signals that can be
used to detect the presence of a genetic rearrangement. Further,
the proximity distance is dependent on the particular cell
preparation techniques employed and the size of the nuclei therein,
and for a particular cell preparation is relative depending on the
distance between signals in normal and abnormal cells.
The staining patterns exemplified in the examples of Section VIII
are representative of one type of probe strategy. Many other probe
strategies can be employed. FIG. 11 illustrates some other
exemplary probe strategies for detecting genetic rearrangements,
the patterns of which can be modified and optimized and otherwise
varied to detect particular genetic rearrangements.
Use of other disease specific reagents of this invention would be
analogous to the methods detailed in Section VIII for CML. For
example, the diagnosis and study of acute lymphocytic leukemia
(ALL) may be accomplished by replacing the BCR probe (PEM12) of
Section VIII with a probe from the 5' end of the BCR gene. ALL is
of particular interest because the Ph' chromosome is the most
common cytogenetic abnormality in that disease, and the presence of
such a chromosome is indicative of a very aggressive neoplasm.
The methods and reagents herein exemplified, particularly in
Section VIII, provide for the means to distinguish between
cytogenetically similar but genetically different diseases.
"Cytogenetically" in that particular context refers to a similarity
determined by conventional banding analysis. CML and ALL are in
that context cytogenetically similar in that conventional banding
analysis can not distinguish them because the breakpoints
associated with each are so close together in the human genome.
Further, this invention provides methods and reagents that can be
used in a cytogenetic research mode for the study of the molecular
bases of genetic disease. For example, if an abnormality in a
person's karyotype is noted by conventional banding analysis, the
probes and reagents of this invention can be used to detect any
genetic rearrangements in the vicinity of said abnormality. The
underlying molecular basis of the abnormality can be determined by
the methods and reagents of this invention, and the resulting
differences at the genetic level may be indicative of different
treatment plans and prognostically important. The underlying
genetic rearrangements may be found to be consistently associated
with a set of phenotypic characteristics in a population.
The following sections provide examples of making and using the
staining compositions of this invention and are for purposes of
illustration only and not meant to limit the invention in any way.
The following abbreviations are used.
Abbreviations
AAF--N-acetoxy-N-2-acetyl-aminofluorene BN--bicarbonate buffer with
NP-40 bp--base pair CML--chronic myelogenous leukemia
DAPI--4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole dATP--deoxyadenosine
triphosphate DCS--as in fluorescein-avidin DCS (a commercially
available cell sorter grade of fluorescein Avidin D)
dCTP--deoxycytosine triphosphate dGTP--deoxyguanosine triphosphate
DI--DNA index dNTP--deoxynucleotide triphosphate
dTTP--deoxythymidine triphosphate dUTP--deoxyuridine triphosphate
EDTA--ethylenediaminetetraacetate FISH--fluorescence in situ
hybridization FACS--fluorescence-activated cell sorting
FITC--fluorescein isothiocyanate HPLC--high performance liquid
chromatography IB--isolation buffer kb--kilobase kDa--Kilodalton
NP-40--non-ionic detergent commercially available from Sigma as
Nonidet P-40 (St. Louis, Mo.) PBS--phosphate-buffered saline
PHA--phytohemagglutinin PCR--polymerase chain reaction
PI--propidium iodide PMSF--phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride
PN--mixture of 0.1 M NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4 and 0.1 M buffer
Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4, pH 8; 0.1% NP-40 PNM--Pn buffer plus 5% nonfat
dry milk (centrifuged); buffer 0.02% Na azide Rb-1--retinoblastoma
gene RFLP--restriction fragment length polymorphism SD--Standard
Deviation SDS--sodium dodecyl sulfate SSC--0.15 M NaCl/0.015 M Na
citrate, pH 7 VNTR--variable number tandem repeat ug--microgram
ul--microliter um--micrometer uM--micromole ml--milliliter
mM--milliMole mm--millimeter ng--nanogram I. Methods of Preparing
Chromosome-Specific Staining Reagents I.A. Isolation of
Chromosome-Specific DNA and Formation of DNA Fragment Libraries
The first step in a preferred method of making the compositions of
the invention is isolating chromosome-specific DNA (which term
includes target-specific and/or region-specific DNA, as indicated
above, wherein specific refers to the origin of the DNA). This step
includes first isolating a sufficient quantity of the particular
chromosome type or chromosomal subregion to which the staining
composition is directed, then extracting the DNA from the isolated
chromosome(s) or chromosomal subregion(s). Here "sufficient
quantity" means sufficient for carrying out subsequent steps of the
method. Preferably, the extracted DNA is used to create a library
of DNA inserts by cloning using standard genetic engineering
techniques.
Preferred cloning vectors include, but are not limited to, yeast
artificial chromosomes (YACS), plasmids, bacteriophages and
cosmids. Preferred plasmids are Bluescribe plasmids; preferred
bacteriophages are lambda insertion vectors, more preferably Charon
4A, Charon 21A, Charon 35, Charon 40 and GEM11; and preferred
cosmids include Lawrist 4, Lawrist 5 and sCos1.
As indicated above, the DNA can be isolated from any source.
Chromsome-specific staining reagents can be made from both plant
and animal DNA according to the methods of this invention.
Important sources of animal DNA are mammals, particularly primates
or rodents wherein primate sources are more particularly human and
monkey, and rodent sources are more particularly rats or mice, and
more particularly mice.
1. Isolating DNA from an Entire Chromosome. A preferred means for
isolating particular whole chromosomes (specific chromosome types)
is by direct flow sorting [fluorescence-activated cell sorting
(FACS)] of metaphase chromosomes with or without the use of
interspecific hybrid cell systems. For some species, every
chromosome can be isolated by currently available sorting
techniques. Most, but not all, human chromosomes are currently
isolatable by flow sorting from human cells, Carrano et al.,
"Measurement and Purification of Human Chromosomes by Flow
Cytometry and Sorting," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., Vol. 76, pgs.
1382-1384 (1979). Thus, for isolation of some human chromosomes,
use of the human/rodent hybrid cell system may be necessary, see
Kao, "Somatic Cell Genetics and Gene Mapping," International Review
of Cytology., Vol. 85, pgs. 109-146 (1983), for a review, and
Gusella et al., "Isolation and Localization of DNA Segments from
Specific Human Chromosomes," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., Vol. 77, pgs.
2829-2833 (1980). Chromosome sorting can be done by commercially
available fluorescence-activated sorting machines, e.g., Becton
Dickinson FACS-II, Coulter Epics V sorter, or special purpose
sorters optimized for chromosome sorting or like instrument.
DNA is extracted from the isolated chromosomes by standard
techniques, e.g., Marmur, "A Procedure for the Isolation of
Deoxyribonucleic Acid from Micro-Organisms," J. Mol. Biol., Vol. 3,
pgs. 208-218 (1961); or Maniatis et al., Molecular Cloning: A
Laboratory Manual (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, 1982) pgs.
280-281. These references are incorporated by reference for their
descriptions of DNA isolation techniques.
Generation of insert libraries from the isolated
chromosome-specific DNA is carried out using standard genetic
engineering techniques, e.g., Davies et al., "Cloning of a
Representative Genomic Library of the Human X Chromosome After
Sorting by Flow Cytometry," Nature, Vol. 293, pgs. 374-376 (1981);
Krumlauf et al., "Construction and Characterization of Genomic
Libraries from Specific Human Chromosomes," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.,
Vol. 79, pgs. 2971-2975 (1982); Lawn et al., "The Isolation and
Characterization of Linked Delta-and-Beta-Globin Genes from a
Cloned Library of Human DNA." Cell, Vol. 15, pgs. 1157-1174 (1978);
and Maniatis et al., "Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual,"
(Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory, 1982), pgs. 256-308; Van Dilla et
al., id; Fuscoe, Gene, 52:291 (1987); and Fuscoe et al., Cytogenet.
Cell Genet., 43:79 (1986). Said references are herein incorporated
by reference.
Recombinant DNA libraries for each of the human chromosomes have
been constructed by the National Laboratory Gene Library Project
and are available from the American Type Culture Collection. [Van
Dilla et al., Biotechnology, 4:537 (1986).] Small insert-containing
libraries were constructed by complete digestion of flow sorted
human chromosome genomic DNA with HindIII or EcoRI and cloning into
the Lambda insertion vector Charon 21A. The vector is capable of
accepting human inserts of up to 9.1' kb in size. Thus, HindIII (or
EcoRI) restriction fragments greater than 9.1' kb will not be
recovered from these libraries. The observed average insert size in
these libraries is approximately 4 kb. A representative list of the
HindIII chromosome-specific libraries with their ATCC accession
numbers are shown in Table 1.
TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 HUMAN CHROMOSOME - SPECIFIC GENOMIC
LIBRARIES IN CHARON 21A VECTOR CHROMOSOME ATCC # LIBRARY 1 57753
LL01NS01 1 57754 LL01NS02 2 57744 LL02NS01 3 57751 LL03NS01 4 57700
LL04NS01 4 57745 LL04NS02 5 57746 LL05NS01 6 57701 LL06NS01 7 57755
LL07NS01 8 57702 LL08NS02 9 57703 LL09NS01 10 57736 LL10NS01 11
57704 LL11NS01 12 57756 LL12NS01 13 57705 LL13NS01 13 57757
LL13NS02 14 57706 LL14NS01 14/15 57707 LL99NS01 15 57737 LL15NS01
16 57758 LL16NS03 17 57759 LL17NS02 18 57710 LL18NS01 19 57711
LL19NS01 20 57712 LL20NS01 21 57713 LL21NS02 22 57714 LL22NS01 X
57747 LL0XNS01 Y 57715 LL0YNS01
Alternatively, the extracted DNA from a sorted chromosome type can
be amplified by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) rather than
cloning the extracted DNA in a vector or propagating it in a cell
line. Appropriate tails are added to the extracted DNA in
preparation for PCR. References for such PCR procedures are set out
in Section I.B infra.
Other possible methods of isolating the desired sequences from
hybrid cells include those of Schmeckpeper et al., "Partial
Purification and Characterization of DNA from Human X Chromosome,"
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci, Vol. 76, pgs. 6525-6528 (1979); or Olsen et
al., supra (in Background). Accordingly, these references are
incorporated by reference.
2. Isolating DNA from a Portion of a Chromosome. Among the methods
that can be used for isolating region-specific chromosomal DNA
include the selection of an appropriate chromosomal region from DNA
that has previously been mapped, for example, from a library of
mapped cosmids; the sorting of derivative chromosomes, for example,
by FACS; the microdissection of selected chromosomal material;
subtractive hybridization; identification of an appropriate hybrid
cell containing a desired chromosomal fragment, extracting and
amplifying the DNA, and selecting the desired amplified DNA; and
the selection of appropriate chromosomal material from radiation
hybrids. The standard genetic engineering techniques outlined above
in subsection I.A.1 are used in such procedures well-known to those
in the art. Amplification of the region-specific DNA can be
performed by cloning in an appropriate vector, propagating in an
appropriate cell line, and/or by the use of PCR (see I.B
infra).
A preferred method of isolating chromosomal region-specific DNA is
to use mapped short DNA sequences to probe a library of longer DNA
sequences, wherein the latter library has usually been cloned in a
different vector. For example, a probe cloned in a plasmid can be
used to probe a cosmid or yeast artificial chromosome (YAC)
library. By using an initial seed probe, overlapping clones in the
larger insert library can be found (a process called "walking"),
and a higher complexity probe can be produced for reliable staining
of the chromosomal region surrounding the seed probe. Ultimately,
when an entire genome for a species has been mapped (for example,
by the Human Genome Project for the human species), ordered clones
for the entire genome of the species will be available. One can
then easily select the appropriate clones to form a probe of the
desired specificity.
Another method of isolating DNA from a chromosomal region or
regions (or also a whole chromosome) is to propagate such a
chromosomal region or regions in an appropriate cell line (for
example, a hybrid cell line such as a human/hamster hybrid cell),
extract the DNA from the cell line and clone it in an appropriate
vector and select clones containing human DNA to form a library.
When a hybrid cell is used, the chromosomes in the hybrid cell
containing the human chromosomal material may be separated by flow
sorting (FACS) prior to cloning to increase the frequency of human
clones in the library. Still further, total DNA from the hybrid
cell can be isolated and labeled without further cloning and used
as a probe, as exemplified in FIG. 6.
3. Single-Stranded Probes. In some cases, it is preferable that the
nucleic acid fragments of the heterogeneous mixture consist of
single-stranded RNA or DNA. Under some conditions, the binding
efficiency of single-stranded nucleic acid probes has been found to
be higher during in situ hybridization, e.g., Cox et al.,
"Detection of mRNAs in Sea Urchin Embryos by In Situ Hybridization
Using Asymmetric RNA Probes," Developmental Biology, Vol. 101, pgs.
485-502 (1984).
Standard methods are used to generate RNA fragments from isolated
DNA fragments. For example, a method developed by Green et al.,
described in Cell, Vol. 32, pgs. 681-694 (1983), is commercially
available from Promega Biotec (Madison, Wis.) under the tradename
"Riboprobe." Other transcription kits suitable for use with the
present invention are available from United States Biochemical
Corporation (Cleveland, Ohio) under the tradename "Genescribe."
Single-stranded DNA probes can be produced with the single-stranded
bacteriophage M13, also available in kit form, e.g. Bethesda
Research Laboratories (Gaithersburg, Md.). The hybridizations
illustrated in FIG. 4 were performed with the libraries of Table 1
subcloned into the Bluescribe plasmid vector (Stratagene, La Jolla,
Calif.). The Bluescribe plasmid contains RNA promoters which permit
production of single-stranded probes.
Co-pending, commonly owned U.S. patent application No. 934,188
(filed Nov. 24, 1986), entitled "Method of Preparing and Applying
Single Stranded DNA Probes to Double Stranded Target DNAs,"
provides methods for preparing and applying non-self-complementary
single-stranded nucleic acid probes that improve signal-to-noise
ratios attainable in situ hybridization by reducing non-specific
and mismatched binding of the probe. That application further
provides for methods of denaturing double-stranded target nucleic
acid which minimizes single-stranded regions available for
hybridization that are non-complementary to probe sequences. Said
application is herein specifically incorporated by reference.
Briefly, probe is constructed by treating DNA with a restriction
enzyme and an exonuclease to form template/primers for a DNA
polymerase. The digested strand is resynthesized in the presence of
labeled nucleoside triphosphate precursor, and the labeled
single-stranded fragments are separated from the resynthesized
fragments to form the probe. The target nucleic acid is treated
with the same restriction enzyme used to construct the probe, and
is treated with an exonuclease before application of the probe.
I.B. PCR
Another method of producing probes of this invention includes the
use of the polymerase chain reaction [PCR]. [For an explanation of
the mechanics of PCR, see Saiki et al., Science, 230:1350 (1985)
and U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,683,195, 4,683,202 (both issued Jul. 28, 1987)
and 4,800,159 (issued Jan. 24, 1989).] Target-specific nucleic acid
sequences, isolated as indicated above, can be amplified by PCR to
produce target-specific sequences which are reduced in or free of
repetitive sequences. The PCR primers used for such a procedure are
for the ends of the repetitive sequences, resulting in
amplification of sequences flanked by the repeats.
FIG. 7 illustrates such a method of using PCR wherein the
representative repetitive sequence is Alu. If only short segments
are amplified, it is probable that such sequences are free of other
repeats, thus providing DNA reduced in repetitive sequences.
One can further suppress production of repetitive sequences in such
a PCR procedure by first hybridizing complementary sequences to
said repetitive sequence wherein said complementary sequences have
extended non-complementary flanking ends or are terminated in
nucleotides which do not permit extension by the polymerase. The
non-complementary ends of the blocking sequences prevent the
blocking sequences from acting as a PCR primer during the PCR
process.
II. Removal of Repetitive Sequences and/or Disabling the
Hybridization Capacity of Repetitive Sequences
Typically a probe of the current invention is produced in a number
of steps including: obtaining source nucleic acid sequences that
are complementary to the target region of the genome, labeling and
otherwise processing them so that they will hybridize efficiently
to the target and can be detected after they bind, and treating
them to either disable the hybridization capacity or remove a
sufficient proportion of shared repetitive sequences, or both
disable and remove such sequences. The order of these steps depends
on the specific procedures employed.
The following methods can be used to remove shared repetitive
sequences and/or disable the hybridization capacity of such shared
repetitive sequences. Such methods are representative and are
expressed schematically in terms of procedures well known to those
of ordinary skill the art, and which can be modified and extended
according to parameters and procedures well known to those in the
art.
1. Single-copy probes. A single-copy probe consists of nucleic acid
fragments that are complementary to single-copy sequences contained
in the target region of the genome. One method of constructing such
a probe is to start with a DNA library produced by cloning the
target region. Some of the clones in the library will contain DNA
whose entire sequence is single-copy; others will contain
repetitive sequences; and still others will have portions of
single-copy and repetitive sequences. Selection, on a done by done
basis, and pooling of those clones containing only single-copy
sequences will result in a probe that will hybridize specifically
to the target region. The single-copy nature of a clone can
ultimately be established by Southern hybridization using standard
techniques. FIG. 4H shows hybridization with 120 clones selected in
this way from a chromosome 4 library.
Southern analysis is very time consuming and labor intensive.
Therefore, less perfect but more efficient screening methods for
obtaining candidate single-copy clones are useful. In Section V.B,
examples of improved methods are provided for screening individual
phage and plasmid clones for the presence of repetitive DNA using
hybridization with genomic DNA. The screening of plasmid clones is
more efficient, and approximately 80% of selected clones contain
only single-copy sequences; the remainder contain low-copy repeats.
However, probes produced in this way can produce adequate staining
contrast, indicating that the low-copy repetitive sequences can be
tolerated in the probe (see subsection 3 of this section).
A disadvantage of done by done procedures is that a done is
discarded even if only a portion of the sequence it contains is
repetitive. The larger the length of the cloned nucleic acid, the
greater the chance that it will contain a repetitive sequence.
Therefore, when nucleic acid is propagated in a vector that
contains large inserts such as a cosmid, YAC, or in a cell line,
such as hybrid cells, it may be advantageous to subclone it in
smaller pieces before the single-copy selection is performed. The
selection procedures just outlined above do not discriminate
between shared and specific repetitive sequences; clones with
detectable repetitive sequences of either type are not used in the
probe.
2. Individual testing of hybridization properties. The
hybridization specificity of a piece of nucleic acid, for example,
a clone, can be tested by in situ hybridization. If under
appropriate hybridization conditions it binds to single-copy or
repetitive sequences specific for the desired target region, it can
be included in the probe. Many sequences with specific
hybridization characteristics are already known, such as
chromosome-specific repetitive sequences [Trask et al., supra,
(1988) and references therein], VNTRs, numerous mapped single copy
sequences. More are continuously being mapped. Such sequences can
be included in a probe of this invention.
3. Bulk Procedures. In many genomes, such as the human genome, a
major portion of shared repetitive DNA is contained in a few
families of highly repeated sequences such as Alu. A probe that is
substantially free of such high-copy repetitive sequences will
produce useful staining contrast in many applications. Such a probe
can be produced from some source of nucleic acid sequences, for
example, the libraries of Table 1, with relatively simple bulk
procedures. Therefore, such bulk procedures are the preferred
methods for such applications.
These methods primarily exploit the fact that the hybridization
rate of complementary nucleic acid strands increases as their
concentration increases. Thus, if a heterogeneous mixture of
nucleic acid fragments is denatured and incubated under conditions
that permit hybridization, the sequences present at high
concentration will become double-stranded more rapidly than the
others. The double-stranded nucleic acid can then be removed and
the remainder used as a probe. Alternatively, the partially
hybridized mixture can be used as the probe, the double-stranded
sequences being unable to bind to the target. The following are
methods representative of bulk procedures that are useful for
producing the target-specific staining of this invention.
3a. Self-reassociation of the probe. Double-stranded probe nucleic
acid in the hybridization mixture is denatured and then incubated
under hybridization conditions for a time sufficient for the
high-copy sequences in the probe to become substantially
double-stranded. The hybridization mixture is then applied to the
sample. The remaining labeled single-stranded copies of the highly
repeated sequences bind throughout the sample producing a weak,
widely distributed signal. The binding of the multiplicity of
low-copy sequences specific for the target region of the genome
produce an easily distinguishable specific signal.
Such a method is exemplified in Section VI.B (infra) with
chromosome-specific libraries for chromosomes 4 and 21 (pBS4 and
pBS21) as probes for those chromosomes. The hybridization mix,
containing a probe concentration in the range of 1-10 ng/ul was
heated to denature the probe and incubated at 37.degree. C. for 24
hours prior to application to the sample.
3b. Use of blocking nucleic acid. Unlabeled nucleic acid sequences
which are complementary to those sequences in the probe whose
hybridization capacity it is desired to inhibit are added to the
hybridization mixture. The probe and blocking nucleic acid are
denatured, if necessary, and incubated under appropriate
hybridization conditions. The sequences to be blocked become
double-stranded more rapidly than the others, and therefore are
unable to bind to the target when the hybridization mixture is
applied to the target. In some cases, the blocking reaction occurs
so quickly that the incubation period can be very short, and
adequate results can be obtained if the hybridization mix is
applied to the target immediately after denaturation. A blocking
method is generally described by Sealy et al., "Removal of Repeat
Sequences form Hybridization Probes", Nucleic Acid Research,
13:1905 (1985), which reference is incorporated by reference.
Examples of blocking nucleic acids include genomic DNA, a high-copy
fraction of genomic DNA and particular sequences as outlined below
(i-iii).
3b.i. Genomic DNA. Genomic DNA contains all of the nucleic acid
sequences of the organism in proportion to their copy-number in the
genome. Thus, adding genomic DNA to the hybridization mixture
increases the concentration of the high-copy repeat sequences more
than low-copy sequences, and therefore is more effective at
blocking the former. However, the genomic DNA does contain copies
of the sequences that are specific to the target and so will also
reduce the desired chromosome-specific binding if too much is
added. Guidelines to determine how much genomic DNA to add (see
3.e. Concept of Q, infra) and examples of using genomic blocking
DNA are provided below. The blocking effectiveness of genomic DNA
can be enhanced under some conditions by adjusting the timing of
its addition to the hybridization mix; examples of such timing
adjustments are provided with Protocol I and Protocol II
hybridizations illustrated in FIGS. 4B through E (Protocol I) and
FIG. 4F (Protocol II) and detailed in Section VI, infra.
3b.ii. High-copy fraction of genomic DNA. The difficulty with use
of genomic DNA is that it also blocks the hybridization of the
low-copy sequences, which are predominantly the sequences that give
the desired target staining. Thus, fractionating the genomic DNA to
obtain only the high-copy sequences and using them for blocking
overcomes this difficulty. Such fractionation can be done, for
example, with hydroxyapatite as described below (3c.i).
3b.iii. Specified sequences. The blocking of a particular sequence
in the probe can be accomplished by adding many unlabeled copies of
that sequence. For example, Alu sequences in the probe can be
blocked by adding cloned Alu DNA. Blocking DNA made from a mixture
of a few clones containing the highest copy sequences in the human
genome can be used effectively with chromosome-specific libraries
for example, those of Table I. Alternatively, unlabeled nucleic
acid sequences from one or more chromosome-specific libraries could
be used to block a probe containing labeled sequences from one or
more other chromosome-specific libraries. The shared sequences
would be blocked whereas sequences occurring only on the target
chromosome would be unaffected. FIG. 4F shows that genomic DNA was
not effective in completely blocking the hybridization of a
sequence or sequences shared by human chromosome 21 and the
centromeric regions of the other human acrocentric chromosomes.
When a clone or clones containing such a sequence or sequences is
or are eventually isolated, unlabeled DNA produced therefrom could
be added to the genomic blocking DNA to improve the specificity of
the staining.
3c. Removal of Sequences.
3c.i. Hydroxyapatite. Single- and double-stranded nucleic acids
have different binding characteristics to hydroxyapatite. Such
characteristics provide a basis commonly used for fractionating
nucleic acids. Hydroxyapatite is commerically available (eg.
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Richmond, Calif.). The fraction of genomic
DNA containing sequences with a particular degree of repetition,
from the highest copy-number to single-copy, can be obtained by
denaturing genomic DNA, allowing it to reassociate under
appropriate conditions to a particular value of C.sub.ot, followed
by separation using hydroxyapatite. The single- and double-stranded
nucleic acid can also be discriminated by use of S1 nuclease. Such
techniques and the concept of C.sub.ot are explained in Britten et
al., "Analysis of Repeating DNA Sequences by Reassociation", in
Methods in Enzymology, vol. 29, pgs. 363418 (1974), which article
is herein incorporated by reference.
The single-stranded nucleic acid fraction produced in 3a. or 3b.
above can be separated by hydroxyapatite and used as a probe. Thus,
the sequences that have been blocked (that become double-stranded)
are physically removed. The probe can then be stored until needed.
The probe can then be used without additional blocking nucleic
acid, or its staining contrast can perhaps be improved by
additional blocking.
3c.ii. Reaction with immobilized nucleic acid. Removal of
particular sequences can also be accomplished by attaching
single-stranded "absorbing" nucleic acid sequences to a solid
support. Single-stranded source nucleic acid is hybridized to the
immobilized nucleic add. After the hybridization, the unbound
sequences are collected and used as the probe. For example, human
genomic DNA can be used to absorb repetitive sequences from human
probes. One such method is described by Brison et al., "General
Method for Cloning Amplified DNA by Differential Screening with
Genomic Probes," Molecular and Cellular Biology, Vol. 2, pgs.
578-587 (1982). Accordingly, that reference is incorporated by
reference. Briefly, minimally sheared human genomic DNA is bound to
diazonium cellulose or a like support. The source DNA,
appropriately cut into fragments, is hybridized against the
immobilized DNA to C.sub.ot values in the range of about 1 to 100.
The preferred stringency of the hybridization conditions may vary
depending on the base composition of the DNA. Such a procedure
could remove repetitive sequences from chromosome-specific
libraries, for example, those of Table I, to produce a probe
capable of staining a whole human chromosome.
3d. Blocking non-targeted sequences in the targeted genome.
Blocking of non-targeted biding sites in the targeted genome by
hybridization with unlabeled complementary sequences will prevent
binding of labeled sequences in the probe that have the potential
to bind to those sites. For example, hybridization with unlabeled
genomic DNA will render the high-copy repetitive sequences in the
target genome double-stranded. Labeled copies of such sequences in
the probe will not be able to bind when the probe is subsequently
applied.
In practice, several mechanisms combine to produce the staining
contrast. For example, when blocking DNA is added to the probe as
in 3b above, that which remains single-stranded when the probe is
applied to the target can bind to and block the target sequences.
If the incubation of the probe with the blocking DNA is minimal,
then the genomic DNA simultaneously blocks the probe and competes
with the probe for binding sites in the target.
3e. Concept of Q. As mentioned in section 3b.i above, it is
necessary to add the correct amount of genomic DNA to achieve the
best compromise between inhibiting the hybridization capacity of
high-copy repeats in the probe and reducing the desired signal
intensity by inhibition of the binding of the target-specific
sequences. The following discussion pertains to use of genomic
blocking DNA with probes produced by cloning or otherwise
replicating stretches of DNA from the target region of the genome.
Thus, the probe contains a representative sampling of the
single-copy, chromosome-specific repetitive sequences, and shared
repetitive sequences found in the target. Such a probe might range
in complexity from 100 kb of sequence derived from a small region
of the genome, for example several closely spaced cosmid clones; to
many millions of bases, for example a combination of multiple
libraries from Table I. The discussion below is illustrative and
can be extended to other situations where different blocking
nucleic acids are used. The following discussion of Q is designed
only to give general guidelines as to how to proceed.
The addition of unlabeled genomic DNA to a hybridization mix
containing labeled probe sequences increases the concentration of
all of the sequences, but increases the concentration of the shared
sequences by a larger factor than the concentration of the
target-specific sequences because the shared sequences are found
elsewhere in the genome, whereas the target-specific sequences are
not. Thus, the reassociation of the shared sequences is
preferentially enhanced so that the hybridization of the labeled
copies of the shared sequences to the target is preferentially
inhibited.
To quantity this concept, first consider one of the sequences,
repeat or single-copy, that hybridize specifically to the ith
chromosome in a hybridization mixture containing a mass m.sub.p of
probe DNA from the ith chromosome library of Table 1 (for example)
and m.sub.b of unlabeled genomic DNA. The number of labeled copies
of the sequence is proportional to m.sub.p. However, the number of
unlabeled copies is proportional to f.sub.im.sub.b, where f.sub.i
is the fraction of genomic DNA contained on the ith chromosome.
Thus, the ratio of unlabeled to labeled copies of each of the
sequences specific for the target chromosome, is
f.sub.im.sub.b/m.sub.p, which is defined herein as Q. For normal
human chromosomes, 0.016.ltoreq.f.sub.i.ltoreq.0.08 [Mendelsohn et
al., Science, 179:1126 (1973)]. For representative examples
described in Section VI.B (infra), f.sub.4=0.066 and
f.sub.21=0.016. For a probe targeted at a region comprised of L
base pairs, f.sub.i=L/G where G is the number of base pairs in a
genome (approximately 3.times.10.sup.9 bases for humans and other
mammals). Thus, Q=(L/G) (m.sub.b/m.sub.p).
Now consider a shared sequence that is distributed more-or-less
uniformly over the genome, for example, Alu. The number of labeled
copies is proportional to m.sub.p, whereas the number of unlabeled
copies is proportional to m.sub.b. Thus, the ratio of unlabeled to
labeled copies is m.sub.b/m.sub.p=Q/f.sub.i. This is true for all
uniformly distributed sequences, regardless of copy number. Thus
adding genomic DNA increases the concentration of each specific
sequence by the factor 1+Q, whereas each uniformly distributed
sequence is increased by the larger factor 1+Q/f.sub.i. Thus, the
reassociation rates of the shared sequences are increased by a
larger factor than those of the specific sequences by the addition
of genomic DNA.
It can be shown that roughly half of the beneficial effect of
genomic DNA on relative reassociation rates is achieved when Q=1,
and, by Q=5, there is essentially no more benefit to be gained by
further increases. Thus, the protocol I hybridizations of Section
VI.B infra keep Q.ltoreq.5.
To illustrate the use of genomic blocking DNA, it is convenient to
consider a model of a genome wherein 50% of the DNA is comprised of
specific sequences (both repetitive and single-copy) and the other
50% of the DNA is comprised of shared repetitive sequences that are
distributed uniformly over the genome. Thus, according to the
model, if the target is L bases (that is, the probe contains
fragments representing L bases of the target area or areas of the
genome), sequences containing L/2 bases will be specific to the
target, and L/2 will be shared with the entire genome.
Case I. The complexity of the probe is about 50 kb to about 100 kb.
(In this case the complexity may be approximately equal to L since
the probability is that no repetitive sequences will typically
occur with more than a few copies in such a number of bases). Using
a standard hybridization mixture (as exemplified in Section VI.B,
infra), the target can be hybridized with about 2 ng of labeled
probe DNA in 10 ul of hybridization mix, corresponding to
approximately 1 pg/ul per kb of specific sequences (as used in
Section VI.B, infra). Suppose the hybridization is to a slide
containing 10.sup.4 cells (a typical number), and each cell has
about 6 pg of DNA, (typical for mammals). Then in this model
calculation, there is 3 pg of shared repetitive sequences per cell.
Thus, for 10.sup.4 cells there are 3.times.10.sup.4 pg or 30 ng of
shared sequences on the slide. Similarly, there is
10.sup.4.times.0.5.times.10.sup.5.times.6/3.times.10.sup.9 pg=1 pg
of target for the specific sequences. The probe contains
1/2.times.2 ng or 1 ng of shared sequences and 1 ng of specific
sequences. Therefore, there is not enough probe to saturate the
shared sequences in the target DNA, but enough to saturate the
specific sequences. The signal from the shared sequences is spread
at low intensity over the entire genome whereas the specific signal
is concentrated in a compact region. Thus, good contrast can be
obtained without adding any blocking genomic DNA at all.
A great deal of genomic DNA can be added to improve the contrast
without interfering with the hybridization of the specific
sequences, that is, Q remains low even if a great deal of genomic
DNA is added.
Q=10.sup.5/3.times.10.sup.9m.sub.b/m.sub.p=3.times.10.sup.-5m.sub.b/m.sub-
.p. If a large amount of blocking nucleic acid, for example, 10 ug
were used (according to the standard hybridization protocols
exemplified in Section VI.B infra wherein the practical limit of
total nucleic acid is on the order of 10 ug in a 10' ul
hybridization mixture) with the 2 ng of probe, then
Q=3.times.10.sup.-5.times.104 ng/2 ng=3/2.times.10.sup.-1=0.15.
Thus, Q is <1, and is so low that the blocking DNA cannot
substantially interfere with the desired signal. Increasing the
amount of labeled probe nucleic acid to speed the hybridization
would further decrease Q. In practice, one would typically use 1 ug
of blocking DNA for such a hybridization.
Case II. As the size of the target region is increased, the
complexity of the probe necessarily is increased, and the amount of
DNA in the hybridization mix needs to be increased in order to have
a sufficient concentration of each portion of specific sequence to
hybridize. Also, if one desires to decrease the hybridization time
of the procedure, the probe concentration must be increased. In
these situations, the increase in probe concentration results in an
increase in the amount of shared sequences in the hybridization
mixture, which in turn increases the amount of hybridization that
will occur to the shared sequences in the target area or areas,
thereby reducing the contrast ratio.
With very high complexity probes spanning several entire
chromosomes, L/G can approach 1. In order to stain such a portion
of the genome within a reasonable time, for example, overnight, the
concentration of labeled nucleic acid needs to be increased, for
example, 200 ng in 10 ul of hybridization mixture. Up to about 3000
ng of blocking DNA can be used and still keep Q.ltoreq.5 [wherein
the calculation is Q=5 =0.3 m.sub.b/200 ng or m.sub.b=1000
ng/0.3=3,333 ng]. In practice, staining 25% and more of the human
genome (for example, human chromosomes 1, 3 and 4) can be
accomplished with the blocking protocols described below, but the
contrast is less than for that achieved with probes for smaller
regions.
III. Labeling the Nucleic Acid Fragments of the Heterogeneous
Mixture
Several techniques are available for labeling single- and
double-stranded nucleic acid fragments of the heterogeneous
mixture. They include incorporation of radioactive labels, e.g.
Harper et al. Chromosoma, Vol 83, pgs. 431-439 (1984); direct
attachment of fluorochromes or enzymes, e.g. Smith et al., Nucleic
Acids Research, Vol. 13, pgs. 2399-2412 (1985), and Connolly et
al., Nucleic Acids Research Vol. 13, pgs. 4485-4502 (1985); and
various chemical modifications of the nucleic acid fragments that
render them detectable immunochemically or by other affinity
reactions, e.g. Tchen et al., "Chemically Modified Nucleic Acids as
Immunodetectable Probes in Hybridization Experiments," Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci., Vol 81, pgs. 3466-3470 (1984); Richardson et al.,
"Biotin and Fluorescent Labeling of RNA Using T4 RNA Ligase,"
Nucleic Acids Research, Vol. 11, pgs. 6167-6184 (1983); Langer et
al., "Enzymatic Synthesis of Biotin-Labeled Polynucleotides: Novel
Nucleic Acid Affinity Probes," Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., Vol. 78,
pgs. 6633-6637 (1981); Brigati et al., "Detection of Viral Genomes
in Cultured Cells and Paraffin-Embedded Tissue Sections Using
Biotin-Labeled Hybridization Probes," Virology, Vol. 126, pgs.
32-50 (1983); Broker et al., "Electron Microscopic Visualization of
tRNA Genes with Ferritin-Avidin: Biotin Labels," Nucleic Acids
Research, Vol. 5, pgs. 363-384 (1978); Bayer et al., "The Use of
the Avidin Biotin Complex as a Tool in Molecular Biology," Methods
of Biochemical Analysis Vol. 26, pgs. 1-45 (1980) Kuhlmann,
Immunoenzyme Techniques in Cytochemistry (Weinheim, Basel, 1984).
Langer-Safer et al., PNAS USA, 79: 4381 (1982): Landegent et al.,
Exp. Cell Res., 153: 61 (1984); and Hopman et al., Exp. Cell Res.,
169: 357 (1987).
Exemplary labeling means include those wherein the probe fragments
are biotinylated, modified with N-acetoxy-N-2-acetylaminofluorene,
modified with fluorescein isothiocyanate, modified with mercury/TNP
ligand, sulfonated, digoxigenenated or contain T-T dimers.
The key feature of "probe labeling" is that the probe bound to the
target be detectable. In some cases, an intrinsic feature of the
probe nucleic acid, rather than an added feature, can be exploited
for this purpose. For example, antibodies that specifically
recognize RNA/DNA duplexes have been demonstrated to have the
ability to recognize probes made from RNA that are bound to DNA
targets [Rudkin and Stollar, Nature, 265:472-473 (1977)]. The RNA
used for such probes is unmodified. Probe nucleic acid fragments
can be extended by adding "tails" of modified nucleotides or
particular normal nucleotides. When a normal nucleotide tail is
used, a second hybridization with nucleic acid complementary to the
tail and containing fluorochromes, enzymes, radioactivity, modified
bases, among other labeling means, allows detection of the bound
probe. Such a system is commerically available from Enzo Biochem
(Biobridge Labeling System; Enzo Biochem Inc., New York, N.Y.).
Another example of a means to visualize the bound probe wherein the
nucleic acid sequences in the probe do not directly carry some
modified constituent is the use of antibodies to thymidine dimers.
Nakane et al., 20 (2):229 (1987), illustrate such a method wherein
thymine-thymine dimerized DNA (T-T DNA) was used as a marker for in
situ hybridization. The hybridized T-T DNA was detected
immunohistochemically using rabbit anti-T-T DNA antibody.
All of the labeling techniques disclosed in the above references
may be preferred under particular circumstances. Accordingly, the
above-cited references are incorporated by reference. Further, any
labeling techniques known to those in the art would be useful to
label the staining compositions of this invention. Several factors
govern the choice of labeling means, including the effect of the
label on the rate of hybridization and binding of the nucleic acid
fragments to the chromosomal DNA, the accessibility of the bound
probe to labeling moieties applied after initial hybridization, the
mutual compatibility of the labeling moieties, the nature and
intensity of the signal generated by the label, the expense and
ease in which the label is applied, and the like.
Several different high complexity probes, each labeled by a
different method, can be used simultaneously. The binding of
different probes can thereby be distinguished, for example, by
different colors.
IV. In Situ Hybridization
Application of the heterogeneous mixture of the invention to
chromosomes is accomplished by standard in situ hybridization
techniques. Several excellent guides to the technique are
available, e.g., Gall and Pardue, "Nucleic Acid Hybridization in
Cytological Preparations," Methods in Enzymology. Vol. 21, pgs.
470-480 (1981); Henderson, "Cytological Hybridization to Mammalian
Chromosomes," International Review of Cytology, Vol. 76, pgs. 1-46
(1982); and Angerer, et al., "In Situ Hybridization to Cellular
RNAs," in Genetic Engineering: Principles and Methods Setlow and
Hollaender, Eds., Vol. 7, pgs. 43-65 (Plenum Press, New York,
1985). Accordingly, these references are incorporated by
references.
Three factors influence the staining sensitivity of the
hybridization probes: (1) efficiency of hybridization (fraction of
target DNA that can be hybridized by probe), (2) detection
efficiency (i.e., the amount of visible signal that can be obtained
from a given amount of hybridization probe), and (3) level of noise
produced by nonspecific binding of probe or components of the
detection system.
Generally in situ hybridization comprises the following major
steps: (1) fixation of tissue or biological structure to be
examined, (2) prehybridization treatment of the biological
structure to increase accessibility of target DNA, and to reduce
nonspecific binding, (3) hybridization of the heterogeneous mixture
of probe in the DNA in the biological structure or tissue; (4)
posthybridization washes to remove probe not bound in specific
hybrids, and (5) detection of the hybridized probes of the
heterogeneous mixture. The reagents used in each of these steps and
their conditions of use vary depending on the particular
situation.
The following comments are meant to serve as a guide for applying
the general steps listed above. Some experimentation may be
required to establish optimal staining conditions for particular
applications.
In preparation for the hybridization, the probe, regardless of the
method of its production, may be broken into fragments of the size
appropriate to obtain the best intensity and specificity of
hybridization. As a general guideline concerning the size of the
fragments, one needs to recognize that if the fragments are too
long they are not able to penetrate into the target for binding and
instead form aggregates that contribute background noise to the
hybridization; however, if the fragments are too short, the signal
intensity is reduced.
Under the conditions of hybridization exemplified in Section VI.B
wherein human genomic DNA is used as an agent to block the
hybridization capacity of the high copy shared repetitive
sequences, the preferred size range of the probe fragments is from
about 200 bases to about 600. The preferred hybridization
temperature is about 30.degree. C. to about 45.degree. C., more
preferably about 35.degree. C. to about 40.degree. C., and still
more preferably about 37.degree. C.; preferred washing temperature
range is from about 40.degree. C. to about 50.degree. C., more
preferably about 45.degree. C.
The size of the probe fragments is checked before hybridization to
the target; preferably the size of the fragments is monitored by
electrophoresis, more preferably by denaturing agarose gel
electrophoresis.
Fixatives include acid alcohol solutions, acid acetone solutions,
Petrunkewitsch's reagent, and various aldehydes such as
formaldehyde, paraformaldehyde, glutaraldehyde, or the like.
Preferably, ethanol-acetic acid or methanol-acetic acid solutions
in about 3:1 proportions are used to fix the chromosomes in
metaphase spreads. For cells or chromosomes in suspension, a
fixation procedure disclosed by Trask, et al., in Science, Vol.
230, pgs. 1401-1402 (1985), is useful. Accordingly, Trask et al.,
is incorporated by reference. Briefly, K.sub.2CO.sub.3 and
dimethylsuberimidate (DMS) are added (from a 5.times.concentrated
stock solution, mixed immediately before use) to a suspension
containing about 5.times.10.sup.6 nuclei/ml. Final K.sub.2CO.sub.3
and DMS concentrations are 20 mM and 3 mM, respectively. After 15
minutes at 25.degree. C., the pH is adjusted from 10.0 to 8.0 by
the addition of 50 microliters of 100 mM citric acid per milliliter
of suspension. Nuclei are washed once by centrifugation (300 g, 10
minutes, 4.degree. C. in 50 mM kCl, 5 mM Hepes buffer, at pH 9.0,
and 10 mM MgSO.sub.4).
A preferred fixation procedure for cells or nuclei in suspension is
disclosed by Trask et al., Hum. Genet. 78:251-259 (1988), which
article is herein incorporated by reference. Briefly, nuclei are
fixed for about 10 minutes at room temperature in 1%
paraformaldehyde in PBS, 50' mM MgSO.sub.4, pH 7.6 and washed
twice. Nuclei are resuspended in isolation buffer (IB) (50 mM KCl,
5 mM HEPES, 10 mM MgSO.sub.4, 3 mM dithioerythritol, 0.15 mg/ml
RNase, pH 8.0)/0.05% Triton X-100 at 10.sup.8/ml.
Frequently before in situ hybridization chromosomes are treated
with agents to remove proteins. Such agents include enzymes or mild
acids. Pronase, pepsin or proteinase K are frequently used enzymes.
A represent- ative acid treatment is 0.02-0.2 N HCl, followed by
high temperature (e.g., 70.degree. C.) washes. Optimization of
deproteinization requires a combination of protease concentration
and digestion time that maximizes hybridization, but does not cause
unacceptable loss of morphological detail. Optimum conditions vary
according to tissue types and method of fixation. Additional
fixation after protease treatment may be useful. Thus, for
particular applications, some experimentation may be required to
optimize protease treatment.
In some cases pretreatment with RNase may be desirable to remove
residual RNA from the target. Such removal can be accomplished by
incubation of the fixed chromosomes in 50-100 microgram/milliliter
RNase in 2.times.SSC (where SSC is a solution of 0.15M NaCL and
0.015M sodium citrate) for a period of 1-2 hours at room
temperature.
The step of hybridizing the probes of the heterogeneous probe
mixture to the chromosomal DNA involves (1) denaturing the target
DNA so that probes can gain access to complementary single-stranded
regions, and (2) applying the heterogeneous mixture under
conditions which allow the probes to anneal to complementary sites
in the target. Methods for denaturation include incubation in the
presence of high pH, low pH, high temperature, or organic solvents
such as formamide, tetraalkylammonium halides, or the like, at
various combinations of concentration and temperature.
Single-stranded DNA in the target can also be produced with
enzymes, such as, Exonuclease III [van Dekken et al., Chromosoma
(Berl) 97:1-5 (1988)]. The preferred denaturing procedure is
incubation for between about 1-10 minutes in formamide at a
concentration between about 35-95 percent in 2.times.SSC and at a
temperature between about 25-70.degree. C. Determination of the
optimal incubation time, concentration, and temperature within
these ranges depends on several variables, including the method of
fixation and type of probe nucleic acid (for example, DNA or
RNA).
After the chromosomal DNA is denatured, the denaturing agents are
typically removed before application of the heterogeneous probe
mixture. Where formamide and heat are the primary denaturing
agents, removal is conveniently accomplished by several washes with
a solvent, which solvent is frequently chilled, such as a 70%, 85%,
100% cold ethanol series. Alternatively the composition of the
denaturant can be adjusted as appropriate for the in situ
hybridization by addition of other constituents or washes in
appropriate solutions. The probe and target nucleic acid may be
denatured simultaneously by applying the hybridization mixture and
then heating to the appropriate temperature.
The ambient physiochemical conditions of the chromosomal DNA and
probe during the time the heterogeneous mixture is applied is
referred to herein as the hybridization conditions, or annealing
conditions. Optimal hybridization conditions for particular
applications can be adjusted by controlling several factors,
including concentration of the constituents, incubation time of
chromosomes in the heterogeneous mixture, and the concentrations,
complexities, and lengths of the nucleic acid fragments making up
the heterogeneous mixture. Roughly, the hybridization conditions
must be sufficiently close to the melting temperature to minimize
nonspecific binding. On the other hand, the conditions cannot be so
stringent as to reduce correct hybridizations of complementary
sequences below detectable levels or to require excessively long
incubation times.
The concentrations of nucleic acid in the hybridization mixture is
an important variable. The concentrations must be high enough so
that sufficient hybridization of respective chromosomal binding
sites occurs in a reasonable time (e.g., within hours to several
days). Higher concentrations than that necessary to achieve
adequate signals should be avoided so that nonspecific binding is
minimized. An important practical constraint on the concentration
of nucleic acid in the probe in the heterogeneous mixture is
solubility. Upper bounds exist with respect to the fragment
concentration, i.e., unit length of nucleic acid per unit volume,
that can be maintained in solution and hybridizes effectively.
In the representational examples described in Section VI.B (infra),
the total DNA concentration in the hybridization mixture had an
upper limit on the order of 1 ug/ul. Probe concentrations in the
range of 1-20 ng/ul were used for such whole chromosome staining.
The amount of genomic blocking DNA was adjusted such that Q was
less than 5. At the low end of probe concentration, adequate
signals were obtained with a one hour incubation, that is, a time
period wherein the probe and blocking DNA are maintained together
before application to the targeted material, to block the high-copy
sequences and a 16 hour hybridization. Signals were visible after
two hours of hybridization. The best results (bright signals with
highest contrast) occurred after a 100 hour hybridization, which
gave the low-copy target-specific sequences more opportunity to
find binding sites. At the high end of the probe concentration,
bright signals are obtained after hybridizations of 16 hours or
less; the contrast was reduced since more labeled repetitive
sequences were included in the probe.
The fixed target object can be treated in several ways either
during or after the hybridization step to reduce non-specific
binding of probe DNA. Such treatments include adding nonprobe, or
"carrier", DNA to the heterogeneous mixture, using coating
solutions, such as Denhardt's solution (Biochem. Biophys. Res.
Commun., Vol. 23, pgs. 641-645 (1966), with the heterogeneous
mixture, incubating for several minutes, e.g., 5-20, in denaturing
solvents at a temperature 5-10.degree. C. above the hybridization
temperature, and in the case of RNA probes, mild treatment with
single strand RNase (e.g., 5-10 micrograms per millileter RNase) in
2.times.SSC at room temperature for 1 hour).
V. Chromosome-Specific Staining Reagents Comprising Selected
Single-Copy Sequences
V.A. Making and Using a Staining Reagent Specific to Human
Chromosome 21
V.A.1. Isolation of Chromosome 21 and Construction of a Chromosome
21-Specific Library
DNA fragments from human chromosome-specific libraries are
available from the National Laboratory Gene Library Project through
the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC), Rockville, Md. DNA
fragments from chromosome 21 were generated by the procedure
described by Fuscoe et al., in "Construction of Fifteen Human
Chromosome-Specific DNA Libraries from Flow-Purified Chromosomes,"
Cytogenet. Cell Genet., Vol. 43, pgs. 79-86 (1986), which reference
is incorporated by reference. Briefly, a human diploid fibroblast
culture was established from newborn foreskin tissue. Chromosomes
of the cells were isolated by the MgSO.sub.4 method of van den Engh
et al., Cytometry, Vol. 5, pgs. 108-123 (1984), and stained with
the fluorescent dyes--Hoechst 33258 and Chromomycin A3. Chromosome
21 was purified on the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory high
speed sorter, described by Peters et al., Cytometry, Vol. 6, pgs.
290-301 (1985).
After sorting, chromosome concentrations were approximately
4.times.10.sup.5/ml. Therefore, prior to DNA extraction, the
chromosomes (0.2-1.0.times.10.sup.6) were concentrated by
centrifugation at 40,000.times.g for 30 minutes at 4.degree. C. The
pellet was then resuspended in 100 microliters of DNA isolation
buffer (15 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, 10 mM Tris HCl pH 8.0) containing
0.5% SDS and 100 micrograms/ml proteinase K. After overnight
incubation at 37.degree. C., the proteins were extracted twice with
phenol:chloroform: isoamyl alcohol (24:24:1) and once with
chloroform:isoamyl alcohol (24:1). Because of the small amounts of
DNA, each organic phase was reextracted with a small amount of 10
mM Tris pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA (TE). Aqueous layers were combined and
transferred to a Schleicher and Schuell mini-collodion membrane
(#UHO20/25) and dialyzed at room temperature against TE for 6-8
hours. The purified DNA solution was then digested with 50 units of
HindIII (Bethesda Research Laboratories, Inc.) in 50 mM NaCl, 10 mM
Tris HCl pH 7.5, 10 mM MgCl.sub.2, 1 mM dithiothreitol. After 4
hours at 37.degree., the reaction was stopped by extractions with
phenol and chloroform as described above. The aqueous phase was
dialyzed against water overnight at 4.degree. C. in a
mini-collodion bag and then 2 micrograms of Charon 21A arms cleaved
with HindIII and treated with calf alkaline phosphatase (Boehringer
Mannheim) were added. This solution was concentrated under vacuum
to a volume of 50-100 microliters and transferred to a 0.5 ml
microfuge tube where the DNA was precipitated with one-tenth volume
3M sodium acetate pH 5.0 and 2 volumes ethanol. The precipitate was
collected by centrifugation, washed with cold 70% ethanol, and
dissolved in 10 microliters of TE.
After allowing several hours for the DNA to dissolve, 1 microliter
of 10.times.X ligase buffer (0.5M Tris HCl pH 7.4, 0.1 M
MgCl.sub.2, 0.1M dithiothreitol, 10 mM ATP, 1 mg/ml bovine serum
albumin) and 1 unit of T4 ligase (Bethesda Research Laboratory,
Inc.) were added. The ligation reaction was incubated at 10.degree.
C. for 16-20 hours and 3 microliter aliquots were packaged into
phage particles using in vitro extracts prepared from E. coli
strains BHB 2688 and BHB 2690, described by Hohn in Methods in
Enzymology, Vol. 68, pgs. 299-309 (1979) Molecular Cloning: A
Laboratory Manual, (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, New York, 1982).
Briefly, both extracts were prepared by sonication and combined at
the time of in vivo packaging. These extracts packaged wild-type
lambda DNA at an efficiency of 1-5.times.10.sup.8 plaque forming
units (pfu) per microgram. The resultant phage were amplified on E.
coli LE392 at a density of approximately 10.sup.4 pfu/150 mm dish
for 8 hours to prevent plaques from growing together and to
minimize differences in growth rates of different recombinants. The
phage were eluted from the agar in 10 ml SM buffer (50 mM Tris HCl
pH 7.5, 10 mm MgSO.sub.4, 100 mM NaCl, 0.01% gelatin) per plate by
gentle shaking at 4.degree. C. for 12 hours. The plates were then
rinsed with an additional 4 ml of SM. After pelleting cellular
debris, the phage suspension was stored over chloroform at
4.degree. C.
V.A.2. Construction and Use of Chromosome 21-Specific Stain for
Staining Chromosome 21 of Human Lymphocytes
Clones having unique sequence inserts are isolated by the method of
Benton and Davis, Science, Vol. 196, pgs. 180-182, (1977). Briefly,
about 1000 recombinant phage are isolated at random from the
chromosome 21-specific library. These are transferred to
nitrocellulose and probed with nick translated total genomic human
DNA.
Of the clones which do not show strong hybridization, approximately
300 are picked which contain apparent unique sequence DNA. After
the selected clones are amplified, the chromosome 21 insert in each
done is .sup.32P labeled and hybridized to Southern blots of human
genomic DNA digested with the same enzyme used to construct the
chromosome 21 library, i.e., Hind III. Unique sequence containing
clones are recognized as those that produce a single band during
Southern analysis. Roughly, 100 such clones are selected for the
heterogeneous mixture. The unique sequence clones are amplified,
the inserts are removed by Hind III digestions, and the inserts are
separated from the phage arms for gel electrophoresis. The probe
DNA fragments (i.e., the unique sequence inserts) are removed from
the gel and biotinylated by nick translation (e.g., by a kit
available from Bethesda Research Laboratories). Labeled DNA
fragments are separated from the nick translation reaction using
small spin columns made in 0.5 ml Eppendorph tubes filled with
Sephadex G-50 (medium) swollen in 50 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA, 0.1% SDS,
at pH 7.5. Human lymphocyte chromosomes are prepared following
Harper et al, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Vol. 78, pgs. 4458-4460
(1981). Metaphase and interphase cells were washed 3 times in
phosphate buffered saline, fixed in methanol-acetic acid (3:1) and
dropped onto cleaned microscope slides. Slides are stored in a
nitrogen atmosphere at -20.degree. C.
Slides carrying interphase cells and/or metaphase spreads are
removed from the nitrogen, heated to 65.degree. C. for 4 hours in
air, treated with RNase (100 micrograms/ml for 1 hour at 37.degree.
C.), and dehydrated in an ethanol series. They are then treated
with proteinase K (60 ng/ml at 37.degree. C. for 7.5 minutes) and
dehydrated. The proteinase K concentration is adjusted depending on
the cell type and enzyme lot so that almost no phase microscopic
image of the chro- mosomes remains on the dry slide. The
hybridization mix consists of (final concentrations) 50 percent
formamide, 2.times.SSC, 10 percent dextran sulfate, 500
micrograms/ml carrier DNA (sonicated herring sperm DNA), and 2.0
microgram/ml biotin-labeled chromosome 21-specific DNA. This
mixture is applied to the slides at a density of 3
microliters/cm.sup.2 under a glass coverslip and sealed with rubber
cement. After overnight incubation at 37.degree. C., the slides are
washed at 45.degree. C. (50% formamide-2.times.SSC pH 7, 3 times 3
minutes; followed by 2.times.SSC pH 7, 5 times 2 minutes) and
immersed in BN buffer (0.1 M Na bicarbonate, 0.05 percent NP-40, pH
8). The slides are never allowed to dry after this point.
The slides are removed from the BN buffer and blocked for 5 minutes
at room temperature with BN buffer containing 5% non-fat dry milk
(Carnation) and 0.02% Na Azide (5 microliter/cm.sup.2 under plastic
coverslips). The coverslips are removed, and excess liquid briefly
drained and fluorescein-avidin DCS (3 microgram/ml in BN buffer
with 5% milk and 0.02% NaAzide) is applied (5 microliter/cm.sup.2).
The same coverslips are replaced and the slides incubated 20
minutes at 37.degree. C. The slides are then washed 3 times for 2
minutes each in BN buffer at 45.degree. C. The intensity of
biotin-linked fluorescence is amplified by adding a layer of
biotinylated goat anti-avidin antibody (5 microgram/ml in BN buffer
with 5% goat serum and 0.02% Na Azide), followed, after washing as
above, by another layer of fluorescein-avidin DCS.
Fluorescein-avidin DCS, goat antiavidin and goat serum are all
available commercially, e.g., Vector Laboratories (Burlingame,
Calif.). After washing in BN, a fluorescence antifade solution,
p-phenylenediamine (1.5 microliter/cm.sup.2 of coverslip) is added
before observation. It is important to keep this layer thin for
optimum microscopic imaging. This antifade significantly reduced
fluorescein fading and allows continuous microscopic observation
for up to 5 minutes. The DNA counterstains (DAPI or propidium
iodide) are included in the antifade at 0.25-0.5 microgram/ml.
The red-fluorescing DNA-specific dye propidium iodide (PI) is used
to allow simultaneous observation of hybridized probe and total
DNA. The fluorescein and PI are excited at 450-490 nm (Zeiss filter
combination 487709). Increasing the excitation wavelength to 546 nm
(Zeiss filter combination 487715) allows observation of the PI
only. DAPI, a blue fluorescent DNA-specific stain excited in the
ultraviolet (Zeiss filter combination 487701), is used as the
counterstain when biotin-labeled and total DNA are observed
separately. Metaphase chromosome 21s are detected by randomly
located spots of yellow distributed over the body of the
chromosome.
V.B. Improved Method for Efficiently Selecting Chromosome 21
Single-Copy Sequences
Fuscoe et al., Genomics, 5:100-109 (1989) provides more efficient
procedures than the method described immediately above (V.A.2) for
selecting large numbers of single-copy sequence or very low copy
number repeat sequence clones from recombinant phage libraries and
demonstrates their use to stain chromosome 21. Said article is
hereby incorporated by reference. Briefly, clones were selected
from the Charon 21A library LL21NS02 (made from DNA from human
chromosome 21) using two basic procedures. In the first, the phage
library was screened in two stages using methods designed to be
more sensitive to the presence of repetitive sequences in the
clones than the method of Section V.A.2. The selected clones were
then subcloned into plasmids. The 450 inserts thus selected form
the library pBS-U21. The second was in a multistep process in
which: 1) Inserts from LL21NS02 were subcloned into Bluescribe
plasmids, 2) plasmids were grown at high density in bacterial
colonies on nitrocellulose filters and 3) radioactive human genomic
DNA was hybridized to the plasmid DNA on nitrocellulose filters at
low stringency in two steps and 4) plasmids having inserts that
failed to hybridize were selected as potentially carrying
single-copy sequences. Fifteen hundred and thirty colonies were
picked in this manner to form the library pBS-U21/1530.
Southern analysis indicated that the second procedure was more
effective at recognizing repetitive sequence than the first.
Fluorescence in situ hybridization with DNA from pBS-U21/1530
allowed specific, intense staining of the number 21 chromosomes in
metaphase spreads made from human lymphocytes. Hybridization with
pBS-U21 gives less specific staining of chromosome 21. Details
concerning the Fuscoe et al. method of selecting single-copy
sequence or very low repeat sequence probes from recombinant
libraries can be found in found in Fuscoe et al., id.
V.C. Hybridization with a Collection of Chromosome 4 Single-Copy
Sequences
Chromosome 4 Single-Copy Sequences. One hundred and twenty clones
carrying chromosome 4-specific single-copy sequence inserts
selected from the Charon 21A library LL04NS01 (ATCC accession
number 57700; Van Dilla et al., supra; see Table 1) were supplied
by C. Gilliam (Harvard University) [Gilliam et al., Nucleic Acids
Res. 15:1445 (1987)]. The human inserts were all about 3 kilobases
(kb) in length, so the ratio of insert to vector DNA was <0.1.
Total phage DNA was produced from each clone individually using
DEAE-cellulose columns (Whatman DE-52) [Helms et al., DNA 4:39
(1985)]. DNA pooled from the 120 clones was biotinylated by
nick-translation with biotin-11-dUTP (Bethesda Research
Laboratories) and recovered at a concentration of about 20
nanograms per microliter (ng/ul) using Sephadex G-50 spin
columns.
Cells. Metaphase spreads from human lymphocytes were prepared from
methotrexate-synchronized cultures by using the procedure of Harper
et al., supra. The cells were fixed in methanol/acetic acid, 3:1.
Slides were stored at -20.degree. C. in plastic bags filled with
nitrogen gas.
In Situ Hybridization: Single-Copy Hybridization. Hybridization was
accomplished by using a modification of the procedure described by
Pinkel et al., PNAS USA, 83: 2934 (1986). The slide mounted cells
were treated with RNase [100 micrograms per milliliter (ug/ml) in
0.3 molar (M) sodium chloride (NaCl)/30 millimolar (mM) sodium
citrate at 37.degree. C. for 1 hr), dehydrated in a 70%/85%/100%
ethanol series, treated with proteinase K (0.3-0.6 ug/ml in 20 mM
Tris/2 mM CaCl.sub.2, pH 7.5, for 7.5 min at 37.degree. C.), and
fixed [4% paraformaldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS; in
g/liter, KCl, 0.2; KH.sub.2PO.sub.4, 0.2; NaCl, 8;
Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4.7H.sub.2O, 2.16) plus 50' mM MgCl.sub.2 for 10
min at room temperature]. The DNA in the target cells was denatured
by immersion in 70% formamide/2.times.SSC (0.3 M NaCl/30 mM sodium
citrate) at pH 7, for 2 min at 70.degree. C. The hybridization
mixture [10 ul total volume consisting of 50% formamide, 0.3 M
NaCl/30 mM sodium citrate (final concentration), 10% dextran
sulfate, 50 ug of sonicated herring DNA per ml, and 3-6 ng of
biotinylated chromosome 4 unique sequences (40-80 ng of total phage
DNA)] was then denatured (70.degree. C. for 5 min) and applied.
Hybridization was at 37.degree. C. overnight (16 hr). Slides were
washed in three changes of 50% formamide/0.3 M NaCl/30 mM sodium
citrate (final concentration), pH 7, at 45.degree. C. for 5 min
each and once in PN buffer (a mixture of 0.1 M NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4
and 0.1 M Na.sub.2HPO4 to give pH 8/0.1% Nonidet P-40). The slides
were then treated with alternating layers of fluoresceinated avidin
and biotinylated goat antiavidin, both at 5 ug/ml in PNM buffer (PN
buffer/5% non-fat dry milk/0.02% sodium azide, centrifuged to
remove solids), for 20 min each at room temperature until three
layers of avidin were applied. The avidin and goat anti-avidin
treatments were separated by three washes of 3 min each in PN
buffer [avidin (DCS grade) and anti-avidin from Vector Laboratories
(Burlingame, Calif.)]. After the final avidin treatment, a
fluorescence antifade solution [Johnson and Noqueria, J. Immunol.
Methods, 43:349 (1981)] containing 1 ug of
4',6-amidino-2-phenylindole or propidium iodide per ml was applied
as a counterstain (1.5 ul/cm.sup.2 under a no. 1 coverslip).
Results. As shown in FIG. 4H, individual hybridization sites could
be located to within a fraction of the width of a chromatid after
overnight hybridization (16 hr) and application of three layers of
avidin. Analysis of three spreads from the hybridization with the
120 unique sequence probes at a total probe concentration of 1.5
pg/ul per kilobase of human insert, showed 222 fluorescent spots
out of the 1440 possible on the number 4 chromosomes (120 target
sites per chromatid.times.4 chromatids per metaphase.times.3
metaphases). Thus, the hybridization efficiency was 15%. There were
814 total spots on all of the chromosomes giving a hybridization
specificity of 27%. The experiment demonstrates that substantial
hybridization can occur with single copy probes at low probe
concentrations in overnight hybridizations. The contrast ratio of
chromosome 4 relative to the rest of the .times. ##EQU00001##
(Chromosome 4 comprises about 6% of the genome.) VI. Incapacitating
Shared Repetitive Sequences VI.A. Chromosome 21-Specific Staining
Using Blocking DNA
High concentration of unlabeled human genomic DNA and lambda phage
DNA were used to inhibit the binding of repetitive and vector DNA
sequences to the target chromosomes. Heavy proteinase digestion and
subsequent fixation of the target improved access of probes to
target DNA.
Human metaphase spreads were prepared on microscope slides with
standard techniques and stored immediately in a nitrogen atmosphere
at -20.degree. C.
Slides were removed from the freezer and allowed to warm to room
temperature in a nitrogen atmosphere before beginning the staining
procedure. The warmed slides were first treated with 0.6
microgram/ml proteinase K in P buffer (20 mM Tris, 2 mM CaCl.sub.2
at pH 7.5) for 7.5 minutes, and washed once in P buffer. The amount
of proteinase K used needs to be adjusted for different batches of
slides. After denaturing the slides were stored in 2.times.SSC. A
hybridization mix was prepared which consisted of 50% formamide,
10% dextran sulfate, 1% Tween 20, 2.times.SSC, 0.5 mg/ml human
genomic DNA, 0.03 mg/ml lambda DNA, and 3 microgram/ml biotin
labeled probe DNA. The probe DNA consisted of the highest density
fraction of phage from the chromosome 21 Hind III fragment library
(ATCC accession number 57713), as determined by a cesium chloride
gradient. (Both insert and phage DNA of the probe were labeled by
nick translation.) The average insert size (amount of chromosome 21
DNA), as determined by gel electrophoresis was about 5 kilobases.
No attempt was made to remove repetitive sequences from the inserts
or to isolate the inserts from the lambda phage vector. The
hybridization mix was denatured by heating to 70.degree. C. for 5
minutes followed by incubation at 37.degree. C. for 1 hour. The
incubation allows the human genomic DNA and unlabeled lambda DNA in
the hybridization mix to block the human repetitive sequences and
vector sequences in the probe.
The slide containing the human metaphase spread was removed from
the 2.times.SSC and blotted dry with lens paper. The hybridization
mix was immediately applied to the slide, a glass cover slip was
placed on the slide with rubber cement, and the slide was incubated
overnight at 37.degree. C. Afterwards preparation of the slides
proceeded as described in Section V.B. (wherein chromosome 21 DNA
was stained with fluorescein and total chromosomal DNA
counterstained with DAPI). FIGS. 1A-C illustrate the results. FIG.
1A is a DAPI image of the human metaphase spread obtained with a
computerized image analysis system. It is a binary image showing
everything above threshold as a white, and the rest as black. The
primary data was recorded as a gray level image with 256 intensity
levels. (Small arrows indicate the locations of the chromosome
21s.) FIG. 1B is a fluorescein image of the same spread as in FIG.
1A, again in binary form. (Again, small arrows indicate the
locations of the chromosome 21s.) FIG. 1C illustrates the positions
of the chromosome 21s after other less densely stained objects were
removed by standard image processing techniques.
VI.B. Detection of Trisomy 21 and Translocations of Chromosome 4
Using Bluescribe Plasmid Libraries
As illustrated in Section VI.A., a human chromosome-specific
library, including its shared repetitive sequences, can be used to
stain that chromosome if the hybridization capacity of the shared
repetitive sequences is reduced by incubation with unlabeled human
genomic DNA. In Section VI.A., the nucleic acid sequences of the
heterogeneous mixture were cloned in the phage vector Charon 21A,
in which the ratio of insert of vector DNA is about 0.1 (4 kb
average insert to 40 kb of vector). In this section, we demonstrate
that transferring the same inserts to a smaller cloning vector, the
about 3 kb Bluescribe plasmid, which increases the ratio of insert
to vector DNA to 0.5, improved the specificity and intensity of the
staining.
As previously discussed, incubation of the probe can be carried out
with the probe alone, with the probe mixed with unlabeled genomic
DNA, and with the probe mixed with unlabeled DNA enriched in all or
some shared repetitive sequences. If unlabeled genomic DNA is
added, then it is important to add enough to incapacitate
sufficiently the shared repetitive sequences in the probe. However,
the genomic DNA also contains unlabeled copies of the sequences,
the hybridization of which is desired. As explained above, Q is
herein defined as the ratio of unlabeled to labeled copies of the
chromosome- specific sequences in the hybridization mixture.
Cells. Metaphase spreads from human lymphocytes were prepared from
methotrexate-synchronized cultures by using the procedure of Harper
et al. supra. These and all other cells used in this example were
fixed in methanol/acetic add, 3:1. Other human lymphocyte cultures
were irradiated with .sup.60Co gamma rays and stimulated with
phytohemagglutnin. Colcemid was added 48 hr after stimulation and
metaphase spreads were prepared 4 hr later. Metaphase spreads and
interphase cells from lymphoblastoid cells (GM03716A; Human Mutant
Cell Repository, Camden, N.J.) carrying trisomy 21 were prepared
after a 4-hr colcemid block. Interphase cells from the cell line
RS4;11 carrying t(4;11) and isochromosome 7q were harvested, fixed
in methanol/acetic add, and dropped onto slides [Strong et al.,
Blood, 65:21 (1985)]. Slides were stored at -20.degree. C. in
plastic bags filled with nitrogen gas.
pBS-4. The entire chromosome 4 library LL04NS02 (ATCC accession
number 57745; Van Dilla et al., supra) was subcloned into
Bluescribe plasmids (Stratagene La Jolla, Calif.) to form the
library pBS4. The average insert to vector DNA ratio in pBS-4 is
about 1. The plasmid library was amplified in bulk and the DNA was
extracted using DEAE-cellulose columns (Whatman DE-52) [Helms et
al., DNA, 4:39 (1985)]. The DNA was then biotinylated by nick
translation with biotin-11-dUTP (Bethesda Research Laboratories)
and recovered at a concentration of about 20 ng/ul using Sephadex
G-50 spin columns. In some experiments, the biotinylated DNA was
concentrated by ethanol precipitation to achieve higher probe
concentrations.
pBS-21. The entire chromosome 21 library LL21NS02 (ATCC accession
number 57713; Van Dilla et al., supra) was subcloned into
Bluescribe plasmids to form the library pBS-21. This library was
amplified and biotinylated as described above for pBS4.
Human genomic DNA. Placental DNA (Sigma) was treated with
proteinase K, extracted with phenol, and sonicated to a size range
of 200-600 base pairs (bp).
Whole Library Hybridization. Hybridization was as above in section
V.C except that RNase, proteinase K, and paraformaldehyde were not
used. The amount of probe and genomic DNA in the hybridization
mixture and the length of the hybridization varied as described in
Results. All probe concentrations refer to the human insert DNA
unless otherwise noted. DNA concentrations were determined by
fluorometric analysis (Hoeffer Scientific Instruments, San
Francisco). Incubation of the hybridization mixture prior to
hybridization followed two different protocols as indicated
immediately below.
Protocol I. The hybridization mixture (10 ul) contained 10-150 ng
of biotinylated human DNA (20-300 ng of total plasmid DNA) and 0-10
ug of unlabeled genomic DNA. The mixture was heated to denature the
DNA and incubated at 37.degree. C. for a time t before it was added
to the slide. Hybridization times ranged from 2 to 110 hr.
Protocol II. Protocol II was identical to Protocol I except that an
additional aliquot of freshly denatured genomic DNA was added to
the hybridization mixture after an incubation time t. The mixture
was then incubated an additional time t prior to starting the
hybridization. The volume of the hybridization mixture was
increased <20% by the additional genomic DNA.
Microscopy. Quantitative fluorescence measurements were performed
using a video camera on the microscope and a digital image
processing system, [Trask et al., Human Genet., 78:251 (1988)]
Results. FIG. 4A shows hybridization of pBS-4 to a human metaphase
spread with a probe concentration of 1 ng/ul. No genomic DNA was
used and the hybridization mixture was applied immediately after
denaturation. All of the chromosomes are stained, except near many
centromeres, with two copies of chromosome 4 being stained most
heavily. All of the chromosomes are stained along most of their
lengths due to sequences in the probe which are shared with other
chromosomes. Unstained regions, noted by arrows, show locations for
which homologous sequences are not present in pBS-4. The unstained
regions are mostly centromeric and along the long arm of the Y
chromosome. Blocks of repetitive DNA specific to those sites are
known to exist.
The visible contrast on chromosome 4 is the result of the
interaction of several factors. (i) All of the DNA in chromosome 4
is potential target for sequences in the probe, whereas only those
sequences on the other chromosomes that are shared with chromosome
4 can bind probe. (ii) The hybridization time and probe
concentration were high enough to allow significant binding of the
specific sequences in the probe. (iii) The ratio of probe to target
sequences is higher for the specific sequences than for the shared
sequences [Ten nanograms of chromosome 4 DNA was hybridized to
about 200 ng of human DNA target (4.times.10.sup.4 cells), 13 ng of
which is chromosome 4. Thus, the ratio of probe to target for the
specific sequences was about 1, whereas for the shared sequences it
was about 0.05.]
The contrast can be increased by allowing the denatured probe DNA
to partially reassociate prior to adding it to the slide,
preferentially depleting the single-stranded high-copy
(predominantly the shared) sequences in the probe [Cantor &
Schimmel, Biophysical Chemistry: The Behavior of Biological
Macromolecules, (part III, p. 1228) (Freeman 1980)]. A significant
increase in staining specificity resulting from probe reassociation
was observed experimentally for chromosome 4 using a hybridization
mixture with 1 ng of probe per microliter (ul) and a 24 hr
incubation at 37.degree. C. prior to in situ hybridization (not
shown). Likewise, hybridization after a 24 hr incubation of 4 ng of
chromosome 21 probe per ul resulted in a substantial contrast
ratio. That result indicates that at such concentrations the
chromosome-specific sequences remain substantially single stranded
for times on the order of days in the hybridization mixture. It
also demonstrates that other mechanisms that might inactivate the
probe are not significant during the incubation.
FIGS. 4B and 4C show the result of a protocol I hybridization [0.8
ng of probe per ul and 24 ng of genomic DNA per ul (Q.ltoreq.2);
1-hr probe incubation and 110-hr hybridization]. Quantitative image
analysis shows that the intensity per unit length of the FITC
fluorescein on chromosome 4 is approximately 20 times that of the
other chromosomes, that is the contrast ratio is 20:1. Two layers
of avidin-fluorescein isothiocyanate have been used here to make
the non-target chromosomes sufficiently bright to be measured
accurately. However, the number 4 chromosomes can be recognized
easily after a single layer.
FIG. 4D demonstrates detection of a radiation-induced translocation
involving chromosome 4 in human lymphocytes [protocol I, 1' ng of
probe per ul and 76 ng of genomic DNA per ul (Q=5); 1-hr probe
incubation and 16-hr hybridization]. The contrast ratio was about
5. The hybridization intensity and specificity shown in FIG. 4D are
such that even small portions of the involved chromosome can be
detected.
The ease with which translocations can be recognized offers the
opportunity for translocation detection by automated means, such
as, computerized microscopy or flow cytometry. [See Section VIII
infra for elaboration concerning automated detection means.]
FIG. 4E shows that the normal and two derivative chromosomes
resulting from the translocation between chromosomes 4 and 11
[t(4;11)] in cell line RS4;11 can be detected in interphase nuclei
as three distinct domains [protocol I, 13.5 ng of probe per ul and
800 ng of genomic DNA per ul (Q=5); 1-hr probe incubation and 16-hr
hybridization]. The increased probe concentration resulted in
brighter signals relative to FIG. 4D. Approximately half of the
cells clearly show the presence of three nuclear domains,
presumably produced by the two portions of the involved chromosome
4 and the intact normal chromosome. The domains in the other nuclei
may have been obscured by the nuclear orientation in these
two-dimensional views, by nuclear distortion that occurred during
slide preparation, or because the domains were too close to each
other to be distinguished. Hybridization using procedures that
preserve three-dimensional morphology may resolve these issues and
also permit general studies of chromosomal domains in interphase
nuclei [Trask et al., Hum. Genet., 78:251 (1988)].
Hybridization of pBS21 to a metaphase spread from a cell line with
trisomy 21 is shown in FIG. 4F [protocol II, 4 ng of probe per ul
and 250 ng of genomic DNA per ul; 3-hr incubation, additional 250
ng of genomic DNA per ul (Q=1+1); 3-hr probe incubating and 16-hr
hybridization]. A small amount of hybridization is visible near the
centromeres of the other acrocentric chromosomes.
FIG. 4G shows two interphase nuclei from the same hybridization
which clearly show the three chromosome 21 domains. Hybridization
with probe prepared according to protocol I resulted in higher
relative intensity of the shared signals on the D- and G-group
chromosomes, and consequently it was more difficult to determine
the number of number 21 chromosomes in interphase (not shown).
Increasing stringency by using a hybridization mixture with 55%
formamide and 0.15 M NaCl/15 mM sodium citrate, which lowers the
melting temperature about 8.degree. C., did not reduce the unwanted
hybridization. Addition of unlabeled pA ribosomal DNA [Erikson et
al., Gene, 16:1 (1981)] also was ineffective at increasing
specificity.
The centromeric region of the D- and G-group chromosomes contain
ribosomal [Erikson et al., id] and alpha satellite sequences and
perhaps others [Choo et al., Nucleic Acids Res., 16: 1273 (1988)].
These are relatively low copy sequences shared with only a few
chromosomes, so Protocol I is not very effective at suppressing
them relative to the chromosome 21-specific sequences. In addition,
these sequences are clustered on the chromosomes, so that even much
reduced hybridization is clearly visible. This is especially
distracting in analysis of interphase nuclei. Calculations indicate
that addition of several aliquots of freshly denatured genomic DNA
periodically during the incubation (protocol II) should increase
the staining specificity. FIG. 4F shows a protocol II
hybridization, using two aliquots of genomic DNA, to a metaphase
spread from a trisomy 21 cell line. Intense hybridization to the
three number 21 chromosomes is clearly visible and hybridization to
the other D- and G-group chromosomes has been reduced to an
acceptable level. FIG. 4G shows that hybridization to chromosomes
other than chromosome 21 is sufficiently low that the three
chromosome 21 domains are clearly visible in interphase nuclei. In
practice, the most convenient procedure for suppressing the shared
acrocentric hybridization might be inclusion of unlabeled DNA from
one of the other D- or G-group chromosome libraries (or unlabeled
cloned DNA from just these sequences, if available) as additional
competitor. The use of libraries from non-target chromosomes as
blocker for a probe may in general improve contrast. The specific
sequences in the probe will not be blocked (Q=0) no matter how much
competitor for the shared sequences is added.
VI.C. Hybridization of Yeast Artificial Chromosomes (YACS) to Human
Metaphase Spread
YACS. Seven yeast clones HY1, HY19, HY29, HYA1.A2, HYA3.A2,
HYA3.A9, and HYA9E6 were obtained from D. Burke (Washington
University, St. Louis, Mo.). The lengths of the human DNA in the
clones ranged from about 100 kb to about 600 kb. Gel
electrophoresis was performed to verify the size of these inserts.
Each of these clones was grown up and total DNA was isolated. The
isolated DNA was biotinylated by nick translation so that 10-30% of
the thymidine was replaced by biotin-11-dUTP. The concentration of
the total labeled DNA after nick translations is in the range of
10-20 ng/ul.
Blocking DNA. Human placental DNA (Sigma) was treated with
proteinase K and extracted with phenol and sonicated to a size
range of 200-600 bp. Total DNA isolated from yeast not containing
an artificial chromosome was sonicated to a similar size range.
Both of these DNA's were maintained at a concentration of 1-10
ug/ul.
Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Hybridization followed
the procedures of Pinkel et al. (1988), supra (as exemplified in
Sections V and VI, supra) with slight modifications. Metaphase
spreads were prepared from methotrexate synchronized cultures
according to the procedures of Harper et al. PNAS (USA) 78:
4458-4460, (1981). Cells were fixed in methanol/acetic acid, fixed
(3:1), dropped onto slides, air dried, and stored at -20.degree. C.
under nitrogen gas until used. The slides were then immersed two
minutes in 70% formamide/2.times.SSC to denature the target DNA
sequences, dehydrated in a 70-85-100% ethanol series, and air
dried. (SSC is 0.15 M NaCl/0.015 M'Na Citrate, pH 7). Ten--100 ng
of biotinylated yeast DNA, and approximately 1 ug each of unlabeled
yeast and human genomic DNA were then added to the hybridization
mix (final volume 10 ul, final composition 50%
formamide/2.times.SSC/10% dextran sulfate), heated to 70.degree. C.
for 5 min., and then incubated at 37.degree. C. for 1 hr to allow
the complementary strands of the more highly repeated sequences to
reassociate.
The hybridization mixture was then applied to the slide
(approximately 4 cm.sup.2 area) and sealed with rubber cement under
a glass cover slip. After overnight incubation at 37.degree. C. the
coverslip was removed and the slide washed 3 times 3 min each in
50% formamide/2.times.SSC at 42-45.degree. C., and once in PN
buffer [mixture of 0.1 M NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4 and 0.1 M
Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4 to give pH 8; 0.1% Nonidet P-40 (Sigma)]. The
bound probe was then detected with alternating 20 min incubations
(room temperature in avidin-FITC and goat-anti-avidin antibody,
both at 5 ug/ml in PNM buffer (PN buffer plus 5% nonfat dry milk,
centrifuged to remove solids; 0.02% Na azide). Avidin and
anti-avidin incubation were separated by 3 washes of 3 min each in
PN buffer. Two or three layers of avidin were applied (Avidin, DCS
grade, and biotinylated goat-anti-avidin are obtained from Vector
Laboratories Inc., Burlingame, Calif.).
FIG. 5 shows the hybridization of HYA3.A2 (580 kb of human DNA) to
12q21.1. The location of the hybridization was established by using
a conventional fluorescent banding technique employing the
DAPI/actinomycin D procedure: Schweizer, "Reverse fluorescent
chromosome banding with chromomycin and Dapi," Chromosoma,
58:307-324 (1976). The hybridization signal forms a band across the
width of each of the chromosome 12s, indicating the morphology of
the packing of DNA in that region of the chromosome.
The YAC clone positions are attributed as shown in Table 2
below.
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 YAC Competition Hybridization YAC Clone
Insert Size Localization HY1 120 Xq23 HY19 450 8q23.3 21q21.1 HY27
500 14q12 HYA1.A2 250 6q16 HYA3.A2 580 12q21.1 HYA3.A9 600 14q21
HYA9.E6 280 1p36.2 3q22
VI.D. Hybridization With Human/Hamster Hybrid Cell
Essentially the same hybridization and staining conditions were
used in this example as for those detailed in the procedure of
Pinkel et al. (1988), supra and exemplified in Sections V.C. and
VI.B., supra. in this example, 400 ng of biotin labeled DNA from a
hamster-human hybrid cell that contains one copy of human
chromosome 19 was mixed with 1.9 ug of unlabeled human genomic DNA
in 10 ul of hybridization mix. Hybridization was for approximately
60 hours at 37.degree. C. Fluorescent staining of the bound probe
and counterstaining of the chromosomes was as in the other examples
above. FIG. 6 shows the results of the hybridization.
VII. Specific Applications
The present invention allows microscopic and in some cases flow
cytometric detection of genetic abnormalities on a cell by cell
basis. The microscopy can be performed entirely by human observers,
or include various degrees of additional instrumentation and
computational assistance, up to full automation. The use of
instrumentation and automation for such analyses offers many
advantages. Among them are the use of fluorescent dyes that are
invisible to human observers (for example, infared dyes), and the
opportunity to interpret results obtained with multiple labeling
methods which might not be simultaneously visible (for example,
combinations of fluorescent and absorbing stains, autoradiography,
etc.) Quantitative measurements can be used to detect differences
in staining that are not detectable by human observers. As is
described below, automated analysis can also increase the speed
with which cells and chromosomes can be analysed.
The types of cytogenetic abnormalities that can be detected with
the probes of this invention include: Duplication of all or part of
a chromosome type can be detected as an increase in the number or
size of distinct hybridization domains in metaphase spreads or
interphase nuclei following hybridization with a probe for that
chromosome type or region, or by an increase in the amount of bound
probe. If the probe is detected by fluorescence, the amount of
bound probe can be determined either flow cytometrically or by
quantitative fluorescence microscopy. Deletion of a whole
chromosome or chromosome region can be detected as a decrease in
the number or size of distinct hybridization domains in metaphase
spreads or interphase nuclei following hybridization with a probe
for that chromosome type or region, or by a decrease in the amount
of bound probe. If the probe is detected by fluorescence, the
amount bound can be determined either flow cytometrically or by
quantitative fluorescence microscopy. Translocations, dicentrics
and inversion can be detected in metaphase spreads and interphase
nuclei by the abnormal juxtaposition of hybridization domains that
are normally separate following hybridization with probes that
flank or span the region(s) of the chromosome(s) that are at the
point(s) of rearrangement. Translocations involve at least two
different chromosome types and result in derivative chromosomes
possessing only one centromere each. Dicentrics involve at least
two different chromosome types and result in at least one
chromosome fragment lacking a centromere and one having two
centromeres. Inversions involve a reversal of polarity of a portion
of a chromosome.
VII.A Banding Analysis
Substantial effort has been devoted during the past thirty years to
development of automated systems (especially computer controlled
microscopes) for automatic chromosome classification and aberration
detection by analysis of metaphase spreads. In recent years, effort
has been directed at automatic classification of chromosomes which
have been chemically stained to produce distinct banding patterns
on the various chromosome types. These efforts have only partly
succeeded because of the subtle differences in banding pattern
between chromosome types of approximately the same size, and
because differential contraction of chromosomes in different
metaphase spreads causes a change in the number and width of the
bands visible on chromosomes of each type. The present invention
overcomes these problems by allowing construction of reagents which
produce a staining pattern whose spacing, widths and labeling
differences (for example different colors) are optimized to
facilitate automated chromosome classification and aberration
detection. This is possible because hybridization probes can be
selected as desired along the lengths of the chromosomes. The size
of a band produced by such a reagent may range from a single small
dot to a substantially uniform coverage of one or more whole
chromosomes. Thus the present invention allows construction of a
hybridization probe and use of labeling means, preferably
fluorescence, such that adjacent hybridization domains can be
distinguished, for example by color, so that bands too closely
spaced to be resolved spatially can be detected spectrally (i.e. if
red and green fluorescing bands coalesce, the presence of the two
bands can be detected by the resulting yellow fluorescence).
The present invention also allows construction of banding patterns
tailored to particular applications. Thus they can be significantly
different in spacing and color mixture, for example, on chromosomes
that are similar in general shape and size and which have similar
banding patterns when conventional techniques are used. The size,
shape and labeling (e.g. color) of the hybridization bands produced
by the probes of the present invention can be optimized to
eliminate errors in machine scoring so that accurate automated
aberration detection becomes possible. This optimized banding
pattern will also greatly improve visual chromosome classification
and aberration detection.
The ease of recognition of specific translocation breakpoints can
be improved by using a reagent closely targeted to the region of
the break. For example, a high complexity probe of this invention
comprising sequences that hybridize to both sides of the break on a
chromosome can be used. The portion of the probe that binds to one
side of the break can be detected differently than that which binds
to the other, for example with different colors. In such a pattern,
a normal chromosome would have the different colored hybridization
regions next to each other, and such bands would appear dose
together. A break would separate the probes to different
chromosomes or result in chromosomal fragments, and could be
visualized as much further apart on an average.
VII.B Biological Dosimetry
One approach to biological dosimetry is to measure frequencies of
structurally aberrant chromosomes as an indication of the genetic
damage suffered by individuals exposed to potentially toxic agents.
Numerous studies have indicated the increase in structural
aberration frequencies with increasing exposure to ionizing
radiation and other agents, which are called clastogens. Dicentric
chromosomes are most commonly scored because their distinctive
nature allows them to be scored rapidly without banding analysis.
Rapid analysis is important because of the low frequency of such
aberrations in individuals exposed at levels found in workplaces
(.about.2.times.10.sup.-3/cell). Unfortunately, dicentrics are not
stably retained so the measured dicentric frequency decreases with
time after exposure. Thus low level exposure over long periods of
time does not result in an elevated dicentric frequency because of
the continued clearance of these aberrations. Translocations are
better aberrations to score for such dosimetric studies because
they are retained more or less indefinitely. Thus, assessment of
genetic damage can be made at times long after exposure.
Translocations are not routinely scored for biological dosimetry
because the difficulty of recognizing them makes scoring sufficient
cells for dosimetry logistically impossible.
The present invention eliminates this difficulty. Specifically,
hybridization with a probe which substantially uniformly stains
several chromosomes (e.g. chromosomes 1, 2, 3 and 4) allows
immediate microscopic identification in metaphase spreads of
structural aberrations involving these chromosomes. Normal
chromosomes appear completely stained or unstained by the probe.
Derivative chromosomes resulting from translocations between
targeted and non-targeted chromosomes are recognized as being only
partly stained, FIG. 4D. Such partially hybridized chromosomes can
be immediately recognized either visually in the microscope or in
an automated manner using computer assisted microscopy.
Discrimination between translocations and dicentrics is facilitated
by adding to the probe, sequences found at all of the chromosome
centromeres. Detection of the centromeric components of the probe
with a labeling means, for example color, different from that used
to detect the rest of the probe elements allows ready
identification of the chromosome centromeres, which in turn
facilitates discrimination between dicentrics and translocations.
This technology dramatically reduces the scoring effort required
with previous techniques so that it becomes feasible to examine
tens of thousands of metaphase spreads as required for low level
biological dosimetry.
VII.C. Prenatal Diagnosis
The most common aberrations found prenatally are trisomies
involving chromosomes 21 (Down syndrome), 18 (Edward syndrome) and
13 (Patau syndrome) and X0 (Turner syndrome), XXY (Kleinfelter
syndrome) and XYY disease. Structural aberrations also occur.
However, they are rare and their clinical significance is often
uncertain. Thus, the importance of detecting these aberrations is
questionable. Current techniques for obtaining fetal cells for
conventional karyotyping, such as, amniocentesis and chorionic
villus biopsy yield hundreds to thousands of cells for analysis.
These are usually grown in culture for 2 to 5 weeks to produce
sufficient mitotic cells for cytogenetic analysis. Once metaphase
spreads are prepared, they are analyzed by conventional banding
analysis. Such a process can only be carried out by highly skilled
analysts and is time consuming so that the number of analyses that
can be reliably carried out by even the largest cytogenetics
laboratories is only a few thousand per year. As a result, prenatal
cytogenetic analysis is usually limited to women whose children are
at high risk for genetic disease (e.g. to women over the age of
35).
The present invention overcomes these difficulties by allowing
simple, rapid identification of common numerical chromosome
aberrations in interphase cells with no or minimal cell culture.
Specifically, abnormal numbers of chromosomes 21, 18, 13, X and Y
can be detected in interphase nuclei by counting numbers of
hybridization domains following hybridization with probes specific
for these chromosomes (or for important regions thereof such as
21q22 for Down syndrome). A hybridization domain is a compact,
distinct region over which the intensity of hybridization is high.
An increased frequency of cells showing three domains (specifically
to greater than 10%) for chromosomes 21, 18 and 13 indicates the
occurrence of Down, Edward and Patau syndromes, respectively. An
increase in the number of cells showing a single X-specific domain
and no Y-specific domain following hybridization with X-specific
and Y-specific probes indicates the occurrence of Turner syndrome.
An increase in the frequency showing two X-specific domains and one
Y-specific domain indicates Kleinfelter syndrome, and increase in
the frequency of cells showing one X-specific domain and two
Y-specific domains indicates an XYY fetus. Domain counting in
interphase nuclei can be supplemented (or in some cases replaced)
by measurement of the intensity of hybridization using, for
example, quantitative fluorescence microscopy or flow cytometry,
since the intensity of hybridization is approximately proportional
to the number of target chromosomes for which the probe is
specific. Numerical aberrations involving several chromosomes can
be scored simultaneously by detecting the hybridization of the
different chromosomes with different labeling means, for example,
different colors. These aberration detection procedures overcome
the need for extensive cell culture required by procedures since
all cells in the population can be scored. They eliminate the need
for highly skilled analysts because of the simple, distinct nature
of the hybridization signatures of numerical aberrations. Further,
they are well suited to automated aberration analysis.
The fact that numerical aberrations can be detected in interphase
nuclei also allows cytogenetic analysis of cells that normally
cannot be stimulated into mitosis. Specifically, they allow
analysis of fetal cells found in maternal peripheral blood. Such a
feature is advantageous because it eliminates the need for invasive
fetal cell sampling such as amniocentesis or chorionic villus
biopsy.
As indicated in the Background, the reason such embryoinvasive
methods are necessary is that conventional karyotyping and banding
analysis requires metaphase chromosomes. At this time, there are no
accepted procedures for culturing fetal cells separated from
maternal blood to provide a population of cells having metaphase
chromosomes. In that the staining reagents of this invention can be
employed with interphase nuclei, a non-embryo-invasive method of
karyotyping fetal chromosomes is provided by this invention.
The first step in such a method is to separate fetal cells that
have passed through the placenta or that have been shed by the
placenta into the maternal blood. The incidence of fetal cells in
the maternal bloodstream is very low, on the order of 10.sup.-4 to
10.sup.-6 cells/ml and quite variable depending on the time of
gestation; however, appropriately marked fetal cells may be
distinguished from maternal cells and concentrated, for example,
with high speed cell sorting.
The presence of cells of a male fetus may be identified by a label,
for example a fluorescent tag, on a chromosome-specific staining
reagent for the Y chromosome. Cells that were apparently either
lymphocytes or erythrocyte precursors that were separated from
maternal blood where shown to be Y-chromatin-positive. [Zillacus et
al., Scan. J. Haematol, 15: 333 (1975); Parks and Herzenberg,
Methods in Cell Biology, Vol. 10, pp. 277-295 (Academic Press,
N.Y., 1982); and Siebers et al., Humangenetik, 28: 273 (1975)].
A preferred method of separating fetal cells from maternal blood is
the use of monoclonal antibodies which preferentially have affinity
for some component not present upon the maternal blood cells. Fetal
cells may be detected by paternal HLA (human leukocyte antigen)
markers or by an antigen on the surface of fetal cells. Preferred
immunochemical procedures to distinguish between fetal and maternal
leukocytes on the basis of differing HLA type use differences at
the HLA-A2, -A3, and -B7 loci, and further preferred at the -A2
locus. Further, first and second trimester fetal trophoblasts may
be marked with antibody against the internal cellular constituent
cytokeratin which is not present in maternal leukocytes. Exemplary
monoclonal antibodies are described in the following
references.
Herzenberg et al., PNAS, 76: 1453 (1979), reports the isolation of
fetal cells, apparently of lympoid origin, from maternal blood by
fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) wherein the separation
was based on the detection of labeled antibody probes which bind
HLA-A2 negative cells in maternal blood. Male fetal cells separated
in that manner were further identified by quinacrine staining of
Y-chromatin.
Covone et al., Lancet, Oct. 13, 1984: 841, reported the recovery of
fetal trophoblasts from maternal blood by flow cytometry using a
monoclonal antibody termed H315. Said monoclonal reportedly
identifies a glycoprotein expressed on the surface of the human
syncytiotrophoblast as well as other trophoblast cell populations,
and that is absent from peripheral blood cells.
Kawata et al., J. Exp. Med., 160: 653 (1984), discloses a method
for isolating placental cell populations from suspensions of human
placenta. The method uses coordinate two-color and light-scatter
FACS analysis and sorting. Five different cell populations were
isolated on the basis of size and quantitative differences in the
coordinate expression of cell surface antigens detected by
monoclonal antibodies against an HLA-A, B, C monomorphic
determinant (MB40.5) and against human trophoblasts (anti-Trop-1
and anti-Trop-2).
Loke and Butterworth, J. Cell Sci., 76: 189 (1985), describe two
monoclonal antibodies, 18B/A5 and 18A/C4, which are reactive with
first trimester cytotrophoblasts and other fetal epithelial tissues
including syncytiotrophoblasts.
A preferred monoclonal antibody to separate fetal cells from
maternal blood for staining according to this invention is the
anti-cytokeratin antibody Cam 5.2, which is commercially available
from Becton-Dickinson (Franklin Lakes, N.J., USA).
Other preferred monoclonal antibodies for separating fetal cells
from maternal blood are those disclosed in co-pending, commonly
owned U.S. patent application, U.S. Ser. No. 389,224, filed Aug. 3,
1989, entitled "Method for Isolating Fetal Cytotrophoblast Cells".
[See also: in Fisher et al., J. Cell. Biol., 109 (2): 891-902
(1989)]. The monoclonal antibodies disclosed therein react
specifically with antigen on first trimester human cytotrophoblast
cells, which fetal cells have the highest probability of reaching
the maternal circulation. Said application and article are herein
specifically incorporated by reference. Briefly, the disclosed
monoclonal antibodies were raised by injection of test animals with
cytotrophoblast cells obtained from sections of the placental bed,
that had been isolated by uterine aspiration. Antibodies raised
were subjected to several cytological screens to select for those
antibodies which react with the cytotrophoblast stem cell layer of
first trimester chorionic villi.
Preferred monoclonal antibodies against such first trimester
cytotrophoblast cells disclosed by Fisher et al. include monoclonal
antibodies produced from the following hybridomas deposited at the
American Tyupe Culture Collection (ATCC; Rockville, Md., USA) under
the Budapest Treaty:
TABLE-US-00003 Hybridoma ATCC Accession # J1D8 HB10096 P1B5
HB10097
Both hybridoma cultures were received by the ATCC on Apr. 4, 1989
and reported viable thereby on Apr. 14, 1989.
Fisher et al. state that fetal cells isolated from maternal blood
by use of said monoclonal antibodies are capable of replication in
vitro. Therefore, fetal cells isolated by the method of Fisher et
al., that is, first trimester fetal cytotrophoblasts, may provide
fetal chromosomal material that is both in metaphase and in
interphase.
The fetal cells, preferably leukocytes and cytotrophoblasts, more
preferably cytotrophoblasts, once marked with an appropriate
antibody are then separated from the maternal cells either directly
or by preferably separating and concentrating said fetal cells by
cell sorting or panning. For example, FACS may be used to separate
fluorescently labeled fetal cells, or flow cytometry may be
used.
The fetal cells once separated from the maternal blood can then be
stained according to the methods of this invention with appropriate
chromosome-specific staining reagents of this invention, preferably
those of particular importance for prenatal diagnosis. Preferred
staining reagents are those designed to detect aneuploidy, for
example, trisomy of any of several chromosomes, including
chromosome types 21, 18, 13, X and Y and subregions on such
chromosomes, such as, subregion 21q22 on chromosome 21.
Preferably, a fetal sample for staining analysis according to this
invention comprises at least 10 cells or nuclei, and more
preferably about 100 cells or nuclei.
VII.D Tumor Cytogenetics
Numerous studies in recent years have revealed the existence of
structural and numerical chromosome aberrations that are diagnostic
for particular disease phenotypes and that provide clues to the
genetic nature of the disease itself. Prominent examples include
the close association between chronic myelogeneous leukemia and a
translocation involving chromosome 9 and 22, the association of a
deletion of a portion of 13q14 with retinoblastoma and the
association of a translocation involving chromosomes 8 and 14 with
Burkitts lymphoma. Current progress in elucidating new tumor
specific abnormalities is limited by the difficulty of producing
representative, high quality banded metaphase spreads for
cytogenetic analysis. These problems stem from the fact that many
human tumors are difficult or impossible to grow in culture. Thus,
obtaining mitotic cells is usually difficult. Even if the cells can
be grown in culture, there is the significant risk that the cells
that do grow may not be representative of the tumorigenic
population. That difficulty also impedes the application of
existing genetic knowledge to clinical diagnosis and prognosis.
The present invention overcomes these limitations by allowing
detection of specific structural and numerical aberrations in
interphase nuclei. These aberrations are detected as described
supra. Hybridization with whole chromosome probes will facilitate
identification of previously unknown aberrations thereby allowing
rapid development of new associations between aberrations and
disease phenotypes. As the genetic nature of specific malignancies
becomes increasingly well known, the interphase assays can be made
increasingly specific by selecting hybridization probes targeted to
the genetic lesion. Translocation at specific sites on selected
chromosomes can be detected by using hybridization probes. that
closely flank the breakpoints. Use of these probes allows diagnosis
of these specific disease phenotypes. Translocations may be
detected in interphase because they bring together hybridization
domains that are normally separated, or because they separate a
hybridization domain into two, well separated domains. In addition,
they may be used to follow the reduction and reemergence of the
malignant cells during the course of therapy. Interphase analysis
is particularly important in such a application because of the
small number of cells that may be present and because they may be
difficult or impossible to stimulate into mitosis.
Duplications and deletions, processes involved in gene
amplification and loss of heterozygosity, can also be detected in
metaphase spreads and interphase nuclei using the techniques of
this invention. Such processes are implicated in an increasing
number of different tumors.
VIII. Detection of BCR-ABL Fusion in Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia
(CML)
Probes. This section details a CML assay based upon FISH with
probes from chromosomes 9 and 22 that flank the fused BCR and ABL
sequences in essentially all cases of CML (FIG. 8). The BCR and ABL
probes used in the examples of this section were kindly provided by
Carol A. Westbrook of the Department of Medicine, Section of
Hematology/Oncology at the University of Chicago Medical Center in
Chicago, Ill. (USA).
The ABL probe on chromosome 9, c-hu-ABL, is a 35-kb cosmid (pCV105)
clone selected to be telomeric to the 200-kb region of ABL between
exons IB and II in which the breaks occur (24). The BCR probe on
chromosome 22, PEM12, is an 18-kb phage clone (in EMBL3) that
contains part of, and extends centromeric to, the 5.8-kb breakpoint
duster region of the BCR gene in which almost all CML breakpoints
occur. FISH was carried out using a biotin labeled ABL probe,
detected with the fluorochrome Texas red, and a digoxigenin labeled
BCR probe, detected with the green fluorochrome FITC. Hybridization
of both probes could be observed simultaneously using a
fluorescence microscope equipped with a double band pass filter set
(Omega Optical).
FIG. 8 is a schematic representation of the BCR gene on chromosome
22, the ABL gene of chromosome 9, and the BCR-ABL fusion gene on
the Philadelphia chromosome, showing the location of CML
breakpoints and their relation to the probes. Exons of the BCR gene
are depicted as solid boxes. The Roman numeral I refers to the
first exon of the BCR gene; the arabic numerals 1-5 refer to the
exons within the breakpoint cluster region, here indicated by the
dashed line. The approximate location of the 18 kb phage PEM12
probe (the BCR probe) is indicated by the open horizontal bar.
Since the majority of breakpoints in CML occur between exons 2 and
4,15 kb or more of target for PEM12 will remain on the Philadelphia
chromosome. In the classic reciprocal translocation a few kb of
target for PEM12 (undetectable fluorescent signal) will be found on
the derivative chromosome. The map and exon numbering (not to
scale) is adapted from Heisterkamp et al. (ref. 34, supra).
Exons of the ABL gene are depicted as open vertical bars (not to
scale). The Roman numerals Ia and Ib refer to the alternative first
exons, and II to the second exon. Exon II is approximately 25 kb
upstream of the end of the 28 kb cosmid c-hu-abl (the ABL probe).
All CML breakpoints occur upstream of exon II, usually between
exons Ib and Ia, within a region that is approximately 200kb in
length. Thus, c-hu-abl will always be 25 to 200 kb away from the
fusion junction. The map (not to scale) is adapted from Heisterkamp
et al. (ref. 35, supra). The BCR-ABL fusion gene is depicted. In
CML, PEM12 will always lie at the junction, and c-hu-abl will be
separated from PEM12 by 25 to 225 kb.
Sample Preparation: CML-4: peripheral blood was centrifuged for 5
min. Ten drops of interface was diluted with PBS, spun down, fixed
in methanol/acetic acid (3:1), and dropped on slides. CML-2, 3, 7:
Five to 10 drops of marrow diluted with PBS to prevent clotting
were fixed in methanol/acetic acid and dropped on slides. CML-1, 4,
5, 6: Peripheral blood and/or bone marrow was cultured in RPMI 1640
supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum, an antibiotic mixture
(gentamycin 500 mg/ml), and 1% L-glutamine for 24 h. Cultures were
synchronized according to J. J. Yunis and M. E. Chandler Prog. in
Clin. Path., 7:267 (1977), and chromosome preparations followed
Gibis and Jackson, Karyogram, 11:91 (1985).
Hybridization and Detection Protocol. Hybridization followed
procedures described by D. Pinkel et al. (27), Trask et al. (25),
and J. B. Lawrence et al (30), with modifications. The BCR probe
was nick-translated (Bethesda Research Laboratories
Nick-Translation System) with digoxigenin-11-dUTP (Boehringer
Mannheim Biochemicals) with an average incorporation of 25%. The
ABL probe was similarly nick-translated with biotin-11-dUTP (Enzo
Diagnostics).
1. Hybridization. Denature target interphase cells and/or metaphase
spreads on glass slides at 72.degree. C. in 70%
formamide/2.times.SSC at pH 7 for 2 min. Dehydrate in an ethanol
series (70%, 85%, and 100% each for 2 min.). Air dry and place at
37.degree. C. (2.times.SSC is 0.3M NaCl/30 mM sodium citrate). Heat
10 ml of hybridization mixture containing 2 ng/ml of each probe,
50% formamide/2.times.SSC, 10% dextran sulphate, and 1 mg/ml human
genomic DNA (sonicated to 200-600 bp) to 70.degree. C. for 5 min.
to denature the DNA. Incubate for 30 min. at 37.degree. C. Place on
the warmed slides, cover with a 20 mm.times.20 mm coverslip, seal
with rubber cement, and incubate overnight in a moist chamber at
37.degree. C. Remove coverslips and wash three times for 20 minutes
each in 50% formamide/2.times.SSC pH 7 at 42.degree. C., twice for
20 minutes each in 2.times.SSC at 42.degree. C., and finally rinse
at room temperature in 4.times.SSC.
2. Detection of Bound Probes: All incubation steps are performed
with approximately 100 ml of solution at room temperature under
coverslips. The biotinylated ABL probe was detected first, then the
digoxigenin-labeled BCR probe.
a. Biotinylated ABL Probe: Preblock with 4.times.SSC/1% bovine
serum albumin (BSA) for 5 min. Apply Texas Red-avidin (Vector
Laboratories Inc., 2 mg/ml in 4.times.SSC/1% BSA) for 45 min. Wash
in 4.times.SSC once, 4.times.SSC/1% Triton-X 100 (Sigma) and then
again in 4.times.SSC, 5 min. each. Preblock for 5 min. in PNM (PN
containing 5% non-fat dry milk and 0.02% sodium azide and
centrifuged to remove solids. PN is 0.1 M NaH.sub.2PO.sub.4/0.1M
Na.sub.2HPO.sub.4, 0.05% NP40, pH 8). Apply biotinylated goat
anti-avidin (Vector Laboratories Inc., 5 mg/ml in PNM) for 45 min.
Wash twice in PN for 5 min. Apply a second layer of Texas
Red-avidin (2 mg/ml in PNM) for 45 min. Wash twice in PN for 5 min.
each.
b. Digoxigenin-Labeled BCR Probe: Preblock with PNM for 5 min.
Apply sheep anti-digoxigenin antibody (obtained from D. Pepper,
Boehringer Mannheim Biochemicals, Indianapolis, Ind.; 15.4 mg/ml in
PNM) for 45 min. Wash twice in PN for 5 min. each. Preblock with
PNM for 5 min. Apply rabbit-anti-sheep antibody conjugated with
FITC (Organon Teknika-Cappel, 1:50 in PNM) for 45 min. Wash twice
for 5 min. each in PN. If necessary, the signal is amplified by
preblocking for 5 min. with PNM and applying sheep anti-rabbit IgG
antibody conjugated to FITC (Organon Teknika-Cappel, 1:50 in PNM)
for 45 min. Rinse in PN.
3. Visualization: The slides are mounted fluorescence antifade
solution [G. D. Johnson and J. G. Nogueria, J. Immunol. Methods,
43:349 (1981)) (ref. 31, supra)] containing 1 mg/ml
4',6-amidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) as a counterstain, and examined
using a FITC/Texas red double-band pass filter set (Omega Optical)
on a Zeiss Axioskop.
The method used for BCR-ABL PCR tested herein was that described in
Hegewisch-Becker et al. for CML-3, 4 and 7 (ref. 32, supra), and
Kohler et al., for CML-5 and 6 (ref. 33, supra).
Results. ABL and BCR hybridization sites were visible on both
chromatids of chromosomes in most metaphase spreads. The ABL probe
bound to metaphase spreads from normal individuals (FIG. 9A) near
the telomere on 9q while the BCR probe bound at 22q11 (FIG. 9B).
Hybridization with the ABL or BCR probe to normal interphase nuclei
typically resulted in two tiny fluorescent dots corresponding to
the target sequence on both chromosome homologues. The spots were
apparently randomly distributed in the two dimensional nuclear
images and were usually well separated. A few cells showed two
doublet hybridization signals probably a result of hybridization to
both sister chromatids of both homologues in cells which had
replicated this region of DNA (i.e., those in the S- or G2-phase of
cell cycle). Dual color FISH of the ABL (red) and BCR (green)
probes to normal G1 nuclei yielded two red (ABL) and two green
(BCR) hybridization signals distributed randomly around the
nucleus.
The genetic rearrangement of CML brings the DNA sequences
homologous to the probes together on an abnormal chromosome,
usually the Ph.sup.1, and together in the interphase nucleus, as
illustrated in FIG. 8. The genomic distance between the probe
binding sites in the fusion gene varies among CML cases, ranging
from 25 to 225 kb, but remains the same in all the cells of a
single leukemic done. Dual color hybridization with ABL and BCR
probes to interphase CML cells resulted in one red and one green
hybridization signal located at random in the nucleus, and one
red-green doublet signal in which the separation between the two
colors was less than 1 micron (or one yellow hybridization signal
for hybridization in very close proximity, see FIG. 10). The
randomly located red and green signals are ascribed to
hybridization to the ABL and BCR genes on the normal chromosomes,
and the red-green doublet signal to hybridization to the BCR-ABL
fusion gene. Interphase mapping studies suggest that DNA sequences
separated by less than 250 kb should be separated in interphase
nuclei by less than 1 micron (25). As a result, cells showing red
and green hybridization signals separated by greater than 1 micron
were scored as normal since this is consistent with the
hybridization sites being on different chromosomes. However, due to
statistical considerations, some normal cells will have red and
green dots close enough together to be scored as abnormal. In these
two dimensional nuclear analyses, 9 out of 750 normal nuclei had
red and green hybridization signals less than 1 micron of each
other. Thus, approximately 1% of normal cells were classified as
abnormal.
Table 3 shows the hybridization results for 7 samples from 6 CML
cases along with conventional karyotypes, and other diagnostic
results (PCR and Southern blot data ). All six cases, including 3
that were found to be Ph.sup.1 negative by banding analysis
(CML-5,-6 and -7), showed red-green hybridization signals separated
by less than 1 micron in greater than 50% of nuclei examined. In
most, the fusion event was visible in almost every cell. One case
(CML-7) showed fusion signals in almost every cell even though PCR
analysis failed to detect the presence of a fusion gene and banding
analysis did not reveal a Philadelphia chromosome.
Hybridization to metaphase spreads was performed in three cases
(CML-1,-5 and -6). All of these showed red and green hybridization
signals in clone proximity on a single acrocentric chromosome. In
two cases, scored as t(9:22) (q34;q11) by banding, the red-green
pair was in close proximity to the telomere of the long arm of a
small acrocentric chromosome as expected for the Ph.sup.1 (FIG.
9C). One case (CML-6) was suspected by classical cytogenetics to
have an insertion of chromosomal material at 22q11. Dual color
hybridization to metaphase spreads from this case showed the
red-green pair to be centrally located in a small chromosome (FIG.
9D). That result is consistent with formation of the BCR-ABL fusion
gene by an insertion. In one case (CML-1), two pairs of red-green
doublet signals were seen in 3 out 150 (2%) interphase nuclei. That
may indicate a double Ph.sup.1 (or double fusion gene) in those
cells. Such an event was not detected by standard cytogenetics,
which was limited to analysis of 25 metaphase spreads. The
acquisition of an additional Ph.sup.1 is the most frequent
cytogenetic event accompanying blast transformation, and its
cytogenetic detection may herald disease acceleration.
Simultaneous hybridization with ABL and BCR probes to metaphase
spreads of the CML derived cell line K-562 showed multiple
red-green hybridization sites along both arms of a single
acrocentric chromosome. Hybridization to interphase nuclei showed
that the red and green signals were confined to the same region of
the nucleus. That is consistent with their being localized on a
single chromosome. Twelve to fifteen hybridization pairs were seen
in each nucleus indicating corresponding amplification of the
BCR-ABL fusion gene (see FIGS. 9E and 9F). These findings are
consistent with previous Southern blot data showing amplification
of the fusion gene in this cell line (26).
In summary, analysis of interphase cells for seven CML, and four
normal cell samples using dual color FISH with ABL and BCR probes
suggests the utility of this approach for routine diagnosis of CML
and clinical monitoring of the disease. Among its very important
advantages are the ability to obtain genetic information from
individual interphase or metaphase cells in less than 24 hours.
Thus, it can be applied to all cells of a population, not just to
those that fortuitously or through culture, happen to be in
metaphase. Further, the genotypic analysis can be associated with
cell phenotype, as judged by morphology or other markers, thereby
permitting the study of lineage specificity of cells carrying the
CML genotype as well as assessment of the frequency of cells
carrying the abnormality.
Random juxtaposition of red and green signals in two dimensional
images of normal cells, which occurs in about 0.01 of normal cells,
sets the low frequency detection limit. That detection limit may be
lowered by more complete quantitative measurement of the separation
and intensity of the hybridization signals in each nucleus using
computerized image analysis. Such analysis will be particularly
important in studying patient populations in which the cells
carrying the BCR-ABL fusion at low frequency (e.g., during
remission, after bone marrow transplantation, during relapse or in
model systems).
This assay also should be advantageous for detection of CML cells
during therapy when the number of cells available for analysis is
low since only a few cells are required. Finally, simple counting
of hybridization spots allows for the detection and quantitative
analysis of amplification of the BCR-ABL fusion gene as illustrated
for the K562 cell line (FIG. 9E). Quantitative measurement of
fluorescence intensity may assist with such an analysis.
IX. Detection of the Retinoblastoma Gene in Metaphase Chromosomes
and Interphase Nuclei
Probes. Fourteen lambda phage clones which form three contigs
(overlapping nucleic acid sequences) and span all the exons of the
Rb-1 gene were obtained from Yuen Kai Fung [Division of Hematology
and Oncology, Childrens' Hospital of Los Angeles, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif. 90027 (USA)]. The phage
DNA was labeled either by biotin-dUTP or digoxigenin-dUTP using the
Bio Nick.TM. Labeling System [BRL Life Technologies, Inc.,
Gaithersburg, Md. (USA)].
A probe specific to the 13/21 centromeric alphoid repetitive
sequence was used in assisting identification of chromosome 13 in
metaphase preparations. The 13/21 centromeric probe was prepared by
the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) according to methods detailed
in Weier et al., Hum. Genet. 87(4):489-494 (1991). Briefly, the
probe was made by PCR using flow sorted human chromosome 21s as a
template and two primers (30 .mu.M) specific for the alphoid
sequence. The product was labeled during the PCR reaction by
including biotin-11-dUTP (100%). Oligonucleotide primers used were
W21R1 (5'-GGATAGCTTAACGATTTCGTTGGAAAC-3') and W21R2
(5'-CAAACGTGCTCAAAGTAAGGGAATG-3'). They were synthesized using
phosphoramidite chemistry on a DNA synthesizer (Applied Biophysics,
Foster City, Calif., model 380B). Synthesis and further
purification of the oligonucleotides by C18 reverse phase
chromatography and HPLC was performed according to the
specifications of the manufacturer (Waters Chromatography, Milford,
Mass., USA). Using the flow sorted chromosomal DNA as a template
these primers generate a 135 bp product.
Cell samples. PHA-stimulated normal peripheral blood lymphocytes,
cultured human skin fibroblasts, two fibroblast cell lines from
retinoblastoma patients GM05877 46, XX, del(13)
(pter-q14.1::q21.2-qter) and GM01142A 46, XX, del(13)
(pter-q14.1::q22.1-qter) obtained from the NIGMS (National
Institute of General Medical Science) Human Genetic Mutant Cell
Repository (Camden, N.J.), and clinical human breast cancer samples
obtained either by fine-needle aspiration or disaggregation of
fresh tumor tissue were used [made available by Fred Waldman, M.D.,
Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of California, San
Francisco, Calif. (USA)]. Cell lines were either treated with
colcemid to prepare metaphases or grown to confluency to obtain
G0/G1 interphase nuclei. All samples were fixed in 3:1
methanol-acetic acid and dropped on microscope slides. Before in
situ hybridization the slides were treated with (1 ug/50 ml)
Proteinase K [Boehringer Mannheim GmbH, Indianapolis, Ind.) (USA)
for 7.5 min at 37.degree. C.
In situ hybridization. FISH was done using modifications of
previously published methods (Pinkel et al., 1986; Trask et al.
1989). The hybridization mixture consisting of 20-40 ng of labeled
probe, 5-10 .mu.g unlabeled human placental DNA in 50% formamide,
2.times.SSC and 10% dextran sulphate was denaturated for 5 min at
70.degree. C. and then allowed to reanneal for 30-60 min at
37.degree. C. In dual color hybridizations, 20 ng of Rb 3' end
probe and 20 ng of Rb 5' end probe was used. In cohybridizations
with the 13/21 centromeric probe, 2 ng of the centromeric probe was
used with 20-40 ng of the Rb-1 probe. The slides were denatured in
70% formamide, 2.times.SSC at 70.degree. C. for 2 min.
Hybridization was done under a coverslip in a moist chamber at
37.degree. C. for 2 days.
Staining. Briefly, the slides were washed three times in 50%
formamide, 2.times.SSC for 10 min, twice in 2.times.SSC and once in
0.1.times.SSC at 45.degree. C. Biotin-labeled specimens were
stained with (5 ug/ml) FITC- or Texas Red-Avidin [Vector
Laboratories, Inc., Burlingame, Calif. (USA)] in 4.times.SSC/1% BSA
for 30 minutes at room temperature. Anti-avidin (Vector
Laboratories, Inc. (5 ug/ml) incubation was done in PNM buffer for
20 min followed by a second layer of FITC/Texas Red-Avidin in PNM
buffer. Digoxigenin-labeled probes were detected using an
FITC-labeled sheep antibody against digoxigenin and a second layer
of rabbit anti-sheep FITC antibody (Vector Laboratories, Inc.,
Burlingame, Calif.). Before each antibody or avidin treatment the
slides were preblocked with either 1%BSA or PNM. Between the
antibody incubations the slides were washed twice in 4.times.SSC
and once in 4.times.SSC/0.1%=TRITON X-100 or three times in PN
buffer. Nuclei were counter-stained with 0.2 ug/ml propidium iodide
or 0.27 uM DAPI in an antifade solution.
Fluorescence microscopy and digital image analysis. A Nikon
fluorescence microscope was used in most of the analyses. For
interphase analysis at least 150 nuclei were scored from each
sample. To map the metaphase hybridization signals accurately
digital image analysis was used. The multicolor images were stored
on computer magnetic disks at an approximate resolution of 19
pixels/em and analyzed using a specific software program based on
the TCL-Image software package. The program defines the contour of
the DAPI-stained chromosome and draws the longitudinal axis of the
chromosome. The hybridization signals are then overlaid in
pseudocolors on the chromosome image to calculate their relative
position in terms of the distance from the p-telomere compared to
the total chromosome length (=fractional length scale).
Results. Using fourteen lambda phage clones together (Rb-1 probe),
a bright and specific hybridization signal on lymphocyte metaphase
preparations in the mid-region of the q-area of chromosome 13 were
obtained (FIGS. 13A and 13B). A more accurate localization of the
Rb-1 gene was achieved by digital image analysis. The mean distance
of the Rb-1 signal from the 13 pter (p-terminus) was determined to
be compatible with the location of Rb-1 gene in the band q14.2
(FIG. 13C). Analysis of the Rb-1 hybridization from interphase
nuclei was first attempted in normal lymphocytes and fibroblasts
(FIG. 13D). Two hybridization signals representing the two gene
alleles were detected in about 90% of the nuclei (FIG. 14A). The
remaining 10% showed either one or three fluorescence signals. In
interphase, the fluorescence signal was not always singular but
could appear as 2-4 small adjacent individual spots probably
because the Rb-1 probe consists of three separate contigs.
Two fibroblast cell lines from retinoblastoma patients with
homozygous deletions affecting the Rb-1 region were used to test
the sensitivity of FISH in detecting deletions using an absence of
a hybridization signal as an indicator of deletions. In both cell
lines one Rb-1 signal was detected in about 70-80% of the
interphase nuclei (FIGS. 13G and 14B). Metaphase preparations from
those cell lines hybridized simultaneously with the Rb-1 and the
13/21 centromeric probes showing that the normal chromosome 13 had
both the centromeric and the Rb-1 signals, whereas the other
slightly shortened chromosome 13 hybridized only with the
centromeric probe (FIGS. 13E and 13F).
The Rb-1 probe was also used to study fine needle aspirations and
touch preparations from different breast cancer patients. Although
the breast cancer samples had more non-specific background
fluorescence than cultured cells, it was still possible to evaluate
Rb-1 gene copy numbers from individual tumor nuclei (FIG. 13H). As
shown in Table 4 below, marked genetic heterogeneity both within
and between breast tumors was found in the analysis of six cases.
The modal Rb-1 gene copy number varied from 1-3 in the tumors. As
compared to experiments with cell cultures, the clinical samples
showed a higher percentage of cells without any Rb-1 signals. Table
4 shows the percentage of nuclei exhibiting a defined number of
Rb-1 signals/nucleus in six clinical breast cancer specimens. The
results represent the mean of 2-3 hybridization experiments. At
least 150 cells were scored from each slide.
TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 No. signals/nuclei (%) Tumor 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
DI B156 22 23 45 5 5 0 0 1.50 B245 28 36 31 3 2 0 0 1.35 B249 2 10
23 36 25 3 0.5 1.82 B252 21 14 43 14 3 3 1 1.87 B259 36 49 12 2 1 0
0 1.64 B263 16 3 11 33 20 10 6 2.25 DI = DNA index
To detect subregions of the Rb-1 gene, single phage clones spanning
only 8-20 kb of the 200 kb Rb-1 gene were used as hybridization
probes. The hybridization signals from such probes could be seen
both in metaphase chromosomes and interphase nuclei, but the
hybridization efficiency was significantly less than with the
pooled Rb-1 probe. In contrast, if 2-5 contiguous phage clones were
pooled the hybridization was more efficient and more easily
evaluated. This approach was used to visualize the 3' and 5' ends
of the Rb-1 gene in interphase nuclei with differently labeled
probes in a dual-color hybridization (FIG. 13I).
Thus, in conclusion, the Rb-1 gene was mapped to 13q14 by FISH and
digital image analysis confirming the location of the gene to be in
close proximity to the esterase D locus (Sparkes et al., 1980).
Also shown in this section is that the methods of this invention
can be used to detect deletions involving the Rb-1 locus. In order
to verify the presence of a deletion from unbanded propidium iodide
stained metaphase preparations, it was necessary to use a reference
probe which in the representative example of this section was a
13/21 pericentromeric alpha satellite probe. Chromosome 13s with a
deletion in the Rb-1 locus were thereby identified.
The representative examples of this section demonstrate that
chromosome-specific staining can be used to detect Rb-1 gene
deletions from interphase nuclei of cultured fibroblasts from
retinoblastoma patients known to have a constitutive deletion in
13q. The usefulness of chromosome-specific staining is determined
by the hybridization efficiency obtained, which in turn
experientially has been found to be dependent on probe target size.
Previous studies on interphase FISH have mainly been done using
probes to pericentromeric repetitive sequences with a target size
of a few megabases with hybridization efficiencies around 90-95%
(Pinkel et al. 1986). In experiments using the 150 kb Rb-1 probe
with cultured cells, the hybridization efficiency obtained in
interphase was about 80-90%, whereas in clinical samples the
efficiency was apparently less since a number of cells exhibited no
hybridization signals. Poor hybridization efficiency might
therefore lead to misinterpretation of a deletion. Further, in
solid tumors having very complex karyotypic abnormalities, the
distinction between numerical chromosome aberrations and structural
abnormalities may be difficult to evaluate. Therefore, it is
preferred in analyzing large numbers of solid tumors to
co-hybridize with other reference probes for the same chromosome to
control for the hybridization efficiency as well as for the
presence of numerical chromosomal abnormalities. The centromeric
13/21 alpha satellite probe used successfully in metaphase
preparations cannot be applied to interphase analysis because the
signals for chromosome 13 and 21 cannot be distinguished.
Therefore, for interphase analysis, it is preferred that a
reference probe specific for chromosome 13 be used.
The studies on clinical breast cancer material described in this
section demonstrate the genetic heterogeneity of breast cancer. The
evaluation of this heterogeneity coupled with the possibility of
studying gene copy numbers from morphologically defined individual
tumor cells are major advantages of the chromosome-specific
staining methods of this invention.
X. Detection of Chromosome 3 and 17 Aberrations Associated with
Cancer
Probes. Two centromeric-specific alpha satellite probes are used in
the representative examples of this section; one is specific to
chromosome 17, and the other to chromosome 3. The
centromeric-specific probes were prepared similarly as the 13/21
specific centromeric probes were, as indicated above in Section IX.
Specifically, those probes were prepared using a polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) process employing a thermostable enzyme [Saiki et
al., Science, 239:487-491 (1988)] as follows.
Probe specific for alpha satellite centromeric repeats on human
chromosome 17. Approximately 50 ng (nanograms) of DNA isolated from
the Bluescribe plasmid library for chromosome 17 (pBS17) were used
as the DNA template. Pinkel et al., PNAS USA, 85:9138-9142
(December 1988) describes the preparation of such Bluescribe
libraries as subcloning an entire chromosome 17 library, which is
publicly available as LL17NS01 or LA17NS03 [Van Dilla et al.,
Bio/Technology, 4:537-552 (June 1986)] into Bluescribe plasmids
[Stratagene, La Jolla, Calif. (USA)].
The reaction buffer consisted of 5 units of Thermus aquaticus (Taq)
DNA polymerase [Bethesda Research Laboratories, Gaithersburg, Md.
(USA)]; mixed with 100 .mu.l amplification/biotinylation buffer [10
mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.4 at 20.degree. C.; 1.5 mM MgCl.sub.2; 5 mM KCl;
and 0.2 mM each of 2'-deoxyadenosine 5'-triphosphate (dATP),
2'-deoxyguanosine 5'-triphosphate (dGTP), and biuotin-II-dUTP [all
the deoxynucleotide triphosphates were from Sigma, St. Louis, Mo.
(USA)]; and 1.2 .mu.M each of the two primers WA1 and WA2 [WA1
5'-GAAGCTTA(A/T(C/G)T(C/A)ACAGAGTT (G/T)AA-3' and WA2
5'-GCTGCAGATC(A/C)C(A/C)AAG(A/T/C)AGTTTC-3']. Mineral oil (100
.mu.l) [Squibb, Princeton, N.J. (USA)] was layered on top of the
reaction mixture to prevent evaporation during the PCR.
DNA amplification and simultaneous biotinylation was performed
during 45 cycles using an automated thermal cycling system [Weier
and Gray, DNA 7:441-447 (1988)]. Each cycle began with a thermal
denaturation step of 90 seconds at 94.degree. C. (120 seconds for
the initial denaturation). Primer annealing during the second step
of each cycle was performed at 53.degree. C. for 90 seconds. The
temperature was then increased slowly (7.degree. C./minute) to
72.degree. C. The cycle was completed by holding that temperature
for 120 seconds for primer extension. Amplification of alpha
satellite DNA was confirmed visually by electrophoresis of 5 .mu.l
aliquots of the PCR reaction mixture on 4% agarose gels (BRL) in 40
mM Tris-acetate, 1 mM EDTA, pH 8.0 containing 0.5 .mu./ml ethidium
bromide [Maniatis et al., (1986), supra]. The concentration of
double stranded DNA in the reaction was determined to be 229
.mu.g/ml by Hoeschst 33258 fluorescence using a TK 100 fluorometer
[Hoefer Scientific, San Francisco, Calif. (USA)].
Probe specific for alpha satellite centromeric repeats on human
chromosome 3. In vitro DNA amplification was performed using
approximately 80 ng of CsCl gradient isolated DNA from the
Bluescribe plasmid library for chromosome 3 (pBS3) (400 .mu.g/l) as
amplification template per 200 .mu.l reaction mixture. The reaction
buffer was the same as that used to prepare the chromosome 17
centromeric-specific probe above except that dTTP is used instead
of biotin-11-dUTP.
PCR was performed for 30 cycles using an automated thermal cycler
[Perkin-Elmer/Cetus, Norwalk, Conn. (USA)]. The DNA template was
denatured at 94.degree. C. for 1 minute (1 minute 30 seconds during
the first cycle). Primer annealing and extension were performed at
53.degree. C. and 72.degree. C., respectively. Probe biotinylation
and further amplification was accomplished in a second reaction by
adding a 5 .mu.l aliquot of the product to 200 .mu.l reaction mix
containing 0.25 mM Biotin-11-dUTP (Sigma St. Louis, Mo.) in the
absence of dTTP and 10 units of Taq polymerase [Weier et al., J.
Histochem. Cytochem, 38:421-426 (1990)]. The
amplification/biotinylation reaction was performed during an
additional 20 PCR cycles. Amplification of degenerate alpha
satellite DNA was confirmed visually by gel electrophoresis of 10
.mu.l aliquots of the PCR reaction in either 1.8% or 4% agarose
(BRL) in 40 mM Tris-acetate, 1 mM EDTA buffer, pH 8.0 containing
0.5 .mu.g/ml ethidium bromide. After completion of PCR, labeled
probe and amplified DNA were stored at -18.degree. C.
Chromosome 3 alpha satellite centromeric-specific repetitive probe.
Another chromosome 3 centromeric-specific probe called palpha 3-5
was obtained from Huntington Willard, Ph.D. [Department of
Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.
(USA)]. That probe was described at the Ninth International
Workshop on Human Gene Mapping in Paris [Cytogenet. Cell Genet., 46
(14):424, 564 and 712 (1987), and 51 (14):111 (1989)]; and a
similar probe is described in Waye and Willard, Chromosoma (Berl),
97:475-480 (1989). The palpha 3-5 probe was labeled with AAF
according to conventional methodology for use in the experiments
described below.
3p cosmid probe. A 3p cosmid probe called cC13-787 was obtained
from Yusuke Nakamura, MD, Ph.D [Division of Biochemistry, Cancer
Institute, Toshima, Tokyo, 170, Japan]. Its isolation and mapping
to 3p21.2-p21.1 is described in Yamakawa et al., Genomics,
9(3):536-543 (1991). That probe was amplified and labeled with
biotin according to a PCR linker/adapter method described in
Johnson, Genomics, 6:243-251 (1990) and Saunders et al., Nucl.
Acids. Res., 17 (22):9027-9037 (1989).
3q cosmid probe. A 3q cosmid probe named J14R1A12 was developed and
provided by Wen-Lin Kuo [Biomedical Department, P.O. Box 5507
(L-452), Lawrence Livermore National laboratory, Livermore, Calif.
94550 (USA)]. It was obtained from a chromosome 21 flow sorted
library prepared by conventional means. It was mapped to the
location 3q26 using an extrapolation of the fractional length for
the probe to a chromosome 3 ideogram. It was labeled with
biotin-dUTP using the Bio Nick.TM. Labeling System [BRL Life
Technologies, Inc. Gaithersburg, Md. (USA)].
Composite Whole Chromosome 3-Specific Probe. A probe specific for
the whole chromosome 3 was a Bluescribe plasmid library for
chromosome 3 prepared according to Pinkel et al., PNAS USA,
85:9138-9142 (December 1988) and named pBS3.
Cell Samples. Used in the following examples were PHA-stimulated
normal peripheral blood lymphocytes; two ovarian cancer cell lines,
designated as RMUG-S and RMUG-L, provided by Shiro Nozawa, Md.,
Ph.D. (Department of Obstetrics/Gynecology, School of Medicine,
Keio University, 35 Shinano-machi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160, Japan)
and described in Sakayori et al., Human Cell, 3 (1):52-56 (1990);
and a uterine cervical adenocarcinoma cell line, named TMCC-1,
described in Sakamoto, J. Tokyo Med. College, 46 (5):925-936
(1988). RMUG-S is a hypodiploid cancer cell line, whereas RMUG-L is
a hypertriploid cancer cell line. Both lines were cloned from the
same clinical specimen.
In situ hybridization and staining. The protocols resulting in the
hybridizations shown in FIGS. 15, 16 and 17 were the same as those
used in Section IX except that for FIG. 15, the hybridization
mixture contained 5 .mu.g of herring sperm DNA instead of 5 .mu.g
of unlabeled placental DNA, and reannealing of the denatured probe
just before in situ hybridization was not performed: and for FIG.
16, the hybridization mixture contained a reduced amount of 0,5
.mu.g of unlabeled human placental DNA explicitly 0.5 .mu.g.
For the results shown in FIGS. 18 and 19, the hybridization
protocols differed from that detailed in Section IX in that before
hybridization, the slides were pretreated with 100 .mu.g/ml of
RNase for 30 minutes at 37.degree. C. and then treated with
1.mu.g/ml of Proteinaise K for 7.5 minutes at 37.degree. C. The
hybridization mixture comprised 1 .mu.l biotinylated 3p cosmid
(wherein the PCR product was diluted 1:10 with double distilled,
deionized water) or 30 ng-40 ng 3q cosmid; 2 ng chromosome 3 alpha
satellite centromeric-specific probe (palpha 3-5) labeled with AAF;
5 .mu.g-10 .mu.g unlabeled human placental DNA; and 7.0 .mu.l of
master mix [which consists of 5 ml formamide to which 1 g dextran
sulphate and 1 ml 20.times.SSC (prepared using deionized, double
distilled water) was added, the pH of which was adjusted to 7.0
with 1N HCl and the final volume to 7 ml was completed with
deionized, double distilled water]. The master mixture is stored at
-20.degree. C. indefinitely.
For the results shown in FIGS. 18 and 19, a dual color staining
protocol was performed essentially according to Trask and Pinkel,
Methods in Cell Biology, 33:383400 (1991). Briefly, the slides were
washed three times in the washing solutions for 10 minutes each at
45.degree. C., 2.times.SSC for 10 minutes at 45.degree. C.,
0.1.times.SSC for 10 minutes, and PN buffer (wherein the percentage
of NP-40 is 0.05% rather than 0.1%) for 5 minutes at room
temperature. The washing solutions comprise 50%
formamide:2.times.SSC (75 ml formamide; 15 ml 20.times.SSC; and 60
ml deionized, double distilled water wherein the pH is adjusted to
7.0 with 1 N HCl).
The slides are preblocked with 20 .mu.l PNM buffer under a
22.times.22 mm coverslip at room temperature for 5 minutes inside a
dark moist chamber. The coverslip is then taken off, and the PNM
buffer is drained from the slide.
Twenty .mu.l of anti-AAF and Avidin-Texas Red solution are added to
the cells+area per slide and then covered with a 22.times.22 mm
coverslip. The slides are incubated within a dark moist chamber for
1 hour at room temperature. The anti-AAF and Avidin-Texas Red
solution is prepared by adding 8 .mu.l of 0.25 .mu.g/.mu.l
Avidin-Texas Red (Vector) to 1 ml of the supernatant of anti-AAF
producing mouse cells.
The coverslips are then removed, and the slides are washed with
intermittent shaking in the PN buffer thrice for 10 minutes each in
a dark place.
The cells are then preblocked as described above. Twenty .mu.l of
goat-anti-mouse-FITC antibody and biotinylated anti-Avidin antibody
solution is added to the cells' area on each slide. The cells are
covered with a coverslip and incubated inside a dark moist chamber
for one hour at room temperature. The antibody solution per ml
comprises 20 .mu.l of goat-anti-mouse-FITC antibody [from Cal Taq
(Burlingame, Calif.) i.e., the final concentration is 20 .mu.g/ml]
and 10 .mu.l biotinylated anti-avidin antibody solution at the
concentration of 0.5 mg/ml (from Vector Laboratories, i.e., the
final concentration is 5 .mu.g/ml) to 970 .mu.l antibody dilution
buffer [IX Dulbecco's PBS (Ca, Mg free), 0.05% TWEEN 20, 2% normal
goat serum].
The coverslips were removed from the slides, and the slides are
then washed with intermittent shaking in the PN buffer thrice for
10 minutes each in a dark place. The cells are then preblocked as
indicated above.
Twenty .mu.l of the Avidin-Texas Red solution were added to the
cells' area per slide, and then a coverslip was applied. The slides
are then incubated inside a dark moist chamber for one hour at room
temperature. The Avidin-Texas Red Solution comprises 8 .mu.l of a
0.25 .mu.g/.mu.l Avidin-Texas Red (Vector) to 1 ml of the antibody
dilution buffer.
The coverslips are then removed from the slides, and the slides are
washed in the PN buffer thrice for 10 minutes each in a dark place.
About 8 .mu.l of 0.8 .mu.m DAPI (counterstain) in an anti-fade
solution is prepared according to J. Immuno. Methods, 43:349 (1981)
[100 mg p-phenylene-diamine dihydrochloride (Sigma P1519) in 10 ml
Dulbecco's PBS; pH adjusted to 8 with 0.5 M carbonate-bicarbonate
buffer; 90 ml glycerol added; filtered through 0.22 .mu.m; stored
at -20.degree. C.] was added to the slides. The slides mounted with
the anti-fade solution can be stored in a dark chamber at 4.degree.
C.
Results. FIG. 15A shows the hybridization of the chromosome 17
centromere-specific alpha satellite probe to normal lymphocytes
wherein in metaphase chromosomes, two bright signals are seen, and
in interphase nuclei, two bright, tight hybridization domains are
visible. FIG. 15B shows the hybridization of that probe to the
human ovarian mucinous cysto-adenocarcinoma (RMUG-L), wherein in
both metaphase and interphase, four signals are visible.
These examples are representative of the use of chromosome-specific
repeat probes for the detection of numerical chromosome aberrations
on chromosome 17 which are used as a component of the high
complexity staining probes of this invention.
FIGS. 16A and B show hybridization of the whole chromosome
composite probe for chromosome 3 (pBS3) (A) to normal lymphocytes
and (B) to the ovarian cancer cell line (RMUG-L). Two normal
chromosome 3s are seen in FIG. 16A, whereas four chromosome 3s are
seen in the ovarian cancer cell line (FIG. 16B), of which two are
apparently shorter than the intact chromosome 3s, a pattern which
is congruent with a 3p deletion in the karyotype.
Chromosome-specific recombinant lambda libraries have been
constructed for all the human chromosomes by the National
Laboratory Gene Library Project [Van Dilla et al. (1986), supra].
Subsequently, those libraries were subcloned into Bluescribe
plasmid vectors (Stratagene), and whole chromosome composite probes
were generated from the DNA extracted from those plasmids [Fuscoe
et al., Genomics, 5:100-109 (1989); Collins et al., Genomics
11(4):997-1006(1991)]. Staining with such whole chromosome
composite probes can be used to detect not only large deletions but
also subtle translocations and to identify the origin of marker
chromosomes.
FIGS. 17A and B (as well as FIGS. 9, 10 and 13, among others)
provide examples of the use of locus-specific probes to count the
copy number of specific genes in tumor cells and to detect changes
in patterns of hybridization domains. FIGS. 17A and B provide
representative examples of the use of locus-specific probes to
detect translocations. As indicated above, such examples are the
first step in locating exact information on genetic rearrangements
within a locus. The 3q cosmid probe employed in these studies is
just one of many potential probes from chromosome 3 that can be
used [Yamakawa et al., Genomics, 9(3):536-543 (1991)]. Preferably,
in metaphase spreads probes with different labels according to
their order in a normal chromosome 3 may be used to detect any
structural chromosomal aberrations differing from the standard.
Further, in either metaphase spreads or interphase nuclei, probes
with different labels according to their location in normal
chromosomes may be used to detect structural chromosomal
aberrations, for example, commonly deleted lesions found in cancer
cells.
FIGS. 17A and B show the hybridization of a chromosome 3
centromeric-specific alpha satellite repeat probe (the one
generated by the PCR process with the primers WA1 and WA2) and a 3q
cosmid probe (J14R1A12 mapped to 3q 26) to, respectively (A) normal
lymphocytes and (B) a uterine cervical adenocarcinoma cell line
(TMCC-1). As indicated in the description of the figures above, two
pairs of normal chromosome 3s are illustrated in (A) whereas a a
pair of cosmid signals specific to chromosome region 3q was found
to be translocated to another chromosome.
FIGS. 18A and 18B show dual color hybridization to normal
lymphocytes, metaphase spread and interphase nucleus, respectively.
FIGS. 19A and 19B show comparable hybridizations to an ovarian
cancer cell line. A chromosome 3 centromeric-specific repetitive
probe (AAF labeled palpha 3-5 from Huntington Willard) and 3p
region-specific (3p21.2 p21.1) cosmid probe (cC13-787) (that is
biotinylated and amplified and labeled by linker adapter PCR) were
employed in such hybridizations. Two hundred interphase nuclei were
scored for each experiment.
In FIG. 18A, the image of chromosome 3 from normal lymphocytes was
digitized by the digital fluorescent microscope and shows one
chromosome 3 centromeric-specific green signal and one pair of
chromosome 3p region-specific red signal for each chromatid were
visible.
In FIG. 18B, the picture of an interphase nucleus from normal
lymphocytes, taken with a conventional fluorescent microscope,
shows two greenish hybridization domains for the centromeric
specific probes and two reddish domains for the 3p probe. It was
commonly observed that a pair of cosmid signals on both chromatids
of one chromosome 3 fuses into a single spot in interphase
nuclei.
FIG. 19A shows a partial metaphase spread, one chromosome 3 shows a
normal hybridization pattern whereas the other shows a 3p deletion.
FIG. 19B shows in interphase nuclei, four large greenish domains
for the centromeric probe and two small reddish hybridization
domains for the 3p probe, indicating aneuploidy of chromosome 3,
wherein two out of four of the chromosome 3s have a 3p
deletion.
Eighty-six percent of the interphase nuclei of the normal
lymphocytes showed normal pattern of two green centromeric signals
and two red signals of the 3p cosmid probe. However 98% (94%) of
interphase nuclei of the RMUG-S (RMUG-L) cells showed a lesser
number of red signals (3p cosmid) than green signals (centromere)
suggesting a chromosome 3p deletion in those cell lines. Among
those nuclei, 53% (52%) of interphase nuclei of the RMUG-S (RMUG-L)
cells showed two domines of the 3p cosmid signal and 4 domains of
the chromosome 3 centromeric-specific signals.
FIGS. 20 and 21 show the results of simultaneous hybridizations of
an AAF-labeled chromosome 3 centromere-specific probe (from H.
Willard) and a biotinylated chromosome 3q cosmid probe (J14R1A12)
wherein in FIG. 20 the target is a metaphase spread and interphase
nucleus of normal lymphocytes and wherein in FIG. 21 the target is
an interphase nucleus from the ovarian cancer cell line (RMUG-S). A
pattern for a normal chromosomal complement is shown in FIG. 20 as
two chromosome 3 centromere-specific green signals and two pairs of
chromosome 3q cosmid red signals per cell. An abnormal pattern is
shown in FIG. 21 as four chromosome 3 centromere-specific green
signals and four chromosome 3q cosmid red signals, indicating that
the cell contains four long arms of chromosome 3. The results shown
in FIGS. 20 and 21 support the feasibility of detecting 3p
deletions in interphase nuclei of tumor cells if combined with the
findings of domain number for 3p cosmid signals. Such a methodology
can be applied to detect 3p deletions in clinical tumor specimens
for basic research on tumorigenesis and progression, and adjunctive
diagnosis of cancers associated with 3p deletions, such as, small
cell lung cancer, renal cell cancer and ovarian cancer.
The descriptions of the foregoing embodiments of the invention have
been presented for purpose of illustration and description. They
are not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the
precise form disclosed, and obviously many modifications and
variations are possible in light of the above teachings. The
embodiments were chosen and described in order to best explain the
principles of the invention and its practical application to
thereby enable others skilled in the art to best utilize the
invention in various embodiments and with various modifications as
are suited to the particular use contemplated. It is intended that
the scope of the invention be defined by the claims appended
hereto. All references cited herein are hereby incorporated by
reference.
* * * * *
References