Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization Analysis Identified The Chromosomal Aberrations and Putative Genes Involved in Prostate Tumorigenesis of Malaysian Men (Analisis Tatasusunan Perbandingan Genom Penghibridan dalam Mengenal Pasti Aberasi Kromosom dan Gen Berkemungkinan Terlibat dalam Tumorigenesis Prostat dalam Kalangan Lelaki di Malaysia).
Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis of small supernumerary marker chromosomes in human infertility Author links open overlay panel N. Guediche a b L. Tosca a b A. Kara Terki c C. Bas a b L. Lecerf d J. Young e A. Briand-Suleau d B. Tou f J. Bouligand f g S. Brisset a M. Misrahi f A. Guiochon-Mantel f g M. Goossens d G. Tachdjian a b.
Array based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) has emerged as a powerful tool for detecting gene copy number variants implicated in many disease states. Simple, robust genomic DNA labeling reagents and removal of free dye and nucleotides are two of the most critical components determining array CGH experiment’s performance.
Hidden Markov models approach to the analysis of array CGH data.. In order to investigate genomic alterations we are using microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH). The computational task is to map and characterize the number and types of copy number alterations present in the tumors, and so define copy number.
However, karyotype analysis provides low resolution. A much higher resolution of DNA dosage imbalances and LOH can be characterized using array comparative genome hybridization (aCGH) and array genome hybridization (AGH). aCGH and AGH can be performed for the assessment of acquired DNA copy number variation (CNV).
Human and Mouse Genome Analysis using Array Comparative Genomic Hybridization by Antoine Maria Snijders. - University of California San Francisco Utrecht, Utrecht University, 2004. Proefschrift. - ISBN 90-393-3786-1 Keywords: array comparative genomic hybridization, DNA copy number, genetic instability.
Genomic profiles of uterine leiomyosarcomas Array-CGH analysis was carried out to identify genomic alterations in 4 cases of ULM and 7 cases of ULMS. The clinical characteristics of patients were listed in Table 1.In ULMs, no genomic alterations were detected within the threshold range (defined as log 2 ratio between 0.25 and 0.25).