2003
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-59349-9_15
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genetic Subtyping of Renal Cell Carcinoma by Comparative Genomic Hybridization

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
28
0
3

Year Published

2005
2005
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
2
28
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…2,4 The significant difference in cancer-specific survival between patients with tumors and without 9p losses suggests that a tumor suppressor gene on 9p may be involved in tumor progression. [15][16][17][18] Loss of chromosome 9p was found in 12-36% of clear cell renal cell carcinomas by microsatellite analyses and comparative genomic hybridization. 19 demonstrated an association between loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 9p (24% of cases), using highly polymorphic microsatellite markers, and survival of patient for short duration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2,4 The significant difference in cancer-specific survival between patients with tumors and without 9p losses suggests that a tumor suppressor gene on 9p may be involved in tumor progression. [15][16][17][18] Loss of chromosome 9p was found in 12-36% of clear cell renal cell carcinomas by microsatellite analyses and comparative genomic hybridization. 19 demonstrated an association between loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 9p (24% of cases), using highly polymorphic microsatellite markers, and survival of patient for short duration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Junker et al (51) analyzed five cases of multifocal papillary renal tumors by comparative genomic hybridization and found at least one identical alteration in four of the five cases; however, this technique can only detect DNA copy number aberrations that span 2 to 10 Mb or more and, thus, is not ideal for clonality analysis. These results are also not surprising given the well-characterized and specific chromosomal copy number increases commonly seen in most cases of papillary renal cell carcinoma.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Associations with outcome were evaluated for patients with clear cell RCC only given the documented differences in outcome and associations with outcome by RCC histological subtype. [9][10][11] …”
Section: Patient Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8 In addition, previous studies have clustered chromophobe, papillary, and clear cell RCC subtypes into a single pathologic entity during analysis, despite the known histologic, genetic, and prognostic differences of these RCC subtypes. [9][10][11] Combined analysis of localized and metastatic RCC patients has further confounded the interpretation of prior studies analyzing the utility of preoperative laboratory values as indicators of prognosis. 8 Hence, to address these limitations, we examined a large cohort of patients with clinically confined (pNx/pN0, pM0), clear cell RCC and long-term follow-up to assess whether preoperative laboratory values might serve as independent prognosticators of outcome for patients with RCC.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%