The application of an in situ karyotyping technique for mesenchymal stromal cells: a validation and comparison study with classical G-banding.
- Author:
Sang Mee HWANG
1
;
Cha Ja SEE
;
Jungeun CHOI
;
Seon Young KIM
;
Qute CHOI
;
Jung Ah KIM
;
Jiseok KWON
;
Si Nae PARK
;
Kyongok IM
;
Il Hoan OH
;
Dong Soon LEE
Author Information
1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Comparative Study ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't ; Validation Studies
- Keywords:
fluorescence in situ hybridization;
in situ culture;
karyotype;
mesenchymal stromal cells
- MeSH:
Azure Stains;
Chromosome Banding/*methods;
Humans;
In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence/*methods;
Karyotyping/*methods;
Mesenchymal Stromal Cells/*cytology
- From:Experimental & Molecular Medicine
2013;45(12):e68-
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
The cytogenetic analysis of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) is essential for verifying the safety and stability of MSCs. An in situ technique, which uses cells grown on coverslips for karyotyping and minimizes cell manipulation, is the standard protocol for the chromosome analysis of amniotic fluids. Therefore, we applied the in situ karyotyping technique in MSCs and compared the quality of metaphases and karyotyping results with classical G-banding and chromosomal abnormalities with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Human adipose- and umbilical cord-derived MSC cell lines (American Type Culture Collection PCS-500-011, PCS-500-010) were used for evaluation. The quality of metaphases was assessed by analyzing the chromosome numbers in each metaphase, the overlaps of chromosomes and the mean length of chromosome 1. FISH was performed in the interphase nuclei of MSCs for 6q, 7q and 17q abnormalities and for the enumeration of chromosomes via oligo-FISH in adipose-derived MSCs. The number of chromosomes in each metaphase was more variable in classical G-banding. The overlap of chromosomes and the mean length of chromosome 1 as observed via in situ karyotyping were comparable to those of classical G-banding (P=0.218 and 0.674, respectively). Classical G-banding and in situ karyotyping by two personnel showed normal karyotypes for both cell lines in five passages. No numerical or structural chromosomal abnormalities were found by the interphase-FISH. In situ karyotyping showed equivalent karyotype results, and the quality of the metaphases was not inferior to classical G-banding. Thus, in situ karyotyping with minimized cell manipulation and the use of less cells would be useful for karyotyping MSCs.
