Analytical and clinical performance of chromosomal microarrays compared with FISH panel and conventional karyotyping...

In this single center retrospective analysis on 102 CLL patients, we assessed analytical and clinical performance of CMA against a targeted FISH panel (ATM, TP53, CEP12, D13S319 and LAMP1 loci) and karyotyping. CMA yielded additional information compared to karyotype in 39 cases (38 %). On the other hand, while CMA detected aberrations were also detected by FISH in all 31 cases (30 %), aberrations with low clonal size (<30 %) detected by FISH were missed by CMA. When evaluated with National Cancer Center Network (NCCN) guidelines, the capture rate of prognostic relevant cytogenetic information for FISH only, FISH + Chromosomes and FISH + CMA analyses were 95, 96 and 100 % respectively. With Cancer Cytogenomics Consortium (CGC) Criteria, these figures for FISH only, FISH + Chromosomes and FISH + CMA were 88 %, 92 and 100 % respectively. In conclusion, CMA provides additional analytical information to FISH and karyotyping, but this information has a clinical utility only in a small number of patients. Limit of detection (LOD) issues preclude replacement of FISH by CMA, but CMA may be a viable alternative to karyotyping. Further research is warranted.