Reliability Evaluation of Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH) and G-Banding on Bone Marrow and Peripheral Blood Cells in Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Patients

Document Type : Short Communication


1 Department of Cellular and Molecular Biology, Islamic Azad University, Ahar Branch, East Azerbaijan, Iran;Dr. Rahmani Medical Genetic Lab, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan, Iran

2 Department of Hematology and Oncology Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan, Iran;4Emam Reza Hospital, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan, Iran


Chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) is a myeloproliferative disease. The cytogenetic hallmark of CML is Philadelphia (Ph) chromosome. This study aimed to diagnose suspected CML patients, to monitor CML patients under therapy using cytogenetic and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) techniques to analyze their bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB) samples, and finally to compare their obtained results for both specimens. This study was conducted during one-year period (2012-2013). The participants were recruited from the Hematology and Oncology Clinic of Shahid Gazi (Emam Reza) Hospital of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan Province, Iran. We analyzed 90 samples from 60 suspected CML patients (30 BM and 60 PB samples). All samples were analyzed using G-banding, 5 samples using dual fusion FISH (DF-FISH) probes, as well as 30 samples using both FISH and G-banding. Among the 90 analyzed samples of 60 patients, 25 (41.66%) were Ph+ using karyotyping, whereas five cases were not analyzable, so FISH was applied and the results confirmed that only two individuals were BCR-ABL+. In the comparison between 25 BM and 25 PB samples using karyotyping, 15 (60%) and 10 (40%) were ph+, respectively. The comparison of FISH and karyotyping on 30 samples showed that 9 (30%) and 8 (26.66%) were Ph+, respectively, and only 18.18% of Ph+ patients showed atypical patterns. In the comparison between BM-cytogenetic and PB- interphase-FISH (I-FISH), BM-cytogenetic was more reliable than PB-I-FISH in detecting Ph. Our data demonstrate that FISH analysis is a rapid, reliable and sensitive technique. The comparison between BM and PB showed that PB can not be replaced by BM, even in detecting by FISH.