Search

Background: While array-comparative genomic hybridization (a-CGH) and next-generation sequencing (NGS or exome) technologies have swiftly spread throughout the medical field, karyotype has gradually lost its leading role among genetic tests. Several international guidelines recommend starting with a-CGH screening then going on with exome analysis when investigating a patient with intellectual disability (ID) and no precise clinical diagnosis. A-CGH and whole exome sequencing increase etiologic diagnoses rate up to 30% in case of ID. However, physicians have to deal with the lack of qualitative information of the genome. Especially, exome and a-CGH analysis fail to detect chromosomal rearrangements because breakpoints are either located in introns or not associated with a gain or loss of genetic material. If these technologies cannot easily identify chromosomal translocations or inversions which sometimes split a gene, karyotype can., Discussion: For the 5 cases described, karyotype provided the right diagnosis for a Mendelian disease while molecular analysis remained unsuccessful. We conclude that when a Mendelian disease is strongly suggested clinically, if molecular analysis is normal, it could be very useful to carry out a karyotype in order to demonstrate a chromosomal rearrangement involving the targeted gene. If this gene is disrupted, the physician can confirm the suspected disease and give appropriate genetic counseling., Summary: This article aims at keeping in mind that karyotype, this old-fashioned genetic tool, can still remain powerful and useful within some genetic issues. Even in this modern period of whole exome sequencing, young geneticists should know that karyotype remains a powerful and cheap technology, available throughout the world and can still do a lot for families., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangements occur in 1% to 7% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Crizotinib, an ALK inhibitor, has been demonstrated to provide dramatic clinical benefits in ALK-positive advanced-stage NSCLC. Fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) has been established in clinical trials as the standard procedure method for detecting ALK rearrangements. Although the detection of ALK by immunohistochemistry (IHC) has been proposed for the screening of patients, large-scale studies are warranted to validate such a hierarchical approach., Methods: In this article, we report the largest series thus far of parallel FISH and IHC ALK testing in 3244 consecutive NSCLC cases analyzed at two independent French centers., Results: FISH-positive and/or IHC-positive results were demonstrated in 150 of 3244 cases (4.6%). An imbalanced sex ratio was detected, with women exhibiting a 2.2-fold relative risk for an alteration. Strikingly, only 80 of 150 specimens were classified as ALK positive by both techniques. The specimens with discordant FISH/IHC analyses were FISH-positive/IHC-negative (36), FISH-negative/IHC-positive (19), or FISH-noncontributive/IHC-positive (15). Thus, a single FISH or IHC analysis performed alone would have failed to detect approximately one-fourth of the ALK-positive cases with similar findings in our two centers., Conclusions: This study highlights the feasibility of systematic NSCLC testing by both FISH and IHC in routine practice. Many preanalytical factors may account for the apparent discrepancies between both methods, suggesting that hierarchical screening may underscore ALK-positive cases. This significant level of discrepancy supports the need of combined testing to optimize the detection of ALK-inhibitor-eligible patients given that some patients with discordant testing were found to respond to crizotinib.

Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is a significant cause of cancer-related mortality in women, and there has been no substantial decrease in the death rates due to EOC in the last three decades. Thus, basic knowledge regarding ovarian tumor cell biology is urgently needed to allow the development of innovative treatments for EOC. Traditionally, EOC has not been considered an immunogenic tumor, but there is evidence of an immune response to EOC in patients. Clinical data demonstrate that an antitumor immune response and immune evasion mechanisms are correlated with a better and lower survival, respectively, providing evidence for the immunoediting hypothesis in EOC. This review focuses on the immune response and immune suppression in EOC. The immunological roles of chemotherapy and surgery in EOC are also described. Finally, we detail pilot data supporting the efficiency of immunotherapy in the treatment of EOC and the emerging concept that immunomodulation aimed at counteracting the immunosuppressive microenvironment must be associated with immunotherapy strategies.