throbber
@ © 1996 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/naturegenetics
`
`article
`
`Detection of heterozygous
`mutations in BECAf using high
`density oligonucleotide arrays and
`two—colour fluorescence analysis
`
`Joseph G. Hacial, Lawrence C. Brodyl, Mark S. Cheez, Stephen P. A. Fodor2 8:
`Francis S. Collins1
`
`The ability to scan a large gene rapidly and accurately for all possible heterozygous
`mutations in large numbers of patient samples will be critical for the future of medicine.
`We have designed high-density arrays consisting of over 96,600 oligonucleotides 20-
`nucleotides (nt) in length to screen for a wide range of heterozygous mutations in the
`3.45-kilobases (kb) exon 11 of the hereditary breast and ovarian cancer gene BRCA1.
`Reference and test samples were co-hybridized to these arrays and differences in
`hybridization patterns quantitated by two-colour analysis. Fourteen of fifteen patient
`samples with known mutations were accurately diagnosed, and no false positive
`mutations were identified in 20 control samples. Eight single nucleotide polymorphisms
`were also readily detected. DNA chip—based assays may provide a valuable new
`technology for high-throughput cost-efficient detection of genetic alterations.
`
`(ASO) hybridization} which detect only a finite set of
`While some genetic conditions such as sickle cell dis-
`ease, achondroplasia, or the triplet repeat disorders are previously described mutations.
`A variety of protocols have been used to screen for all
`mutationally monomorphic, extensive heterogeneity of
`mutations amongst affected individuals is the more
`usual observation. This allelic heterogeneity pre—
`sents a considerable challenge to the development
`of high-throughput cost-effective analytical meth—
`ods for mutation detection. All possible mutations
`must be detectable, and in diploid organisms a
`mutation in an autosomal gene must routinely be
`identifiable in the context of wild—type sequence
`from the other allele.
`
`+A,+C,+G, or +T
`5'$ 3'
`
`A case in point is the familial early onset breast
`cancer gene, BRCAI. Germline mutations in
`BRCAI are present in 50—60% of kindreds with
`breast and ovarian cancer, and may account for
`approximately 26% of all breast cancer cases in
`the general population”. Heterozygotes are
`markedly predisposed to early onset breast and
`ovarian cancer, and are also at moderately increased
`risk of developing colon and prostate cancers. The
`protein coding region of BRCA1 contains 5,592
`basepairs (bp) in 22 coding exons spread over 100
`kb of genomic DNA". Over 111 unique BRCAI
`mutations distributed throughout the gene have
`been described7x8. Most of these are frameshift,
`nonsense, or splice mutations resulting in a dis—
`ruption of the normal reading frame Except for
`the Ashkenazi Jewish population, where two muta»
`tions account for the majority of BRCA1 alter-
`ationsg‘”, allelic heterogeneity confounds the
`ability to identify BRCAI mutation carriers by
`methods (such as allele—specific oligonucleotide
`
`‘National Center
`for Human Genome
`Research, Building
`49/3/11 4, National
`Institutes ofHealth.
`Bethesda,
`Maryland 20892,
`USA
`
`ZAffymetrix, 3380
`Central Expressway
`Santa Clam,
`California 95051,
`USA
`
`Correspondence
`should be addressed
`to F. S. C.
`
`nature genetics volume 14 december 1996
`
`
`
`A1, A2, A3, A4, or A5
`
`5' _—I_3'
`
`Fig. 1 Classes of probe array oligonucleotides. Each
`position is interrogated with a total of 28 separate
`oligonucleotides, 14 (two wild type, three base sub-
`stitution, four insertion and five deletion) each for the
`sense and antisense strands. All probes are 20 nt in
`length. a, Sequencing probes contain each of the four
`nucleotide substitutions, nine bases from the 3' end
`of the oligonucleotide (one of these will represent the
`wild-type sequence). b, insertion probes contain each
`of the four possible single nucleotide insertions, nine
`bases from the 3‘ end of the oligonucleotide. c, Dele-
`tion probes have 1-5 nt deleted, nine bases from the
`3‘—end of the oligonucleotide. d, Sequencing and insertion probes are
`tiled adjacent to one another in the upper portion of the array. e, Deletion
`probes along with the corresponding wild-type probe are tiled in the
`lower portion of the array.
`
`441
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 1
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 1
`
`

`

`© 1996 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/naturegenetics
`
`article
`
`
`
`
`
`--
`
`d‘r-— '
`
`I
`
`11-";-
`
`.-
`
`'3'“‘35:...wzz—523 :‘Trw'
`
`fifi‘u If'I’ .F'vl-I-:'
`_
`1-.-
`
`f- "- no. ”-
`him:... 4:2:IL’T. .r..r3F""‘
`
`.
`- 1‘.-
`..
`'-"— ..-;---I -
`
`
`’1'.
`h
`
`
`
`I...“9.1 ,1 is! I".r -- ;'”-r unv-.‘—
`’3
`m
`"-1-. .I.
`
`
`
`
`1.517%
`
`99173:
`
`fig. 2 Chip image comparisons. a, Hybridization pattern of fluo-
`rescein reference target to an 1.28 x 1.28 cm array of 48,300
`oligonucleotides (50 micron feature size) false coloured in green. b,
`Hybridization pattern of phycoerythrin stained biotinylated RUL47
`target false coloured in red. c, Composite image of the false
`coloured green and red images with areas of identical signal given
`in yellow. d, Magnification of the region surmunding the 2457 C—>T
`mutation found in the upper left hand quadrant of (c). e, Close—up
`of the probe sets surrounding the 2457 C~>T mutation. The con—
`trast and threshold values have been set differently relative to (d) to
`increase clarity. BRCAl cDNA nucleotide positions and identéty of
`probes are labelled. The intervening columns represent different
`insertion probes at these positions as shown in Fig. 1d. The normal
`sequence is T at 2456. C at 2457, and A at 2458. (Details for the
`method of chip synthesis using light-directed oligonucleotide syrr
`thesis can be found in refs 2122). Briefly. DNA phosphoramidites
`bearing S'Aphotolabile protecting groups are coupled to a solid
`silica substrate utilizing modified DNA synthesis protocols. Spa—
`tially addressable synthesis of oligonucleotide species is obtained through photolithographic techniques where selected oligonu~
`cleotides are photodeprotected on the chip surface for each coupling cycle. Combinatorial synthesis strategies may yield up to 2”
`differeat oligonucleotide species in n synthesis cycles allowing the described array to be manufactured in 80 such cycles. In the pre-
`sent scheme, 30 identical high density array chips were simultaneously produced in a single 3 h synthesis.
`
`
`
`possible BRCAI germline mutations, virtually all of
`which begin with amplification of individual exons by
`DNA PCR or of the transcript by RT-PCR. These
`include the single-strand conformation polymorphism
`assay (SSCP), manual or automated direct DNA
`sequencing, clamped denaturing gel electrophoresis
`
`(CDGE), heteroduplex analysis, and the protein trun—
`cation assay‘HO. All of these require gel electrophoresis,
`seriously complicating the challenge of scale-up,
`automation, and reduction in cost.
`Advances in light-directed combinatorial chemical
`synthesis have made manufacturing of high-density
`
`442
`
`nature genetics volume 14 december 1996
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 2
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 2
`
`

`

`13% © 1996 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/naturegenetics
`article
`
`Fig. 3 Two—colour loss of signal assay for a h
`deletion. Fluorescein-iabelied reference and
`biotinylated targets were co~hybridized to
`the array. To correct for reproducible differ‘
`ences in the hybridization efficiencies of ref-
`erence and test targets. the ratio of
`fiuorescein to phycoerythrin signal at each
`Wald-type posétion was normalized against
`ratios derived from a separate chip co—
`hybridization experiment. Five data point
`moving averages of sense and antisense
`strand—corrected ratios are plotted against
`nucleotide posrtion. a, Sense strand ratios
`from 185—F15 (3875dal4). b, Antisense
`strand ratios from 185—F15 (3875del4) A
`peak at the position of mutation is present
`on both strands.
`
`
`
`IntensityRatio
`
`Q"
`
`
`
`IntensityRatio
`
`
`
`Nucleotide
`
`in the 3.45—kb BRCAI exon 11, which contaires approx-
`oligonucleotide probe arrays on solid surfaces possi—
`imately 60% of the BRCA1 coding region, including 10-
`bleZHZ. Oligonucleotides are generated in sin: on a sil—
`bp of flanking intronic sequence. Families of over 96,600
`icon surface by combining standard DNA synthesis
`oligonucleotides were designed to detect all possible sin-
`protocols with phosphoramidite reagents modified with
`gle base substitutions, single base insertions, and I—S-bp
`photolabile 5'~protecting groups. Spatially addressable
`deletions on both strands. Four 20=nt sequencing
`synthesis is accomplished through selective photodec
`probes, substituted with one of the four nucleotides in
`protection of chip areas, utilizing a photolithographic
`the central position. interrogate the identity of each
`mask set in a process similar in principle to that utilized
`nucleotide (Fig. la,d). Four ZO-nt insertion probes con-
`in computer microchip manufacture. These deprotect‘
`taining the possible single base insertions at the central
`ed areas are activated for chemical coupling. Selective
`position query for the presence and identity of an inser-
`deprotection of multiple areas containing a distinct
`tion (Fig. 111,51). Likewise five 20-nt long deletion probes
`oligonucleotide sequence (such as all those having an
`adenine as the next residue) allows for the simultane-
`query for the presence and identity of all possible l—S-
`bp deletions (Fig. lc,e). All probes were selected to be
`ous stepwise synthesis of numerous different oligonu—
`ZO-nt long as this length gave the optimal signal inten—
`cleotide species. In one manufacturing protocol, there
`sity and specificity under the tested experimental con—
`are four reactions performed for each coupling step cor-
`ditions
`(data
`not
`shown). Allele—specific
`responding to the separate photodeprotection and cou-
`oligonucleotides complementary to other described
`pling to those oligonucleotides in areas needing
`mutations not included in the above classes may be eas—
`incorporation of an A, C, G or T residue. The remainder
`ily incorporated.
`of each synthesis cycle, including oxidation and cap-
`
`a
`ping steps, are performed simultaneously for
`all oligonucleotides in the array. Multiple
`arrays consisting of many thousands distinct
`oligonucleotides can be reproducibly man—
`ufactured in several hours’ time. They can
`be designed to provide sequence informa—
`tion of any known gene. By analysing the
`hybridization pattern of fluorescent —labelled
`nucleic acid target to such arrays, sensitive
`
`high-throughput assays have been developed
`to screen for mutations in the cystic fibrosis
`(CFTR) gene”, the HIV—1 reverse transcrip-
`tase and protease gene524‘25, the fi—globin
`gene”, and the mitochondrial genome".
`None of these prior applications, however,
`have tested the ability of the method to
`detect all possible heterozygous mutations
`in a large gene at high sensitivity and speci-
`ficity.
`
`
`
`Design of oligonucieotide array
`We examined the ability ofa DNA-chip
`based assay to detect heterozygous mutations
`
`Fig. 4 Twocolour loss of signal assay for a nonsense mutation. a, Sense strand
`ratios from RUL47 (2457 C—aT). b, Antisense strand ratios from RUL47 (2457
`0—91). The heterozygous nonsense mutation and five homozygous polymor—
`phisms appear as distinct peaks on both strands.
`
`nature genetics volume 14 december 1996
`
`443
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 3
`
`Nucleotide
`
`
`
`intensityRatio
`
`
`
`IntensityRatio
`
`
`
`
`
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 3
`
`

`

`@ © 1996 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/naturegenetics
`article
`
`
`
`
`
`_1'abie 1 Sensitivity of mutation-detection in patient samples with germline mutations in
` BRCA1 exon 1 1
`
`Mutation
`Loss of Signalb
`Gain of Signal3
`Sample
`Mutation
`identificationC
`Coding Noncoding
`Coding Noncoding
`No
`——
`—
`-
`—
`ST750
`1128insA
`Yes
`+
`+
`na
`na
`624~F32
`1294de|40
`Yes
`+
`—
`—
`+
`3295
`1323delG
`Yes
`+
`+
`-
`—
`ST755
`2294delG
`Yes
`+
`+
`+
`+
`RUL57
`2314d615
`Yes
`+
`+
`+
`+
`RUL47
`2457C—>T
`Yes
`+
`+
`+
`+
`M00 52
`2804delAA
`Yes
`—-
`+
`+
`+
`ENGQ
`31 21 delA
`Yes
`+
`+
`+
`+
`ENG?
`3286ClelG
`Yes
`+
`+
`—
`—
`ENGS
`3452del4
`Yes
`+
`+
`—
`-
`3265
`3600del1 1
`Yes
`+
`+
`+
`+
`808—F1 61
`3867G—>T
`Yes
`+
`+
`—
`—
`185—F1 5
`3875del4
`Yes
`+
`+
`+
`+
`RUL77
`3937insG
`
`
`
`
`+ + + +ENG33986delAA Yes
`
`
`a"+’indicatt=,-s that the mutant probe has an intensity 1.2x or greater than the corresponding wild-type
`probe. ‘—’ indicates that the mutant probe has an intensity less than a factor of 1.2x to the corre-
`sponding wild-type probe; na indicates data not available. b‘+’ indicates a distinct peak at the mutant
`position. ‘—’ indicates the absence of a distinct peak at the mutant position. cmutation detection algo—
`rithm defined in text and Fig. 5,
`
`based targets as they showed superior hybridization
`fidelity and signal strength in this system (data not
`shown).
`
`Gain of signal analysis
`Mutant substitution, insertion, and deletion probes
`should detect sequence changes through a gain of
`hybridization signal in the test target, as the wild-type
`target generally should not hybridize strongly to them.
`We used this analysis to detect heterozygous base sub—
`stitutions (Fig. 2). The hybridization pattern of the ref-
`erence is shown in green (Fig. 2a) while the
`hybridization pattern of sample RUL47 containing a
`2457 C—>T nonsense mutation is shown in red (Fig. 2b).
`These images were superimposed with the areas of iden—
`tical signal given in yellow (Fig. 2c—e). Only the wild,
`type allele 2457 ‘C’ probe hybridized with the reference
`target. In contrast, the heterozygous mutant target
`
`Test Sample
`
`This chip design provides redundant information
`which contributes to sensitivity and specificity. Ideally,
`a heterozygous mutation in a patient sample should
`result in (i) a ‘gain of signal’ increase in hybridization
`to an oligonucleotide representing a perfect match to
`the mutant sequence, provided it is represented on the
`chip and (ii) a 50% ‘loss of signal’ intensity (relative to
`a normal control) for the family of wild-type oligonu~
`clcotide probes that query the position of the mutation.
`Under ideal circumstances, a true positive should appear
`on both stands. Due to the complexity of the hybridiza—
`tion reaction, specific mutations may only fulfill a sub-
`set of these ideal criteria. One of our goals was to define
`an algorithm which maximizes sensitivity and speci—
`ficity in the analysis of this intentionally redundant data.
`
`Advantages of a two-colour analysis system
`Two—colour assays have been used to great advantage in
`comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) as a means
`of measuring two-fold or greater differences in copy
`number between samples such as occur with chromo—
`somal deletions, duplications, and amplifications”. This
`approach is based upon measuring the relative ratios of
`fluorescence from reference and test targets, labelled
`with different fluorophores and bound to normal chroe
`mosomal spreads after a competitive hybridization step.
`Based on the success of this approach, we investigated
`the use of two-colour assay systems to provide an ana-
`lytical means of detecting heterozygous sequence dif-
`ferences between samples at the nucleotide level. This
`allows a locus on the differences between a wild—type
`reference standard and the unknown patient sample,
`rather than requiring de navo determination of the
`sequence with each patient sample. In this approach,
`wild-type fluorescein-labelled (‘green’) reference and
`biotinylated (stained with a phycoerythrin—streptavidin
`‘rcd’ conjugate after hybridization) in vitro transcribed
`RNA test targets were competitively co~hybridized to
`the array with the relative binding to all probes mea-
`sured”. The ratio of reference and test targets occu~
`pancy to each ofthe 96,600 oligonucleotides in the array
`was used to detect sequence differences between the two
`samples. RNA-based targets were used in favor of DNA
`
`
`
`Both Strands One Strand
`
`Not Present
`
`Mutation
`Detected
`
`Undetermined Mutation
`2/1 5
`Not Detected
`
`12/15
`
`1
`
`1/15
`
` Loss of Signal Loss of Signal Loss of Signal
`
`
`of Signal
`G
`Either Strand
`
`Mutation
`Detected
`2/15
`_ _
`‘
`Fig. 5 Data analysis algorithm flowchart. The number of analysed
`patient sampr containing exon 11 mutations which fulfill the indi—
`cated criteria of Ioss-of—signal or gain—of—signal assays is given.
`Fourteen of fifteen patient samples fulfill the requirements of muta-
`tion detection given in the text,
`
`444
`
`nature genetics volume 14 december 1996
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 4
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 4
`
`

`

`@ © 1996 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/naturegenetics
`article
`
`hybridized to both the wild—type allele 2457 ‘C’ probe
`as well as the mutant allele 2457 ‘T’ probe, resulting in
`a red signal at the position of the mutation.
`
`Loss of signal analysis
`Two—colour loss of signal assays are a second analytical
`means of detecting sequence differences between sam-
`ples. Localized changes in hybridization signal ratios
`may reflect different stoichiometries of wild-type alleles
`in the hybridization solution, axed thus potential het—
`erozygous sequence differences between the two samv
`pies. A corrected ratio (see Fig. 3 legend) of reference
`sample and test sample binding to wild-type sequencing
`probes for each strand can be plotted against nucleotide
`position. Regions of identical sequence should be close
`to a value of 1.0, while regions with sequence differ-
`ences should show a peak centered near the point of
`mutation. For a point mutation, this Width should be
`about 20 bp wide; for a deletion of 11 bp it is expected
`to be approximately (n+20)-bp in width. This ‘width
`propertfv’ of true peaks helps to distinguish them from
`noise (Fig. 3a,b). Ideal heterozygous mutations should
`produce peaks with a value of about 2.0, reflecting the
`two wild-type alleles in the reference compared to the
`single wild-type allele in the mutant heterozygote sam—
`ple. Any cross—hybridization of the mutant allele to the
`wild-type probe will reduce this ratio closer to 1.0. In
`practice, a cut-off of 1.2 was found to represent a good
`threshold.
`
`Relative to the heterozygous state, homozygous
`sequence differences will produce larger peaks due to
`the absence of signal from a wild—type allele. In these
`cases the theoretical peak height is infinite although in
`practice cross-hybridization usually reduces these sig-
`nals to be within a value of 10. For example, six sepa~
`rate peaks were observed for each strand of sample
`RUL47 (Fig. 4a,b). One of these (the smallest) detects
`the heterozygous 2457 C—aT nonsense mutation. The
`other five strong peaks correspond to five polymor-
`phisms 2201 T/T, 2430 C/C, 2731 T/T, 3232 G/G, and
`3667 G/G found in sample RUL47 in the homozygous
`state. These variants have been described and are in
`
`strong disequilibrium with each otherléiz‘). Polymor—
`phic signals will not be observed when the test sample
`has the same genotype as the reference.
`
`Application to multiple BRCA1 mutations
`A summary of the results of two-colour gain and loss
`of signal analysis experiments for 15 known exon 11
`BRCAI mutations is given in Table 1, representing all
`of the genomic DNA samples available to us which con-
`tain known alterations in this exon. In addition, twen-
`ty control samples from individuals without a known
`family history of breast cancer were evaluated to ascer-
`tain the specificity of the assay. Seven reported poly—
`morphisms were detected along with a previously
`unreported heterozygous base substitution 1606 G-aA
`(Arg496His) found in sample RUL57, which was con-
`firmed by dideoxysequencing. Seven of the pathologic
`mutations (2314de15, 2457C—>T, 2804delAA, 3286delG,
`3867G—>T 3937insG, and 3986delAA) were detected in
`completely optimal fashion with clear gain of signal and
`loss of signal results on each strand. For the other muta
`tions, the sensitivity of any particular assay on one or
`both strands was imperfect. For example, while the
`
`3875del4 mutation was readily detected with the loss of
`signal assay (Fig. 3a,b), the gain of signal assay failed to
`give a distinct signal, presumably because of strong
`wild-type target cross»hybridization at this location.
`Gain of signal assays based upon insertion and deletion
`probes were also capable of generating a significant
`number of false positive signals using this criteria (data
`not shown), whereas the loss of signal assay was much
`more robust.
`
`Discussion
`
`Our observations suggest the following procedure for
`interpreting chip hybridization data (Fig. 5). First exam-
`ine the loss of signal data. If a peak of width >20 bp is
`found in the same position on both strands, a sequence
`alteration is almost certainly present. We encountered
`no false positives of this sort in examining 3.45 kb of
`BRCA1 exon 11 sequence in 15 patients and 20 control
`samples (a total onlZO kb of BRCA1 sequence).
`Twelve of the 15 patient mutations in Table 1 were
`immediately detectable by this strategy, and the pre-
`cise mutation could then be identified in seven of them
`
`by examining the gain of signal data. In ambiguous
`cases where there is a loss of signal on one strand but
`not the other, the gain of signal data can still lead to
`accurate mutation detection. Two samples show loss
`of signal (of 220 bp) on one strand but not the other.
`In one of these (ENG9, 3121delA) there is a specific
`gain of signal for the appropriate oligonucleotide on
`both strands, whereas the other (3295, 1323delG)
`reveals this gain ofsignal above threshold on one
`strand only. In 20 control samples, a specific loss of
`signal on one strand was never accompanied by a con—
`firmatory gain of signal on either strand. As this cri-
`terion does not appear to result in false positives, we
`scored both ENG9 and 3295 as having been correctly
`identified as mutation-bearing. Only one of the fifteen
`samples (ST750, 1128insA), which showed neither a
`specific gain or loss of signal on either strand, would
`be scored as a false negative in the current assay. That
`mutation results from the expansion of a poly (dA) -
`(dT) tract from 7—8 nts in length, and would be pre—
`dicted to be particularly difficult to detect. Interest-
`ingly, two other samples that putatively contained the
`mutations 2086insG and 2035 T—aA did not generate
`specific loss or gain of signal on either strand. Dideoxy—
`sequencing analysis confirmed that these samples were
`of wild~type sequence in this region. Thus with the
`current algorithm the sensitivity of the method is 93%
`and the specificity is 100%.
`There are a number of possible mechanisms for false
`negative and false positive mutation detection results.
`Because the RNA targets are fragmented to an average
`length of 50~100 nt in order to minimize secondary
`structure formation prior to hybridization, the differ—
`ing lengths of RNA species between reference and test
`targets may affect the result. Sequence changes that
`enhance or decrease hybridization due to intramolec~
`ular or intermolecular target structure may also con-
`found analysis. Certain 20—mer probes may adopt
`secondary structures that could inhibit
`target
`hybridization. Short repetitive sequences (as is the
`1128insA case) and duplications will pose a serious
`challenge to any hybridization based assay. In these
`cases, there is an increased potential for cross-
`
`nature genetics volume 14 december 1996
`
`445
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 5
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 5
`
`

`

`article
`
`@5 © 1996 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/naturegenetics
`
`hybridization due in part to probe slippage that
`induces the formation of stable partial duplexes. Iden—
`tification of mutations within 20 bp of polymorphisms
`may prove challenging as the loss of signal from poly-
`morphic sequence changes may partially obscure the
`loss of signal due to mutations. Modifying the array to
`contain additional wild-type probes based on common
`polymorphic sequences would optimize mutation
`detection by eliminating interference from these poly—
`morphisms.
`A two—tiered strategy for mutation detection by DNA
`chips is suggested by our results. The first level would
`consist of an array containing only wild—type probes
`for both strands. Hybridization of reference and patient
`target to such an array and analysis for loss of signal
`peaks on one or both strands should reveal candidate
`regions where sequence changes may be present.
`Including redundant alternative probe lengths (such
`as 17, 20 and 25 nts) on the chip should further assist
`in both sensitivity and specificity not only by repro—
`ducing the peak signal but also by causing predictable
`changes in peak signal widths. Data from longer probes
`would be expected to generate broader peak signals
`while data from shorter probes are expected to gener-
`ate sharper peak signals. Gain-of-signal probes for
`common polymorphisms would also be included on
`the first tier chip. If a loss of signal peak is centered at
`a known polymorphic site, it can be checked for gain of
`signal at those polymorphism probes. For those sam-
`ples where loss—of-signal peaks remain unexplained,
`both strands of the sample could be analysed on a sec-
`ond tier chip containing a more complex array of base
`substitution, deletion, and insertion gain of signal
`probes. Information from gain—of—signal assays can be
`used to confirm the loss—of-signal assay and in many
`cases will precisely identify the exact nucleotides mutat—
`ed. This two»level approach provides a way of econo—
`mizing the probe content on a single chip. One could
`imagine screening for mutations in several candidate
`genes at once with the less complex screening chip, and
`only a fraction of samples would need to be analysed
`by the more complex gain of signal mutation detection
`chip. All identified nonpolymorphic sequence changes
`should be verified by directed dideoxysequencing
`analysis of the indicated region. As with any mutation
`analysis method, determination of the phenotypic con-
`sequences of a missense alteration not found in nor—
`mal chromosomes can prove vexing. Development of
`a functional assay for BRCAI to distinguish benign
`variants from pathological missense alterations will be
`an important step”.
`We have demonstrated the feasibility of using
`oligonucleotide arrays in screening for a variety of
`nucleotide changes in the heterozygous state for
`BRCAI. These assays may provide a sensitive screen for
`detecting a multitude of different mutations. Oligonu—
`cleotide arrays for other applications such as analysing
`specific CFTR gene mutations or the HIV reverse tran—
`scriptase and protease genes have been customized by
`modifying probe positioning and length to enhance the
`fidelity of the assay23'25. Such modifications can be
`readily applied to this system also. The use of DNA
`chips for mutation detection should be extensible to
`virtually any gene by synthesis of the appropriate chip.
`Advances in chip manufacturing and signal detection
`
`have made analysis of hybridization patterns to arrays
`consisting ofgreater than 250,000 oligonucleotide
`probes possible (data not shown). This will facilitate
`screening of the entire BRCAI coding region includ-
`ing splice site junctions using multiplexed amplifica—
`tion of target exons and the array design strategies
`proposed above. As the photolithographic mask set
`used in chip manufacture is the major expense (cur—
`rently costing a few thousand dollars) and is reusable,
`there are major economics of scale associated with high
`volume of testing. This technology therefore especial—
`ly lends itself towards making large scale genetic stud-
`ies economically feasible. Given the attractive features
`of high—throughput, automation, and modest cost, the
`DNA chip approach has the potential to become a valu—
`able method in future applications of mutation detec—
`tion to medicine.
`
`Methods
`PCR from genomic DNA and RNA target preparation. PCR
`reactions were performed on genomic samples using the
`EXPANDTM Long Range PCR Kit (Boehringer) with intronic
`primers 11FT3 S‘~ATTAACCCTCACTAAAGGGAATTAAAT~
`GAAAGAGTATGAGC-3' and 11RT7 S'MTAATACGACTCAC»
`TATAGGGAGTGCTCCCAAAAGCATAAA~3' containing T3
`and T7 RNA polymerase promoter sequences respectively. In
`vitro transcription reactions from these exon 11 amplicon tem-
`plates were performed in 10 pl reaction volumes using T3 RNA
`polymerase transcription buffer (Promega), 0.7 mM of ATP,
`CTP, GTP, and UTP, 10 mM DTT, 0.7 mM fluorescein—lZ-UTP
`or 0.15 mM biotin-itS-UTP (Boehringer Mannheim) for refer—
`ence and test samples respectively, and lOU T3 or T7 RNA poly-
`merase as indicated.
`
`Target Preparation and Analysis. Reference template was gen—
`erated from PCR amplification product of exon 11 from a
`BRCAI cDNA clone modified to contain I7l—nt and 70-nt of
`exon 11 upstream and downstream intronic splice site
`sequences respectively. Reference and test sample transcription
`products were diluted to a final concentration of 100 nM in a 25
`til solution of 30 mM MgC12. The reaction was incubated at 94
`“C for 70 min to fragment targetsl‘H5. Co-fragmented targets
`were diluted 1/100 into a 300 pl volume of hybridization buffer
`(3 M TMACC] (tetramethylammonium chloride), leE pH
`7.4, 0.001% Triton X-100, 1 nM S‘-—fluorescein—labelled control
`oligonucleotide 5'—CGGTAGCATCTTGAC—3'). This control
`oligonucleotide is designed to hybridize to specific surface
`probes to aid in image alignment. Target was hybridized with
`the chip in a 250 [.11 volume for 4 h at 35 °C. The chip surface was
`washed with 10 m1 of wash buffer (6X SSPB, 0.001% Triton X»
`100) and stained with phycoerythrin-streptavidjn conjugate
`(Molecular Probes) (2 tig/ml in wash buffer) for 5 min at room
`temperature. The chip was washed with 10 ml of wash buffer
`and scanned for 40 min utilizing a scanning confocal micro-
`scope equipped with a 488 nm argon laser (GeneChip Scanner
`(Affymetrix))“‘25. Fluorescent hybridization signals were
`detected by a photomultiplier tube using 515645 nm bandpass
`and 560 nm longpass emission filters for fluorescein reference
`(green) and biotin test (red) samples respectively23'27.
`
`Data analysis. Photomultiplier output signal was converted into
`proportional spatially addressed pixel values using GeneChip
`Software (Aifymetrix) to create a digitized fluorescence image.
`The relative contributions of the reference and test targets to
`each probe signal were extracted from each set of experimental
`green reference and red test
`images using AVl Software
`(Affymetrix) and imported into a Microsoft Excel 7.0a work‘
`sheet. The ratio of reference and test signals for each wild—type
`probe was quantitated and compared to the same ratios mea-
`sured from an identical experiment performed on a different
`
`446
`
`nature genetics volume 14 december 1996
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 6
`
`GeneDX 1007, pg. 6
`
`

`

`-@2 © 1996 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/naturegenetics
`
`article
`
`test sample. The ratios of the referenceltest ratios derived from
`the two separate expesiments were plotted against nucleotide
`position to generate loss of signal data (as in Figs 3,4). it is nec-
`essary to compare reference/test wild—type probe signal ratios
`from separate experiments to generate a stable baseline as the
`baseline generated by plotting reference/test wild—type probe
`signal ratios generated from a single chip against nucleotide
`position was not sufficiently stable to permit data analysis.
`
`Dideoxysequencing analysis. Four pairs of PCR primers
`(PI Ml 3+ 5'~GTTTCCCAGTCACACGGAATTAAATGAAAG
`AGTATGAGC—3’ and P1Mi3- 5'—AGGAAACAGCTATGAC—
`CATGTGAGGGGACGCTCTTG—S', P2M13+ 5'~G'I'I‘TCCCA
`GTCACACGTTGGGAAAACCTATCGGAA» 3‘ and P2Ml3-
`5'—AGGAAACAGCTATGACCATCTTTGGGGTCTTCA
`GCA—S‘, P3M13+ 5'—GTTTCCCAGTCACACGTGTTCAAA
`TACCAGTGAACTTA-3' and P3Ml3— S'—AGGAAACAGC-
`TATGACCATGGAGCCCACTTCATTAGTAC—3‘ and MM 13+
`5"GTTTCCCAGTCACACGCCAAGTACAGTGAGCACAAT-
`TA—3' and P4M13— 5'—AGGAAACAGCTATGACCATGTGC
`TCCCAAAAGCATAAA-3') were designed to generate four
`partially overlapping amplicons which cover
`the entire
`
`."
`
`shoes-in
`
`familial breast cancer to
`1. Hall, J. et 3/. Linkage of early—onset
`chromosome 17q21. Science ”0. 1684-1689 (1990).
`Narod, S. et at. Familial breast-ovarian cancer locus on chromosome
`17q12~q23. Lancet 338. 82—83 (1891).
`Easton. D.F. et al. Genetic analysis In familial breast and ovarian cancer.
`Results from 214 families. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 52, 673-701 (1993).
`Rowell, 5., Newman, 8., Boyd, J. & King, M.C. Inherited predisposition
`to breast and ovarian cancer. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 55. 861—865 (1994).
`Ford, D. and the Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Risks of cancer in
`BRCAI-mutation carriers. Lancet 343. 692—695 (1994).
`Miki, Y. et al. A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer
`susceptibility gene BRCA 1. Science 266. 66—71 (1994).
`Shattuck-Eidens, D. et al. A collaborative survey of 80 mutations in the
`BRCA1 breast and ovarian cancer susceptébility gene. implications for
`presymptomatic testing and screening. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 273,
`535-541 (1995).
`8. A comprehensive listing of BRCA1 mutations and mutation screening
`protocols can be found in the Breast Cancer Information Core
`Database
`located
`on
`the
`World Wide Web
`at
`http://ww

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket