Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 366

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative genomic hybridization using oligonucleotide microarrays and total genomic DNA

Open access
Barrett, Michael T., Scheffer, Alicia, Ben-Dor, Amir, Sampas, Nick, Lipson, Doron, Kincaid, Robert, Tsang, Peter, Curry, Bo, Baird, Kristin, Meltzer, Paul S., Yakhini, Zohar, Bruhn, Laurakay, Laderman, Stephen·2004·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Array-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) measures copy-number variations at multiple loci simultaneously, providing an important tool for studying cancer and developmental disorders and for developing diagnostic and therapeutic targets. Arrays for CGH based on PCR products representing assemblies of BAC or cDNA clones typically require maintenance, propagation, replication, and verification of large clone sets. Furthermore, it is difficult to control the specificity of the hybridization to the complex sequences that are present in each feature of such arrays. To develop a more robust and flexible platform, we created probe-design methods and assay protocols that make oligonucleotide microarrays synthesized in situ by inkjet technology compatible with array-based comparative genomic hybridization applications employing samples of total genomic DNA. Hybridization of a series of cell lines with variable numbers of X chromosomes to arrays designed for CGH measurements gave median ratios for X-chromosome probes within 6% of the theoretical values (0.5 for XY/XX, 1.0 for XX/XX, 1.4 for XXX/XX, 2.1 for XXXX/XX, and 2.6 for XXXXX/XX). Furthermore, these arrays detected and mapped regions of single-copy losses, homozygous deletions, and amplicons of various sizes in different model systems, including diploid cells with a chromosomal breakpoint that has been mapped and sequenced to a precise nucleotide and tumor cell lines with highly variable regions of gains and losses. Our results demonstrate that oligonucleotide arrays designed for CGH provide a robust and precise platform for detecting chromosomal alterations throughout a genome with high sensitivity even when using full-complexity genomic samples.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0407979101

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 366

Metadata

Authors
Barrett, M. T., Scheffer, A., Ben-Dor, A., Sampas, N., Lipson, D., Kincaid, R., Tsang, P., Curry, B., Baird, K., Meltzer, P. S., Yakhini, Z., Bruhn, L., & Laderman, S.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2004-12-10
Volume
101
Issue
51
Pages
17765-17770
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2143500395
Cited by
366
References
1
FWCI
21.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparative genomic hybridization using oligonucleotide microarrays and total genomic DNA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0407979101
The paper
Barrett, M. T., Scheffer, A., Ben-Dor, A., Sampas, N., Lipson, D., Kincaid, R., Tsang, P., Curry, B., Baird, K., Meltzer, P. S., Yakhini, Z., Bruhn, L., & Laderman, S. (2004). Comparative genomic hybridization using oligonucleotide microarrays and total genomic DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0407979101

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.