ライフサイエンスコーパス: comparative genomic hybridization

1 gnificant regions of genomic loss with array comparative genomic hybridization.

2 x ligation-dependent probe amplification and comparative genomic hybridization.

3 NHS gene, were further analysed using array comparative genomic hybridization.

4 cation was in an area of gain as measured by comparative genomic hybridization.

5 ber variation data obtained from array-based comparative genomic hybridization.

6 S3 cells on human chromosomes 14-18 by array comparative genomic hybridization.

7 es has changed with the application of array comparative genomic hybridization.

8 an 1 kb with high-resolution chromosome-wide comparative genomic hybridization.

9 s determined with the use of oligonucleotide comparative genomic hybridization.

10 d to recurrent rearrangement, by array-based comparative genomic hybridization.

11 essed this question using yeast genetics and comparative genomic hybridization.

12 nt in situ hybridization and BAC-based array comparative genomic hybridization.

13 t to copy number changes identified by array comparative genomic hybridization.

14 ical isolates of serotypes 6A, 6B, and 14 by comparative genomic hybridization.

15 ral, and epidemiological associations, using comparative genomic hybridization.

16 quencing and copy number assessment by array comparative genomic hybridization.

17 frame was identified with genome-wide array comparative genomic hybridization.

18 igated 14 sporadic EOAD trios first by array-comparative genomic hybridization.

19 terations (CNAs) were defined by using array comparative genomic hybridization.

20 copy number variants were detected by array comparative genomic hybridization.

21 re analyzed for rare CNVs>300 kb using array comparative genomic hybridization.

22 siliense were identified through array-based comparative genomic hybridization.

23 to genome-wide copy number analysis by array comparative genomic hybridization.

24 ty and congenital abnormalities, using array comparative genomic hybridization.

25 ed gene-expression profiling and array-based comparative genomic hybridization.

26 We analyzed, by high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization, 316 children with spo

27 As detected by array comparative genomic hybridization, about one-third of ma

28 In this study, array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) (n = 10) detect

29 s obesity syndrome using Agilent 185 k array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and Affymetrix

30 samples and comparison with microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and digital PCR

31 itional molecular techniques including array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and Droplet Dig

32 aberration profiles were studied using array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and expression

33 oidy played a role in this phenomenon, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and metaphase k

34 equencing was complemented with custom array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and RNA sequenc

35 d deletion calls, 82 were subjected to array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and/or breakpoi

36 Of 27 nonsatellited SMCs analyzed by array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and/or fluoresc

37 With increasing resolution of array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) arrays, more an

38 Comparison of gene transcription and array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) between melanom

39 We used a custom oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) covering 20 gen

40 The careful normalization of array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) data is of crit

41 of tumor DNA copy numbers assessed by array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) data.

42 The use of gene-centric high-density array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) has revolutioni

43 years evaluate the diagnostic rate of array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) in the setting

44 We performed array-Comparative Genomic Hybridization (aCGH) on 83 different

45 study, we used a high-resolution array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) platform that t

46 We have designed a custom array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) platform with 3

47 MM, an algorithm for mapping CNVs from array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) platforms compr

48 cence in situ hybridization (FISH) and array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) suffer from low

49 in cancer, we retrospectively applied array-comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to 20 malignant

50 to disease progression, we used array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to compare geno

51 Here, we describe the use of array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to identify cop

52 We used array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to identify rar

53 e or genomic alterations, we performed array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to investigate

54 Here, we use genome-wide array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to profile diff

55 extended the application of cDNA array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to survey gene

56 m probands and 372 control subjects by array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) using a 19K who

57 imately 350 bp) was designed and array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was performed o

58 Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was performed o

59 Oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was performed o

60 Recently, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was used for sS

61 on with allogeneic ones and correlated array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) with gene expre

62 Cytogenetic analysis, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), and exome sequ

63 e analyzed for deletions by using PCR, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), and FISH.

64 ng and vertical integration with array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), as well as exp

65 paired-end DNA sequencing/mapping and array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), do not identif

66 Genomic technologies, such as array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), increasingly o

67 ingle colorectal cancer-derived CTC by array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), mutational pro

68 ubjected to high-resolution microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), of which 24 we

69 rescence in situ hybridization (FISH), array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), or whole-genom

70 this sequence-based CNV call set with array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), quantitative P

71 s gained from wider use of genome-wide array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), specific insig

72 The CNVs can be identified by array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH), the most commo

73 These CNVs were validated by array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH).

74 fish (Danio rerio) T-ALL samples using array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH).

75 lmonary neuroendocrine tumors based on array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH).

76 17q23.1q23.2, identified by microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH).

77 n 106 breast cancers using tiling-path array-comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH).

78 o genome-wide copy number analysis via array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH).

79 Assessment of the TOP1 locus by array comparative genomic hybridization across the NCI-60 show

80 low sorting of tumor cells followed by array comparative genomic hybridization allows for high defini

81 Array comparative genomic hybridization also identified recurr

82 nding sites (ChIP-chip), and high resolution comparative genomic hybridization, among other uses.

83 Comparative genomic hybridization analyses of 41 strains

84 e polymerase chain reaction, immunoblot, and comparative genomic hybridization analyses were performe

85 Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis after laser c

86 ndromic thrombocytopenia have clinical array-comparative genomic hybridization analysis and appropria

87 Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis demonstrated

88 ed several chromosomal aberrations and array comparative genomic hybridization analysis identified nu

89 Comparative genomic hybridization analysis indicated tha

90 Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of one case d

91 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis showed that b

92 Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis was performed

93 To characterize these events, comparative genomic hybridization analysis was performed

94 Comparative genomic hybridization analysis with two PM1-

95 We present rCGH, a comprehensive array-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis workflow, int

96 velopmental disabilities by microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis.

97 nts, in 23 subjects by high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization and breakpoint junctio

98 ly all protein-coding genes in mammals using comparative genomic hybridization and expression array m

99 BAC-array comparative genomic hybridization and fluorescence in si

100 A novel application of array comparative genomic hybridization and fluorescence in si

101 rs targeted by safety margins, we used array comparative genomic hybridization and fluorescent in sit

102 Comparative genomic hybridization and genome sequencing

103 erived from each metastasis were analyzed by comparative genomic hybridization and global transcript

104 gh-throughput scanning technologies, such as comparative genomic hybridization and high-density singl

105 viduals with mental retardation by BAC array comparative genomic hybridization and identified 16 path

106 t of human 1p31-36, according to array-based comparative genomic hybridization and karyotyping.

107 combines patient outcome analysis with array comparative genomic hybridization and mRNA expression pr

108 Comparative genomic hybridization and next-generation se

109 Comparative genomic hybridization and PCR screening show

110 Subsequent comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative polym

111 ues, including whole exome sequencing, array comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative polym

112 By both oligonucleotide-based comparative genomic hybridization and recombination hot

113 samples from children with T-ALL using array comparative genomic hybridization and sequence analysis.

114 in leukemogenesis, we used microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization and single nucleotide

115 using bacterial artificial chromosome array comparative genomic hybridization and single nucleotide

116 Whole genome scanning using comparative genomic hybridization and single nucleotide

117 We used genome-wide tiling comparative genomic hybridization and single nucleotide

118 echnologies, including oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridization and SNP genotyping arr

119 Array comparative genomic hybridization and spectral karyotype

120 istry (22 different antibodies), array-based comparative genomic hybridization and targeted next gene

121 bined data from high-resolution, array-based comparative genomic hybridization and transcriptome anal

122 gle nucleotide polymorphism arrays and array comparative genomic hybridization, and can reliably dete

123 a combination of spectral karyotyping, array comparative genomic hybridization, and cDNA microarrays

124 dy combined bulked-segregant analysis, array comparative genomic hybridization, and CRISPR/Cas9 metho

125 ST) and whole genome clustering of data from comparative genomic hybridization, and indicated special

126 a combination of somatic cell hybrids, array comparative genomic hybridization, and the specificity o

127 We identified by array comparative genomic hybridization, and validated by quan

128 Applying a two-stage high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization approach to analyse 50

129 ents by using a high-resolution, array-based comparative genomic hybridization approach to unravel th

130 Comparative genomic hybridization array (aCGH) showed th

131 Comparative genomic hybridization array analysis reveale

132 anel analysis or even probes for large-scale comparative genomic hybridization array processes.

133 tive lengthening of telomeres with data from comparative genomic hybridization array studies, as well

134 in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis, and a comparative genomic hybridization array were used in one

135 Comparative genomic hybridization array, SCN1A testing a

136 Using a strain-specific comparative genomic hybridization array, we report the i

137 As judged by array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) and spectr

138 gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and public array comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) data, we s

139 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) is a highl

140 he genomic level, we carried out array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) on 64 pros

141 We used high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) to map the

142 nome, high-resolution, tiling path BAC array comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH) was employ

143 ic alteration found in CR tumors using array comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH), gene expr

144 s) in modern domesticated cattle using array comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH), quantitat

145 rison to CNVs previously identified by array-comparative genomic hybridization (array CGH).

146 ce tagged (ESTs), we carried out array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) and detect

147 xamine for CNVs, ultra-high resolution array-comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) assays wer

148 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) has emerge

149 s, and other rearrangements, and array-based comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) is a popul

150 High-resolution array-based comparative genomic hybridization (arrayCGH) and fluores

151 Genome wide, high-resolution array-based comparative genomic hybridization (arrayCGH) and immunoh

152 to classify gene expression and array-based comparative genomic hybridization (arrayCGH) data using

153 Array comparative genomic hybridization (arrayCGH) is widely u

154 We performed comparative genomic hybridization arrays and targeted ge

155 A combination of SNP arrays, comparative genomic hybridization arrays, and whole-exom

156 e TBK1 gene were further tested using custom comparative genomic hybridization arrays.

157 ary deletion and duplication testing through comparative genomic hybridization arrays.

158 The results were further confirmed by custom comparative genomic hybridization arrays.

159 fluorescence in situ hybridization and array comparative genomic hybridization as well as large-inser

160 =6), whole-exome sequencing (n=66) and array comparative genomic hybridization-based copy-number anal

161 By comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analyses of embr

162 Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analyses of micr

163 n, gene methylation, microRNA expression and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis in huma

164 A comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis of 35 o

165 ence of CFT073, microarrays were utilized in comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis of a pa

166 ution of P. gingivalis, and microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis was use

167 Using array-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analysis, we hav

168 GRIA3 (encoding iGluR3) by using an X-array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and four missens

169 ensive genomic profiling of CTCs using array-comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and next-generat

170 cancer through whole-exome sequencing, array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and RNA transcri

171 Genome-wide analysis methods, such as array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and whole-genome

172 eneticists who wish to use genome-wide array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) assays for clini

173 te estimation of DNA copy numbers from array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) data is importan

174 er the problem of clustering a population of Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH) data samples usi

175 ship between multiple types of cancers using comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) data.

176 We used a public array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) database and rea

177 Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) demonstrated rep

178 ted colorectal cancer cell lines using array-comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) for copy number

179 Genetic testing by array-comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) for DGS was requ

180 Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) has been develop

181 Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) has been useful

182 linical cohort of children who had undergone comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) microarray analy

183 Towards this goal, we performed array-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) on 86 primary pr

184 We performed comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) on the genomic D

185 osatellite analysis with either conventional comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) or multiplex lig

186 copy number profiles obtained from 107 array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) studies.

187 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) technology is us

188 The application of comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) to lesion-induce

189 ses using conventional methodologies such as comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) to metaphase spr

190 ncing, quantitative PCR, breeding, and array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) together confirm

191 Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) was performed on

192 Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) was used to comp

193 n Drosophila, by developing microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) with multiple sp

194 eotide microarray analysis (ROMA), a form of comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), at a resolution

195 Using Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH), differences wer

196 y fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), microsatellite

197 This microarray comparative genomic hybridization (CGH)-based analysis h

198 by DNA content, and profiling genomes using comparative genomic hybridization (CGH).

199 gel electrophoresis (PFGE), and array-based comparative genomic hybridization (CGH).

200 mors and matched metastases were analyzed by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH).

201 exist by using a high density, gene-centric Comparative Genomic Hybridizations (CGH) array on cell l

202 Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridizations (CGH) interrogate gen

203 t) for circulating cfDNA and performed array comparative genomic hybridization copy number profiling

204 Unsupervised analyses of array comparative genomic hybridization data associated loss o

205 Applying CORE to comparative genomic hybridization data from a large set

206 d a new method (BioHMM) for segmenting array comparative genomic hybridization data into states with

207 s of strains as "genovars." A compilation of comparative genomic hybridization data on 291 Salmonella

208 carrying out a meta-analysis of array-based comparative genomic hybridization data that considers bo

209 e Cancer Genome Atlas, quantitative FISH and comparative genomic hybridization data that demonstrate

210 ormed several algorithms on segmenting array comparative genomic hybridization data.

211 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization demonstrated that the

212 hisms are recognized with great precision by comparative genomic hybridization, eliminating the need

213 We conclude that control DNA in array-based comparative genomic hybridization experiments should be

214 Although based on the analysis of data from comparative genomic hybridization experiments, we antici

215 Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization has become a widesprea

216 Array comparative genomic hybridization has been used widely t

217 rameterization of facial characteristics and comparative genomic hybridization has led to new discove

218 nd chromosome alterations by high-resolution comparative genomic hybridization identified features di

219 hybrid neurofibromas/schwannomas using array comparative genomic hybridization, immunohistochemistry,

220 ta from 21,470 individuals obtained by array-comparative genomic hybridization in a clinical diagnost

221 py number variation by high-resolution array-comparative genomic hybridization in diverse tissues fro

222 nome-wide chromosomal imbalances using array comparative genomic hybridization in glial and mesenchym

223 Comparative genomic hybridizations indicated few genetic

224 The use of array comparative genomic hybridization is replacing the use o

225 Here array comparative genomic hybridization is used to characteriz

226 echnologies, such as whole genome sequencing/comparative genomic hybridization, is likely to broaden

227 Using a combination of array comparative genomic hybridization, mate pair and cloned

228 We first present an array comparative genomic hybridization method capable of dete

229 Finally, we used a "virtual comparative genomic hybridization" method to identify co

230 otide microarray analysis, a high-resolution comparative genomic hybridization methodology, with this

231 ing a whole-exome tiling array and the array comparative genomic hybridization methodology.

232 labeled and co-hybridized to a whole-genome comparative genomic hybridization microarray, which is c

233 osarcoma formation, we have integrated array comparative genomic hybridization, microarray expression

234 with CMT1A or HNPP by oligonucleotide-based comparative genomic hybridization microarrays and breakp

235 ding miRNA microarray (n = 106), array-based comparative genomic hybridization (n = 109), cDNA microa

236 On array-based comparative genomic hybridization (n = 3), gain of 6p wa

237 of a custom 10q oligonucleotide array-based comparative genomic hybridization (NimbleGen) and polyme

238 High-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization of 235 high-grade sero

239 e molecular basis for ecological phenotypes, comparative genomic hybridization of a set of 97 diverse

240 Comparative genomic hybridization of adenomas from Rassf

241 >100 kilobases were identified by microarray comparative genomic hybridization of genomic DNA from 15

242 py number changes were monitored using array comparative genomic hybridization of laser-capture micro

243 iations are commonly detected by array based comparative genomic hybridization of sample to reference

244 We performed high resolution comparative genomic hybridization on 25 MCC specimens us

245 nalyzed a subset of these tumors (n = 32) by comparative genomic hybridization on a 185K oligonucleot

246 disability (XLID) were investigated by array comparative genomic hybridization on a high-density olig

247 d out genome-wide copy-number analysis using comparative genomic hybridization on a panel of mouse ov

248 We performed comparative genomic hybridization on a single human micr

249 (T-ALL), we performed high-resolution array comparative genomic hybridization on diagnostic specimen

250 0 sequences to implement targeted 1q21 array comparative genomic hybridization on individuals (n = 42

251 s) were confirmed using an ultra-dense array comparative genomic hybridization platform.

252 nly detect large CNVs (> 15 kb) in the array comparative genomic hybridization profiles for the same

253 mbers of which had a 16p11.2 deletion, using comparative genomic hybridization, quantitative polymera

254 nstability but not polyploidy based on array comparative genomic hybridization results.

255 in size and complexities; in one case, array comparative genomic hybridization revealed 18 copy numbe

256 Array comparative genomic hybridization revealed a partial los

257 Investigation by array-comparative genomic hybridization revealed deletion of a

258 Additionally, array comparative genomic hybridization revealed that novel as

259 Array comparative genomic hybridization showed a 22q11.23 dupl

260 most often missed by other methods, such as comparative genomic hybridization, single nucleotide pol

261 erforming high-density oligonucleotide array comparative genomic hybridization, specifically interrog

262 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization studies revealed delet

263 in 2419 patients referred for clinical array comparative genomic hybridization studies.

264 vel alterations, we performed an array-based comparative genomic hybridization survey of 128 non-smal

265 By using a combination of array-comparative genomic hybridization, TaqMan copy number as

266 Genetic studies using microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization technology have result

267 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization testing in blood sampl

268 Melanoma DNA was exposed to array comparative genomic hybridization to assess gross chromo

269 of six genes previously identified by array comparative genomic hybridization to be involved in aggr

270 e H3 and MIB-1 to evaluate mitotic activity, comparative genomic hybridization to detect chromosomal

271 used whole-exome sequencing and array-based comparative genomic hybridization to evaluate a subset o

272 We used array comparative genomic hybridization to identify a 219-kb d

273 red with bone marrow at diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization to investigate relapse

274 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization to map these deletions

275 type, determined by QF-PCR, was validated by comparative genomic hybridization to microarrays.

276 irst took advantage of high-resolution array-comparative genomic hybridization to search for ALK rear

277 re compared with common breast cancers using comparative genomic hybridization, transcriptional profi

278 We identified all DAFCs by comparative genomic hybridization, uncovering two new am

279 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization using a custom Agilent

280 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization using Agilent platform

281 to higher grade gliomas, we performed array comparative genomic hybridization using two independent

282 Comparative genomic hybridization using whole-genome mic

283 or and primary tumor cells using array-based comparative genomic hybridization, using frozen specimen

284 Array comparative genomic hybridization was performed on DNA e

285 Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization was used to examine th

286 Array comparative genomic hybridization was used to identify c

287 Array comparative genomic hybridization was used to screen for

288 Using array-based comparative genomic hybridization, we followed disease p

289 Using comparative genomic hybridization, we found that NCC-der

290 Using array comparative genomic hybridization, we found that, as in

291 ugh breakpoint-spanning PCR as well as array comparative genomic hybridization, we have identified th

292 Using comparative genomic hybridization, we observed the ident

293 t probe amplification (MLPA) and array-based comparative genomic hybridization were performed to conf

294 ted by conversion technology and array-based comparative genomic hybridization, which revealed a rear

295 ary tract masculinization disorders by array-comparative genomic hybridization, which revealed in 1.3

296 Herein, we used comparative genomic hybridization with a custom high-res

297 ted from humans, horses, cattle, and pigs by comparative genomic hybridization with microarrays conta

298 essed the problem of MIC contamination using comparative genomic hybridization with purified MIC and

299 cence in situ hybridization (FISH) and array comparative genomic hybridization, with a tiling path of

300 gans for gene copy-number changes with array comparative genomic hybridization yields the first direc