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 essed this question using yeast genetics and comparative genomic hybridization.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

16 ral, and epidemiological associations, using 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 aberration profiles were studied using array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) and expression

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

57 Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was performed o

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

74 17q23.1q23.2, identified by microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH).

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

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

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

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

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

80 Array comparative genomic hybridization also identified recurr

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

82 Comparative genomic hybridization analyses of 41 strains

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

84 Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis after laser c

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

86 Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis demonstrated

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

88 Comparative genomic hybridization analysis indicated tha

89 Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of one case d

90 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization analysis showed that b

91 Array comparative genomic hybridization analysis was performed

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

93 Comparative genomic hybridization analysis with two PM1-

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

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

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

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

98 BAC-array comparative genomic hybridization and fluorescence in si

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

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

101 Comparative genomic hybridization and genome sequencing

102 Recent advances in resolution of comparative genomic hybridization and genomic sequence a

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 PCR screening show

109 Subsequent comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative polym

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

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

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

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

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

115 Whole genome scanning using comparative genomic hybridization and single nucleotide

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

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

118 Array comparative genomic hybridization and spectral karyotype

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

127 Comparative genomic hybridization array (aCGH) showed th

128 Comparative genomic hybridization array analysis reveale

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

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

131 Comparative genomic hybridization array, SCN1A testing a

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

149 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization (arrayCGH) is a microa

150 Array comparative genomic hybridization (arrayCGH) is widely u

151 We performed comparative genomic hybridization arrays and targeted ge

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

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

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

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

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

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

158 By comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analyses of embr

159 Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) analyses of micr

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

171 er the problem of clustering a population of Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH) data samples.

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

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

174 Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) demonstrated rep

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

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

177 Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) has been develop

178 Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) has been useful

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

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

181 ssion of breast carcinoma, we did cDNA array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) on a panel of br

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

189 Array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) was performed on

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

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

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

193 Using Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH), differences wer

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

202 We analyzed array comparative genomic hybridization data from 102 primary

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

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

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

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

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

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

209 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization demonstrated that the

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

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

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

213 Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization has become a widesprea

214 Array comparative genomic hybridization has been used widely t

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

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

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

218 as screened by a high-resolution array-based comparative genomic hybridization in 89 human ovarian ca

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

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

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

222 Comparative genomic hybridizations indicated few genetic

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

224 Here array comparative genomic hybridization is used to characteriz

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

226 Microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization (M-CGH) is a powerful

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 BAC microarray was used for array comparative genomic hybridization on prostate cancer sam

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

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

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

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

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

257 Array comparative genomic hybridization revealed a partial los

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

259 Additionally, array comparative genomic hybridization revealed that novel as

260 Array comparative genomic hybridization showed that PLP1 dupli

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

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

263 Array-based comparative genomic hybridization studies revealed delet

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

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

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

267 bridization (arrayCGH) is a microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization technique that has bee

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

269 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization testing in blood sampl

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

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

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

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

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

275 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization to map these deletions

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

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

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

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

280 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization using a custom Agilent

281 We performed array comparative genomic hybridization using Agilent platform

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

283 Comparative genomic hybridization using whole-genome mic

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

285 Array comparative genomic hybridization was performed on DNA e

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

287 Array comparative genomic hybridization was used to identify c

288 Array comparative genomic hybridization was used to screen for

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

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

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

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

293 Using comparative genomic hybridization, we observed the ident

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