US20040248107A1

US20040248107A1 - Detection of high grade dysplasia in cervical cells

Info

Publication number: US20040248107A1
Application number: US10/457,639
Authority: US
Inventors: Irina Sokolova; Walter King; Larry Morrison; Steven Seelig
Original assignee: Vysis Inc
Current assignee: Abbott Molecular Inc
Priority date: 2003-06-09
Filing date: 2003-06-09
Publication date: 2004-12-09
Also published as: CA2916808A1; ATE557098T1; US20120164626A1; DK1631686T3; US7517645B2; JP2007501637A; JP4909738B2; US8043805B2; CA2916706A1; US20090269768A1; PT1631686E; US20050026190A1; US10351912B2; ES2384796T3; CA2916808C

Abstract

Methods of using probes and probe sets for the detection of high grade dysplasia and carcinoma in cervical cells are described. Methods of the invention include hybridizing one or more chromosomal probes to a biological sample obtained from a subject and detecting the hybridization pattern of the chromosomal probes to the sample to determine whether the subject has high grade dysplasia or carcinoma. Methods of the invention also include preliminary screening the cells for a marker associated with a risk for cancer.

Description

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Cervical cancer remains one of the most common cancer types affecting women worldwide. The biological pathway to cervical carcinoma begins with normal intraepithelial cells, and develops through low and then high grade dysplasia before malignancy obtains. Cytologists mark the passage to malignancy as progression from normal epithelial cells to atypical squamous cells of undetermined significance (ASCUS) to Low Grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) and then high grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL) before carcinoma in situ and finally malignancy result. Histologists mark the progression from normal cells to various grades of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN I, II and III), then to carcinoma in situ and finally malignancy. CIN I is considered low grade dysplasia comparable to LSIL. CIN II and III are considered high grade dysplasia comparable to HSIL.

The current standard of care includes regular cytologic testing with a Papanicolau (Pap) smear to identify abnormalities as indicating dysplasia or carcinoma in patient cells. When high grade dysplasia is detected and confirmed by histological examination, the transformation zone of the patient's cervix is removed immediately by loop excision or cone biopsy. More radical procedures are required when carcinoma is detected. At the same time, however, the progression from normal to malignancy is not strict and the presence of low grade dysplasia does not necessarily indicate that the patient will progress to high grade dysplasia or malignancy. Significantly, the negative predictive value of cytologic methods (e.g., Pap smears) for detecting high grade dysplasia is poor. Thus, low grade dysplasia may be misdiagnosed as high grade, thereby subjecting the patient to unwarranted treatment and high grade dysplasia may be misdiagnosed as low grade dysplasia, thereby delaying appropriate treatment. Accordingly, there is a need for a diagnostic method that will accurately distinguish between low and high grade dysplasia.

Patient specimens typically comprise many thousands of cells for evaluation. Diagnosis based on evaluation of individual cells can be enormously time consuming and tedious for technicians to perform due to the large number of cells that are required for evaluation. Thus, there is a need for a means to simplify a cell evaluation method.

Others have noted that genetic abnormalities (e.g., changes in chromosome regions or changes in ploidy levels) accompany the progression from normal cells to cervical malignancy. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,919,624 to Ried, et al. Ried et al. noted that chromosomal abnormalities can be used to classify the progression of dysplastic cervical cells in late stages, e.g., from noninvasive cervical to invasive cervical carcinoma. Still others have demonstrated that cervical cancer is associated with infection by certain human papilloma viruses (HPV) types, particularly HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35 and 42. See, e.g., Lazo, Brit. J. Cancer, (1999) 80(12), 2008-2018. Additionally, many cell cycle proteins such as p16 and Cyclin E and cell proliferation markers such as the proteins Ki67 and PCNA are also known to be highly active in neoplastic cells. Thus, cells containing abnormal amounts of these markers have been suggested as good candidates for cells that may progress to malignancy. However, Applicants are not aware that anyone has demonstrated that any chromosomal abnormality with or without the presence of another marker can be used to distinguish low from high grade dysplasia or has combined such a diagnostic method with the known association of HPV and cervical cancer.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The invention is based on the discovery that certain chromosomal abnormalities can be used to selectively detect high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN II and CIN III) and malignant carcinoma in cervical biopsy and Pap smear specimens without detecting low grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. The method can detect high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN II and CIN III) and malignant carcinoma at high sensitivity and specificity levels, i.e. about 95% each. The invention is based on the use of in situ hybridization technology where labeled nucleic acid probes are allowed to hybridize to cervical samples. Preferably, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) is used and the nucleic acid probes are DNA probes that are fluorescently labeled. The hybridization results are then correlated with a clinical diagnosis of high grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN II and CIN III) and malignant carcinoma.

The method of the invention utilizes a set of one or more probes demonstrating a vector value for discriminating between CIN I and CIN II of about 60 or less, wherein the vector value is calculated by Vector=[(100−specificity) ²+(100−sensitivity)²]^1/2. Preferred probes for use in the method are probes to the genetic loci 3q26, 8q24, 20q13, Xp22 and 3p21, and probes that enumerate chromosomes 3 and 15. Multiple probe sets comprising two, three or more probes can be used in the method of the invention. Preferred multiprobe sets comprise probes to the genetic loci 8q24 and 3q26; 3q26, 8q24, Xp22, and chromosome 15; 8q24, 20q13, Xp22 and chromosome 15; and the genetic loci 3p21, 3 p14, 3q26 and chromosome 3. Probes useful in the invention can be incorporated into kits packaged, for example, with other reagents useful in carrying out the methods of the invention. Such kits can comprise one or more probes useful with the invention.

Probes can be selected using the steps of: (a) providing a first plurality of chromosomal probes (by plurality is meant one or more probes); (b) determining the ability of each of the first plurality of probes to distinguish high (CIN II, CIN III and carcinoma) from low (CIN I) grade dysplasia in a cervical specimen; and (c) selecting the probe or probes within the first plurality of probes that distinguish high from low grade dysplasia to yield a second plurality of probes, wherein the second plurality of probes identifies the high grade dysplasia specimens as compared to low grade specimens at a vector value of less than about 60. Preferred probes can be selected by additionally: (d) determining the ability of a combination of probes selected from the second plurality of probes to distinguish the high grade from low grade specimens; and (e) selecting a combination of probes that identifies the high grade specimen as compared to the low grade specimen with a vector value of less than about 40. More preferred embodiments can be selected based on lower vector values (e.g., a vector value of less than about 30).

The biological sample used with the invention can contain a cervical biopsy specimen or a cervical smear such as a Pap smear or a ThinPrep® sample prepared by the method of Cytyc Corp., Boxborough, Mass. The probes used with the invention comprise detectably labeled nucleic acid-based probes, such as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) probes or protein nucleic acid (PNA) probes, which are designed/selected to hybridize to the specific designed chromosomal target. Fluorescent labels such as are used in fluorescent in situ hybridization are preferred but other detectable labels commonly used in hybridization techniques, e.g., enzymatic, chromogenic and isotopic labels, can also be used.

In another aspect of the invention, the detection of the genetic abnormalities is facilitated by adoption of a preliminary cell screening technique whereby cervical cells are screened first for the presence of a suitable associated marker, for example, such as the presence of infection by HPV, e.g., high risk HPV, or abnormal amounts of cell cycle proteins such as p16 and Cyclin E or cell proliferation markers such as Ki67 and PCNA. Such screening can be used to identify more suspicious cells for closer examination and may allow the time required for specimen evaluation to be reduced by as much as 5-10 fold. After the suspicious cells are identified, these suspicious cells are then examined for the presence of chromosomal abnormalities. The presence of chromosomal abnormalities identified by use of the probes of the invention in cells also showing markers of potential malignancy, such as HPV infection, identifies higher grade CIN or malignancy. Such initial screening techniques are amenable to automation, enabling greater simplicity and speed in specimen evaluation.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The invention includes (i) methods of using probes and (ii) probe sets for the detection of high grade dysplasia and carcinoma in cervical cells. The methods and probe sets allow for the early detection of high grade dysplasia in biological samples, such as a cervical biopsies and smears. [0010]
Chromosomal Probes [0011]
Suitable probes for use in the in situ hybridization methods utilized with the invention fall into two broad groups: chromosome enumeration probes, i.e., probes that hybridize to a chromosomal region, usually a repeat sequence region, and indicate the presence or absence of an entire chromosome, and locus specific probes, i.e., probes that hybridize to a specific locus on a chromosome and detect the presence or absence of a specific locus. Chromosome arm probes, i.e., probes that hybridize to a chromosomal region and indicate the presence or absence of an arm of a specific chromosome, may also be useful. Chromosomal probes and combinations thereof are chosen for sensitivity and/or specificity when used in methods of the invention. Probe sets can comprise any number of probes, e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4 or more probes. The number of probes useful with the invention is limited only by the user's ability to detect the probes on an individual basis. [0012]
As is well known in the art, a chromosome enumeration probe can hybridize to a repetitive sequence, located either near or removed from a centromere, or can hybridize to a unique sequence located at any position on a chromosome. For example, a chromosome enumeration probe can hybridize with repetitive DNA associated with the centromere of a chromosome. Centromeres of primate chromosomes contain a complex family of long tandem repeats of DNA comprised of a monomer repeat length of about 171 base pairs, that are referred to as alpha-satellite DNA. Non-limiting examples of chromosome enumeration probes include probes to chromosomes 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18 and X. Examples of several specific chromosome enumeration probes are described in Example 1. [0013]
A locus specific probe hybridizes to a specific, non-repetitive locus on a chromosome. Non-limiting examples of locus specific probes include probes to the following loci: 3q26, 8q24, 20q13, Xp22 and 3p21. Some of these loci comprise genes, e.g., oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes that are altered in some forms of cervical cancer. Thus, probes that target these genes, either exons, introns, or regulatory chromosomal sequences of the genes, can be used in the detection methods described herein. Examples of target genes include: TERC (3q26); MYC (8q24); STK6 (20q13.2-13.3) and MLH (3p21-p23). Additional examples are identified in Example 1. [0014]
Probes that hybridize with centromeric DNA and specific chromosomal loci are available commercially from Vysis, Inc. (Downers Grove, Ill.) and Molecular Probes, Inc. (Eugene, Oreg.). Alternatively, probes can be made non-commercially using well known techniques. Sources of DNA for use in constructing DNA probes include genomic DNA, cloned DNA sequences such as bacterial artificial chromosomes (BAC), somatic cell hybrids that contain one or a part of a human chromosome along with the normal chromosome complement of the host, and chromosomes purified by flow cytometry or microdissection. The region of interest can be isolated through cloning or by site-specific amplification via the polymerase chain reaction (PCR). See, for example, Nath, et al., Biotechnic Histochem, 1998, 73 (1): 6-22; Wheeless, et al., Cytometry, 1994, 17:319-327; and U.S. Pat. No. 5,491,224. Synthesized oligomeric DNA or PNA probes can also be used. [0015]
The size of the chromosomal region detected by the probes used in the invention can vary, for example, from the alpha satellite 171 base pair probe sequence noted above to a large segment of 150,000 bases. For locus-specific probes, that are directly labeled, it is preferred to use probes of at least 100,000 bases in complexity, and to use unlabeled blocking nucleic acid, as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,756,696, herein incorporated by reference, to avoid non-specific binding of the probe. It is also possible to use unlabeled, synthesized oligomeric nucleic acid or protein nucleic acid as the blocking nucleic acid. For targeting a particular gene locus, it is preferred that the probes span the entire genomic coding locus of the gene. [0016]
Chromosomal probes can contain any detection moiety that facilitates the detection of the probe when hybridized to a chromosome. Effective detection moieties include both direct and indirect labels as described below. [0017]
Chromosomal probes can be directly labeled with a detectable label. Examples of detectable labels include fluorophores, i.e., organic molecules that fluoresce after absorbing light, and radioactive isotopes, e.g., [0018] ³²P, and ³H. Fluorophores can be directly labeled following covalent attachment to a nucleotide by incorporating the labeled nucleotide into the probe with standard techniques such as nick translation, random priming, and PCR labeling. Alternatively, deoxycytidine nucleotides within the probe can be transaminated with a linker. The fluoropore can then be covalently attached to the transaminated deoxycytidine nucleotides. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,491,224 to Bittner, et al., which is incorporated herein by reference. Useful probe labeling techniques are described in Molecular Cytogenetics: Protocols and Applications, Y.-S. Fan, Ed., Chap. 2, “Labeling Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Probes for Genomic Targets”, L. Morrison et. al., p. 21-40, Humana Press, © 2002 (hereafter cited as “Morrison 2002”), incorporated herein by reference.
Examples of fluorophores that can be used in the methods described herein are: 7-amino-4-methylcoumarin-3-acetic acid (AMCA), Texas Red™ (Molecular Probes, Inc., Eugene, Oreg.); 5-(and-6)-carboxy-X-rhodamine, lissamine rhodamine B, 5-(and-6)-carboxyfluorescein; fluorescein-5-isothiocyanate (FITC); 7-diethylaminocoumarin-3-carboxylic acid, tetramethylrhodamine-5-(and-6)-isothiocyanate; 5-(and-6)-carboxytetramethylrhodamine; 7-hydroxycoumarin-3-carboxylic acid; 6-[fluorescein 5-(and-6)-carboxamido]hexanoic acid; N-(4,4-difluoro-5,7-dimethyl-4-bora-3a, 4a diaza-3-indacenepropionic acid; cosin-5-isothiocyanate; erythrosine-5-isothiocyanate; 5-(and-6)-carboxyrhodamine 6G; and Cascade™ blue aectylazide (Molecular Probes, Inc., Eugene, Oreg.). [0019]
When multiple probes are used, flourophores of different colors can be chosen such that each chromosomal probe in the set can be distinctly visualized. Preferably the probe panel of the invention will comprise four separate probes, each labeled with a separate fluorophore. Use of four probes is preferred because Applicants believe this provides the best balance between clinical sensitivity (sensitivity can increase with added probes) and imaging/detection complexity (complexity can increase with added probes). It is also within the scope of the invention to use multiple panels sequentially on the same sample: in this embodiment, after the first panel is hybridized, the results are imaged digitally, the sample is destained and then is hybridized with a second panel. [0020]
Probes can be viewed with a fluorescence microscope and an appropriate filter for each fluorophore, or by using dual or triple band-pass filter sets to observe multiple fluorophores. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,776,688 to Bittner, et al., which is incorporated herein by reference. Any suitable microscopic imaging method can be used to visualize the hybridized probes, including automated digital imaging systems, such as those available from MetaSystems or Applied Imaging. Alternatively, techniques such as flow cytometry can be used to examine the hybridization pattern of the chromosomal probes. [0021]
Probes can also be labeled indirectly, e.g., with biotin or digoxygenin by means well known in the art. However, secondary detection molecules or further processing are then required to visualize the labeled probes. For example, a probe labeled with biotin can be detected by avidin conjugated to a detectable marker, e.g., a fluorophore. Additionally, avidin can be conjugated to an enzymatic marker such as alkaline phosphatase or horseradish peroxidase. Such enzymatic markers can be detected in standard calorimetric reactions using a substrate for the enzyme. Substrates for alkaline phosphatase include 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolylphosphate and nitro blue tetrazolium. Diaminobenzoate can be used as a substrate for horseradish peroxidase. [0022]
The probes and probe sets useful with the methods of the invention can be packaged with other reagents into kits to be used in carrying out the methods of the invention. Useful kits can comprise one or more probes from the group of probes to the genetic loci 3q26, 8q24, 20q13, Xp22 and 3p21, and probes that enumerate chromosomes 3 and 15. [0023]

Determining the Presence of High Grade Dysplasia

Pre-Selection of Cells [0024]
Cell samples can be evaluated preliminarily by a variety of methods and using a variety of criteria. The probes and methods described herein are not limited to usage with a particular screening methodology. One example is the “scanning method” wherein the observer scans hundreds to thousands of cells for cytologic abnormalities, e.g., as viewed with a DAPI filter. The number of cells assessed will depend on the cellularity of the specimen, which varies from patient to patient. Cytologic abnormalities commonly but not invariably associated with dysplastic and neoplastic cells include nuclear enlargement, nuclear irregularity, and abnormal DAPI staining (frequently mottled and lighter in color). In the scanning step, the observer preferably focuses the evaluation of the cells for chromosomal abnormalities (as demonstrated by FISH) to those cells that also exhibit cytological abnormalities. In addition, a proportion of the cells that do not have obvious cytologic abnormalities can be evaluated since chromosomal abnormalities also occur in the absence of cytologic abnormalities. This scanning method is described in further detail in U.S. Pat. No. 6,174,681 to Halling, et al., which is incorporated herein by reference. [0025]
More preferably, the observer can scan the cells for a marker associated with cancer. For example, the cells can be scanned for the presence of an associated marker such as the presence of HPV or high risk HPV (e.g., one or more of HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35 or 42). Additionally, cells with abnormal amounts of the cell cycle proteins p16 and Cyclin E or the proliferation markers Ki67 and PCNA are likely to be suspicious and good candidates for closer examination. Cells can be scanned for the presence of these markers using well know methods. Cell scanning is generally amenable to automation. Automated scanning permits increased efficiency by permitting assays to be performed more rapidly and eliminating much of the tedium present in manual scanning. [0026]
Preparation of Samples [0027]
The presence or absence of high grade dysplasia and carcinoma can be determined by identifying chromosomal aberration in the cells. This can be accomplished by in situ hybridization. In general, in situ hybridization includes the steps of fixing a biological sample, hybridizing a chromosomal probe to target DNA contained within the fixed sample, washing to remove non-specifically bound probe, and detecting the hybridized probe. The in situ hybridization can also be carried out with the specimen cells in liquid suspension, followed by detection by flow cytometry. [0028]
Abnormal cells are characterized by abnormal numbers of chromosomes within the cells and/or structural alterations within the cells' chromosomes. Structural alterations can include gains or losses (e.g., hemizygous or homozygous loss) of a specific chromosomal region, such as a locus or centromeric region as indicated in Example 1. Positive test indicators can be developed accordingly. For example, a cell having one or more chromosomal gains, i.e., three or more copies of any given chromosome, can be considered to test positive in the methods described herein. Cells exhibiting monosomy or nullisomy may also be considered test positive under certain circumstances. [0029]
A biological sample is a sample that contains cells or cellular material, e.g., cells or material derived from the uterine cervix of the uterus. Examples of cervical specimens include cervical biopsies, smears, scrapes and the like. Typically, cells are harvested from a biological sample and prepared using techniques well known in the art. Numerous methods are available for collecting cervical cells for evaluation. For example, cells from the ectocervix and endocervix/transformation zone are collected using well-known devices such as endocervical brushes (or “brooms”) or wooden and plastic spatulas. Conventional smears are prepared by spreading cells evenly and thinly onto a glass slide. The slide is then fixed rapidly by immersion into 95% ethanol or spraying with a commercial fixative according to manufacturer instructions. [0030]
For the ThinPrep® collection method (Cytyc Corp., Boxborough, Mass.), cells are transferred from the cervix into the fixative PreservCyt®. This allows cells to be preserved until ready for further processing. Cells are then gently dispersed, randomized and collected onto a TransCyt® membrane filter by drawing the sample across the filter with a vacuum until an optimal number of cells is deposited into the filter. The cells can be further processed as desirable. In another method, the cells collected into PreservCytg or other fixative solution can be further washed by centrifuging, removing the supernatant and resuspending in Carnoys solution (3:1 Methanol:Acetic acid), repeating (e.g., three times) as desired. Cells are then transferred to a glass slide by dropping a small aliquot of cell suspension directly onto the slide. Slides are typically dried overnight. [0031]
Detection of Chromosomal Abnormalities [0032]
Gain or loss of chromosomes or chromosomal regions within a cell is assessed by examining the hybridization pattern of the chromosomal probe or set of chromosomal probes (e.g., the number of signals for each probe) in the cell, and recording the number of signals. Test samples can comprise any number of cells that is sufficient for a clinical diagnosis, and typically contain at least about 100 cells. In a typical assay, the hybridization pattern is assessed in about 25-5,000 cells. Test samples are typically considered “test positive” when found to contain a plurality of chromosomal abnormalities, e.g., cells present gains or losses of one or more chromosomes, loci or chromosomal arms as described herein. Criteria for “test positive” can include testing positive with one, two, three, four or more probes. Testing positive with one probe is a typical test criterion; testing positive with two probes is more preferred, and with four is most preferred. In addition, when multiple probes are used test positive can include detection of abnormal hybridization patterns with a subset of probes, e.g., a combination of gains or losses of a subset of the probes, e.g., two or three probes of a full set of four probes. Hybridization patterns can be assessed in sequence for subsets of probes. For example, the pattern of an initial subset of probes (e.g., probes to the 3q26 and 8q24 loci) can be assessed and, if a positive result is indicated from the subset of probes the test can be taken as positive overall. However, if the initial result is not positive, the pattern for an additional subset of probes (e.g., probes to the Xp22 locus and chromosome 15) can be assessed to complete the test. If the combined result for all probes indicates a positive test result, the test can be taken as positive overall. [0033]
The number of cells identified with chromosomal abnormalities and used to classify a particular sample as positive, in general will vary with the number of cells in the sample. As low as one cell may be sufficient to classify a sample as positive. It is preferred to identify at least 30 cells as positive, more preferred to identify at least 10 cells, and most preferred to identify at least 5 cells as positive. The number of cells used for a positive classification is also known as the cut-off value, which is discussed further below. [0034]
Screening and Monitoring Patients for High Grade Dysplasia and Cervical Carcinoma [0035]
The methods described herein can be used to screen women for high grade dysplasia as a predecessor to cervical carcinoma. For example, women at risk for cervical cancer, e.g., women with abnormal PAP smear, women who are infected with a HPV, e.g., high risk HPV, or women that show abnormal amounts of cell cycle proteins such as p16 and Cyclin E or cell proliferation proteins such as Ki67 and PCNA can be regularly screened with the goal of early detection of progression to high grade dysplasia. For example, general probes and methods to detect infection by HPV in a sample can be used, such as, for example, a whole genomic HPV probe. Type specific probes can also be developed to detect infection by specific HPV types such as one or more of the high risk HPV types HPV 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 42, 52, 55 and 58. Alternatively, antibodies are know and can be adapted to detect the presence of specific proteins such as the p16 and Ki67 proteins in a sample. In this embodiment, the sample is first assayed with the HPV probe or the antibody probe to identify particular cells. The labeled cells are then assessed as to the chromosomal status using a probe panel of the invention. The HPV or antibody step can be performed simultaneously or sequentially with the chromosomal probe panel. [0036]
The screening test can be incorporated into the routine care of women, e.g., as an adjunct to evaluation of routine Pap smears. The methods described here can also be used to adjust treatment strategies for women. As a more reliable test than the conventional tests, e.g., Pap tests, patients can be directed more reliably to the invasive remediation (removal of the transformation zone of the patient's cervix) as necessary. Patients testing negative for high grade dysplasia by the test methodology can be spared this invasive procedure more reliably. [0037]
Probe Selection Methods [0038]
The selection of individual probes and probe sets for use with the invention can be performed using the principles described in the examples. Each probe selected for a probe set should have the ability on its own to discriminate between high and low grade dysplastic cells. Probes with high discrimination ability are preferred. The discrimination analysis described herein comprises calculating the sensitivity and specificity of each probe individually for identifying high and low grade dysplasia. Various cutoff values of cell percentages for targets gained and lost are employed. The primary metric for combined sensitivity and specificity will be a quantity called ‘vector’, which is defined as the magnitude of the vector drawn between the points on a sensitivity versus specificity plot representing the ideal (sensitivity=specificity=100) and the measured sensitivity and specificity of the particular probe or probe set, as measured in a cohort of abnormal and normal samples. As described in Example 2, the vector value ranges from 0 for the ideal case to 141.4 for the worst case. Statistical analyses can also be used to compare means and standard deviations between high and low grade dysplastic cells as described in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/081,393 by Morrison, et al. filed Feb. 20, 2002, which is incorporated herein by reference. [0039]
For multiple probes sets, each probe should be selected to complement the other probes in the set. That is, each probe should identify additional high grade dysplasia markers that the other probe(s) fail to identify. One method for identifying the best complementing set of probes is to take the probe with the lowest vector value, remove the group of tumor specimens it identified from the full set of tumor specimens, and then determine the probe with lowest vector value on the remaining tumor specimens. This process can be continued as necessary to obtain a complete probe set. The approach described here of generating all possible probe combinations, and calculating the sensitivity and specificity of each, predicts the performance of all possible probe sets and allows selection of the minimal probe set with the highest performance characteristics. Also, a variety of combinations with similarly high performance characteristics is obtained. Considering the possible errors due to the finite number of specimens tested, several of the high ranking probe combinations can be compared based on other practical characteristics such as relevance to disease prognosis or difficulty in making the probe. [0040]
However, regardless of the measured ability to complement other probes, each probe must preferably identify a statistically different percentage of test positive cells between the high and low grade adjacent specimen sets. If this condition is not met, then a probe might be selected erroneously based on apparent complementation. Moreover, data from combinations of fewer probes is more reliable than data from combinations of more probes, e.g., data from combinations of two probes is more reliable than data from combinations of three probes. This results from the reduced ability to make correlations between greater numbers of probes with the finite number of specimens tested. [0041]
The dependence of probe and probe combination performance as a function of cutoff value must also be considered. “Cutoff value” can refer to the number or percentage of cells in a population that must have gains or losses for the sample to be considered positive. Therefore, a sample can be considered positive or negative depending upon whether the number (or percentage) of cells in the specimen is above the cutoff value or equal to or less than the cutoff value, respectively. In general, the combined specificity and sensitivity of probes is better at low cutoff values. However, when the high grade dysplasia cells are distributed within a matrix containing many normal and low grade cells, such as from a cervical smear, probes performing best at high cutoffs are more likely to be detected. This is because good performance at high cutoffs indicates a higher prevalence of cells containing the abnormality. Examples of cutoff values that can be used in the determinations include about 5, 25, 50, 100 and 250 cells or 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 50% and 60% of cells in the sample population. [0042]
Measurement of gain of a target chromosome or chromosome region is preferred over measurement of a target chromosome or chromosome region loss, because overlapping targets or poor/failed hybridization to some cells can falsely suggest loss. Locus-specific or chromosomal arm probes designed to detect deletions are also generally smaller than locus-specific or chromosomal arm probes designed to detect gains since the deletion probes must not extend beyond the minimally deleted region. If too much of the “deletion probe” extends beyond the deleted sequence, enough signal may be produced in the assay to be falsely counted. Since “deletion probes” are usually kept small their signals are not as intense as signals for targets typically gained. This in turn makes it more likely that real signals from targets being monitored for deletion may be miscounted. Likewise, repetitive sequence probes, like some chromosome enumeration probes used here are preferable to single locus probes because they usually provide brighter signals and hybridize faster than locus specific probes. On the other hand, repetitive sequence probes are more sensitive to polymorphisms than locus specific probes. [0043]
A probe or combination of probes used with the present invention preferably provides an improvement over conventional methods such as cytology. Useful probes or probe combinations of the invention identify at least about 70% and preferably above about 85% of samples with high grade dysplasia and carcinoma (sensitivity). Similarly, useful probes or probe combinations identify as negative by test at least about 80% and preferably above about 95% of negative samples (specificity). [0044]
The invention is further described in the following examples, which are not intended to limit the scope of the invention described in the claims. [0045]

EXAMPLES

1. Initial Probe Selection. Thirty-five chromosomal regions, identified in Table 1 below, known to show some level of amplification or deletion in cervical cancer or dysplasia were selected for evaluation. The colors in Table 1 refer to the fluorescent label used for each of these probes.

TABLE 1


Probes and Gene Target Locations Used for Probe Selection.

Set	Gold	Red	Green	Aqua	Orange

1			1q41	CEP 15	1p31
			TGFb2	Sat. III	D1S500
2	2q33-q34	2q24	2p24*	CEP 6
	HER-4	TBR1	MYCN	Alpha sat.
3	3p14	3p21-p23	3q26	CEP 7
	FHIT	MLH	TERC	Alpha sat.
4	4p15.3		4p16.3*	CEP 12
	DDX15		Wolf-Hirsch	Alpha sat.
5	5p13		5p15.2	CEP X
	DAB2		D5S2064	Alpha sat.
6			6q16.3-q21	CEP 16	6p21.2
			D6S268	Sat. II	PIM1
11	11q13*	11p15.5	11q23*	CEP 10
	CCND1	HRAS	MLL	Alpha sat.
CEP	CEP 11	CEP 8	CEP 1	CEP 17
	Alpha sat.	Alpha sat.	Sat. II/III	Alpha sat.
X			Xq12*	CEP 18	Xp22.3*
			Androgen receptor	Alpha sat.	STS
Mixed set	8q24*	20q13.2-q13.3	7p12*	CEP 9
	MYC	STK6	EGFR	Alpha sat.

Thirteen of these regions were detected using chromosome enumeration probes (CEP® probes in Table 1)) targeting repetitive centromeric sequences. Twelve of the CEP® probes used are commercially available from Vysis, Inc. (Downers Grove, Ill., www.vysis.com). The other twenty-two regions were detected with locus specific probes targeting unique sequences within amplified or deleted chromosomal regions. [0047]
Seven of these locus specific probes used are commercially available, labeled with SpectrumOrange™ label, from Vysis, Inc. (marked with an asterisk in Table 1.) The commercial STS probe was used. For the other six probes, the same starting DNA material as used to make the commercially available probes was used. Instead of the SpectrumOrange label, the starting DNA was transaminated and then chemically labeled using 5-(and-6)-carboxyrhodamine 6G, succinimidyl ester (Molecular Probes) for the c-myc and CCND1 probes, and fluorescin succinimidyl ester for the other four. The transamination and labeling process used is described in Bittner et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,491,224, incorporated herein by reference. [0048]
The CEP 11 probe labeled in gold was produced using the starting DNA material of the commercially available CEP 11 probe from Vysis, Inc., and using the same procedure as for the c-myc probe. [0049]

The remaining 14 probes were produced from BAC clones sourced as shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2


Experimental probe details.

Probe		BAC clone	Size of the	Probe
location	Probe name	Identification	human insert	Source

2q33-q34	HER-4	RP11 384-k20	156 kb	Research
				Genetics
3p14	FHIT	CTB-1-012	138 kb	Genome
				Systems
4p15.3	DDX15	RP11 192p23	171 kb	Research
				Genetics
2q24	TBR1	RP11 334e15	184 kb	Research
				Genetics
3p21-p23	MLH1	RP11 491d6	102 kb	Research
				Genetics
11p15.5	HRAS	GS1 137c7	138 kb	Genome
				Systems
20q13.2-q13.3	STK6	GS1 32i19	145 kb	Genome
				Systems
1q41	TGFB2	RP11 224o19	177 kb	Research
				Genetics
1p31	D1S500	RP11574n2	164 kb	Research
				Genetics
6p21.2	PIM1	RP3 355m6	134 kb	Research
				Genetics
5p13	DAB2	CTD-2006d4	127 kb	Research
				Genetics
3q26	TERC:	4 clones:	490 kb	All clones
	Clone 300H	RP11 3k16	total	from
	Clone 300I	RP11 362k14	contig size	Research
	Clone 300K	RP11 641d5	made up of	Genetics
	Clone 300L	RP11 816j6	four
			individual
			clones
			200 kb
			125 kb
			128 kb
			48 kb
6q16.3-q21	D6S268	RP1-67a8	155 kb	Research
				Genetics
11q23	MLL	415 024	120 kb	Genome
				Systems
5p.15.2	D5S2064	RP1-144E22	125.5 kb	Research
				Genetics

The HER-4, FHIT, DDX15 and DAB2 probes were also produced using the same method as the c-myc probe. The remaining unique sequence probes were all produced using the nick translation method described in Morrison 2002, Id. at p. 27-30, and the labeled nucleotides Spectrum Orange dUTP, SpectrumRed dUTP or Spectrum Green dUTP (all Vysis, Inc.). [0051]
The labeled probes were then separated into sets of three or four probes each for evaluation as indicated in Table 1. The probe sets were made up of the individual probes, COT 1 DNA (Invitrogen), human placental DNA (Signa), and LSI/WCP Hybridization Buffer (Vysis, Inc.). 10 μl of each of the probe sets were hybridized to ten samples each of cervical biopsy samples. The probe sets each typically contained about 0.5 μg COTI DNA and 2 μg human placental DNA. The probe set hybridization mixes also contained 50 nanograms of SpectrumAqua labeled human placental DNA to provide a background staining of the nuclei in the sample, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,789,161, Morrison et al., incorporated herein by reference. CIN I, CIN II-Ill and invasive cervical squamous carcinoma (CA) samples were obtained from the Cooperative Human Tissue Network (CHTN) supported by the National Cancer Institute. The samples were prepared for hybridization and hybridized with the probe sets as follows. Paraffin embedded tissue sections were placed in xylene solution for 5 min. This procedure was repeated 3 times. Slides were then washed in 100% ethanol twice for 1 min each wash. Slides were then soaked for 15 min in 45%/0.3% peroxide solution, rinsed in water and incubated for 10 min in Pretreatment solution. After rinsing, slides were incubated with a proteinase, e.g., proteinase K or pepsin, for 5-30 min to digest excess proteins and make the DNA more accessible. The slides were then dehydrated in ethanol series, air dried and hybridized with DNA probes usually overnight at 37° C. After hybridization, unspecific probes were washed out in post-hybridization wash solutions such as for example, wash for 2 minutes in 73±1° C. 2×SSC/0.3% NP40. Slides were then washed in a second wash solution such as 2×SSC/0.1% NP40. A DAPI DNA stain was then applied to the slides to facilitate sample evaluation. [0052]
The procedure permitted all probes to hybridize to the samples. The majority of probes showed good signal intensity relative to background. The epithelial layers of the biopsy samples were evaluated under a fluorescence microscope to identify any cells that showed amplification (more than two signals) or deletion (less than two signals) of the DNA target. Gains were recorded for each sample that showed amplification in five or more cells for a particular probe; losses were recorded for each sample that showed a deletion in five or more cells. Samples showing neither gains nor losses were considered disomic. [0053]

The sensitivity, i.e., the percentage of samples showing the condition tested, of each probe for CIN I, CIN II-III and invasive carcinoma was determined for gains, losses and disomies. Losses were found to occur very infrequently in CIN II-III samples and so were not generally useful as markers for CIN II-III and invasive carcinoma. Probes were further assessed for their ability to show maximum frequency of gains for CIN II-III and minimum frequency of gains for CIN I. The results are presented in Table 3. Probes for the targets 8q24, 20q13, 3p21, 3q26, 1p31, Xp22 and CEP 15 were considered the most informative and were selected for further evaluation. The 3p 14 probe showed significant loss in the CIN II-III and invasive carcinoma samples. The ratio of the relative gain of 3q26 to 3 p14 was also evaluated as a measure of the relative gain of the q arm of chromosome 3 to its p arm.

TABLE 3


Sensitivity of Probes for Detecting Gains, Losses
and Disomies in Cervical Specimens.

Gain

Loss

Disomy

Probe	CIN I	CIN II-III	CA	CIN I	CIN II-III	CA	CIN I	CIN II-III	CA

8q24	0	80	100	0	0	0	100	20	0
Xp22	0	70	75	19	0	5	81	30	20
CEP 15	0	70	90	0	0	0	100	30	10
20q13	10	80	90	0	0	0	90	20	10
1p31	10	70	80	0	0	0	90	30	20
3p21	13	85	55	6	0	18	81	15	27
CEP 10	15	70	100	10	0	0	75	30	0
3q26	25	80	100	5	0	0	70	20	0
5p13	30	80	100	5	0	0	65	20	0
CEP 8	30	78	100	5	0	0	65	22	0
5p15	40	80	100	5	0	0	55	20	0
CEP X	50	75	100	5	0	0	45	25	0
2p24	20	67	90	0	0	0	80	33	10
Xq12	14	60	95	14	0	5	74	40	0

	Gain	Loss	Disomy		Gain	Loss	Disomy		Gain

CEP 7	25	60	90	5	0	10	70	40	0
CEP 18	12	60	90	0	0	0	88	40	10
CEP 16	20	60	100	0	0	0	80	40	0
7p12	10	60	90	0	0	10	90	40	0
3p14	10	60	9	10	20	82	80	20	9
1q41	10	60	90	0	0	10	90	40	0
11q13	25	60	85	0	0	0	75	40	15
CEP 12	10	55	100	5	0	0	85	45	0
CEP 6	10	50	100	10	0	0	80	50	0
4p16	30	50	80	0	0	0	70	50	20
4p15	20	50	70	0	0	0	80	50	30
2q33	12	50	50	12	12	15	76	38	35
11p15	15	50	90	0	0	0	85	50	10
CEP 11	20	45	100	5	0	0	75	55	0
CEP 9	0	44	100	5	0	0	95	56	0
CEP 17	10	40	100	5	0	0	85	60	0
6q16-21	10	40	73	0	10	0	90	50	27
CEP 1	13	33	100	6	0	0	81	57	0
2q23	20	30	80	0	10	0	80	60	20
11q23	45	30	80	0	0	0	55	70	20
6p21	0	10	77	5	10	0	95	80	23

2. Discriminate Analysis of In Situ Hybridization Data and Selection of Probe Sets. Additional paraffin embedded biopsy samples classed as normal (WNL), CIN I, CIN II, CIN III and Squamous cell carcinoma (CA) were obtained from the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Tex. (Dr. Raheela Ashfaq). The samples were prepared and hybridized to two sets of probes (CEP 15, 8q24, Xp22 and 20q13; and CEP 3, 3q26, 3q14 and 3p21) as before. Six of the probes used—8q24, Xp22, CEP 15, 20q13, 3p21 and 3q26—were taken from the preferred probes identified in Example 1. Two others —CEP 3 and 3p14—were compared with probes to 3p21 and 3q26 to better assess the relationship of chromosome 3 in the progression to cervical cancer. [0055]

The ability of individual probes and certain probe combinations to discriminate between high and low grade dysplasia in cervical cells was evaluated by determining the number of specimens correctly identified by each probe or probe set. A cutoff number of five cells with gains or losses was used to evaluate samples. A sample was called positive or negative for high grade dysplasia or carcinoma depending upon whether the number of cells in the sample was above the cutoff value or equal to or less than the cutoff value, respectively. The accuracies of identifying the positive samples (sensitivity) and negative samples (specificity) were then used to select the best probes and probe combinations. Table 3a lists the specificity and sensitivity of gain and loss for certain probe targets.

TABLE 3a


Sensitivity and specificity measurements relative to sample grades.

							Sensitivity
	Specificity	Specificity	Specificity	Sensitivity	Sensitivity	Sensitivity	CIN II + CIN
Probe	WNL	CIN I	WNL + CIN I	CIN II	CIN III	CA	III + CA

CEP15	100.00	89.47	94.74	48.15	60.00	57.89	55.35
8q24	95.24	73.68	84.46	96.30	95.00	100.00	97.10
Xp22	100.00	89.47	94.74	59.26	70.00	94.74	74.67
20q13	100.00	78.95	89.48	66.67	70.00	100	78.89
CEP3	100.00	84.21	92.11	55.56	70.00	68.42	64.66
3q26	100.00	73.68	86.84	77.78	90.00	100.00	89.26
3p14	100.00	78.95	89.47	33.33	60.00	15.79	36.37
3p21	100.00	84.21	92.11	37.04	65.00	21.05	41.03
Gain 3q26	100.00	100.00	100.00	7.41	15.00	78.95	33.79
& Loss
3p14
Ratio 3q26/	100.00	89.47	94.74	29.63	70.00	84.21	61.28
CEP3 > 1
Ratio 3q26/	95.24	84.21	89.73	66.67	80.00	94.74	80.47
3p14 > 1
Loss:	95.24	100	97.62	29.63	15.00	89.47	44.70
3p14 < 1

The ability to discriminate between cellular types depends on the overall specificity and sensitivity. Good discrimination requires good specificity and sensitivity. Table 3b presents results for a combined measure of specificity and sensitivity designated “vector”. Vector is calculated as [0057]
Vector=[(100−specificity)²+(100−sensitivity)²]^1/2
Specificity and sensitivity are defined as percentages and range from 100% (perfect) to 0% for no specificity (or sensitivity) at all. Hence, vector values range from 0 for perfect specificity and sensitivity to 141 for zero specificity and sensitivity. [0058]

Table 3b is sorted by increasing vector value for each sample category. Individual probes showing a high ability to discriminate (low vector value) include 3q26, 8q24 and CEP 3. Other probes showing a useful ability to discriminate high grade dysplasia and carcinoma from low grade dysplasia are 20q13, Xp22, CEP 15 and 3p21. Vectors determined for probe ratios such as 3q26/CEP (determined to be >1) and 3q26/3p14 (determined to be >1) can also be useful. Other methods for evaluating and selecting probes using discriminate and combinatorial analytical techniques are described in U.S. Ser. No. 10/081,393 by Morrison, et al., filed Feb. 20, 2002, which is incorporated herein by reference.

TABLE 3b


Vector value for sample grades.

	CIN I	WNL + CIN I	(WNL + CIN I) vs
Probe/Vector	vs CIN II	vs CIN II	(CIN II + CIN III)

3q26	27.00	17.75	13.50
8q24	28.07	16.76	16.87
CEP3	35.55	33.82	25.69
20q13	41.11	36.34	33.49
Xp22	43.73	42.66	35.88
CEP 15	51.22	50.31	46.76
3p21	54.59	53.63	39.59
Ratio 3q26/CEP 3 > 1	54.59	53.63	31.36
Ratio 3q26/3p14 > 1	54.59	53.63	31.36
3p14	62.53	60.64	47.47
Gain 3q26&Loss 3p14	93.30	93.30	88.30
Loss: 3p14 < 1	93.30	93.30	88.30

Based on results from discriminate analysis and probe complementarity as described above, preferred probes for use in distinguishing high from low grade dysplasia in cervical samples include probes to the loci 3q26 and 8q24 and the CEP 3. Sets of probes comprising the probes 3q26 and 8q24; 3q26, 8q24, Xp22, and CEP 15; 8q24, 20q13, Xp22 and CEP 15; and 3p21, 3p14, 3q26 and CEP 3 are particularly preferred. [0060]
Other Embodiments [0061]
While the invention had been described in conjunction with the foregoing detailed description, it is to be understood that the foregoing description is intended to illustrate and not limit the scope of the invention. Other aspects, advantages and modification of the invention are within the scope of the claims set forth below. [0062]

Claims

What is claimed is:

1. A method for screening for high grade dysplasia in a subject, the method comprising:

(a) obtaining a biological sample from the subject;

(b) contacting a set of one or more chromosomal probes able to selectively detect high grade dysplasia in the biological sample under conditions sufficient to enable hybridization of the probes to chromosomes in the sample if any; and

(c) detecting the hybridization pattern of the chromosomal probes to the biological sample to determine whether the subject has high grade dysplasia.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the biological sample comprises a biopsy.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the biological sample comprises a cervical smear or cervical scrape sample.

4. The method of claim 1, wherein the chromosomal probes are fluorescently labeled.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes is characterized by a vector value of less then about 60.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes is characterized by a vector value of less than about 40.

7. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes is characterized by a vector value of less than about 30.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes comprises a probe selected from the group of probes for the specific loci 3q26 and 8q24.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes comprises probes for the specific loci 3q26 and 8q24.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes comprises probes for the specific loci 8q24, 3q26, Xp22 and CEP 15.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes comprises probes for the specific loci 8q24, 20q13, Xp22 and CEP 15.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the set of one or more chromosomal probes comprises probes for the specific loci 3p21, 3 p14, 3q26 and CEP 3.

13. The method of claim 1 wherein cells from the biological sample are prescreened for a marker associated with risk for cancer.

14. The method of claim 1 wherein cells from the biological sample are prescreened for infection by HPV.

15. The method of claim 14 wherein the sample is screened for infection by one or more of the high risk HPV types 16, 18, 31, 33, 35, 42, 52, 55 and 58.

16. The method of claim 1 wherein cells from the biological sample are prescreened for the presence of a cell cycle protein or a cell proliferation marker.

17. The method of claim 16 wherein the cell cycle protein is p16 or Cyclin E.

18. The method of claim 16 wherein the cell proliferation marker is the protein Ki67 or the protein PCNA.