Rapid Communication
Copyright ©2007 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Mar 21, 2007; 13(11): 1737-1742
Published online Mar 21, 2007. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i11.1737
Construction and analysis of tree models for chromosomal classification of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas
Hui-Yong Jiang, Zhong-Xi Huang, Xue-Feng Zhang, Richard Desper, Tong Zhao
Hui-Yong Jiang, Xue-Feng Zhang, Department of General Surgery, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Region, Shenyang 110016, Liaoning Province, China
Zhong-Xi Huang, Tong Zhao, Department of Pathology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou 510515, Guangdong Province, China
Richard Desper, Department of Biology, University College London, Darwin Building, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom
Author contributions: All authors contributed equally to the work.
Supported by Science and Technology Project of Guangzhou, No. 2002Z3-E4016; No. B30101, China
Correspondence to: Richard Desper, Department of Biology, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom. r.desper@ucl.ac.uk
Telephone: +86-20-62787274 Fax: +86-20-61642381
Received: November 23, 2006
Revised: December 18, 2006
Accepted: March 15, 2007
Published online: March 21, 2007
Abstract

AIM: To construct tree models for classification of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) by chromosome copy numbers, to compare them with cDNA microarray classification, and to explore models of multi-gene, multi-step and multi-pathway processes of DLBCL tumorigenesis.

METHODS: Maximum-weight branching and distance-based models were constructed based on the comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) data of 123 DLBCL samples using the established methods and software of Desper et al. A maximum likelihood tree model was also used to analyze the data. By comparing with the results reported in literature, values of tree models in the classification of DLBCL were elucidated.

RESULTS: Both the branching and the distance-based trees classified DLBCL into three groups. We combined the classification methods of the two models and classified DLBCL into three categories according to their characteristics. The first group was marked by +Xq, +Xp, -17p and +13q; the second group by +3q, +18q and +18p; and the third group was marked by -6q and +6p. This chromosomal classification was consistent with cDNA classification. It indicated that -6q and +3q were two main events in the tumorigenesis of lymphoma.

CONCLUSION: Tree models of lymphoma established from CGH data can be used in the classification of DLBCL. These models can suggest multi-gene, multi-step and multi-pathway processes of tumorigenesis. Two pathways, -6q preceding +6q and +3q preceding +18q, may be important in understanding tumorigenesis of DLBCL. The pathway, -6q preceding +6q, may have a close relationship with the tumorigenesis of non-GCB DLBCL.

Keywords: Lymphoma; Subclassification; Comparative gene hybridization; Tree model; Tumorigenesis