Document Type : Research articles


1 Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of medical oncology and hematology /Hazrat Rasoul Hospital, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran


Background: Identification of genetic abnormalities in multiple myeloma (MM) patients is of particular importance in order to design their treatment and management. Therefore, it is necessary to use the diagnostic methods with high sensitivity to detect abnormalities. In this study, we investigated the sensitivity of conventional cytogenetic and FISH methods in the diagnosis of genetic abnormalities in MM patients.Methods: This retrospective study included 246 patients who referred to the Kariminejhad Center for the Diagnosis of Genetic Abnormalities between 2009-2019. All patients were diagnosed based on diagnostic tests, as well as the approval of the relevant physician. The diagnosis of cytogenetic abnormality was made based on the two methods of conventional cytogenetic and FISH.Result: The results showed that out of 246 patients examined by conventional cytogenetic, only 17.8% had abnormal karyotypes. While out of 67 patients examined by FISH, 64.1% had abnormal results. The results also showed that 31 out of 50 patients with normal karyotype had abnormal FISH result. In the present study, the results showed that 25% of the patients had hyperdiploidy (57-47), which was diagnosed by conventional cytogenetic. Also, 40.90% had diploid abnormalities (pseudodiploid or structural abnormalities). FISH detected del 13q in 27.9% and t(11;14) IGH-CCND1 in 18.6% of patients, which were the most frequent compared to other abnormalities.Conclusion: Considering that the variety of mutations and translocations is high in different parts of the world and every day new mutations are detected, using both methods together can help to identify genetic disorders.


  1. Talley PJ, Chantry AD, Buckle CH. Genetics in myeloma: genetic technologies and their application to screening approaches in myeloma. Br Med Bull. 2015;113(1):15-30. doi: 10.1093/bmb/
  2. ldu041. [PubMed: 25662536].
  3. Khalili P, Maddah R, Maleknia M, Shateri Amiri B, Forouzani F, Hasanvand A, et al. Evaluation of Genes and Molecular Pathways Involved in the Progression of Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance (MGUS) to Multiple Myeloma: A Systems Biology Approach. Mol Biotechnol. 2022:1-12. doi: 10.1007/s12033-022-00634-6. [PubMed: 36504354].
  4. Rajkumar S, Gupta V, Fonseca R, Dispenzieri A, Gonsalves W, Larson D, et al. Impact of primary molecular cytogenetic abnormalities and risk of progression in smoldering multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2013;27(8):1738-44. doi: 10.1038/leu.
  5. 86. [PubMed: 23515097].
  6. Hussain A, Almenfi HF, Almehdewi AM, Hamza MS, Bhat MS, Vijayashankar NP. Laboratory features of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Cureus. 2019;11(5). doi: 10.7759/cureus.4716.
  7. Karimi A, Hashemian SMR. Cytokine storm in COVID-19 and the treatment simulacrum. Biomed Biotechnol Res J. 2020;4(1): 41-8. doi: 10.4103/bbrj.bbrj_128_20.
  8. Nouri S, Mirhosseini N, Naghibi N, Hasanian M. Thoracic CT Scan Findings in Patients with Confirmed Hematologic Malignancies Admitted to the Hospital with Acute Pulmonary Symptoms. Int J Cancer Manag. 2023;16(1).
  9. Goodarzi V, Nouri S, Nassaj ZS, Bighash M, Abbasian S. Long non coding RNAs reveal important pathways in childhood asthma: a future perspective. J Mol Histol. 2023:1-13. doi: 10.1007/s10735-023-10131-y. [PubMed: 37537509].
  10. Maddah R, Goodarzi V, Asadi-Yousefabad S-L, Abbasluo M, Shariati P, Kafraj AS. Evaluation of the gut microbiome associated with COVID-19. Inform Med Unlocked. 2023;38:101239. doi: 10.1016/j.imu.2023.101239. [PubMed: 37033411].
  11. Kumar S, Fonseca R, Ketterling RP, Dispenzieri A, Lacy MQ, Gertz MA, et al. Trisomies in multiple myeloma: impact on survival in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Blood. 2012;119(9):2100-5. doi: 10.1182/blood-2011-11-390658. [PubMed: 22234687].
  12. Abdallah N, Rajkumar SV, Greipp P, Kapoor P, Gertz MA, Dispenzieri A, et al. Cytogenetic abnormalities in multiple myeloma: association with disease characteristics and treatment response. Blood cancer j. 2020;10(8):1-9. doi: 10.1038/s41408-020-00348-5. [PubMed: 32782240].
  13. Gabrea A, Martelli ML, Qi Y, Roschke A, Barlogie B, Shaughnessy Jr JD, et al. Secondary genomic rearrangements involving immunoglobulin or MYC loci show similar prevalences in hyperdiploid and nonhyperdiploid myeloma tumors. Genes Chromosomes and Cancer. 2008;47(7):573-90. doi: 10.1002/gcc.20563. [PubMed: 18381641].
  14. Jamali L, Tofigh R, Tutunchi S, Panahi G, Borhani F, Akhavan S, et al. Circulating microRNAs as diagnostic and therapeutic biomarkers in gastric and esophageal cancers. J Cell Physiol. 2018;233(11):8538-50. doi: 10.1002/jcp.26850. [PubMed: 29923196].
  15. Akhavan S, Tutunchi S, Malmir A, Ajorlou P, Jalili A, Panahi G. Molecular study of the proliferation process of beta cells derived from pluripotent stem cells. Mol Biol Rep. 2022:1-8. doi: 10.1007/s11033-021-06892-y. [PubMed: 34734370].
  16. Saxe D, Seo EJ, Beaulieu Bergeron M, Han JY. Recent advances in cytogenetic characterization of multiple myeloma. Int J Lab Hematol. 2019;41(1):5-14. doi: 10.1111/ijlh.12882. [PubMed: 29971938].
  17. Barilà G, Bonaldi L, Grassi A, Martines A, Liço A, Macrì N, et al. Identification of the true hyperdiploid multiple myeloma subset by combining conventional karyotyping and FISH analysis. Blood cancer j. 2020;10(2):1-5. doi: 10.1038/s41408-020-0285-6. [PubMed: 32066724].
  18. Hussein K, Van Dyke DL, Tefferi A. Conventional cytogenetics in myelofibrosis: literature review and discussion. Eur J Haematol. 2009;82(5):329-38. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2009.01224.x. [PubMed: 19141119].
  19. Schreck CB, Moyle PB. Methods for fish biology. 1990.
  20. Rajan A, Rajkumar S. Interpretation of cytogenetic results in multiple myeloma for clinical practice. Blood cancer j. 2015;5(10):e365-e. doi: 10.1038/bcj.2015.92. [PubMed: 26517360].
  21. Avet-Loiseau H, Attal M, Moreau P, Charbonnel C, Garban Fdr, Hulin C, et al. Genetic abnormalities and survival in multiple myeloma: the experience of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome. Blood. 2007;109(8):3489-95. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-08-040410. [PubMed: 17209057].
  22. Safavi M, Safaei A, Monabati A, Hosseini M, Solhjoo F. Conventional Cytogenetic Abnormalities in Plasma Cell Myeloma and Their Prognostic Effect: A Single Center Experience in the Middle East. Middle East J Cancer. 2021;12(2):219-27. doi: 10.30476/mejc.2020.83285. 1158.
  23. Foong E, Siti-Mariam I, Norhidayah R, Zulaikha AB, Nik-Mohd-Zulfikri MZ, Nurul-Alia MN, et al. Cytogenetic Abnormalities at Diagnosis and During Follow Up in Multiple Myeloma Patients and Their Prognostic Implications-A Preliminary Report. Malaysian J Med Health Sci. 2020;16(4). doi: 10.32592/
  24. ircmj.2023.25.10.2843.
  25. Barilà G, Bonaldi L, Grassi A, Martines A, Liço A, Macrì N, et al. Identification of the true hyperdiploid multiple myeloma subset by combining conventional karyotyping and FISH analysis. Blood cancer j. 2020;10(2):18.
  26. Kim S-H, Kim JH, Lee DM, Lee S, Oh SY, Kwon H-C, et al. Comparison between conventional cytogenetics and interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for patients with multiple myeloma. Korean J Hematol. 2009;
  27. (1):14-21. doi: 10.5045/kjh.2009.44.1.14.
  28. Crabtree M, Cai J, Qing X. Conventional Karyotyping and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization for Detection of Chromosomal Abnormalities in Multiple Myeloma. J Hematol. 2022;11(3):87-91. doi: 10.14740/jh1007. [PubMed: 35837374].
  29. Lai Y-y, Huang X-j, Cai Z, Cao X-S, Chen F-p, Chen X-q, et al. Prognostic power of abnormal cytogenetics for multiple myeloma: a multicenter study in China. Chin Med J (Engl). 2012;125(15):2663-70. [PubMed: 22931972].
  30. Oh S, Koo DH, Kwon M-J, Kim K, Suh C, Min C-K, et al. Chromosome 13 deletion and hypodiploidy on conventional cytogenetics are robust prognostic factors in Korean multiple myeloma patients: web-based multicenter registry study. Ann Hematol. 2014;93(8):1353-61. doi: 10.1007/s00277-014-2057-5. [PubMed: 24671365].