Table 1 Comparison between CGH /SNP array and FISH for evaluation of melanocytic lesions.
CGH/SNP | Fluorescence in situ hybridization | |
|---|---|---|
Scope of examination | Evaluates the entire genome | Evaluates specific genomic targets |
Sample size | Needs sufficient material for 10 unstained slides 20–30% Tumor purity (high percentage of other cell types can lead to false-negative results) | Needs 2 slides Requires a comparatively small sample size (30 tumor nuclei) |
Turnaround time | Turnaround time averages weeks | Turnaround time usually within days |
Performance | More sensitive than FISH | Less sensitive than CGH Higher rate of false negative due to limited probe set Higher rate of false positive due to tetraploidy |
Effort | More labor intensive | Less labor intensive |
Cost | Usually more expensive than FISH | Usually less expensive than CGH |
