Official reprint from UpToDate®
www.uptodate.com ©2016 UpToDate®

Chromosomal translocations, deletions, and inversions

Iris Schrijver, MD
James L Zehnder, MD
Athena M Cherry, PhD
Section Editor
Richard A Larson, MD
Deputy Editor
Jennifer S Tirnauer, MD


In this review, we will describe the most common structural chromosomal anomalies, give examples of disease processes resulting from these germline or somatic alterations, and discuss the mechanisms underlying these disorders. Due to the important role of chromosomal abnormalities in the pathogenesis of many hematological disorders, a general review of these specific aberrations is presented separately, as is a review of cytogenetic and molecular genetic tools used to characterize these abnormalities. (See "General aspects of cytogenetic analysis in hematologic malignancies" and "Tools for genetics and genomics: Cytogenetics and molecular genetics".)


Chromosomal aberrations are due to either numerical abnormalities or structural defects. The normal diploid number of chromosomes in humans is 46. There are 23 pairs of chromosomes with 22 pairs of autosomes and two sex chromosomes, the X and the Y. Human females have two X chromosomes (46,XX), while males have one X and one Y chromosome (46,XY).

Abnormality of chromosome number — A numerical abnormality in a cell's chromosomal endowment may be caused by the gain of one or more complete haploid chromosome sets (polyploid karyotype). An example is the triploid chromosomal number (eg, 69,XXY) in a partial hydatiform mole. (See "Gestational trophoblastic disease: Pathology", section on 'Genetics'.)

More commonly, there is a selective gain or loss of an individual chromosome (aneuploidy). As an example, trisomy 21, which causes Down syndrome, is characterized by the gain of one additional copy of chromosome 21. All mutations that change the total number of chromosomes are considered to be genome mutations.

Abnormality of chromosomal structure — Structural chromosomal anomalies, also called chromosomal mutations, comprise those changes that are due to one or more breaks in a chromosome. Following a break, the separated fragments are likely to participate in chromosomal rearrangements. Structural chromosomal changes can result in a displacement of chromosomal regions without any loss or duplication of genetic material (ie, balanced rearrangements) or they may be unbalanced:


Subscribers log in here

To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information or to purchase a personal subscription, click below on the option that best describes you:
Literature review current through: Sep 2016. | This topic last updated: Jun 3, 2016.
The content on the UpToDate website is not intended nor recommended as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of your own physician or other qualified health care professional regarding any medical questions or conditions. The use of this website is governed by the UpToDate Terms of Use ©2016 UpToDate, Inc.
  1. Vamvakas S, Vock EH, Lutz WK. On the role of DNA double-strand breaks in toxicity and carcinogenesis. Crit Rev Toxicol 1997; 27:155.
  2. Warburton, D. De novo structural rearrangements: implications in prenatal diagnosis. In: Clinical Genetics: Problems in Diagnosis and Counseling, Wiley, AM, Carter, TP, Kelly, S, Porter (Eds), Academic Press, New York 1982. p.63.
  3. Rezuke WN, Abernathy EC, Tsongalis GJ. Molecular diagnosis of B- and T-cell lymphomas: fundamental principles and clinical applications. Clin Chem 1997; 43:1814.
  4. Melo JV. BCR-ABL gene variants. Baillieres Clin Haematol 1997; 10:203.
  5. Griesser H. Applied molecular genetics in the diagnosis of malignant non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Diagn Mol Pathol 1993; 2:177.
  6. Mitelman F, Johansson B, Mertens F. The impact of translocations and gene fusions on cancer causation. Nat Rev Cancer 2007; 7:233.
  7. Sawyers CL. Chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 1999; 340:1330.
  8. Warmuth M, Danhauser-Riedl S, Hallek M. Molecular pathogenesis of chronic myeloid leukemia: implications for new therapeutic strategies. Ann Hematol 1999; 78:49.
  9. Mutton D, Alberman E, Hook EB. Cytogenetic and epidemiological findings in Down syndrome, England and Wales 1989 to 1993. National Down Syndrome Cytogenetic Register and the Association of Clinical Cytogeneticists. J Med Genet 1996; 33:387.
  10. Kang SH, Shaw C, Ou Z, et al. Insertional translocation detected using FISH confirmation of array-comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) results. Am J Med Genet A 2010; 152A:1111.
  11. de Ravel T, Aerssens P, Vermeesch JR, Fryns JP. Trisomy of chromosome 16p13.3 due to an unbalanced insertional translocation into chromosome 22p13. Eur J Med Genet 2005; 48:355.
  12. Shinawi M, Cheung SW. The array CGH and its clinical applications. Drug Discov Today 2008; 13:760.
  13. Bi W, Sapir T, Shchelochkov OA, et al. Increased LIS1 expression affects human and mouse brain development. Nat Genet 2009; 41:168.
  14. Carvalho CM, Zhang F, Liu P, et al. Complex rearrangements in patients with duplications of MECP2 can occur by fork stalling and template switching. Hum Mol Genet 2009; 18:2188.
  15. Marinescu RC, Johnson EI, Dykens EM, et al. No relationship between the size of the deletion and the level of developmental delay in cri-du-chat syndrome. Am J Med Genet 1999; 86:66.
  16. Shaughnessy J, Tian E, Sawyer J, et al. High incidence of chromosome 13 deletion in multiple myeloma detected by multiprobe interphase FISH. Blood 2000; 96:1505.
  17. Juyal RC, Greenberg F, Mengden GA, et al. Smith-Magenis syndrome deletion: a case with equivocal cytogenetic findings resolved by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Am J Med Genet 1995; 58:286.
  18. Chen KS, Manian P, Koeuth T, et al. Homologous recombination of a flanking repeat gene cluster is a mechanism for a common contiguous gene deletion syndrome. Nat Genet 1997; 17:154.
  19. Cools J, DeAngelo DJ, Gotlib J, et al. A tyrosine kinase created by fusion of the PDGFRA and FIP1L1 genes as a therapeutic target of imatinib in idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome. N Engl J Med 2003; 348:1201.
  20. Gotlib J. Eosinophilic myeloid disorders: new classification and novel therapeutic strategies. Curr Opin Hematol 2010; 17:117.
  21. Pettenati MJ, Rao PN, Phelan MC, et al. Paracentric inversions in humans: a review of 446 paracentric inversions with presentation of 120 new cases. Am J Med Genet 1995; 55:171.
  22. Kaiser P. Pericentric inversions. Problems and significance for clinical genetics. Hum Genet 1984; 68:1.