Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Identification of cancer patient subgroups using high throughput genomic data is of critical importance to clinicians and scientists because it can offer opportunities for more personalized treatment and overlapping treatments of cancers. In spite of tremendous efforts, this problem still remains challenging because of low reproducibility and instability of identified cancer subgroups and molecular features. In order to address this challenge, we developed Integrative Genomics Robust iDentification of cancer subgroups (InGRiD), a statistical approach that integrates information from biological pathway databases with high-throughput genomic data to improve the robustness for identification and interpretation of molecularly-defined subgroups of cancer patients. We applied InGRiD to the gene expression data of high-grade serous ovarian cancer from The Cancer Genome Atlas and the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study. The results indicate clear benefits of the pathway-level approaches over the gene-level approaches. In addition, using the proposed InGRiD framework, we also investigate and address the issue of gene sharing among pathways, which often occurs in practice, to further facilitate biological interpretation of key molecular features associated with cancer progression. The R package “InGRiD” implementing the proposed approach is currently available in our research group GitHub webpage (https://dongjunchung.github.io/INGRID/).

Keywords

Clustering variable selection biological pathway integrative analysis cancer genomics gene set

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature 2011; 474: 609–615.

Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of human colon and rectal cancer. Nature 2012; 487: 330–337.

Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive molecular characterization of gastric adenocarcinoma. Nature 2014; 513: 202–209.

Hoadley

Yau

Wolf

et al.

Multiplatform analysis of 12 cancer types reveals molecular classification within and across tissues of origin. Cell 2014; 158: 929–944.

Kandoth

Schultz

Cherniack

et al.

Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma. Nature 2013; 497: 67–73.

Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2012; 490: 61–70.

Wang

Seshan

et al.

Pattern discovery and cancer gene identification in integrated cancer genomic data. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2013; 110: 4245–4250.

Tyekucheva

Marchionni

Karchin

Parmigiani

. Integrating diverse genomic data using gene sets. Genome Biol 2011; 12: R105–R105.

Vaske

Benz

Sanborn

et al.

Inference of patient-specific pathway activities from multi-dimensional cancer genomics data using PARADIGM. Bioinformatics 2010; 26: i237–i245.

10.

Shen

Olshen

Ladanyi

. Integrative clustering of multiple genomic data types using a joint latent variable model with application to breast and lung cancer subtype analysis. Bioinformatics 2009; 25: 2906–2912.

11.

Shen

Wang

. Sparse integrative clustering of multiple omics data sets. Ann Appl Stat 2013; 7: 269–294.

12.

Glaab

. Using prior knowledge from cellular pathways and molecular networks for diagnostic specimen classification. Brief Bioinform 2015.

13.

Kim

Kon

DeLisi

. Pathway-based classification of cancer subtypes. Biol Direct 2012; 7: 21–21.

14.

Chang

Chen

et al.

Pathway-based gene signatures predicting clinical outcome of lung adenocarcinoma. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 10979–10979.

15.

Allison

Cui

Page

Sabripour

. Microarray data analysis: from disarray to consolidation and consensus. Nat Rev Genet 2006; 7: 55–65.

16.

Hofree

Shen

Carter

et al.

Network-based stratification of tumor mutations. Nat Methods 2013; 10: 1108–1115.

17.

Eng

Wang

Bradley

et al.

Pathway index models for construction of patient-specific risk profiles. Stat Med 2013; 32: 1524–1535.

18.

Kanehisa

Goto

. KEGG: Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 2000; 28: 27–30.

19.

Jiang

Gentleman

. Extensions to gene set enrichment. Bioinformatics 2007; 23: 306–313.

20.

Tarca

Draghici

Bhatti

et al.

Down-weighting overlapping genes improves gene set analysis. BMC Bioinform 2012; 13: 136–136.

21.

Tothill

Tinker

George

et al.

Novel molecular subtypes of serous and endometrioid ovarian cancer linked to clinical outcome. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 5198–5208.

22.

Bolstad

Irizarry

Astrand

et al.

A comparison of normalization methods for high density oligonucleotide array data based on variance and bias. Bioinformatics 2003; 19: 185–193.

23.

Jones

Zhang

Parsons

et al.

Core signaling pathways in human pancreatic cancers revealed by global genomic analyses. Science 2008; 321: 1801–1806.

24.

Vogelstein

Papadopoulos

Velculescu

et al.

Cancer genome landscapes. Science 2013; 339: 1546–1558.

25.

Winterhoff

Maile

Mitra

et al.

Single cell sequencing reveals heterogeneity within ovarian cancer epithelium and cancer associated stromal cells. Gynecol Oncol 2017.

26.

Scarbrough

Weber

Iversen

et al.

A cross-cancer genetic association analysis of the DNA repair and DNA damage signaling pathways for lung, ovary, prostate, breast, and colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 2016; 25: 193–200.

27.

Verhaak

Tamayo

Yang

et al.

Prognostically relevant gene signatures of high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. J Clin Invest 2013; 123: 517–525.

28.

Reynolds

Richards

de la Iglesia

et al.

Clustering rules: a comparison of partitioning and hierarchical clustering algorithms. J Math Model Algorithm 2006; 5: 475–504.

29.

Bastien

Bertrand

Meyer

et al.

Deviance residuals-based sparse PLS and sparse kernel PLS regression for censored data. Bioinformatics 2015; 31: 397–404.

30.

Chun

Keles

. Sparse partial least squares regression for simultaneous dimension reduction and variable selection. J R Stat Soc Series B Stat Methodol 2010; 72: 3–25.

31.

Chung

Keles

. Sparse partial least squares classification for high dimensional data. Stat Appl Genet Mol Biol 2010; 9: Article17–Article17.

32.

Tibshirani

. The lasso method for variable selection in the Cox model. Stat Med 1997; 16: 385–395.

33.

Croft

O’Kelly

et al.

Reactome: a database of reactions, pathways and biological processes. Nucleic Acids Res 2011; 39: D691–D697.

34.

Kutmon

Riutta

Nunes

et al.

WikiPathways: capturing the full diversity of pathway knowledge. Nucleic Acids Res 2016; 44: D488–D494.

35.

Whetzel

Noy

Shah

et al.

BioPortal: enhanced functionality via new Web services from the National Center for Biomedical Ontology to access and use ontologies in software applications. Nucleic Acids Res 2011; 39: W541–W545.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.55 MB

Semi-supervised identification of cancer subgroups using survival outcomes and overlapping grouping information

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material