Person:

Haibe-Kains, Benjamin

GeneSigDB (http://www.genesigdb.org or http://compbio.dfci.harvard.edu/genesigdb/) is a database of gene signatures that have been extracted and manually curated from the published literature. It provides a standardized resource of published prognostic, diagnostic and other gene signatures of cancer and related disease to the community so they can compare the predictive power of gene signatures or use these in gene set enrichment analysis. Since GeneSigDB release 1.0, we have expanded from 575 to 3515 gene signatures, which were collected and transcribed from 1604 published articles largely focused on gene expression in cancer, stem cells, immune cells, development and lung disease. We have made substantial upgrades to the GeneSigDB website to improve accessibility and usability, including adding a tag cloud browse function, facetted navigation and a ‘basket’ feature to store genes or gene signatures of interest. Users can analyze GeneSigDB gene signatures, or upload their own gene list, to identify gene signatures with significant gene overlap and results can be viewed on a dynamic editable heatmap that can be downloaded as a publication quality image. All data in GeneSigDB can be downloaded in numerous formats including .gmt file format for gene set enrichment analysis or as a R/Bioconductor data file. GeneSigDB is available from http://www.genesigdb.org.

Genomics provided us with an unprecedented quantity of data on the genes that are activated or repressed in a wide range of phenotypes. We have increasingly come to recognize that defining the networks and pathways underlying these phenotypes requires both the integration of multiple data types and the development of advanced computational methods to infer relationships between the genes and to estimate the predictive power of the networks through which they interact. To address these issues we have developed Predictive Networks (PN), a flexible, open-source, web-based application and data services framework that enables the integration, navigation, visualization and analysis of gene interaction networks. The primary goal of PN is to allow biomedical researchers to evaluate experimentally derived gene lists in the context of large-scale gene interaction networks. The PN analytical pipeline involves two key steps. The first is the collection of a comprehensive set of known gene interactions derived from a variety of publicly available sources. The second is to use these ‘known’ interactions together with gene expression data to infer robust gene networks. The PN web application is accessible from http://predictivenetworks.org. The PN code base is freely available at https://sourceforge.net/projects/predictivenets/.

Background and Purpose: Radiomics provides opportunities to quantify the tumor phenotype non-invasively by applying a large number of quantitative imaging features. This study evaluates computed-tomography (CT) radiomic features for their capability to predict distant metastasis (DM) for lung adenocarcinoma patients.

Material and Methods: We included two datasets: 98 patients for discovery and 84 for validation. The phenotype of the primary tumor was quantified on pre-treatment CT-scans using 635 radiomic features. Univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate radiomics performance using the concordance index (CI).

Results: Thirty-five radiomic features were found to be prognostic (CI > 0.60, FDR < 5%) for DM and twelve for survival. It is noteworthy that tumor volume was only moderately prognostic for DM (CI=0.55, p-value=2.77 × 10−5) in the discovery cohort. A radiomic-signature had strong power for predicting DM in the independent validation dataset (CI=0.61, p-value=1.79 ×10−17). Adding this radiomic-signature to a clinical model resulted in a significant improvement of predicting DM in the validation dataset (p-value=1.56 × 10−11).

Conclusions: Although only basic metrics are routinely quantified, this study shows that radiomic features capturing detailed information of the tumor phenotype can be used as a prognostic biomarker for clinically-relevant factors such as DM. Moreover, the radiomic-signature provided additional information to clinical data.

Background: We have previously shown that the Gene expression Grade Index (GGI) was able to identify two subtypes of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors that were associated with statistically distinct clinical outcomes in both untreated and tamoxifen-treated patients. Here, we aim to investigate the ability of the GGI to predict relapses in postmenopausal women who were treated with tamoxifen (T) or letrozole (L) within the BIG 1–98 trial. Methods: We generated gene expression profiles (Affymetrix) and computed the GGI for a matched, case-control sample of patients enrolled in the BIG 1–98 trial from the two hospitals where frozen samples were available. All relapses (cases) were identified from patients randomized to receive monotherapy or from the switching treatment arms for whom relapse occurred before the switch. Each case was randomly matched with four controls based upon nodal status and treatment (T or L). The prognostic value of GGI was assessed as a continuous predictor and divided at the median. Predictive accuracy of GGI was estimated using time-dependent area under the curve (AUC) of the ROC curves. Results: Frozen samples were analyzable for 48 patients (10 cases and 38 controls). Seven of the 10 cases had been assigned to receive L. Cases and controls were comparable with respect to menopausal and nodal status, local and chemotherapy, and HER2 positivity. Cases were slightly older than controls and had a larger proportion of large, poorly differentiated ER+/PgR- tumors. The GGI was significantly and linearly related to risk of relapse: each 10-unit increase in GGI resulted in an increase of approximately 11% in the hazard rate (p = 0.02). Within the subgroups of patients with node-positive disease or who were treated with L, the hazard of relapse was significantly greater for patients with GGI at or above the median. AUC reached a maximum of 78% at 27 months. Conclusion: This analysis supports the GGI as a good predictor of relapse for ER-positive patients, even among patients who receive L. Validation of these results, in a larger series from BIG 1–98, is planned using the simplified GGI represented by a smaller set of genes and tested by qRT-PCR on paraffin-embedded tissues.

Background - Single sample predictors (SSPs) and Subtype classification models (SCMs) are gene expression–based classifiers used to identify the four primary molecular subtypes of breast cancer (basal-like, HER2-enriched, luminal A, and luminal B). SSPs use hierarchical clustering, followed by nearest centroid classification, based on large sets of tumor-intrinsic genes. SCMs use a mixture of Gaussian distributions based on sets of genes with expression specifically correlated with three key breast cancer genes (estrogen receptor [ER], HER2, and aurora kinase A [AURKA]). The aim of this study was to compare the robustness, classification concordance, and prognostic value of these classifiers with those of a simplified three-gene SCM in a large compendium of microarray datasets. Methods - Thirty-six publicly available breast cancer datasets (n = 5715) were subjected to molecular subtyping using five published classifiers (three SSPs and two SCMs) and SCMGENE, the new three-gene (ER, HER2, and AURKA) SCM. We used the prediction strength statistic to estimate robustness of the classification models, defined as the capacity of a classifier to assign the same tumors to the same subtypes independently of the dataset used to fit it. We used Cohen k and Cramer V coefficients to assess concordance between the subtype classifiers and association with clinical variables, respectively. We used Kaplan–Meier survival curves and cross-validated partial likelihood to compare prognostic value of the resulting classifications. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results - SCMs were statistically significantly more robust than SSPs, with SCMGENE being the most robust because of its simplicity. SCMGENE was statistically significantly concordant with published SCMs (k = 0.65–0.70) and SSPs (k = 0.34–0.59), statistically significantly associated with ER (V = 0.64), HER2 (V = 0.52) status, and histological grade (V = 0.55), and yielded similar strong prognostic value. Conclusion - Our results suggest that adequate classification of the major and clinically relevant molecular subtypes of breast cancer can be robustly achieved with quantitative measurements of three key genes.

A major goal in translational cancer research is to identify biological signatures driving cancer progression and metastasis. A common technique applied in genomics research is to cluster patients using gene expression data from a candidate prognostic gene set, and if the resulting clusters show statistically significant outcome stratification, to associate the gene set with prognosis, suggesting its biological and clinical importance. Recent work has questioned the validity of this approach by showing in several breast cancer data sets that ‘‘random’’ gene sets tend to cluster patients into prognostically variable subgroups. This work suggests that new rigorous statistical methods are needed to identify biologically informative prognostic gene sets. To address this problem, we developed Significance Analysis of Prognostic Signatures (SAPS) which integrates standard prognostic tests with a new prognostic significance test based on stratifying patients into prognostic subtypes with random gene sets. SAPS ensures that a significant gene set is not only able to stratify patients into prognostically variable groups, but is also enriched for genes showing strong univariate associations with patient prognosis, and performs significantly better than random gene sets. We use SAPS to perform a large meta-analysis (the largest completed to date) of prognostic pathways in breast and ovarian cancer and their molecular subtypes. Our analyses show that only a small subset of the gene sets found statistically significant using standard measures achieve significance by SAPS. We identify new prognostic signatures in breast and ovarian cancer and their corresponding molecular subtypes, and we show that prognostic signatures in ER negative breast cancer are more similar to prognostic signatures in ovarian cancer than to prognostic signatures in ER positive breast cancer. SAPS is a powerful new method for deriving robust prognostic biological signatures from clinically annotated genomic datasets.