Revisiting inconsistency in large pharmacogenomic studies

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Revisiting inconsistency in large pharmacogenomic studies

Citable link to this page


Title: Revisiting inconsistency in large pharmacogenomic studies
Author: Safikhani, Zhaleh; Smirnov, Petr; Freeman, Mark; El-Hachem, Nehme; She, Adrian; Rene, Quevedo; Goldenberg, Anna; Birkbak, Nicolai J.; Hatzis, Christos; Shi, Leming; Beck, Andrew H.; Aerts, Hugo J.W.L.; Quackenbush, John; Haibe-Kains, Benjamin

Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.

Citation: Safikhani, Z., P. Smirnov, M. Freeman, N. El-Hachem, A. She, Q. Rene, A. Goldenberg, et al. 2017. “Revisiting inconsistency in large pharmacogenomic studies.” F1000Research 5 (1): 2333. doi:10.12688/f1000research.9611.3.
Full Text & Related Files:
Abstract: In 2013, we published a comparative analysis of mutation and gene expression profiles and drug sensitivity measurements for 15 drugs characterized in the 471 cancer cell lines screened in the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) and Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE). While we found good concordance in gene expression profiles, there was substantial inconsistency in the drug responses reported by the GDSC and CCLE projects. We received extensive feedback on the comparisons that we performed. This feedback, along with the release of new data, prompted us to revisit our initial analysis. We present a new analysis using these expanded data, where we address the most significant suggestions for improvements on our published analysis — that targeted therapies and broad cytotoxic drugs should have been treated differently in assessing consistency, that consistency of both molecular profiles and drug sensitivity measurements should be compared across cell lines, and that the software analysis tools provided should have been easier to run, particularly as the GDSC and CCLE released additional data. Our re-analysis supports our previous finding that gene expression data are significantly more consistent than drug sensitivity measurements. Using new statistics to assess data consistency allowed identification of two broad effect drugs and three targeted drugs with moderate to good consistency in drug sensitivity data between GDSC and CCLE. For three other targeted drugs, there were not enough sensitive cell lines to assess the consistency of the pharmacological profiles. We found evidence of inconsistencies in pharmacological phenotypes for the remaining eight drugs. Overall, our findings suggest that the drug sensitivity data in GDSC and CCLE continue to present challenges for robust biomarker discovery. This re-analysis provides additional support for the argument that experimental standardization and validation of pharmacogenomic response will be necessary to advance the broad use of large pharmacogenomic screens.
Published Version: doi:10.12688/f1000research.9611.3
Other Sources:
Terms of Use: This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at
Citable link to this page:
Downloads of this work:

Show full Dublin Core record

This item appears in the following Collection(s)


Search DASH

Advanced Search