A forward selection algorithm to identify mutually exclusive alterations in cancer studies

Epistasis and evolutionary dependencies in human cancers

Cancer evolution is driven by the concerted action of multiple molecular alterations, which emerge and are selected during tumor progression. An alteration is selected when it provides an advantage to the tumor cell. However, the advantage provided by a specific alteration depends on the tumor lineage, cell epigenetic state, and presence of additional alterations. In this case, we say that an evolutionary dependency exists between an alteration and what influences its selection. Epistatic interactions between altered genes lead to evolutionary dependencies (EDs), by favoring or vetoing specific combinations of events. Large-scale cancer genomics studies have discovered examples of such dependencies, and showed that they influence tumor progression, disease phenotypes, and therapeutic response. In the past decade, several algorithmic approaches have been proposed to infer EDs from large-scale genomics datasets. These methods adopt diverse strategies to address common challenges and shed new light on cancer evolutionary trajectories. Here, we review these efforts starting from a simple conceptualization of the problem, presenting the tackled and still unmet needs in the field, and discussing the implications of EDs in cancer biology and precision oncology.

A Network-Centric Framework for the Evaluation of Mutual Exclusivity Tests on Cancer Drivers

One of the key concepts employed in cancer driver gene identification is that of mutual exclusivity (ME); a driver mutation is less likely to occur in case of an earlier mutation that has common functionality in the same molecular pathway. Several ME tests have been proposed recently, however the current protocols to evaluate ME tests have two main limitations. Firstly the evaluations are mostly with respect to simulated data and secondly the evaluation metrics lack a network-centric view. The latter is especially crucial as the notion of common functionality can be achieved through searching for interaction patterns in relevant networks. We propose a network-centric framework to evaluate the pairwise significances found by statistical ME tests. It has three main components. The first component consists of metrics employed in the network-centric ME evaluations. Such metrics are designed so that network knowledge and the reference set of known cancer genes are incorporated in ME evaluations under a careful definition of proper control groups. The other two components are designed as further mechanisms to avoid confounders inherent in ME detection on top of the network-centric view. To this end, our second objective is to dissect the side effects caused by mutation load artifacts where mutations driving tumor subtypes with low mutation load might be incorrectly diagnosed as mutually exclusive. Finally, as part of the third main component, the confounding issue stemming from the use of nonspecific interaction networks generated as combinations of interactions from different tissues is resolved through the creation and use of tissue-specific networks in the proposed framework. The data, the source code and useful scripts are available at: https://github.com/abu-compbio/NetCentric.

Identifying collateral and synthetic lethal vulnerabilities within the DNA-damage response

BACKGROUND

A pair of genes is defined as synthetically lethal if defects on both cause the death of the cell but a defect in only one of the two is compatible with cell viability. Ideally, if A and B are two synthetic lethal genes, inhibiting B should kill cancer cells with a defect on A, and should have no effects on normal cells. Thus, synthetic lethality can be exploited for highly selective cancer therapies, which need to exploit differences between normal and cancer cells.

RESULTS

In this paper, we present a new method for predicting synthetic lethal (SL) gene pairs. As neighbouring genes in the genome have highly correlated profiles of copy number variations (CNAs), our method clusters proximal genes with a similar CNA profile, then predicts mutually exclusive group pairs, and finally identifies the SL gene pairs within each group pairs. For mutual-exclusion testing we use a graph-based method which takes into account the mutation frequencies of different subjects and genes. We use two different methods for selecting the pair of SL genes; the first is based on the gene essentiality measured in various conditions by means of the "Gene Activity Ranking Profile" GARP score; the second leverages the annotations of gene to biological pathways.

CONCLUSIONS

This method is unique among current SL prediction approaches, it reduces false-positive SL predictions compared to previous methods, and it allows establishing explicit collateral lethality relationship of gene pairs within mutually exclusive group pairs.