1
|
Stupnikov A, McInerney CE, Savage KI, McIntosh SA, Emmert-Streib F, Kennedy R, Salto-Tellez M, Prise KM, McArt DG. Robustness of differential gene expression analysis of RNA-seq. Comput Struct Biotechnol J 2021; 19:3470-3481. [PMID: 34188784 PMCID: PMC8214188 DOI: 10.1016/j.csbj.2021.05.040] [Citation(s) in RCA: 40] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2020] [Revised: 05/25/2021] [Accepted: 05/25/2021] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) is a relatively new technology that lacks standardisation. RNA-seq can be used for Differential Gene Expression (DGE) analysis, however, no consensus exists as to which methodology ensures robust and reproducible results. Indeed, it is broadly acknowledged that DGE methods provide disparate results. Despite obstacles, RNA-seq assays are in advanced development for clinical use but further optimisation will be needed. Herein, five DGE models (DESeq2, voom + limma, edgeR, EBSeq, NOISeq) for gene-level detection were investigated for robustness to sequencing alterations using a controlled analysis of fixed count matrices. Two breast cancer datasets were analysed with full and reduced sample sizes. DGE model robustness was compared between filtering regimes and for different expression levels (high, low) using unbiased metrics. Test sensitivity estimated as relative False Discovery Rate (FDR), concordance between model outputs and comparisons of a ’population’ of slopes of relative FDRs across different library sizes, generated using linear regressions, were examined. Patterns of relative DGE model robustness proved dataset-agnostic and reliable for drawing conclusions when sample sizes were sufficiently large. Overall, the non-parametric method NOISeq was the most robust followed by edgeR, voom, EBSeq and DESeq2. Our rigorous appraisal provides information for method selection for molecular diagnostics. Metrics may prove useful towards improving the standardisation of RNA-seq for precision medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Stupnikov
- Department of Biological and Medical Physics, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Dolgoprudny, Russian Federation.,Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - C E McInerney
- Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - K I Savage
- Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - S A McIntosh
- Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - F Emmert-Streib
- Predictive Society and Data Analytics Lab, Faculty of Information Technology and Communication Sciences, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland
| | - R Kennedy
- Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - M Salto-Tellez
- Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - K M Prise
- Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| | - D G McArt
- Patrick G. Johnson Centre for Cancer Research, Queen's University, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
The current global pandemic COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus has already inflicted insurmountable damage both to the human lives and global economy. There is an immediate need for identification of effective drugs to contain the disastrous virus outbreak. Global efforts are already underway at a war footing to identify the best drug combination to address the disease. In this review, an attempt has been made to understand the SARS-CoV-2 life cycle, and based on this information potential druggable targets against SARS-CoV-2 are summarized. Also, the strategies for ongoing and future drug discovery against the SARS-CoV-2 virus are outlined. Given the urgency to find a definitive cure, ongoing drug repurposing efforts being carried out by various organizations are also described. The unprecedented crisis requires extraordinary efforts from the scientific community to effectively address the issue and prevent further loss of human lives and health.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ambrish Saxena
- Indian Institute of Technology Tirupati, Tirupati, India
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Alzubi MA, Turner TH, Olex AL, Sohal SS, Tobin NP, Recio SG, Bergh J, Hatschek T, Parker JS, Sartorius CA, Perou CM, Dozmorov MG, Harrell JC. Separation of breast cancer and organ microenvironment transcriptomes in metastases. Breast Cancer Res 2019; 21:36. [PMID: 30841919 PMCID: PMC6404325 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-019-1123-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2018] [Accepted: 02/19/2019] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The seed and soil hypothesis was proposed over a century ago to describe why cancer cells (seeds) grow in certain organs (soil). Since then, the genetic properties that define the cancer cells have been heavily investigated; however, genomic mediators within the organ microenvironment that mediate successful metastatic growth are less understood. These studies sought to identify cancer- and organ-specific genomic programs that mediate metastasis. Methods In these studies, a set of 14 human breast cancer patient-derived xenograft (PDX) metastasis models was developed and then tested for metastatic tropism with two approaches: spontaneous metastases from mammary tumors and intravenous injection of PDX cells. The transcriptomes of the cancer cells when growing as tumors or metastases were separated from the transcriptomes of the microenvironment via species-specific separation of the genomes. Drug treatment of PDX spheroids was performed to determine if genes activated in metastases may identify targetable mediators of viability. Results The experimental approaches that generated metastases in PDX models were identified. RNA sequencing of 134 tumors, metastases, and normal non-metastatic organs identified cancer- and organ-specific genomic properties that mediated metastasis. A common genomic response of the liver microenvironment was found to occur in reaction to the invading PDX cells. Genes within the cancer cells were found to be either transiently regulated by the microenvironment or permanently altered due to clonal selection of metastatic sublines. Gene Set Enrichment Analyses identified more than 400 gene signatures that were commonly activated in metastases across basal-like PDXs. A Src signaling signature was found to be extensively upregulated in metastases, and Src inhibitors were found to be cytotoxic to PDX spheroids. Conclusions These studies identified that during the growth of breast cancer metastases, there were genomic changes that occurred within both the cancer cells and the organ microenvironment. We hypothesize that pathways upregulated in metastases are mediators of viability and that simultaneously targeting changes within different cancer cell pathways and/or different tissue compartments may be needed for inhibition of disease progression. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13058-019-1123-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mohammad A Alzubi
- Department of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.,Integrative Life Sciences Program, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Tia H Turner
- Department of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.,C. Kenneth and Dianne Wright Center for Clinical and Translational Research, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Amy L Olex
- C. Kenneth and Dianne Wright Center for Clinical and Translational Research, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Sahib S Sohal
- Department of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Nicholas P Tobin
- Department of Oncology and Pathology, Cancer Center Karolinska, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Susana G Recio
- Department of Genetics, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
| | - Jonas Bergh
- Department of Oncology and Pathology, Cancer Center Karolinska, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Thomas Hatschek
- Department of Oncology and Pathology, Cancer Center Karolinska, Karolinska Institutet and University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Joel S Parker
- Department of Genetics, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Carol A Sartorius
- Department of Pathology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA
| | - Charles M Perou
- Department of Genetics, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, USA
| | - Mikhail G Dozmorov
- Department of Biostatistics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - J Chuck Harrell
- Department of Pathology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. .,Integrative Life Sciences Program, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. .,C. Kenneth and Dianne Wright Center for Clinical and Translational Research, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA. .,Massey Cancer Center, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|