[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
research-article

Protein interaction network underpins concordant prognosis among heterogeneous breast cancer signatures

Published: 01 June 2010 Publication History

Abstract

Characterizing the biomolecular systems' properties underpinning prognosis signatures derived from gene expression profiles remains a key clinical and biological challenge. In breast cancer, while different "poor-prognosis" sets of genes have predicted patient survival outcome equally well in independent cohorts, these prognostic signatures have surprisingly little genetic overlap. We examine 10 such published expression-based signatures that are predictors or distinct breast cancer phenotypes, uncover their mechanistic interconnectivity through a protein-protein interaction network, and introduce a novel cross-"gene expression signature" analysis method using (i) domain knowledge to constrain multiple comparisons in a mechanistically relevant single-gene network interactions and (ii) scale-free permutation re-sampling to statistically control for hubness (SPAN - Single Protein Analysis of Network with constant node degree per protein). At adjusted p-values<5%, 54-genes thus identified have a significantly greater connectivity than those through meticulous permutation re-sampling of the context-constrained network. More importantly, eight of 10 genetically non-overlapping signatures are connected through well-established mechanisms of breast cancer oncogenesis and progression. Gene Ontology enrichment studies demonstrate common markers of cell cycle regulation. Kaplan-Meier analysis of three independent historical gene expression sets confirms this network-signature's inherent ability to identify "poor outcome" in ER(+) patients without the requirement of machine learning. We provide a novel demonstration that genetically distinct prognosis signatures, developed from independent clinical datasets, occupy overlapping prognostic space of breast cancer via shared mechanisms that are mediated by genetically different yet mechanistically comparable interactions among proteins of differentially expressed genes in the signatures. This is the first study employing a networks' approach to aggregate established gene expression signatures in order to develop a phenotype/pathway-based cancer roadmap with the potential for (i) novel drug development applications and for (ii) facilitating the clinical deployment of prognostic gene signatures with improved mechanistic understanding of biological processes and functions associated with gene expression changes. http://www.lussierlab.org/publication/networksignature/

References

[1]
L.J. van 't Veer, H. Dai, Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer, Nature, 415 (2002) 530-536.
[2]
M.J. van de Vijver, Y.D. He, A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer, N Engl J Med, 347 (2002) 1999-2009.
[3]
S. Paik, S. Shak, A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer, N Engl J Med, 351 (2004) 2817-2826.
[4]
H.Y. Chuang, E. Lee, Network-based classification of breast cancer metastasis, Mol Syst Biol, 3 (2007) 140.
[5]
A.J. Minn, G.P. Gupta, Genes that mediate breast cancer metastasis to lung, Nature, 436 (2005) 518-524.
[6]
Y. Wang, J.G. Klijn, Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer, Lancet, 365 (2005) 671-679.
[7]
C. Fan, D.S. Oh, Concordance among gene-expression-based predictors for breast cancer, N Engl J Med, 355 (2006) 560-569.
[8]
J. Massague, Sorting out breast-cancer gene signatures, N Engl J Med, 356 (2007) 294-297.
[9]
F. Bertucci, P. Finetti, Gene expression profiling for molecular characterization of inflammatory breast cancer and prediction of response to chemotherapy, Cancer Res, 64 (2004) 8558-8565.
[10]
L.H. Saal, P. Johansson, Poor prognosis in carcinoma is associated with a gene expression signature of aberrant PTEN tumor suppressor pathway activity, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 104 (2007) 7564-7569.
[11]
R. Shen, D. Ghosh, Prognostic meta-signature of breast cancer developed by two-stage mixture modeling of microarray data, BMC Genomics, 5 (2004) 94.
[12]
M.H. van Vliet, F. Reyal, Pooling breast cancer datasets has a synergetic effect on classification performance and improves signature stability, BMC Genomics, 9 (2008) 375.
[13]
M.A. Pujana, J.D. Han, Network modeling links breast cancer susceptibility and centrosome dysfunction, Nat Genet, 39 (2007) 1338-1349.
[14]
A.A. Margolin, A. Califano, Theory and limitations of genetic network inference from microarray data, Ann NY Acad Sci, 1115 (2007) 51-72.
[15]
A.A. Margolin, I. Nemenman, ARACNE: an algorithm for the reconstruction of gene regulatory networks in a mammalian cellular context, BMC Bioinformatics, 7 (2006) S7.
[16]
K. Lage, E.O. Karlberg, A human phenome-interactome network of protein complexes implicated in genetic disorders, Nat Biotechnol, 25 (2007) 309-316.
[17]
Y. Lee, X. Yang, Network modeling identifies molecular functions targeted by miR-204 to suppress head and neck tumor metastasis, PLoS Comput Biol, 6 (2010) e1000730.
[18]
L. Sam, Y. Liu, Discovery of protein interaction networks shared by diseases, Pac Symp Biocomput, 76 (2007) 87.
[19]
S. Van Laere, I. Van der Auwera, Distinct molecular signature of inflammatory breast cancer by cDNA microarray analysis, Breast Cancer Res Treat, 93 (2005) 237-246.
[20]
K. Wang, M.J. Alvarez, Dissecting the interface between signaling and transcriptional regulation in human B cells, Pac Symp Biocomput, 264 (2009) 275.
[21]
T. Ideker, R. Sharan, Protein networks in disease, Genome Res, 18 (2008) 644-652.
[22]
R. Liu, X. Wang, The prognostic role of a gene signature from tumorigenic breast-cancer cells, N Engl J Med, 356 (2007) 217-226.
[23]
C. Sotiriou, P. Wirapati, Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis, J Natl Cancer Inst, 98 (2006) 262-272.
[24]
A.V. Ivshina, J. George, Genetic reclassification of histologic grade delineates new clinical subtypes of breast cancer, Cancer Res, 66 (2006) 10292-10301.
[25]
Y. Kang, P.M. Siegel, A multigenic program mediating breast cancer metastasis to bone, Cancer Cell, 3 (2003) 537-549.
[26]
Ingenuity Systems¿.
[27]
H. Yu, P.M. Kim, The importance of bottlenecks in protein networks: correlation with gene essentiality and expression dynamics, PLoS Comput Biol, 3 (2007) e59.
[28]
Y. Tabach, M. Milyavsky, The promoters of human cell cycle genes integrate signals from two tumor suppressive pathways during cellular transformation, Mol Syst Biol, 1 (2005) 22.
[29]
C. Desmedt, F. Piette, Strong time dependence of the 76-gene prognostic signature for node-negative breast cancer patients in the TRANSBIG multicenter independent validation series, Clin Cancer Res, 13 (2007) 3207-3214.
[30]
P. Shannon, A. Markiel, Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks, Genome Res, 13 (2003) 2498-2504.
[31]
M. Kanehisa, S. Goto, KEGG for representation and analysis of molecular networks involving diseases and drugs, Nucleic Acids Res, 38 (2010) D355-D360.
[32]
H. Yamauchi, M. Cristofanilli, Molecular targets for treatment of inflammatory breast cancer, Nat Rev Clin Oncol, 6 (2009) 387-394.
[33]
S.M. Swain, J.W. Wilson, Estrogen receptor status of primary breast cancer is predictive of estrogen receptor status of contralateral breast cancer, J Natl Cancer Inst, 96 (2004) 516-523.
[34]
H.E. Cunliffe, M. Ringner, The gene expression response of breast cancer to growth regulators: patterns and correlation with tumor expression profiles, Cancer Res, 63 (2003) 7158-7166.
[35]
B.S. Wittner, D.C. Sgroi, Analysis of the MammaPrint breast cancer assay in a predominantly postmenopausal cohort, Clin Cancer Res, 14 (2008) 2988-2993.
[36]
N. Srour, M.A. Reymond, Lost in translation? A systematic database of gene expression in breast cancer, Pathobiology, 75 (2008) 112-118.
[37]
K.S. Albain, W.E. Barlow, Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial, Lancet Oncol, 11 (2010) 55-65.
[38]
http://www.thebiogrid.org/downloads.php. BioGRID.
[39]
http://reactome.org/download/index.html. Reactome.
[40]
http://dip.doe-mbi.ucla.edu/dip/Download.cgi. Database of interacting proteins.
[41]
http://mint.bio.uniroma2.it/mint/download.do. Domino: a domain peptide interactions database.
[42]
http://www.hprd.org/download. Human proteome reference database.
[43]
http://bond.unleashedinformatics.com. Biological objects network databank.
[44]
I.J. Farkas, C. Wu, Topological basis of signal integration in the transcriptional-regulatory network of the yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, BMC Bioinformatics, 7 (2006) 478.
[45]
A.L. Barabasi, R. Albert, Emergence of scaling in random networks, Science, 286 (1999) 509-512.
[46]
Team RDC R. A language and environmental for statistical computing; 2005.
[47]
C. Li, W. Hung Wong, Model-based analysis of oligonucleotide arrays: model validation, design issues and standard error application, Genome Biol, 2 (2001).
[48]
R.L.A. Simon, M.C. Li, M. Ngan, S. Menenzes, Y.D. Zhao, Analysis of gene expression data using BRB-array tools, Cancer Inform, 3 (2007) 11-17.
[49]
A. Subramanian, P. Tamayo, Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 102 (2005) 15545-15550.
[50]
www.graphpad.com. GraphPad.
[51]
www.geneontology.org/GO.tools.microarray.shtml#onto-e Onto-Express.
[52]
M. Ashburner, C.A. Ball, Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. The Gene Ontology Consortium, Nat Genet, 25 (2000) 25-29.
[53]
D. Cox, Regression models and life tables, J R Stat Soc B, 34 (1972) 187-202.
  1. Protein interaction network underpins concordant prognosis among heterogeneous breast cancer signatures

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Journal of Biomedical Informatics
      Journal of Biomedical Informatics  Volume 43, Issue 3
      June, 2010
      115 pages

      Publisher

      Elsevier Science

      San Diego, CA, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 01 June 2010

      Author Tags

      1. Breast cancer
      2. Context-constrained networks
      3. Gene signatures
      4. Protein interaction networks
      5. Systems biology

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • 0
        Total Citations
      • 0
        Total Downloads
      • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
      Reflects downloads up to 07 Jan 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      View Options

      View options

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media