NetBioSIG2014-Talk by Traver Hart

  • View
    479

  • Download
    6

  • Category

    Science

Preview:

DESCRIPTION

NetBioSIG2014 at ISMB in Boston, MA, USA on July 11, 2014

Citation preview

Functional genomics and cancer subtyping with a human cancer coessentiality network

Traver HartLaboratory of Jason Moffat

Donnelly Centre, U. TorontoNetBio SIG, 11 July 2014

GI correlation networks

Costanzo & Baryshnikova, et al., 2010

GI correlationnetworks

Gene aGene bGene cGene dGene e

Cell

line

1

Cell

line

2

Cell

line

3

Cell

line

4

Cell

line

5

Cell

line

12

Cell

line

6

Cell

line

7

Cell

line

8

Cell

line

9

Cell

line

10

Cell

line

11

EssentialNonessential

In yeast, highly correlated profiles imply shared gene function. Can be used to infer function of unknown genes.

Hypothesis: Correlated essentiality profiles across human cancer cell lines (bottom) are analogous to correlated GI profiles and imply shared function—even if we don’t know the query strain

Corollary: Gene clusters can help identify cell lines with similar vulnerabilities, possibly leading to novel classification

Dixon et al., 2009

Query strains

Arra

y ge

nes

Arra

y st

rain

sQuery strains

Pooled library shRNA screens

Marcotte et al., 2012

Bayesian essentiality scoring

Hart et al., 2014

The “daisy model” & core essential genes

Hart et al., 2014

A quantitative measure of sensitivity to RNAi perturbation

Correlation, Essentiality Score vs Expression

Den

sity

Gene aGene bGene cGene dGene e

Cell

line

1

Cell

line

2

Cell

line

3

Cell

line

4

Cell

line

5

Cell

line

12

Cell

line

6

Cell

line

7

Cell

line

8

Cell

line

9

Cell

line

10

Cell

line

11

EssentialNonessential

Query cell lines

Hart et al., 2014

Mean essentiality scoreSt

d. D

ev e

ssen

tialit

y sc

ore

F-measure

Number of Cell Lines

Num

ber o

f Cel

l Lin

es

Num

ber o

f Ess

entia

l Gen

es

Optimize LLS vs KEGG

30 BrCa Luminal + Her2

24 BrCa Basal

34 OvCa

15 PDAC

Filtered data:107 total screens

2,842 genes

Correlations at 1% FDR:1,086 genes

F65

F50

No hairpin norm.

Achilles

Correlation pair rank

Log

Like

lihoo

d Sc

ore

(vs

KEG

G)

4 other

866 genes1,877 edges

RibosomeProteasomeSpliceosomeOxPhos

The HumanCoessentiality

Network

Network ClusteringRibosomeProteasomeSpliceosomeOxPhos

BRCA Luminal/HER2

BrCa/LUM+Her2BrCa/BasalOvCaPDAC

2

Expression vs. Essentiality

Correlation coefficient

GENE CORR P-VALSPDEF 0.716 2.00e-17FOXA1 0.624 6.73e-13ERBB2 0.583 4.57e-11MDM2 0.529 7.87e-09TFAP2C 0.463 5.12e-07FUBP1 0.428 4.33e-06ESR1 0.411 9.39e-05CCND1 0.410 1.17e-05

OxPhos Cluster

BrCa/LUM+Her2BrCa/BasalOvCaPDAC

OxPhos Cluster

ATP5A1ATP5B

COX17

CYC1HCCS

UQCRC1

BCS1LICT1PNPT1SSBP1SUPV3L1TMED2TMEM79

ECSITNDUFA10NDUFA11NDUFAB1

NDUFS1NDUFV1

MRPL21MRPL22MRPL23MRPL51MRPS11ICT1

Functional genomics

(MLL2)

Homolog of GrpE, NEF of Hsp70-typeATPases

Mitochondrial Hsp70 family

Conclusions:• The human cancer coessentiality network

– Depends critically on the new scoring scheme derived from Hart et al, 2014– Optimized by lessons learned from the yeast GI network

• Clusters identify cell lines with common genetic vulnerabilities– Known and novel

• Co-essentiality implies Co-functionality– A unique functional genomics resource

Open questions:• Identify genomic drivers of validated clusters?

• Improve coverage?

• Improve accuracy? CRISPR?

18

Robert RottapelFabrice SirculombFernando SuarezMauricio MedranoJosee Normand

Jason MoffatTroy KetelaKevin BrownJudice KohGlauber BritoAzin SayidDina KaramboulasDewald Van DykDahlia KasimerChristine Misquitta

AcknowledgementsEssentiality Screens in Cancer Cell Lines

Yaroslav FedyshynMarianna LuhovaBohdana FedyshynPatricia MeroChristine Misquitta

Franco Vizeacoumar

Benjamin NeelRichard MarcotteAzin Sayad

CoEssential + CoElution

850 PPI

218 neg

313?

17 PPI

60 neg

236 ?

Vs CORUM

Vs GO_CC

GENE1 GENE2 CoEss CoElu GO_CC? NotesDLST OGDH 0.75 0.97 ? aKG dehydrogenaseMRPL22 MRPL23 0.66 0.52 0 MitochondrialEIF2B2 EIF2B3 0.62 0.91 1 EIF2B complex

MRPL23 SSBP1 0.59 0.70 ? MitochondrialHCCS SSBP1 0.57 0.42 ? MitochondrialNACA RPLP2 0.56 0.61 ? TranslationICT1 MRPL22 0.55 0.68 0 MitochondrialATP5B CYC1 0.53 0.59 ? Mitochondrial

ICT1 PTCD3 0.53 0.70 ? MitochondrialEML4 MAU2 0.52 0.41 0 Microtubule associated protein / sister

chromatid cohesion factor

NSMCE1 SMC5 0.52 0.51 1 SMC5/6 complexCOPB2 COPG1 0.51 0.98 1 Coatomer complexNUTF2 RAN 0.50 0.73 1 Nuclear pore/transportNUP205 NUP93 0.50 0.61 1 Nuclear pore/transportATP5A1 CYC1 0.50 0.79 ? MitochondrialARCN1 COPB1 0.49 0.99 1 Coatomer complexEBNA1BP2 NIFK 0.49 0.60 ? Ribosome biogenesis? Mitosis?BRIX1 UTP15 0.49 0.80 ? Ribosome biogenesisEIF3C PTBP3 0.48 0.47 ? EIF3 / Polypyrimidine (RNA) bindingGRPEL1 HSPA9 0.47 0.48 ? HSP70 + nucleotide exchange factorCYC1 PTCD3 0.47 0.68 ? MitochondrialEIF5A HNRNPK 0.46 0.68 0 Translation / SplicingCYC1 UQCRC1 0.45 0.41 ? MitochondrialCYC1 ECSIT 0.45 0.50 ? MitochondrialATP5B UQCRC1 0.44 0.57 0 Mitochondrial

Why Gene Essentiality?

• Context-sensitive essentials are candidate therapeutic targets

Kaelin WG, Nat Rev Cancer, 2005

Wildtype A

Oncogenic a

Targeted b

Recommended