Finding common aberrations in array CGH data

Array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) technology provides high-resolution measurements of DNA aberrations at tens of thousands of locations distributed throughout the genome. These genomic aberrations cause alterations in gene expression patterns which, in turn, are a common cause for emergence of cancer. However, like all other microarray technologies, the obtained measurement data is noisy. In addition to the measurement noise, the heterogeneity of biological samples and cancer cells add biological noise and it also needs to be taken into account. To infer reliable results, analysis of aCGH data requires that different sources of uncertainty are carefully considered. We present an analysis framework that can be used to find reliable estimates of genomic aberrations that are frequent throughout a set of aCGH data. These commonly aberrant segments of DNA and the genes that reside in them, are key factors in understanding cancer. We demonstrate our framework by applying it to a set of aCGH data obtained from two different types of cancer. We also investigate what biological processes are affected by the mutations uncovered by our analysis of these cancer types using gene ontology enrichment. Based on this enrichment analysis, our framework reliably finds common aberrations in aCGH data.

[1]  J. Tchinda,et al.  Recurrent Fusion of TMPRSS2 and ETS Transcription Factor Genes in Prostate Cancer , 2005, Science.

[2]  Elena Marchiori,et al.  Chromosomal Breakpoint Detection in Human Cancer , 2003, EvoWorkshops.

[3]  Franck Picard,et al.  A statistical approach for array CGH data analysis , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[4]  M. Ashburner,et al.  Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology , 2000, Nature Genetics.

[5]  J. Squire,et al.  Chromosomal localization of DNA amplifications in neuroblastoma tumors using cDNA microarray comparative genomic hybridization. , 2003, Neoplasia.

[6]  Christian J Stoeckert,et al.  STAC: A method for testing the significance of DNA copy number aberrations across multiple array-CGH experiments. , 2006, Genome research.

[7]  Kevin P. Murphy,et al.  Integrating copy number polymorphisms into array CGH analysis using a robust HMM , 2006, ISMB.

[8]  J. Tchinda,et al.  Recurrent fusion of TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in prostate cancer. , 2006, Science.

[9]  Douglas Grove,et al.  Denoising array-based comparative genomic hybridization data using wavelets. , 2005, Biostatistics.

[10]  Jaakko Astola,et al.  CGH-Plotter: MATLAB toolbox for CGH-data analysis , 2003, Bioinform..

[11]  W. Kuo,et al.  High resolution analysis of DNA copy number variation using comparative genomic hybridization to microarrays , 1998, Nature Genetics.

[12]  D. Hanahan,et al.  The Hallmarks of Cancer , 2000, Cell.

[13]  L. Hood,et al.  Highly accurate two-gene classifier for differentiating gastrointestinal stromal tumors and leiomyosarcomas , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  Victor J. Rayward-Smith,et al.  Algorithms for Identification Key Generation and Optimization with Application to Yeast Identification , 2003, EvoWorkshops.

[15]  D. Pinkel,et al.  Array comparative genomic hybridization and its applications in cancer , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[16]  Esteban Ballestar,et al.  The impact of chromatin in human cancer: linking DNA methylation to gene silencing. , 2002, Carcinogenesis.

[17]  R Kath,et al.  Tumor progression and metastasis , 1990, Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie.

[18]  Wessel N. van Wieringen,et al.  CGHcall: Calling aberrations for array CGH tumor profiles. , 2008 .

[19]  Jane Fridlyand,et al.  Bioinformatics Original Paper a Comparison Study: Applying Segmentation to Array Cgh Data for Downstream Analyses , 2022 .

[20]  Stine H. Kresse,et al.  Array comparative genomic hybridization reveals distinct DNA copy number differences between gastrointestinal stromal tumors and leiomyosarcomas. , 2006, Cancer research.

[21]  Emmanuel Barillot,et al.  Analysis of array CGH data: from signal ratio to gain and loss of DNA regions , 2004, Bioinform..

[22]  Peter J. Park,et al.  Comparative analysis of algorithms for identifying amplifications and deletions in array CGH data , 2005, Bioinform..

[23]  John N. Weinstein,et al.  Framework for Identifying Common Aberrations in DNA Copy Number Data , 2007, RECOMB.

[24]  M. Wigler,et al.  Circular binary segmentation for the analysis of array-based DNA copy number data. , 2004, Biostatistics.

[25]  D. Pinkel,et al.  Comparative Genomic Hybridization for Molecular Cytogenetic Analysis of Solid Tumors , 2022 .

[26]  Paul H. C. Eilers,et al.  Quantile smoothing of array CGH data , 2005, Bioinform..

[27]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Hidden Markov models approach to the analysis of array CGH data , 2004 .