Mining high‐throughput screens for cancer drug targets—lessons from yeast chemical‐genomic profiling and synthetic lethality

The recent decrease in the rate that new cancer therapies are being translated into clinical use is mainly due to the lack of therapeutic efficacy and clinical safety or toxicology of the candidate drug compounds. An important prerequisite for the development of safe and effective chemical compounds is the identification of their cellular targets. High‐throughput screening is increasingly being used to test new drug compounds and to infer their cellular targets, but these quantitative screens result in high‐dimensional datasets with many inherent sources of noise. We review here the state‐of‐the‐art statistical scoring approaches used in the prediction of drug–target interactions, and illustrate their operation using publicly available data from yeast chemical‐genomic profiling studies. The real data examples underscore the need for developing more advanced data mining approaches for extracting the full information from the high‐throughput screens. A particular medical application stems from the concept of synthetic lethality in cancer and how it could open up new opportunities for personalized cancer therapies. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  J. C. Hinshaw,et al.  Discovering Modes of Action for Therapeutic Compounds Using a Genome-Wide Screen of Yeast Heterozygotes , 2004, Cell.

[2]  Alan Ashworth,et al.  Searching for synthetic lethality in cancer. , 2011, Current opinion in genetics & development.

[3]  M. Roberge,et al.  Yeast as a tool to uncover the cellular targets of drugs , 2006, Biotechnology journal.

[4]  Ted Powers,et al.  TOR Complex 1 Includes a Novel Component, Tco89p (YPL180w), and Cooperates with Ssd1p to Maintain Cellular Integrity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae* , 2004, Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[5]  Damian Szklarczyk,et al.  STITCH 2: an interaction network database for small molecules and proteins , 2009, Nucleic Acids Res..

[6]  H. Bussey,et al.  Exploring genetic interactions and networks with yeast , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[7]  Grant W. Brown,et al.  Integration of chemical-genetic and genetic interaction data links bioactive compounds to cellular target pathways , 2004, Nature Biotechnology.

[8]  Ben Lehner,et al.  Evolutionary plasticity of genetic interaction networks , 2008, Nature Genetics.

[9]  Daphne Koller,et al.  Systematic analysis of genome-wide fitness data in yeast reveals novel gene function and drug action , 2010, Genome Biology.

[10]  Elizabeth A. Winzeler,et al.  Genomic profiling of drug sensitivities via induced haploinsufficiency , 1999, Nature Genetics.

[11]  Michael J. Emanuele,et al.  A Genome-wide RNAi Screen Identifies Multiple Synthetic Lethal Interactions with the Ras Oncogene , 2009, Cell.

[12]  D. Silver,et al.  Synthetic lethality--a new direction in cancer-drug development. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  O. Kallioniemi,et al.  High-Throughput Cell-Based Screening of 4910 Known Drugs and Drug-like Small Molecules Identifies Disulfiram as an Inhibitor of Prostate Cancer Cell Growth , 2009, Clinical Cancer Research.

[14]  B. Zupan,et al.  Inference of the molecular mechanism of action from genetic interaction and gene expression data. , 2010, Omics : a journal of integrative biology.

[15]  Corey Nislow,et al.  A survey of yeast genomic assays for drug and target discovery. , 2010, Pharmacology & therapeutics.

[16]  Robert P. St.Onge,et al.  Defining genetic interaction , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[17]  Yudong D. He,et al.  Functional Discovery via a Compendium of Expression Profiles , 2000, Cell.

[18]  Michael Peyton,et al.  Synthetic lethal screen identification of chemosensitizer loci in cancer cells , 2007, Nature.

[19]  Gary D Bader,et al.  The Genetic Landscape of a Cell , 2010, Science.

[20]  D. Pe’er,et al.  Principles and Strategies for Developing Network Models in Cancer , 2011, Cell.

[21]  A. Hopkins Network pharmacology: the next paradigm in drug discovery. , 2008, Nature chemical biology.

[22]  Ricard V. Solé,et al.  Human synthetic lethal inference as potential anti-cancer target gene detection , 2009, BMC Systems Biology.

[23]  Dongsup Kim,et al.  Inference of Protein Complex Activities from Chemical-Genetic Profile and Its Applications: Predicting Drug-Target Pathways , 2008, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[24]  Paul A Clemons,et al.  The Connectivity Map: Using Gene-Expression Signatures to Connect Small Molecules, Genes, and Disease , 2006, Science.

[25]  Ronald W. Davis,et al.  Functional profiling of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae genome , 2002, Nature.

[26]  Michael Costanzo,et al.  Charting the genetic interaction map of a cell. , 2011, Current opinion in biotechnology.

[27]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  A latent variable model for chemogenomic profiling , 2005, Bioinform..

[28]  Ronald W. Davis,et al.  Functional characterization of the S. cerevisiae genome by gene deletion and parallel analysis. , 1999, Science.

[29]  W. Kaelin The Concept of Synthetic Lethality in the Context of Anticancer Therapy , 2005, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[30]  Nir Hacohen,et al.  Minimizing the risk of reporting false positives in large-scale RNAi screens , 2006, Nature Methods.

[31]  L. Hartwell,et al.  Integrating genetic approaches into the discovery of anticancer drugs. , 1997, Science.

[32]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  Chemogenomic profiling: identifying the functional interactions of small molecules in yeast. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[33]  P. Hieter,et al.  Specific synthetic lethal killing of RAD54B-deficient human colorectal cancer cells by FEN1 silencing , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[34]  Ben S. Wittner,et al.  Systematic RNA interference reveals that oncogenic KRAS-driven cancers require TBK1 , 2009, Nature.

[35]  B. Roberts,et al.  Saccharomyces cerevisiae PAC2 functions with CIN1, 2 and 4 in a pathway leading to normal microtubule stability. , 1997, Genetics.

[36]  Nevan J Krogan,et al.  Cross-species chemogenomic profiling reveals evolutionarily conserved drug mode of action , 2010, Molecular systems biology.

[37]  Tero Aittokallio,et al.  Quantitative maps of genetic interactions in yeast - Comparative evaluation and integrative analysis , 2011, BMC Systems Biology.

[38]  Corey Nislow,et al.  Recent advances and method development for drug target identification. , 2010, Trends in pharmacological sciences.

[39]  Robert P. St.Onge,et al.  The Chemical Genomic Portrait of Yeast: Uncovering a Phenotype for All Genes , 2008, Science.

[40]  S. Nijman Synthetic lethality: General principles, utility and detection using genetic screens in human cells , 2011, FEBS letters.

[41]  Jeff Piotrowski,et al.  Combining functional genomics and chemical biology to identify targets of bioactive compounds. , 2011, Current opinion in chemical biology.

[42]  A. Murray,et al.  The spindle checkpoint of budding yeast depends on a tight complex between the Mad1 and Mad2 proteins. , 1999, Molecular biology of the cell.

[43]  Robert P. St.Onge,et al.  Genome-Wide Requirements for Resistance to Functionally Distinct DNA-Damaging Agents , 2005, PLoS genetics.

[44]  N. Hacohen,et al.  Highly parallel identification of essential genes in cancer cells , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[45]  William A Weiss,et al.  Recognizing and exploiting differences between RNAi and small-molecule inhibitors. , 2007, Nature chemical biology.

[46]  Jae K. Lee,et al.  Use of yeast chemigenomics and COXEN informatics in preclinical evaluation of anticancer agents. , 2011, Neoplasia.