Joint Clustering of Single-Cell Sequencing and Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization Data for Reconstructing Clonal Heterogeneity in Cancers

Aneuploidy and whole genome duplication (WGD) events are common features of cancers associated with poor outcomes, but the ways they influence trajectories of clonal evolution are poorly understood. Phylogenetic methods for reconstructing clonal evolution from genomic data have proven a powerful tool for understanding how clonal evolution occurs in the process of cancer progression, but extant methods so far have limited the ability to resolve tumor evolution via ploidy changes. This limitation exists in part because single-cell DNA-sequencing (scSeq), which has been crucial to developing detailed profiles of clonal evolution, has difficulty in resolving ploidy changes and WGD. Multiplex interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (miFISH) provides a more unambiguous signal of single-cell ploidy changes but it is limited to profiling small numbers of single markers. Here, we develop a joint clustering method to combine these two data sources with the goal of better resolving ploidy changes in tumor evolution. We develop a probabilistic framework to maximize the probability of latent variables given the pre-clustered datasets, which we optimize via Markov chain Monte Carlo sampling combined with linear regression. We validate the method by using simulated data derived from a glioblastoma (GBM) case profiled by both scSeq and miFISH. We further apply the method to two GBM cases with scSeq and miFISH data by reconstructing a phylogenetic tree from the joint clustering results, demonstrating their synergistic value in understanding how focal copy number changes and WGD events can collectively contribute to tumor progression.

[1]  Benjamin J Raphael,et al.  Copy number evolution with weighted aberrations in cancer , 2020, Bioinform..

[2]  S. Petruolo,et al.  Aneuploidy in breast cancer: a fluorescence in situ hybridization study. , 1995, Cytometry.

[3]  Russell Schwartz,et al.  Phylogenetic analysis of multiprobe fluorescence in situ hybridization data from tumor cell populations , 2013, Bioinform..

[4]  S. Gabriel,et al.  Pan-cancer patterns of somatic copy-number alteration , 2013, Nature Genetics.

[5]  Luay Nakhleh,et al.  SiCloneFit: Bayesian inference of population structure, genotype, and phylogeny of tumor clones from single-cell genome sequencing data , 2019, Genome Research.

[6]  Alberto Orfao,et al.  Detailed characterization of alterations of chromosomes 7, 9, and 10 in glioblastomas as assessed by single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays. , 2011, The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD.

[7]  Russell Schwartz,et al.  Inferring models of multiscale copy number evolution for single-tumor phylogenetics , 2015, Bioinform..

[8]  E. Letouzé,et al.  Analysis of the copy number profiles of several tumor samples from the same patient reveals the successive steps in tumorigenesis , 2010, Genome Biology.

[9]  Leland McInnes,et al.  UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection , 2018, J. Open Source Softw..

[10]  Stefano Colella,et al.  Loss of Heterozygosity on Chromosome 10 Is More Extensive in Primary (De Novo) Than in Secondary Glioblastomas , 2000, Laboratory Investigation.

[11]  A. Schäffer,et al.  Aneuploidy, TP53 mutation, and amplification of MYC correlate with increased intratumor heterogeneity and poor prognosis of breast cancer patients , 2018, Genes, chromosomes & cancer.

[12]  S. Gabriel,et al.  Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. , 2010, Cancer cell.

[13]  Benjamin J Raphael,et al.  SCARLET: Single-cell tumor phylogeny inference with copy-number constrained mutation losses. , 2020, Cell systems.

[14]  E. Lander,et al.  Assessing the significance of chromosomal aberrations in cancer: Methodology and application to glioma , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[15]  A. Schäffer,et al.  The evolution of tumour phylogenetics: principles and practice , 2017, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[16]  Henry H. Heng,et al.  Chromosomal instability (CIN): what it is and why it is crucial to cancer evolution , 2013, Cancer and Metastasis Reviews.

[17]  B. Taylor,et al.  Genome doubling shapes the evolution and prognosis of advanced cancers , 2018, Nature Genetics.

[18]  P. Nowell The clonal evolution of tumor cell populations. , 1976, Science.

[19]  ShamirRon,et al.  A Linear-Time Algorithm for the Copy Number Transformation Problem. , 2017 .

[20]  D. Pellman,et al.  From polyploidy to aneuploidy, genome instability and cancer , 2004, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[21]  Y. Peer,et al.  The evolutionary significance of polyploidy , 2017, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[22]  Russell Schwartz,et al.  Tumor Copy Number Deconvolution Integrating Bulk and Single-Cell Sequencing Data. , 2020, Journal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology.

[23]  A. Schäffer,et al.  FISHtrees 3.0: Tumor Phylogenetics Using a Ploidy Probe , 2016, PloS one.

[24]  Samuel F. Bakhoum,et al.  Chromosomal instability drives metastasis through a cytosolic DNA response , 2017, Nature.

[25]  J. Troge,et al.  Tumour evolution inferred by single-cell sequencing , 2011, Nature.