A systems approach to model metastatic progression.

Proteomic profiling of human disease has seen much early activity with the accessibility of the newest generation of high-throughput platforms and technologies. Nevertheless, the nature of the dynamic physiologic milieu and high dimensionality of the data has complicated major diagnostic and prognostic breakthroughs. Our recent article in Cancer Cell delineates an integrative model for culling a molecular signature of metastatic progression in prostate cancer from proteomic and transcriptomic analyses and shows its facility as a predictor of prognosis. The study leveraged direct proteomic analysis of tumor tissue extracts, differential feature selection characterizing the proteomic alterations of prostate cancer subclasses, and integration with public and study-derived genomic data to construct a multiplex gene signature representing progression of indolent cancer to aggressive disease. This further predicted clinical outcome in a variety of solid tumors. This review describes the context of the work, the framework for the analysis itself, and a look forward to the promise of this systems approach to human disease.

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

[2]  J. Weinstein,et al.  Biomarkers in Cancer Staging, Prognosis and Treatment Selection , 2005, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[3]  John T. Wei,et al.  Integrative genomic and proteomic analysis of prostate cancer reveals signatures of metastatic progression. , 2005, Cancer cell.

[4]  T. Barrette,et al.  Mining for regulatory programs in the cancer transcriptome , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[5]  A. Chinnaiyan,et al.  Integrative analysis of the cancer transcriptome , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[6]  A. Jemal,et al.  Cancer Statistics, 2005 , 2005, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[7]  Michael E Phelps,et al.  Systems Biology and New Technologies Enable Predictive and Preventative Medicine , 2004, Science.

[8]  M. Becich,et al.  Gene expression alterations in prostate cancer predicting tumor aggression and preceding development of malignancy. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  D. Ransohoff.  Rules of evidence for cancer molecular-marker discovery and validation , 2004, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[10]  W. Gerald,et al.  Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of prostate cancer. , 2004, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[11]  Daniel B. Martin,et al.  Quantitative Proteomic Analysis of Proteins Released by Neoplastic Prostate Epithelium , 2004, Cancer Research.

[12]  A. Owen,et al.  A Bayesian framework for combining heterogeneous data sources for gene function prediction (in Saccharomyces cerevisiae) , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  R. Aebersold,et al.  Mass spectrometry-based proteomics , 2003, Nature.

[14]  E. Lander,et al.  A molecular signature of metastasis in primary solid tumors , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[15]  S. Dhanasekaran,et al.  The polycomb group protein EZH2 is involved in progression of prostate cancer , 2002, Nature.

[16]  E. Petricoin,et al.  Clinical proteomics: translating benchside promise into bedside reality , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[17]  P. Schellhammer,et al.  Serum protein fingerprinting coupled with a pattern-matching algorithm distinguishes prostate cancer from benign prostate hyperplasia and healthy men. , 2002, Cancer research.

[18]  David E. Misek,et al.  Discordant Protein and mRNA Expression in Lung Adenocarcinomas * , 2002, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[19]  Roger E Bumgarner,et al.  Integrated genomic and proteomic analyses of a systematically perturbed metabolic network. , 2001, Science.

[20]  J. Mesirov,et al.  Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. , 1999, Science.