Using pathway modules as targets for assay development in xenobiotic screening.

Toxicology and pharmaceutical research is increasingly making use of high throughout-screening (HTS) methods to assess the effects of chemicals on molecular pathways, cells and tissues. Whole-genome microarray analysis provides broad information on the response of biological systems to chemical exposure, but is not practical to use when thousands of chemicals need to be evaluated at multiple doses and time points, as well as across different tissues, species and life-stages. A useful alternative approach is to identify a focused set of genes that can give a coarse picture of systems-level responses and that can be scaled to the evaluation of thousands of chemicals and diverse biological contexts. We demonstrate a computational approach to select in vitro expression assay targets that are informative and broadly distributed in biological pathway space, using the concept of pathway modularity. Canonical pathways are decomposed into subnetworks (modules) of functionally-related genes based on rules such as co-regulated expression, protein-protein interactions, and coordinated physiological activity. Pathway modules are constructed using these rules but are then restricted by the bounds of canonical pathways. We demonstrate this approach using a subset of genes associated with tumor development and cancer progression. Target genes were identified for assay development, and then validated by using independent, published microarray data. The result is a targeted set of genes that are sensitive predictors of whether a chemical will perturb each pathway module. These selected genes could then form the basis for a battery to test for pathway-chemical interactions under many biological contexts using throughput expression-based assays.

[1]  Adam Yasgar,et al.  Quantitative high-throughput screening: a titration-based approach that efficiently identifies biological activities in large chemical libraries. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  P. Robinson,et al.  Walking the interactome for prioritization of candidate disease genes. , 2008, American journal of human genetics.

[3]  Ying Xu,et al.  Prediction of functional modules based on comparative genome analysis and Gene Ontology application , 2005, Nucleic acids research.

[4]  Mona Singh,et al.  How and when should interactome-derived clusters be used to predict functional modules and protein function? , 2009, Bioinform..

[5]  Thomas C. Wiegers,et al.  Comparative Toxicogenomics Database: a knowledgebase and discovery tool for chemical–gene–disease networks , 2008, Nucleic Acids Res..

[6]  Kiyoko F. Aoki-Kinoshita,et al.  From genomics to chemical genomics: new developments in KEGG , 2005, Nucleic Acids Res..

[7]  Tianwei Yu,et al.  An exploratory data analysis method to reveal modular latent structures in high-throughput data , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[8]  Michael J. Keiser,et al.  Predicting new molecular targets for known drugs , 2009, Nature.

[9]  M. Fielden,et al.  A Gene Expression Signature that Predicts the Future Onset of Drug-Induced Renal Tubular Toxicity , 2005, Toxicologic pathology.

[10]  Lee Bennett,et al.  Prediction of compound signature using high density gene expression profiling. , 2002, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[11]  Nir Friedman,et al.  Modularity and directionality in genetic interaction maps , 2010, Bioinform..

[12]  Christopher P Austin,et al.  High-throughput screening assays for the identification of chemical probes. , 2007, Nature chemical biology.

[13]  Ying Xu,et al.  Prediction of functional modules based on gene distributions in microbial genomes. , 2005, Genome informatics. International Conference on Genome Informatics.

[14]  E. Snitkin,et al.  Genome-wide prioritization of disease genes and identification of disease-disease associations from an integrated human functional linkage network , 2009, Genome Biology.

[15]  Thierry Emonet,et al.  Understanding Modularity in Molecular Networks Requires Dynamics , 2009, Science Signaling.

[16]  James R. Knight,et al.  A comprehensive analysis of protein–protein interactions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae , 2000, Nature.

[17]  Minoru Kanehisa,et al.  The KEGG database. , 2002, Novartis Foundation symposium.

[18]  Daphne Koller,et al.  Genome-wide discovery of transcriptional modules from DNA sequence and gene expression , 2003, ISMB.

[19]  Jing Zhu,et al.  Edge-based scoring and searching method for identifying condition-responsive protein-protein interaction sub-network , 2007, Bioinform..

[20]  Samuel Kaski,et al.  Searching for functional gene modules with interaction component models , 2010, BMC Systems Biology.

[21]  Ron Shamir,et al.  Identifying functional modules using expression profiles and confidence-scored protein interactions , 2009, Bioinform..

[22]  Qi Liu,et al.  Gene-set analysis and reduction , 2008, Briefings Bioinform..

[23]  Michael C. Rosenstein,et al.  The comparative toxicogenomics database: a cross-species resource for building chemical-gene interaction networks. , 2006, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[24]  Like Fokkens,et al.  Cohesive versus Flexible Evolution of Functional Modules in Eukaryotes , 2009, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[25]  B. Snel,et al.  The identification of functional modules from the genomic association of genes , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[26]  Nicola J. Rinaldi,et al.  Computational discovery of gene modules and regulatory networks , 2003, Nature Biotechnology.

[27]  R. Judson,et al.  The Toxicity Data Landscape for Environmental Chemicals , 2008, Environmental health perspectives.

[28]  T. Golub,et al.  A method for high-throughput gene expression signature analysis , 2006, Genome Biology.

[29]  L. Mirny,et al.  Protein complexes and functional modules in molecular networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[30]  M. Fielden,et al.  A gene expression biomarker provides early prediction and mechanistic assessment of hepatic tumor induction by nongenotoxic chemicals. , 2007, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[31]  Susumu Goto,et al.  The KEGG databases at GenomeNet , 2002, Nucleic Acids Res..

[32]  Xiaohua Hu,et al.  Mining and state-space modeling and verification of sub-networks from large-scale biomolecular networks , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[33]  Ron Shamir,et al.  Identification of functional modules using network topology and high-throughput data , 2007, BMC Systems Biology.

[34]  Jean-Marc Schwartz,et al.  Local and global modes of drug action in biochemical networks , 2008, BMC chemical biology.

[35]  G. V. Paolini,et al.  Global mapping of pharmacological space , 2006, Nature Biotechnology.

[36]  Joshua M. Stuart,et al.  A Gene-Coexpression Network for Global Discovery of Conserved Genetic Modules , 2003, Science.

[37]  Yang Wang,et al.  Cost-sensitive boosting for classification of imbalanced data , 2007, Pattern Recognit..

[38]  A. Hopkins,et al.  The druggable genome , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[39]  Kevin C. Dorff,et al.  The MicroArray Quality Control (MAQC)-II study of common practices for the development and validation of microarray-based predictive models , 2010, Nature Biotechnology.

[40]  Olga G. Troyanskaya,et al.  Nearest Neighbor Networks: clustering expression data based on gene neighborhoods , 2007, BMC Bioinformatics.

[41]  Tobias Müller,et al.  Identifying functional modules in protein–protein interaction networks: an integrated exact approach , 2008, ISMB.

[42]  D. Pe’er,et al.  Module networks: identifying regulatory modules and their condition-specific regulators from gene expression data , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[43]  D. Koller,et al.  A module map showing conditional activity of expression modules in cancer , 2004, Nature Genetics.

[44]  P. Bork,et al.  Genome evolution reveals biochemical networks and functional modules , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  Yang Chen,et al.  Open Access Research Article Identification of Responsive Gene Modules by Network-based Gene Clustering and Extending: Application to Inflammation and Angiogenesis , 2022 .

[46]  An-Ping Zeng,et al.  Hierarchical structure and modules in the Escherichia coli transcriptional regulatory network revealed by a new top-down approach , 2004, BMC Bioinformatics.

[47]  A. Barabasi,et al.  The human disease network , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[48]  B. Bollobás.  The evolution of random graphs , 1984 .

[49]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Drug—target network , 2007, Nature Biotechnology.

[50]  Zikai Wu,et al.  Identifying responsive functional modules from protein-protein interaction network , 2009, Molecules and cells.

[51]  Ravi Iyengar,et al.  Network analyses in systems pharmacology , 2009, Bioinform..

[52]  Lee Bennett,et al.  Gene expression analysis reveals chemical-specific profiles. , 2002, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[53]  Yoshihiro Yamanishi,et al.  KEGG for linking genomes to life and the environment , 2007, Nucleic Acids Res..

[54]  Anastasios Bezerianos,et al.  An in silico method for detecting overlapping functional modules from composite biological networks , 2008, BMC Systems Biology.

[55]  Hong Wang,et al.  Uncovering packaging features of co-regulated modules based on human protein interaction and transcriptional regulatory networks , 2010, BMC Bioinformatics.

[56]  J. Hopfield,et al.  From molecular to modular cell biology , 1999, Nature.

[57]  Alexander Rives,et al.  Modular organization of cellular networks , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[58]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Disease signatures are robust across tissues and experiments , 2009, Molecular systems biology.

[59]  Hedi Peterson,et al.  GraphWeb: mining heterogeneous biological networks for gene modules with functional significance , 2008, Nucleic Acids Res..

[60]  Charles W. Schmidt,et al.  TOX 21: New Dimensions of Toxicity Testing , 2009, Environmental health perspectives.

[61]  J. Dopazo,et al.  Evidence for systems-level molecular mechanisms of tumorigenesis , 2007, BMC Genomics.

[62]  T. Knudsen,et al.  Computational systems analysis of developmental toxicity: design, development and implementation of a Birth Defects Systems Manager (BDSM). , 2005, Reproductive toxicology.

[63]  David M. Reif,et al.  In Vitro Screening of Environmental Chemicals for Targeted Testing Prioritization: The ToxCast Project , 2009, Environmental health perspectives.