Use case driven evaluation of open databases for pediatric cancer research

BackgroundA plethora of Web resources are available offering information on clinical, pre-clinical, genomic and theoretical aspects of cancer, including not only the comprehensive cancer projects as ICGC and TCGA, but also less-known and more specialized projects on pediatric diseases such as PCGP. However, in case of data on childhood cancer there is very little information openly available. Several web-based resources and tools offer general biomedical data which are not purpose-built, for neither pediatric nor cancer analysis. Additionally, many Web resources on cancer focus on incidence data and statistical social characteristics as well as self-regulating communities.MethodsWe summarize those resources which are open and are considered to support scientific fundamental research, while we address our comparison to 11 identified pediatric cancer-specific resources (5 tools, 6 databases). The evaluation consists of 5 use cases on the example of brain tumor research and covers user-defined search scenarios as well as data mining tasks, also examining interactive visual analysis features.ResultsWeb resources differ in terms of information quantity and presentation. Pedican lists an abundance of entries with few selection features. PeCan and PedcBioPortal include visual analysis tools while the latter integrates published and new consortia-based data. UCSC Xena Browser offers an in-depth analysis of genomic data. ICGC data portal provides various features for data analysis and an option to submit own data. Its focus lies on adult Pan-Cancer projects. Pediatric Pan-Cancer datasets are being integrated into PeCan and PedcBioPortal. Comparing information on prominent mutations within glioma discloses well-known, unknown, possible, as well as inapplicable biomarkers. This summary further emphasizes the varying data allocation. Tested tools show advantages and disadvantages, depending on the respective use case scenario, providing inhomogeneous data quantity and information specifics.ConclusionsWeb resources on specific pediatric cancers are less abundant and less-known compared to those offering adult cancer research data. Meanwhile, current efforts of ongoing pediatric data collection and Pan-Cancer projects indicate future opportunities for childhood cancer research, that is greatly needed for both fundamental as well as clinical research.

[1]  Jill S Barnholtz-Sloan,et al.  Alex's Lemonade Stand Foundation Infant and Childhood Primary Brain and Central Nervous System Tumors Diagnosed in the United States in 2007-2011. , 2015, Neuro-oncology.

[2]  Mark Pinese,et al.  Zero childhood cancer – Accelerating translation of experimental oncology: Better matching drug to target , 2018 .

[3]  Jeannine Walston,et al.  ABOUT THE AMERICAN BRAIN TUMOR ASSOCIATION , 2014 .

[4]  Edgar R. Weippl,et al.  The Right to Be Forgotten: Towards Machine Learning on Perturbed Knowledge Bases , 2016, CD-ARES.

[5]  Benjamin E. Gross,et al.  Integrative Analysis of Complex Cancer Genomics and Clinical Profiles Using the cBioPortal , 2013, Science Signaling.

[6]  M. Stratton,et al.  The cancer genome , 2009, Nature.

[7]  David Scheie,et al.  Importance of Comprehensive Molecular Profiling for Clinical Outcome in Children With Recurrent Cancer , 2018, Front. Pediatr..

[8]  Claudia Peitzsch,et al.  Cancer biomarker discovery: Current status and future perspectives , 2014, International journal of radiation biology.

[9]  David Haussler,et al.  Abstract LB-212: Treehouse Childhood Cancer Project: a resource for sharing and multiple cohort analysis of pediatric cancer genomics data , 2015 .

[10]  David Haussler,et al.  Abstract LB-338: A critical evaluation of genomic data sharing: Barriers to accessing pediatric cancer genomic datasets: a Treehouse Childhood Cancer Initiative experience , 2017 .

[11]  Gang Fu,et al.  Disease Ontology 2015 update: an expanded and updated database of human diseases for linking biomedical knowledge through disease data , 2014, Nucleic Acids Res..

[12]  Sumit Gupta,et al.  The validity of pediatric cancer diagnoses in a population-based general cancer registry in Ontario, Canada , 2016, BMC Cancer.

[13]  Xiaomin Lu,et al.  Improved survival for children and adolescents with acute lymphoblastic leukemia between 1990 and 2005: a report from the children's oncology group. , 2012, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  Jinghui Zhang,et al.  Reply to Artifacts in the data of Hu et al. , 2015, Nature Genetics.

[15]  Benjamin E. Gross,et al.  The cBio cancer genomics portal: an open platform for exploring multidimensional cancer genomics data. , 2012, Cancer discovery.

[16]  S. Hirschfeld,et al.  Pediatric oncology: regulatory initiatives. , 2000, The oncologist.

[17]  Jesse S Boehm,et al.  Emerging Opportunities for Target Discovery in Rare Cancers. , 2017, Cell chemical biology.

[18]  Juli D. Klemm,et al.  A Comprehensive Infrastructure for Big Data in Cancer Research: Accelerating Cancer Research and Precision Medicine , 2017, Front. Cell Dev. Biol..

[19]  D. Spandidos,et al.  Human cancer databases (Review) , 2014, Oncology reports.

[20]  Arcadi Navarro,et al.  The European Genome-phenome Archive of human data consented for biomedical research , 2015, Nature Genetics.

[21]  Mark P. Molloy,et al.  P17.47COMPREHENSIVE PROTEOMIC PROFILING OF BEVACIZUMAB-RESISTANT GLIOBLASTOMA MULTIFORME , 2014 .

[22]  Adam C. Resnick,et al.  GENT-31. PEDcBIOPORTAL: A CANCER DATA VISUALIZATION TOOL FOR INTEGRATIVE PEDIATRIC CANCER ANALYSES , 2016 .

[23]  S. Mohapatra,et al.  : DISEASE ONTOLOGY , 2014 .

[24]  Igor Jurisica,et al.  In silico cancer research towards 3R , 2018, BMC Cancer.

[25]  M. Seidel,et al.  Baby genome screening: paving the way to genetic discrimination? , 2017, British Medical Journal.

[26]  P. Voûte,et al.  What are the challenges in pediatric oncology? , 2002, Medical and pediatric oncology.

[27]  Ching-Hon Pui,et al.  Toward the Cure of All Children With Cancer Through Collaborative Efforts: Pediatric Oncology As a Global Challenge. , 2015, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[28]  Diane M. Griffiths,et al.  THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA , 2007 .

[29]  Michael C. Heinold,et al.  The landscape of genomic alterations across childhood cancers , 2018, Nature.

[30]  Ted D Wade,et al.  Traits and types of health data repositories , 2014, Health Inf. Sci. Syst..

[31]  Eva Steliarova-Foucher,et al.  International Classification of Childhood Cancer, third edition , 2005, Cancer.

[32]  John D. Heiss,et al.  New Developments in the Pathogenesis and Therapeutic Targeting of the IDH1 Mutation in Glioma , 2015, International journal of medical sciences.

[33]  Andreas Holzinger,et al.  On Computationally-Enhanced Visual Analysis of Heterogeneous Data and Its Application in Biomedical Informatics , 2014, Interactive Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining in Biomedical Informatics.

[34]  Matthew Meyerson,et al.  Landscapes of childhood tumours , 2018, Nature.

[35]  Marek Ostaszewski,et al.  Integration and Visualization of Translational Medicine Data for Better Understanding of Human Diseases , 2016, Big Data.

[36]  C. Deng,et al.  Characterization of potential driver mutations involved in human breast cancer by computational approaches , 2017, Oncotarget.

[37]  Mary Goldman,et al.  The UCSC Xena platform for public and private cancer genomics data visualization and interpretation , 2018, bioRxiv.

[38]  N. Schork,et al.  Identification of rare cancer driver mutations by network reconstruction. , 2009, Genome research.

[39]  Elaine R. Mardis,et al.  The emerging clinical relevance of genomics in cancer medicine , 2018, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[40]  Tobias Schreck,et al.  Integrating Open Data on Cancer in Support to Tumor Growth Analysis , 2016, ITBAM.

[41]  Morris A. Swertz,et al.  State-of-the-Art and Future Challenges in the Integration of Biobank Catalogues , 2015, Smart Health.

[42]  Syed Haider,et al.  International Cancer Genome Consortium Data Portal—a one-stop shop for cancer genomics data , 2011, Database J. Biol. Databases Curation.

[43]  Ching-Hon Pui,et al.  Challenging issues in pediatric oncology , 2011, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.

[44]  Meagan Farmer,et al.  Pediatric cancer genetics , 2017, Current opinion in pediatrics.

[45]  Li Ding,et al.  The Pediatric Cancer Genome Project , 2012, Nature Genetics.

[46]  Christine M. Cutillo,et al.  The importance of international collaboration for rare diseases research: a European perspective , 2017, Gene Therapy.

[47]  Andreas Holzinger,et al.  Can we Trust Machine Learning Results? Artificial Intelligence in Safety-Critical Decision Support , 2018, ERCIM News.

[48]  Allison P. Heath,et al.  Data Commons to Support Pediatric Cancer Research. , 2017, American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting.

[49]  Shabaz Mohammed,et al.  Comparative Phosphoproteomic Analysis of Checkpoint Recovery Identifies New Regulators of the DNA Damage Response , 2013, Science Signaling.

[50]  Richard G Grundy,et al.  Integrated molecular genetic profiling of pediatric high-grade gliomas reveals key differences with the adult disease. , 2010, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[51]  Ruth Ladenstein,et al.  Challenges for children and adolescents with cancer in Europe: The SIOP-Europe agenda , 2014, Pediatric blood & cancer.

[52]  Guy Cosnard,et al.  IDH1 mutation, a genetic alteration associated with adult gliomatosis cerebri , 2012, Neuropathology : official journal of the Japanese Society of Neuropathology.

[53]  Jan O. Korbel,et al.  TB-17A COMPREHENSIVE PAN-CANCER ANALYSIS OF CHILDHOOD MALIGNANCIES , 2016 .

[54]  Min Zhao,et al.  Pedican: an online gene resource for pediatric cancers with literature evidence , 2015, Scientific Reports.

[55]  E. Kramárová,et al.  The international classification of childhood cancer , 1996, International journal of cancer.

[56]  K. Tomczak,et al.  The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA): an immeasurable source of knowledge , 2015, Contemporary oncology.

[57]  S. Mathoulin-Pélissier,et al.  Evidence-based data and rare cancers: The need for a new methodological approach in research and investigation. , 2019, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[58]  Gudrun Schleiermacher,et al.  Advances in Risk Classification and Treatment Strategies for Neuroblastoma. , 2015, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[59]  Roland Eils,et al.  The whole-genome landscape of medulloblastoma subtypes , 2017, Nature.

[60]  Andreas Holzinger,et al.  DO NOT DISTURB? Classifier Behavior on Perturbed Datasets , 2017, CD-MAKE.

[61]  Amir Samii,et al.  Molecular pathway activation - New type of biomarkers for tumor morphology and personalized selection of target drugs. , 2018, Seminars in cancer biology.

[62]  E.M.S. Dijk,et al.  The European Open Science Cloud for Research Pilot Project - EOSCpilot , 2017 .

[63]  Gudrun Schleiermacher,et al.  Implementation of mechanism of action biology-driven early drug development for children with cancer. , 2016, European journal of cancer.

[64]  Roland Eils,et al.  ICGC PedBrain - dissecting the genomic complexity underlying medulloblastoma using whole-genome sequencing , 2012, BMC Proceedings.

[65]  Andreas Holzinger,et al.  Integrated web visualizations for protein-protein interaction databases , 2015, BMC Bioinformatics.

[66]  Gary D Bader,et al.  International network of cancer genome projects , 2010, Nature.

[67]  Eric J. Topol,et al.  The big medical data miss: challenges in establishing an open medical resource , 2015, Nature Reviews Genetics.