Parenclitic networks for predicting ovarian cancer

Prediction and diagnosis of complex disease may not always be possible with a small number of biomarkers. Modern ‘omics’ technologies make it possible to cheaply and quantitatively assay hundreds of molecules generating large amounts of data from individual samples. In this study, we describe a parenclitic network-based approach to disease classification using a synthetic data set modelled on data from the United Kingdom Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS) and serological assay data from a nested set of samples from the same study. This approach allows us to integrate quantitative proteomic and categorical metadata into a single network, and then use network topologies to construct logistic regression models for disease classification. In this study of ovarian cancer, comprising of 30 controls and cases with samples taken <14 months to diagnosis (n = 30) and/or >34 months to diagnosis (n = 29), we were able to classify cases with a sensitivity of 80.3% within 14 months of diagnosis and 18.9% in samples exceeding 34 months to diagnosis at a specificity of 98%. Furthermore, we use the networks to make observations about proteins within the cohort and identify GZMH and FGFBP1 as changing in cases (in relation to controls) at time points most distal to diagnosis. We conclude that network-based approaches may offer a solution to the problem of complex disease classification that can be used in personalised medicine and to describe the underlying biology of cancer progression at a system level.

[1]  N. Johnson Two large randomised trials show ovarian cancer screening has minimal impact on survival , 2018, BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[2]  L. Ding,et al.  Midkine derived from cancer-associated fibroblasts promotes cisplatin-resistance via up-regulation of the expression of lncRNA ANRIL in tumour cells , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[3]  F. Korner‐Nievergelt,et al.  The earth is flat (p > 0.05): significance thresholds and the crisis of unreplicable research , 2017, PeerJ.

[4]  L. Miller,et al.  Conservation of immune gene signatures in solid tumors and prognostic implications , 2016, BMC Cancer.

[5]  M. Zanin Using complex networks for refining survival prognosis in prostate cancer patient , 2016, F1000Research.

[6]  Y. Naomoto,et al.  Novel Midkine Inhibitor iMDK Inhibits Tumor Growth and Angiogenesis in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma. , 2016, Anticancer research.

[7]  D. Oram,et al.  Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial , 2016, The Lancet.

[8]  J. Chester,et al.  Personalised cancer medicine , 2015, International journal of cancer.

[9]  Christian Pilarsky,et al.  Glypican-1 identifies cancer exosomes and detects early pancreatic cancer , 2015, Nature.

[10]  Iosif Meyerov,et al.  Parenclitic Network Analysis of Methylation Data for Cancer Identification , 2015, PloS one.

[11]  Edmond J. Breen,et al.  A novel multiplexed immunoassay identifies CEA, IL-8 and prolactin as prospective markers for Dukes’ stages A-D colorectal cancers , 2015, Clinical Proteomics.

[12]  Bernard Rachet,et al.  40-year trends in an index of survival for all cancers combined and survival adjusted for age and sex for each cancer in England and Wales, 1971–2011: a population-based study , 2015, The Lancet.

[13]  G. von Heijne,et al.  Tissue-based map of the human proteome , 2015, Science.

[14]  Jingyan Xie,et al.  Midkine as a potential diagnostic marker in epithelial ovarian cancer for cisplatin/paclitaxel combination clinical therapy. , 2015, American journal of cancer research.

[15]  Massimiliano Zanin,et al.  Parenclitic networks: uncovering new functions in biological data , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[16]  A. Wellstein,et al.  Expression of a Secreted Fibroblast Growth Factor Binding Protein-1 (FGFBP1) in Angioproliferative Kaposi Sarcoma , 2014, Journal of AIDS & clinical research.

[17]  J. Stenvang,et al.  Homogenous 96-Plex PEA Immunoassay Exhibiting High Sensitivity, Specificity, and Excellent Scalability , 2014, PloS one.

[18]  M. Akbari,et al.  Granzyme H Serum Levels Variations with Both Reproductive Hormone Receptors, and Related Hormone Receptors in Breast Cancer Patients , 2014, Iranian journal of cancer prevention.

[19]  S. Buys,et al.  Oral contraceptive and reproductive risk factors for ovarian cancer within sisters in the breast cancer family registry , 2014, British Journal of Cancer.

[20]  Robert Brown,et al.  Candidate DNA methylation drivers of acquired cisplatin resistance in ovarian cancer identified by methylome and expression profiling , 2012, Oncogene.

[21]  Sudhir Srivastava,et al.  Ovarian Cancer Biomarker Performance in Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial Specimens , 2011, Cancer Prevention Research.

[22]  D Timmerman,et al.  HE4 and CA125 as a diagnostic test in ovarian cancer: prospective validation of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm , 2011, British Journal of Cancer.

[23]  T. Muramatsu Midkine, a heparin-binding cytokine with multiple roles in development, repair and diseases , 2010, Proceedings of the Japan Academy. Series B, Physical and biological sciences.

[24]  Jinping Li,et al.  HE4 as a biomarker for ovarian and endometrial cancer management , 2009, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[25]  Jason Gunn,et al.  Glypican-1 modulates the angiogenic and metastatic potential of human and mouse cancer cells. , 2008, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[26]  Lucas Antiqueira,et al.  Analyzing and modeling real-world phenomena with complex networks: a survey of applications , 2007, 0711.3199.

[27]  Francis S. Collins,et al.  Mapping the cancer genome , 2007 .

[28]  A. Maitra,et al.  Expression of a fibroblast growth factor-binding protein during the development of adenocarcinoma of the pancreas and colon. , 2006, Cancer research.

[29]  H. Roberts Gynaecological cancer and the contraceptive pill , 2004 .

[30]  Michèl Schummer,et al.  The HE4 (WFDC2) protein is a biomarker for ovarian carcinoma. , 2003, Cancer research.

[31]  Joshua J. Millspaugh,et al.  Effects of sample size on kernel home range estimates , 1999 .

[32]  P. J. Green,et al.  Density Estimation for Statistics and Data Analysis , 1987 .

[33]  J. Dungan HE4 and CA125 as a diagnostic test in ovarian cancer: prospective validation of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm , 2011 .

[34]  Steven J Skates,et al.  A novel multiple marker bioassay utilizing HE4 and CA125 for the prediction of ovarian cancer in patients with a pelvic mass. , 2009, Gynecologic oncology.

[35]  R. Bast,et al.  The CA 125 tumour-associated antigen: a review of the literature. , 1989, Human reproduction.