Centrality of cancer-related genes in human biological pathways: A graph analysis perspective

This study investigates standard and novel centrality models to identify the topological organization of cancer-related genes in biological pathways. We examined the linear relationship between the ratio of cancer-related genes and centrality rankings from different models. We also compared the cumulative distributions of centrality scores for cancer-related and non-cancer-related genes. Difference between the mean centrality scores of the two groups was tested in each pathway. The results show that when accounting for the directions of pathways and the importance of the interacting genes, the centrality of a gene correlates with the probability of cancer-relatedness. In particular, we show that the centrality measures we propose, namely Source-Sink PageRank and Source-Sink Katz, produce a distinction between the distribution of the two gene groups. Source-Sink PageRank shows the highest statistical power in differentiating between the means centrality values of two groups. The presented analysis provides a new perspective for understanding the topological organization of cancer-related genes.

[1]  Carter T. Butts,et al.  Social Network Analysis with sna , 2008 .

[2]  Eli Upfal,et al.  Algorithms for Detecting Significantly Mutated Pathways in Cancer , 2010, RECOMB.

[3]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[4]  M. Roizen,et al.  Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation , 2012 .

[5]  M. Taghi Mostafavi,et al.  Use of Structural Properties of Underlying Graphs in Pathway Enrichment Analysis of Genomic Data , 2017, BCB.

[6]  Jin Wang,et al.  Centrality-based pathway enrichment: a systematic approach for finding significant pathways dominated by key genes , 2012, BMC Systems Biology.

[7]  Weijun Luo,et al.  Pathview: an R/Bioconductor package for pathway-based data integration and visualization , 2013, Bioinform..

[8]  T. Hubbard,et al.  A census of human cancer genes , 2004, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[9]  Pablo Tamayo,et al.  Gene set enrichment analysis: A knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Stefan Wiemann,et al.  KEGGgraph: a graph approach to KEGG PATHWAY in R and bioconductor , 2009, Bioinform..

[11]  Phillip Bonacich,et al.  Eigenvector-like measures of centrality for asymmetric relations , 2001, Soc. Networks.

[12]  Jing Ma,et al.  Network-based pathway enrichment analysis with incomplete network information , 2014, Bioinform..

[13]  Pooja Mittal,et al.  A novel signaling pathway impact analysis , 2009, Bioinform..

[14]  Mark Newman,et al.  Networks: An Introduction , 2010 .

[15]  U. Alon.  Network motifs: theory and experimental approaches , 2007, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[16]  Cristina Mitrea,et al.  Methods and approaches in the topology-based analysis of biological pathways , 2013, Front. Physiol..

[17]  Jianzhi Zhang,et al.  Why Do Hubs Tend to Be Essential in Protein Networks? , 2006, PLoS genetics.

[18]  Roded Sharan,et al.  Modelling the Yeast Interactome , 2014, Scientific Reports.

[19]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Lethality and centrality in protein networks , 2001, Nature.