Identifying cancer subtypes in glioblastoma by combining genomic, transcriptomic and epigenomic data

We present a nonparametric Bayesian method for disease subtype discovery in multi-dimensional cancer data. Our method can simultaneously analyse a wide range of data types, allowing for both agreement and disagreement between their underlying clustering structure. It includes feature selection and infers the most likely number of disease subtypes, given the data. We apply the method to 277 glioblastoma samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas, for which there are gene expression, copy number variation, methylation and microRNA data. We identify 8 distinct consensus subtypes and study their prognostic value for death, new tumour events, progression and recurrence. The consensus subtypes are prognostic of tumour recurrence (log-rank p-value of $3.6 \times 10^{-4}$ after correction for multiple hypothesis tests). This is driven principally by the methylation data (log-rank p-value of $2.0 \times 10^{-3}$) but the effect is strengthened by the other 3 data types, demonstrating the value of integrating multiple data types. Of particular note is a subtype of 47 patients characterised by very low levels of methylation. This subtype has very low rates of tumour recurrence and no new events in 10 years of follow up. We also identify a small gene expression subtype of 6 patients that shows particularly poor survival outcomes. Additionally, we note a consensus subtype that showly a highly distinctive data signature and suggest that it is therefore a biologically distinct subtype of glioblastoma. The code is available from this https URL

[1]  Joshua M. Korn,et al.  Comprehensive genomic characterization defines human glioblastoma genes and core pathways , 2008, Nature.

[2]  P. Green,et al.  Modelling Heterogeneity With and Without the Dirichlet Process , 2001 .

[3]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Discovering transcriptional modules by Bayesian data integration , 2010, Bioinform..

[4]  F. Markowetz,et al.  The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups , 2012, Nature.

[5]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Modeling and Visualizing Uncertainty in Gene Expression Clusters Using Dirichlet Process Mixtures , 2009, TCBB.

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

[7]  H. Ishwaran,et al.  Exact and approximate sum representations for the Dirichlet process , 2002 .

[8]  T. Ferguson.  A Bayesian Analysis of Some Nonparametric Problems , 1973 .

[9]  M. Escobar,et al.  Bayesian Density Estimation and Inference Using Mixtures , 1995 .

[10]  D. B. Dahl.  Bayesian Inference for Gene Expression and Proteomics: Model-Based Clustering for Expression Data via a Dirichlet Process Mixture Model , 2006 .

[11]  Florian Markowetz,et al.  Patient-Specific Data Fusion Defines Prognostic Cancer Subtypes , 2011, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[12]  C. Antoniak.  Mixtures of Dirichlet Processes with Applications to Bayesian Nonparametric Problems , 1974 .

[13]  K. Ickstadt,et al.  Improved criteria for clustering based on the posterior similarity matrix , 2009 .

[14]  David B. Dahl,et al.  Sequentially-Allocated Merge-Split Sampler for Conjugate and Nonconjugate Dirichlet Process Mixture Models , 2005 .