Identification of Key Processes Underlying Cancer Phenotypes Using Biologic Pathway Analysis

Cancer is recognized to be a family of gene-based diseases whose causes are to be found in disruptions of basic biologic processes. An increasingly deep catalogue of canonical networks details the specific molecular interaction of genes and their products. However, mapping of disease phenotypes to alterations of these networks of interactions is accomplished indirectly and non-systematically. Here we objectively identify pathways associated with malignancy, staging, and outcome in cancer through application of an analytic approach that systematically evaluates differences in the activity and consistency of interactions within canonical biologic processes. Using large collections of publicly accessible genome-wide gene expression, we identify small, common sets of pathways – Trka Receptor, Apoptosis response to DNA Damage, Ceramide, Telomerase, CD40L and Calcineurin – whose differences robustly distinguish diverse tumor types from corresponding normal samples, predict tumor grade, and distinguish phenotypes such as estrogen receptor status and p53 mutation state. Pathways identified through this analysis perform as well or better than phenotypes used in the original studies in predicting cancer outcome. This approach provides a means to use genome-wide characterizations to map key biological processes to important clinical features in disease.

[1]  J. Winderickx,et al.  Ceramide involvement in apoptosis and apoptotic diseases. , 2006, Mini reviews in medicinal chemistry.

[2]  Ehud Shapiro,et al.  Cells as Computation , 2003, CMSB.

[3]  J. Foekens,et al.  Gene-expression profiles to predict distant metastasis of lymph-node-negative primary breast cancer , 2005, The Lancet.

[4]  J. Wade Davis,et al.  Statistical Pattern Recognition , 2003, Technometrics.

[5]  M. Becich,et al.  Gene expression alterations in prostate cancer predicting tumor aggression and preceding development of malignancy. , 2004, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[6]  G. Glinsky,et al.  Microarray analysis identifies a death-from-cancer signature predicting therapy failure in patients with multiple types of cancer. , 2005, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[7]  J. Testa,et al.  Perturbations of the AKT signaling pathway in human cancer , 2005, Oncogene.

[8]  P. Hevezi,et al.  Gene expression analyses reveal molecular relationships among 20 regions of the human CNS , 2006, Neurogenetics.

[9]  C. Burger,et al.  Tamoxifen treatment for breast cancer enforces a distinct gene-expression profile on the human endometrium: an exploratory study. , 2005, Endocrine-related cancer.

[10]  T. Poggio,et al.  Multiclass cancer diagnosis using tumor gene expression signatures , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[11]  D. Hanahan,et al.  The Hallmarks of Cancer , 2000, Cell.

[12]  Kenneth H Buetow,et al.  Cancer Molecular Analysis Project: weaving a rich cancer research tapestry. , 2002, Cancer cell.

[13]  A. Orth,et al.  Large-scale analysis of the human and mouse transcriptomes , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[14]  M. Meisner,et al.  Modulation of the ceramide level, a novel therapeutic concept? , 2000, Current drug targets.

[15]  Jo Wixon Pathway Databases , 2001, Comparative and functional genomics.

[16]  R. Nicholson,et al.  Tamoxifen resistance in MCF7 cells promotes EMT‐like behaviour and involves modulation of β‐catenin phosphorylation , 2006, International journal of cancer.

[17]  K. Kinzler,et al.  Cancer genes and the pathways they control , 2004, Nature Medicine.

[18]  G. Tortora,et al.  Key cancer cell signal transduction pathways as therapeutic targets. , 2006, European journal of cancer.

[19]  W. Rzeski,et al.  NMDA antagonist inhibits the extracellular signal-regulated kinase pathway and suppresses cancer growth , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[20]  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.

[21]  J. Franklin,et al.  The elements of statistical learning: data mining, inference and prediction , 2005 .

[22]  Jun Lu,et al.  Pathway level analysis of gene expression using singular value decomposition , 2005, BMC Bioinformatics.

[23]  A. Chinnaiyan,et al.  Integrative analysis of the cancer transcriptome , 2005, Nature Genetics.

[24]  Chiou-Feng Lin,et al.  Ceramide in apoptotic signaling and anticancer therapy. , 2006, Current medicinal chemistry.

[25]  M. Buchholz,et al.  An Emerging Role for Ca2+/Calcineurin/NFAT Signaling in Cancerogenesis , 2007, Cell cycle.

[26]  Zvi Fuks,et al.  Endothelial Apoptosis as the Primary Lesion Initiating Intestinal Radiation Damage in Mice , 2001, Science.

[27]  J. Ptak,et al.  Colorectal cancer: Mutations in a signalling pathway , 2005, Nature.

[28]  T. Gress,et al.  Overexpression of c‐myc in pancreatic cancer caused by ectopic activation of NFATc1 and the Ca2+/calcineurin signaling pathway , 2006, The EMBO journal.

[29]  Oksana Gavrilova,et al.  p53 Regulates Mitochondrial Respiration , 2006, Science.

[30]  M. Huang,et al.  Interleukin-7 gene-modified dendritic cells reduce pulmonary tumor burden in spontaneous murine bronchoalveolar cell carcinoma. , 2003, Human gene therapy.

[31]  C. J. Roberts,et al.  Developing gene expression signatures of pathway deregulation in tumors , 2006, Molecular Cancer Therapeutics.

[32]  T. Barrette,et al.  Probabilistic model of the human protein-protein interaction network , 2005, Nature Biotechnology.

[33]  P. Hall,et al.  An expression signature for p53 status in human breast cancer predicts mutation status, transcriptional effects, and patient survival. , 2005, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[34]  H. Hondermarck,et al.  Nerve growth factor receptors and signaling in breast cancer. , 2004, Current cancer drug targets.

[35]  S. Batalov,et al.  A gene atlas of the mouse and human protein-encoding transcriptomes. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[36]  A. Haimovitz-Friedman,et al.  Natural Ceramide Reverses Fas Resistance of Acid Sphingomyelinase −/− Hepatocytes* , 2001, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[37]  L. Sabatier,et al.  Sphingosine-1-phosphate protects proliferating endothelial cells from ceramide-induced apoptosis but not from DNA damage-induced mitotic death. , 2007, Cancer research.

[38]  Seamus J. Martin,et al.  Acid Sphingomyelinase–Deficient Human Lymphoblasts and Mice Are Defective in Radiation-Induced Apoptosis , 1996, Cell.

[39]  Jeffrey T. Chang,et al.  Oncogenic pathway signatures in human cancers as a guide to targeted therapies , 2006, Nature.

[40]  J. Padrón Sphingolipids in anticancer therapy. , 2006, Current medicinal chemistry.

[41]  B. Ripley,et al.  Pattern Recognition , 1968, Nature.

[42]  Shigeo Abe DrEng Pattern Classification , 2001, Springer London.

[43]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

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

[45]  T. Speed,et al.  Summaries of Affymetrix GeneChip probe level data. , 2003, Nucleic acids research.