Dataset Information

Prognostic gene expression signatures of breast cancer are lacking a sensible biological meaning.

ABSTRACT: The identification of prognostic biomarkers for predicting cancer progression is an important problem for two reasons. First, such biomarkers find practical application in a clinical context for the treatment of patients. Second, interrogation of the biomarkers themselves is assumed to lead to novel insights of disease mechanisms and the underlying molecular processes that cause the pathological behavior. For breast cancer, many signatures based on gene expression values have been reported to be associated with overall survival. Consequently, such signatures have been used for suggesting biological explanations of breast cancer and drug mechanisms. In this paper, we demonstrate for a large number of breast cancer signatures that such an implication is not justified. Our approach eliminates systematically all traces of biological meaning of signature genes and shows that among the remaining genes, surrogate gene sets can be formed with indistinguishable prognostic prediction capabilities and opposite biological meaning. Hence, our results demonstrate that none of the studied signatures has a sensible biological interpretation or meaning with respect to disease etiology. Overall, this shows that prognostic signatures are black-box models with sensible predictions of breast cancer outcome but no value for revealing causal connections. Furthermore, we show that the number of such surrogate gene sets is not small but very large.

SUBMITTER: Manjang K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7794581 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prognostic gene expression signatures of breast cancer are lacking a sensible biological meaning.

Manjang Kalifa K Tripathi Shailesh S Yli-Harja Olli O Dehmer Matthias M Glazko Galina G Emmert-Streib Frank F

Scientific reports 20210108 1

The identification of prognostic biomarkers for predicting cancer progression is an important problem for two reasons. First, such biomarkers find practical application in a clinical context for the treatment of patients. Second, interrogation of the biomarkers themselves is assumed to lead to novel insights of disease mechanisms and the underlying molecular processes that cause the pathological behavior. For breast cancer, many signatures based on gene expression values have been reported to be ...[more]

PMID: 33420139

Similar Datasets

Project description:Gene expression profiling has been extensively used to predict outcome in breast cancer patients. We have previously reported on biological hypothesis-driven analysis of gene expression profiling data and we wished to extend this approach through the combinations of various gene signatures to improve the prediction of outcome in breast cancer.We have used gene expression data (25.000 gene probes) from a previously published study of tumours from 295 early stage breast cancer patients from the Netherlands Cancer Institute using updated follow-up. Tumours were assigned to three prognostic groups using the previously reported Wound-response and hypoxia-response signatures, and the outcome in each of these subgroups was evaluated.We have assigned invasive breast carcinomas from 295 stages I and II breast cancer patients to three groups based on gene expression profiles subdivided by the wound-response signature (WS) and hypoxia-response signature (HS). These three groups are (1) quiescent WS/non-hypoxic HS; (2) activated WS/non-hypoxic HS or quiescent WS/hypoxic tumours and (3) activated WS/hypoxic HS. The overall survival at 15 years for patients with tumours in groups 1, 2 and 3 are 79%, 59% and 27%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, this signature is not only independent of clinical and pathological risk factors; it is also the strongest predictor of outcome. Compared to a previously identified 70-gene prognosis profile, obtained with supervised classification, the combination of signatures performs roughly equally well and might have additional value in the ER-negative subgroup. In the subgroup of lymph node positive patients, the combination signature outperforms the 70-gene signature in multivariate analysis. In addition, in multivariate analysis, the WS/HS combination is a stronger predictor of outcome compared to the recently reported invasiveness gene signature combined with the WS.A combination of biological gene expression signatures can be used to identify a powerful and independent predictor for outcome in breast cancer patients.

Project description:Multiple breast cancer gene expression profiles have been developed that appear to provide similar abilities to predict outcome and may outperform clinical-pathologic criteria; however, the extent to which seemingly disparate profiles provide additive prognostic information is not known, nor do we know whether prognostic profiles perform equally across clinically defined breast cancer subtypes. We evaluated whether combining the prognostic powers of standard breast cancer clinical variables with a large set of gene expression signatures could improve on our ability to predict patient outcomes.Using clinical-pathological variables and a collection of 323 gene expression "modules", including 115 previously published signatures, we build multivariate Cox proportional hazards models using a dataset of 550 node-negative systemically untreated breast cancer patients. Models predictive of pathological complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy were also built using this approach.We identified statistically significant prognostic models for relapse-free survival (RFS) at 7 years for the entire population, and for the subgroups of patients with ER-positive, or Luminal tumors. Furthermore, we found that combined models that included both clinical and genomic parameters improved prognostication compared with models with either clinical or genomic variables alone. Finally, we were able to build statistically significant combined models for pathological complete response (pCR) predictions for the entire population.Integration of gene expression signatures and clinical-pathological factors is an improved method over either variable type alone. Highly prognostic models could be created when using all patients, and for the subset of patients with lymph node-negative and ER-positive breast cancers. Other variables beyond gene expression and clinical-pathological variables, like gene mutation status or DNA copy number changes, will be needed to build robust prognostic models for ER-negative breast cancer patients. This combined clinical and genomics model approach can also be used to build predictors of therapy responsiveness, and could ultimately be applied to other tumor types.

Dataset Information

Prognostic gene expression signatures of breast cancer are lacking a sensible biological meaning.

Publications

Prognostic gene expression signatures of breast cancer are lacking a sensible biological meaning.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets