A critical evaluation of network and pathway based classifiers for outcome prediction in breast cancer

Recently, several classifiers that combine primary tumor data, like gene expression data, and secondary data sources, such as protein-protein interaction networks, have been proposed for predicting outcome in breast cancer. In these approaches, new composite features are typically constructed by aggregating the expression levels of several genes. The secondary data sources are employed to guide this aggregation. Although many studies claim that these approaches improve classification performance over single gene classifiers, the gain in performance is difficult to assess. This stems mainly from the fact that different breast cancer data sets and validation procedures are employed to assess the performance. Here we address these issues by employing a large cohort of six breast cancer data sets as benchmark set and by performing an unbiased evaluation of the classification accuracies of the different approaches. Contrary to previous claims, we find that composite feature classifiers do not outperform simple single gene classifiers. We investigate the effect of (1) the number of selected features; (2) the specific gene set from which features are selected; (3) the size of the training set and (4) the heterogeneity of the data set on the performance of composite feature and single gene classifiers. Strikingly, we find that randomization of secondary data sources, which destroys all biological information in these sources, does not result in a deterioration in performance of composite feature classifiers. Finally, we show that when a proper correction for gene set size is performed, the stability of single gene sets is similar to the stability of composite feature sets. Based on these results there is currently no reason to prefer prognostic classifiers based on composite features over single gene classifiers for predicting outcome in breast cancer

Protein Networks as Logic Functions in Development and Cancer

Many biological and clinical outcomes are based not on single proteins, but on modules of proteins embedded in protein networks. A fundamental question is how the proteins within each module contribute to the overall module activity. Here, we study the modules underlying three representative biological programs related to tissue development, breast cancer metastasis, or progression of brain cancer, respectively. For each case we apply a new method, called Network-Guided Forests, to identify predictive modules together with logic functions which tie the activity of each module to the activity of its component genes. The resulting modules implement a diverse repertoire of decision logic which cannot be captured using the simple approximations suggested in previous work such as gene summation or subtraction. We show that in cancer, certain combinations of oncogenes and tumor suppressors exert competing forces on the system, suggesting that medical genetics should move beyond cataloguing individual cancer genes to cataloguing their combinatorial logic

Bridging the Gap between Genotype and Phenotype via Network Approaches

In the last few years we have witnessed tremendous progress in detecting associations between genetic variations and complex traits. While genome-wide association studies have been able to discover genomic regions that may influence many common human diseases, these discoveries created an urgent need for methods that extend the knowledge of genotype-phenotype relationships to the level of the molecular mechanisms behind them. To address this emerging need, computational approaches increasingly utilize a pathway-centric perspective. These new methods often utilize known or predicted interactions between genes and/or gene products. In this review, we survey recently developed network based methods that attempt to bridge the genotype-phenotype gap. We note that although these methods help narrow the gap between genotype and phenotype relationships, these approaches alone cannot provide the precise details of underlying mechanisms and current research is still far from closing the gap

Identification of LIFR, PIK3R1, and MMP12 as Novel Prognostic Signatures in Gallbladder Cancer Using Network-Based Module Analysis

Background: Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is a rare and aggressive malignancy of the biliary tract with a dismal survival rate. Effective biomarkers and therapeutic targets are urgently needed.Methods: We analyzed gene expression profiles of GBC to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and then used these DEGs to identify functional module biomarkers based on protein functional interaction (FI) networks. We further evaluated the module-gene protein expression and clinical significance with immunohistochemistry staining (IHC) in a tissue microarray (TMA) from 80 GBC samples.Results: Five functional modules were identified. Module 0 included classical cancer signaling pathways, such as Ras and PI3K-Akt; and modules 1–4 included genes associated with muscle cells, fibrinogen, extracellular matrix, and integrins, respectively. We validated the expression of LIFR, PIK3R1, and MMP12, which were hubs or functional nodes in modules. Compared with paired peritumoural tissues, we found that the expression of LIFR (P = 0.002) and PIK3R1 (P = 0.046) proteins were significantly downregulated, and MMP12 (P = 0.006) was significantly upregulated. Further prognostic analysis showed that patients with low expression of LIFR had shorter overall survival than those with high expression (log-rank test P = 0.028), the same trend as for PIK3R1 (P = 0.053) and MMP12 (P = 0.006). Multivariate analysis indicated that expression of MMP12 protein (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.429; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.198, 0.930; P = 0.032) was one of the significant independent prognostic factors for overall survival.Conclusions: We found a highly reliable FI network, which revealed LIFR, PIK3R1, and MMP12 as novel prognostic biomarker candidates for GBC. These findings could accelerate biomarker discovery and therapeutic development in this cancer

Network-Based Biomarker Discovery : Development of Prognostic Biomarkers for Personalized Medicine by Integrating Data and Prior Knowledge

Advances in genome science and technology offer a deeper understanding of biology while at the same time improving the practice of medicine. The expression profiling of some diseases, such as cancer, allows for identifying marker genes, which could be able to diagnose a disease or predict future disease outcomes. Marker genes (biomarkers) are selected by scoring how well their expression levels can discriminate between different classes of disease or between groups of patients with different clinical outcome (e.g. therapy response, survival time, etc.). A current challenge is to identify new markers that are directly related to the underlying disease mechanism

From Correlation to Causality: Does Network Information improve Cancer Outcome Prediction?

Motivation: Disease progression in cancer can vary substantially between patients. Yet, patients often receive the same treatment. Recently, there has been much work on predicting disease progression and patient outcome variables from gene expression in order to personalize treatment options. A widely used approach is high-throughput experiments that aim to explore predictive signature genes which would provide identification of clinical outcome of diseases. Microarray data analysis helps to reveal underlying biological mechanisms of tumor progression, metastasis, and drug-resistance in cancer studies. Despite first diagnostic kits in the market, there are open problems such as the choice of random gene signatures or noisy expression data. The experimental or computational noise in data and limited tissue samples collected from patients might furthermore reduce the predictive power and biological interpretability of such signature genes. Nevertheless, signature genes predicted by different studies generally represent poor similarity; even for the same type of cancer. Integration of network information with gene expression data could provide more efficient signatures for outcome prediction in cancer studies. One approach to deal with these problems employs gene-gene relationships and ranks genes using the random surfer model of Google's PageRank algorithm. Unfortunately, the majority of published network-based approaches solely tested their methods on a small amount of datasets, questioning the general applicability of network-based methods for outcome prediction. Methods: In this thesis, I provide a comprehensive and systematically evaluation of a network-based outcome prediction approach -- NetRank - a PageRank derivative -- applied on several types of gene expression cancer data and four different types of networks. The algorithm identifies a signature gene set for a specific cancer type by incorporating gene network information with given expression data. To assess the performance of NetRank, I created a benchmark dataset collection comprising 25 cancer outcome prediction datasets from literature and one in-house dataset. Results: NetRank performs significantly better than classical methods such as foldchange or t-test as it improves the prediction performance in average for 7%. Besides, we are approaching the accuracy level of the authors' signatures by applying a relatively unbiased but fully automated process for biomarker discovery. Despite an order of magnitude difference in network size, a regulatory, a protein-protein interaction and two predicted networks perform equally well. Signatures as published by the authors and the signatures generated with classical methods do not overlap -- not even for the same cancer type -- whereas the network-based signatures strongly overlap. I analyze and discuss these overlapping genes in terms of the Hallmarks of cancer and in particular single out six transcription factors and seven proteins and discuss their specific role in cancer progression. Furthermore several tests are conducted for the identification of a Universal Cancer Signature. No Universal Cancer Signature could be identified so far, but a cancer-specific combination of general master regulators with specific cancer genes could be discovered that achieves the best results for all cancer types. As NetRank offers a great value for cancer outcome prediction, first steps for a secure usage of NetRank in a public cloud are described. Conclusion: Experimental evaluation of network-based methods on a gene expression benchmark dataset suggests that these methods are especially suited for outcome prediction as they overcome the problems of random gene signatures and noisy expression data. Through the combination of network information with gene expression data, network-based methods identify highly similar signatures over all cancer types, in contrast to classical methods that fail to identify highly common gene sets across the same cancer types. In general allows the integration of additional information in gene expression analysis the identification of more reliable, accurate and reproducible biomarkers and provides a deeper understanding of processes occurring in cancer development and progression.:1 Definition of Open Problems 2 Introduction 2.1 Problems in cancer outcome prediction 2.2 Network-based cancer outcome prediction 2.3 Universal Cancer Signature 3 Methods 3.1 NetRank algorithm 3.2 Preprocessing and filtering of the microarray data 3.3 Accuracy 3.4 Signature similarity 3.5 Classical approaches 3.6 Random signatures 3.7 Networks 3.8 Direct neighbor method 3.9 Dataset extraction 4 Performance of NetRank 4.1 Benchmark dataset for evaluation 4.2 The influence of NetRank parameters 4.3 Evaluation of NetRank 4.4 General findings 4.5 Computational complexity of NetRank 4.6 Discussion 5 Universal Cancer Signature 5.1 Signature overlap – a sign for Universal Cancer Signature 5.2 NetRank genes are highly connected and confirmed in literature 5.3 Hallmarks of Cancer 5.4 Testing possible Universal Cancer Signatures 5.5 Conclusion 6 Cloud-based Biomarker Discovery 6.1 Introduction to secure Cloud computing 6.2 Cancer outcome prediction 6.3 Security analysis 6.4 Conclusion 7 Contributions and Conclusion