Signatures of cell death and proliferation in perturbation transcriptomics data-from confounding factor to effective prediction

Transcriptional perturbation signatures are valuable data sources for functional genomics. Linking perturbation signatures to screenings opens the possibility to model cellular phenotypes from expression data and to identify efficacious drugs. We linked perturbation transcriptomics data from the LINCS-L1000 project with cell viability information upon genetic (Achilles project) and chemical (CTRP screen) perturbations yielding more than 90 000 signature-viability pairs. An integrated analysis showed that the cell viability signature is a major factor underlying perturbation signatures. The signature is linked to transcription factors regulating cell death, proliferation and division time. We used the cell viability-signature relationship to predict viability from transcriptomics signatures, and identified and validated compounds that induce cell death in tumor cell lines. We showed that cellular toxicity can lead to unexpected similarity of signatures, confounding mechanism of action discovery. Consensus compound signatures predicted cell-specific drug sensitivity, even if the signature is not measured in the same cell line, and outperformed conventional drug-specific features. Our results can help in understanding mechanisms behind cell death and removing confounding factors of transcriptomic perturbation screens. To interactively browse our results and predict cell viability in new gene expression samples, we developed CEVIChE (CEll VIability Calculator from gene Expression; https://saezlab.shinyapps.io/ceviche/)

Unearthing new genomic markers of drug response by improved measurement of discriminative power

International audienceAbstract. BackgroundOncology drugs are only effective in a small proportion of cancer patients. Our current ability to identify these responsive patients before treatment is still poor in most cases. Thus, there is a pressing need to discover response markers for marketed and research oncology drugs. Screening these drugs against a large panel of cancer cell lines has led to the discovery of new genomic markers of in vitro drug response. However, while the identification of such markers among thousands of candidate drug-gene associations in the data is error-prone, an appraisal of the effectiveness of such detection task is currently lacking.Methods. Here we present a new non-parametric method to measuring the discriminative power of a drug-gene association. Unlike parametric statistical tests, the adopted non-parametric test has the advantage of not making strong assumptions about the data distorting the identification of genomic markers. Furthermore, we introduce a new benchmark to further validate these markers in vitro using more recent data not used to identify the markers.Results. The application of this new methodology has led to the identification of 128 new genomic markers distributed across 61% of the analysed drugs, including 5 drugs without previously known markers, which were missed by the MANOVA test initially applied to analyse data from the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer consortium.Conclusions. Discovering markers using more than one statistical test and testing them on independent data is unusual. We found this helpful to discard statistically significant drug-gene associations that were actually spurious correlations. This approach also revealed new, independently validated, in vitro markers of drug response such as Temsirolimus-CDKN2A (resistance) and Gemcitabine-EWS_FLI1 (sensitivity)