Improved identification of cancer mutational processes

Tom L. Kaufmann,Roland F. Schwarz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-024-01679-w

IF: 30.8

2024-03-09

Nature Genetics

Abstract:Mutational signatures help to deconvolve the different processes that shape cancer genomes. A new tool now alleviates some of the persistent challenges in the field.

genetics & heredity

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A practical framework and online tool for mutational signature analyses show intertissue variation and driver dependencies

Andrea Degasperi,Tauanne Dias Amarante,Jan Czarnecki,Scott Shooter,Xueqing Zou,Dominik Glodzik,Sandro Morganella,Arjun S. Nanda,Cherif Badja,Gene Koh,Sophie E. Momen,Ilias Georgakopoulos-Soares,João M. L. Dias,Jamie Young,Yasin Memari,Helen Davies,Serena Nik-Zainal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43018-020-0027-5

IF: 22.7

2020-02-14

Nature Cancer

Abstract:Mutational signatures are patterns of mutations that arise during tumorigenesis. We present an enhanced, practical framework for mutational signature analyses. Applying these methods to 3,107 whole-genome-sequenced (WGS) primary cancers of 21 organs reveals known signatures and nine previously undescribed rearrangement signatures. We highlight interorgan variability of signatures and present a way of visualizing that diversity, reinforcing our findings in an independent analysis of 3,096 WGS metastatic cancers. Signatures with a high level of genomic instability are dependent on TP53 dysregulation. We illustrate how uncertainty in mutational signature identification and assignment to samples affects tumor classification, reinforcing that using multiple orthogonal mutational signature data is not only beneficial, but is also essential for accurate tumor stratification. Finally, we present a reference web-based tool for cancer and experimentally generated mutational signatures, called Signal (https://signal.mutationalsignatures.com), that also supports performing mutational signature analyses.
Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer

Ludmil B. Alexandrov,Serena Nik-Zainal,David C. Wedge,Samuel A. J. R. Aparicio,Sam Behjati,Andrew V. Biankin,Graham R. Bignell,Niccolò Bolli,Ake Borg,Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale,Sandrine Boyault,Birgit Burkhardt,Adam P. Butler,Carlos Caldas,Helen R. Davies,Christine Desmedt,Roland Eils,Jórunn Erla Eyfjörd,John A. Foekens,Mel Greaves,Fumie Hosoda,Barbara Hutter,Tomislav Ilicic,Sandrine Imbeaud,Marcin Imielinski,Natalie Jäger,David T. W. Jones,David Jones,Stian Knappskog,Marcel Kool,Sunil R. Lakhani,Carlos López-Otín,Sancha Martin,Nikhil C. Munshi,Hiromi Nakamura,Paul A. Northcott,Marina Pajic,Elli Papaemmanuil,Angelo Paradiso,John V. Pearson,Xose S. Puente,Keiran Raine,Manasa Ramakrishna,Andrea L. Richardson,Julia Richter,Philip Rosenstiel,Matthias Schlesner,Ton N. Schumacher,Paul N. Span,Jon W. Teague,Yasushi Totoki,Andrew N. J. Tutt,Rafael Valdés-Mas,Marit M. van Buuren,Laura van ’t Veer,Anne Vincent-Salomon,Nicola Waddell,Lucy R. Yates,Jessica Zucman-Rossi,P. Andrew Futreal,Ultan McDermott,Peter Lichter,Matthew Meyerson,Sean M. Grimmond,Reiner Siebert,Elías Campo,Tatsuhiro Shibata,Stefan M. Pfister,Peter J. Campbell,Michael R. Stratton,,,,

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12477

IF: 64.8

2013-08-14

Nature

Abstract:All cancers are caused by somatic mutations; however, understanding of the biological processes generating these mutations is limited. The catalogue of somatic mutations from a cancer genome bears the signatures of the mutational processes that have been operative. Here we analysed 4,938,362 mutations from 7,042 cancers and extracted more than 20 distinct mutational signatures. Some are present in many cancer types, notably a signature attributed to the APOBEC family of cytidine deaminases, whereas others are confined to a single cancer class. Certain signatures are associated with age of the patient at cancer diagnosis, known mutagenic exposures or defects in DNA maintenance, but many are of cryptic origin. In addition to these genome-wide mutational signatures, hypermutation localized to small genomic regions, ‘kataegis’, is found in many cancer types. The results reveal the diversity of mutational processes underlying the development of cancer, with potential implications for understanding of cancer aetiology, prevention and therapy.

multidisciplinary sciences
Abstract 3563: Multi-modal mutational signatures elucidate the comprehensive consequences of mutational processes

Christopher D. Steele,Ludmil Alexandrov,Azhar Khandekar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.am2024-3563

IF: 11.2

2024-03-22

Cancer Research

Abstract:Abstract The development of mutational signatures defined individually in the contexts of single/double base substitutions, insertions and deletions, structural variants and copy number variation have led to improved understanding of cancer mutagenesis and potential for improved patient stratification. We hypothesized that combining these contexts into a multi-modal mutational signature framework may improve the accuracy of assigning mutational processes to samples, and provide a holistic view of the full repertoire of mutations conferred from such processes. In order to develop multi-modal signatures, bespoke feature engineering was required for each mutational modality to enhance signal, in addition to individual modality matrix normalization so that the data could be harmonized and analyzed as a whole. These methods, and subsequent signature extraction were developed on 2,438 whole genome sequenced cancers from 21 distinct cancer types from the PCAWG consortium for which all modalities of data were available, incorporating a 348 channel signature definition. Deployment of these methods identified multi-modal signatures that encompass multiple mutation types known to associate with specific processes, for example SBS, indel and rearrangement channels defining a signature of homologous recombination deficiency. In contrast, some signatures remain defined by a single mutational modality, highlighting the distinction between broadly mutational processes, and more focused mutation processes. Multi-modal signatures show promise in increasing accuracy for difficult to assign signatures, such as those for homologous recombination deficiency, and therefore in improving patient stratification for life-saving treatment. Citation Format: Christopher D. Steele, Ludmil Alexandrov, Azhar Khandekar. Multi-modal mutational signatures elucidate the comprehensive consequences of mutational processes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 3563.

oncology
Mutational Signatures in Colorectal Cancer: Translational Insights, Clinical Applications, and Limitations

Giovanni Crisafulli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16172956

2024-08-26

Cancers

Abstract:A multitude of exogenous and endogenous processes have the potential to result in DNA damage. While the repair mechanisms are typically capable of correcting this damage, errors in the repair process can result in mutations. The findings of research conducted in 2012 indicate that mutations do not occur randomly but rather follow specific patterns that can be attributed to known or inferred mutational processes. The process of mutational signature analysis allows for the inference of the predominant mutational process for a given cancer sample, with significant potential for clinical applications. A deeper comprehension of these mutational signatures in CRC could facilitate enhanced prevention strategies, facilitate the comprehension of genotoxic drug activity, predict responses to personalized treatments, and, in the future, inform the development of targeted therapies in the context of precision oncology. The efforts of numerous researchers have led to the identification of several mutational signatures, which can be categorized into different mutational signature references. In CRC, distinct mutational signatures are identified as correlating with mismatch repair deficiency, polymerase mutations, and chemotherapy treatment. In this context, a mutational signature analysis offers considerable potential for enhancing minimal residual disease (MRD) tests in stage II (high-risk) and stage III CRC post-surgery, stratifying CRC based on the impacts of genetic and epigenetic alterations for precision oncology, identifying potential therapeutic vulnerabilities, and evaluating drug efficacy and guiding therapy, as illustrated in a proof-of-concept clinical trial.

oncology
A comprehensive comparison of tools for fitting mutational signatures

Matúš Medo,Michaela Medová

2023-10-03

Abstract:Mutational signatures connect characteristic mutational patterns in the genome with biological processes that take place in the tumor tissues. Analysis of mutational signatures can help elucidate tumor evolution, prognosis, and therapeutic strategies. Although tools for extracting mutational signatures de novo have been extensively benchmarked, a similar effort is lacking for tools that fit known mutational signatures to a given catalog of mutations. We fill this gap by comprehensively evaluating eleven signature fitting tools (well-established as well as recent) on synthetic input data. To create realistic input data, we use empirical signature weights in tumor tissue samples from the COSMIC database. The study design allows us to assess the effects of the number of mutations, type of cancer, and the catalog of reference signatures on the results obtained with various fitting tools. We find substantial performance differences between the evaluated tools. Averaged over 120,000 simulated mutational catalogs corresponding to eight different cancer types, SigProfilerSingleSample and SigProfilerAssignment perform best for small and large numbers of mutations per sample, respectively. We further show that ad hoc constraining the list of reference signatures is likely to produce inferior results and that noisy estimates of signature weights in samples with as few as 100 mutations can still be useful in downstream analysis.

Genomics,Quantitative Methods
StarSignDNA: Signature tracing for accurate representation of mutational processes

christian Domilongo Bope,Sumana Kalyanasundaram,Knut D Rand,Sigve Nakken,Ole Christian Lingjaerde,Eivind Hovig

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.06.29.601345

2024-07-04

Abstract:All cell lineages accumulate mutations over time, increasing the probability that some lineages eventually become malignant. Many of the processes responsible for generating mutations are leaving a characteristic footprint in the genome that allows their presence to be detected. However, the mutational pattern in a tumor is usually the combined result of multiple mutational processes being at work simultaneously, and the problem of disentangling the different footprints and their relative impact then becomes a deconvolution problem. Several algorithms have been developed for this purpose, most of them involving a factorization of the mutation count matrix into two nonnegative matrices, representing respectively the underlying mutational signatures and the relative weighting of (or exposure to) these signatures. Here, we introduce the StarSignDNA algorithm for mutational signature analysis, which offers efficient refitting and de novo mutational signature extraction. StarSignDNA is capable of deciphering well-differentiated signatures linked to known mutagenic mechanisms and suggesting clinically relevant predictions for a single patient. The package offers a command line-based interface and data visualization routines.

Bioinformatics
Accurate and sensitive mutational signature analysis with MuSiCal

Hu Jin,Doga C. Gulhan,Benedikt Geiger,Daniel Ben-Isvy,David Geng,Viktor Ljungström,Peter J. Park

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-024-01659-0

IF: 30.8

2024-02-16

Nature Genetics

Abstract:Mutational signature analysis is a recent computational approach for interpreting somatic mutations in the genome. Its application to cancer data has enhanced our understanding of mutational forces driving tumorigenesis and demonstrated its potential to inform prognosis and treatment decisions. However, methodological challenges remain for discovering new signatures and assigning proper weights to existing signatures, thereby hindering broader clinical applications. Here we present Mutational Signature Calculator (MuSiCal), a rigorous analytical framework with algorithms that solve major problems in the standard workflow. Our simulation studies demonstrate that MuSiCal outperforms state-of-the-art algorithms for both signature discovery and assignment. By reanalyzing more than 2,700 cancer genomes, we provide an improved catalog of signatures and their assignments, discover nine indel signatures absent in the current catalog, resolve long-standing issues with the ambiguous 'flat' signatures and give insights into signatures with unknown etiologies. We expect MuSiCal and the improved catalog to be a step towards establishing best practices for mutational signature analysis.

genetics & heredity
A practical guide for mutational signature analysis in hematological malignancies

Francesco Maura,Andrea Degasperi,Ferran Nadeu,Daniel Leongamornlert,Helen Davies,Luiza Moore,Romina Royo,Bachisio Ziccheddu,Xose S Puente,Herve Avet-Loiseau,Peter J Campbell,Serena Nik-Zainal,Elias Campo,Nikhil Munshi,Niccolò Bolli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11037-8

2019-07-05

Abstract:Analysis of mutational signatures is becoming routine in cancer genomics, with implications for pathogenesis, classification, prognosis, and even treatment decisions. However, the field lacks a consensus on analysis and result interpretation. Using whole-genome sequencing of multiple myeloma (MM), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and acute myeloid leukemia, we compare the performance of public signature analysis tools. We describe caveats and pitfalls of de novo signature extraction and fitting approaches, reporting on common inaccuracies: erroneous signature assignment, identification of localized hyper-mutational processes, overcalling of signatures. We provide reproducible solutions to solve these issues and use orthogonal approaches to validate our results. We show how a comprehensive mutational signature analysis may provide relevant biological insights, reporting evidence of c-AID activity among unmutated CLL cases or the absence of BRCA1/BRCA2-mediated homologous recombination deficiency in a MM cohort. Finally, we propose a general analysis framework to ensure production of accurate and reproducible mutational signature data.
The shaping of cancer genomes with the regional impact of mutation processes

Soo-Youn Lee,Han Wang,Hae Jin Cho,Ruibin Xi,Tae-Min Kim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s12276-022-00808-x

2022-01-01

Abstract:Mutation signature analysis has been used to infer the contributions of various DNA mutagenic-repair events in individual cancer genomes. Here, we build a statistical framework using a multinomial distribution to assign individual mutations to their cognate mutation signatures. We applied it to 47 million somatic mutations in 1925 publicly available cancer genomes to obtain a mutation signature map at the resolution of individual somatic mutations. Based on mutation signature-level genetic-epigenetic correlative analyses, mutations with transcriptional and replicative strand asymmetries show different enrichment patterns across genomes, and “transcribed” chromatin states and gene boundaries are particularly vulnerable to transcription-coupled repair activities. While causative processes of cancer-driving mutations can be diverse, as shown for converging effects of multiple mutational processes on TP53 mutations, the substantial fraction of recurrently mutated amino acids points to specific mutational processes, e.g., age-related C-to-T transition for KRAS p.G12 mutations. Our investigation of evolutionary trajectories with respect to mutation signatures further revealed that candidate pairs of early- vs. late-operative mutation processes in cancer genomes represent evolutionary dynamics of multiple mutational processes in the shaping of cancer genomes. We also observed that the local mutation clusters of kataegis often include mutations arising from multiple mutational processes, suggestive of a locally synchronous impact of multiple mutational processes on cancer genomes. Taken together, our examination of the genome-wide landscape of mutation signatures at the resolution of individual somatic mutations shows the spatially and temporally distinct mutagenesis-repair-replication histories of various mutational processes and their effects on shaping cancer genomes.
A Bayesian framework to infer and cluster mutational signatures leveraging prior biological knowledge.

Elena Buscaroli,Azad Sadr Haghighi,Riccardo Bergamin,Salvatore Milite,Edith Natalia Villegas Garcia,Arianna Tasciotti,Alessio Ansuini,Daniele Ramazzotti,Nicola Calonaci,Giulio Caravagna

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.16.613266

2024-09-20

Abstract:The concept of mutational signatures, with its promising translational potential, provides key insights into the mutational processes underlying cancer. Current efforts are increasingly directed toward developing comprehensive catalogues of signatures linked to various tumour types and therapeutic responses. However, the existence of multiple catalogues, generated by different groups using distinct methodologies, underscores the need for standardisation across the field, and a cohesive framework that integrates established signatures remains to be fully realised. Here, we introduce a set of Bayesian algorithms that merge predefined signature catalogues with newly identified signatures, offering a systematic approach to expanding existing collections. By leveraging a diverse array of mutational signatures, our method also groups patients based on shared mutational patterns, further enhancing the translational relevance of these catalogues. We demonstrate that this approach enables the identification of both known and novel molecular subtypes across nearly 7,000 samples spanning three major cancers: breast, colon, and lung. Building on prior research, we propose a robust strategy to deepen our understanding of mutational processes in cancer.

Cancer Biology
Benchmarking 13 tools for mutational signature attribution, including a new and improved algorithm

Nanhai Jiang,Yang Wu,Steven G Rozen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.20.594967

2024-11-08

Abstract:Mutational signatures are characteristic patterns of mutations caused by endogenous mutational processes or by exogenous mutational exposures. There has been little benchmarking of approaches for determining which signatures are present in a sample and estimating the number of mutations due to each signature. This problem is referred to as "signature attribution". We show that there are often many combinations of signatures that can reconstruct the patterns of mutations in a sample reasonably well, even after encouraging sparse solutions. We benchmarked thirteen approaches to signature attribution, including a new approach called Presence Attribute Signature Activity (PASA), on large synthetic data sets (2,700 synthetic samples in total). These data sets recapitulated the single-base, insertion-deletion, and doublet-base mutational signature repertoires of 9 cancer types. For single-base substitution mutations, PASA and MuSiCal outperformed other approaches on all the cancer types combined. Interestingly, however, the ranking of approaches varied by cancer type. For doublet-base substitutions and small insertions and deletions, the ranking of approaches was more stable, with PASA outperforming the other approaches in most of the nine cancer types. For all mutation types, the ranking of approaches varied by cancer type, which we believe reflects inherent difficulties in signature attribution. These stem from the fact that there are often many attributions that can reasonably explain the pattern of mutations in a sample and from the combinatorial search space due to the need to impose sparsity. Despite these difficulties, for all mutation types, PASA's mean rank across cancer types was higher than any other approach's.

Bioinformatics
Interpretation of cancer mutations using a multiscale map of protein systems

Fan Zheng,Marcus R Kelly,Dana J Ramms,Marissa L Heintschel,Kai Tao,Beril Tutuncuoglu,John J Lee,Keiichiro Ono,Helene Foussard,Michael Chen,Kari A Herrington,Erica Silva,Sophie N Liu,Jing Chen,Christopher Churas,Nicholas Wilson,Anton Kratz,Rudolf T Pillich,Devin N Patel,Jisoo Park,Brent Kuenzi,Michael K Yu,Katherine Licon,Dexter Pratt,Jason F Kreisberg,Minkyu Kim,Danielle L Swaney,Xiaolin Nan,Stephanie I Fraley,J Silvio Gutkind,Nevan J Krogan,Trey Ideker,Marcus R. Kelly,Dana J. Ramms,Marissa L. Heintschel,John J. Lee,Kari A. Herrington,Sophie N. Liu,Rudolf T. Pillich,Devin N. Patel,Michael K. Yu,Jason F. Kreisberg,Danielle L. Swaney,Stephanie I. Fraley,J. Silvio Gutkind,Nevan J. Krogan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abf3067

IF: 56.9

2021-10-01

Science

Abstract:Mapping protein interactions driving cancer Cancer is a genetic disease, and much cancer research is focused on identifying carcinogenic mutations and determining how they relate to disease progression. Three papers demonstrate how mutations are processed through networks of protein interactions to promote cancer (see the Perspective by Cheng and Jackson). Swaney et al . focus on head and neck cancer and identify cancer-enriched interactions, demonstrating how point mutant–dependent interactions of PIK3CA, a kinase frequently mutated in human cancers, are predictive of drug response. Kim et al . focus on breast cancer and identify two proteins functionally connected to the tumor-suppressor gene BRCA1 and two proteins that regulate PIK3CA. Zheng et al . developed a statistical model that identifies protein networks that are under mutation pressure across different cancer types, including a complex bringing together PIK3CA with actomyosin proteins. These papers provide a resource that will be helpful in interpreting cancer genomic data. —VV

multidisciplinary sciences
Cancer mutational signatures identification in clinical assays using neural embedding-based representations

Adar Yaacov,Gil Ben Cohen,Jakob Landau,Tom Hope,Itamar Simon,Shai Rosenberg

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2024.101608

2024-06-18

Abstract:While mutational signatures provide a plethora of prognostic and therapeutic insights, their application in clinical-setting, targeted gene panels is extremely limited. We develop a mutational representation model (which learns and embeds specific mutation signature connections) that enables prediction of dominant signatures with only a few mutations. We predict the dominant signatures across more than 60,000 tumors with gene panels, delineating their landscape across different cancers. Dominant signature predictions in gene panels are of clinical importance. These included UV, tobacco, and apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme, catalytic polypeptide (APOBEC) signatures that are associated with better survival, independently from mutational burden. Further analyses reveal gene and mutation associations with signatures, such as SBS5 with TP53 and APOBEC with FGFR3S249C. In a clinical use case, APOBEC signature is a robust and specific predictor for resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs). Our model provides an easy-to-use way to detect signatures in clinical setting assays with many possible clinical implications for an unprecedented number of cancer patients.
Mutational signatures of colorectal cancers according to distinct computational workflows

Paolo Battuello,Giorgio Corti,Alice Bartolini,Annalisa Lorenzato,Alberto Sogari,Mariangela Russo,Federica Di Nicolantonio,Alberto Bardelli,Giovanni Crisafulli

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bib/bbae249

IF: 9.5

2024-05-24

Briefings in Bioinformatics

Abstract:Tumor mutational signatures have gained prominence in cancer research, yet the lack of standardized methods hinders reproducibility and robustness. Leveraging colorectal cancer (CRC) as a model, we explored the influence of computational parameters on mutational signature analyses across 230 CRC cell lines and 152 CRC patients. Results were validated in three independent datasets: 483 endometrial cancer patients stratified by mismatch repair (MMR) status, 35 lung cancer patients by smoking status and 12 patient-derived organoids (PDOs) annotated for colibactin exposure. Assessing various bioinformatic tools, reference datasets and input data sizes including whole genome sequencing, whole exome sequencing and a pan-cancer gene panel, we demonstrated significant variability in the results. We report that the use of distinct algorithms and references led to statistically different results, highlighting how arbitrary choices may induce variability in the mutational signature contributions. Furthermore, we found a differential contribution of mutational signatures between coding and intergenic regions and defined the minimum number of somatic variants required for reliable mutational signature assignment. To facilitate the identification of the most suitable workflows, we developed Comparative Mutational Signature analysis on Coding and Extragenic Regions (CoMSCER), a bioinformatic tool which allows researchers to easily perform comparative mutational signature analysis by coupling the results from several tools and public reference datasets and to assess mutational signature contributions in coding and non-coding genomic regions. In conclusion, our study provides a comparative framework to elucidate the impact of distinct computational workflows on mutational signatures.

biochemical research methods,mathematical & computational biology
Abstract 7415: Assigning mutational signatures to individual samples and individual somatic mutations with SigProfilerAssignment

Raviteja Vangara,Marcos Diaz-Gay,Mark D. Barnes,Xi Wang,S M Ashiqul Islam,Ian Vermes,Stephen Duke,Nithish Bharadhwaj Narasimman,Ting Yang,Zichen Jiang,Sarah Moody,Sergey Senkin,Paul Brennan,Michael R. Stratton,Ludmil B. Alexandrov

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.am2024-7415

IF: 11.2

2024-03-22

Cancer Research

Abstract:Abstract Analysis of mutational signatures is a powerful approach for understanding the mutagenic processes that have shaped the evolution of a cancer genome. To evaluate the mutational signatures operative in a cancer genome, one first needs to quantify their activities by estimating the number of mutations imprinted by each signature, a process known as refitting of mutational signatures. Although multiple tools for refitting known signatures were developed in the past decade, most provide support almost exclusively for single base substitution signatures and lack an online interface. Further, these tools have never been compared, and no existing tool supports probabilistically assigning signatures to a single somatic mutation. Here, we present SigProfilerAssignment, a desktop and online computational framework for assigning all types of mutational signatures to individual samples. SigProfilerAssignment is the first tool that allows both analysis of copy-number signatures and probabilistic assignment of signatures to individual somatic mutations. As its computational engine, the tool uses a custom implementation of the forward stagewise algorithm for sparse regression and nonnegative least squares for numerical optimization. The analysis of 2,700 synthetic cancer genomes with and without noise demonstrates that SigProfilerAssignment outperforms four commonly used approaches for assigning mutational signatures, with consistent top performance across cancer types and most signatures. SigProfilerAssignment stands out as the most precise and sensitive tool while maintaining high computational performance and bringing novel capabilities. SigProfilerAssignment is distributed as an open-source Python/R package available at https://github.com/AlexandrovLab/SigProfilerAssignment, with an online interface available as part of the COSMIC Mutational Signatures website at https://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/signatures/assignment/. Citation Format: Raviteja Vangara, Marcos Diaz-Gay, Mark D. Barnes, Xi Wang, S M Ashiqul Islam, Ian Vermes, Stephen Duke, Nithish Bharadhwaj Narasimman, Ting Yang, Zichen Jiang, Sarah Moody, Sergey Senkin, Paul Brennan, Michael R. Stratton, Ludmil B. Alexandrov. Assigning mutational signatures to individual samples and individual somatic mutations with SigProfilerAssignment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 7415.

oncology
A superior strategy for single-cell mutational screening via multiplex-targeted QPCR using the BioMark HD microfluidic platform.

Guangliang Li,Lisong Teng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2217/fon.14.16

2014-01-01

Future Oncology

Abstract:A major challenge in cancer therapy lies in its complexity and heterogeneity, with increasing recognition of many tumor subtypes that have different biological characteristics and responses to therapies. To effectively address this challenge, personalized medicine has been the 'vogue' currently. Dissecting the detailed clonal architecture of cancer by cancer genomics, which holds the promise of personalized medicine, has significant clinical implications. Substantial advances have been made in DNA-based, high-throughput genomic technologies. However, current methods are still in its infancy, significantly limited by error rates, low cell throughput, high cost and labor intensive. The study under evaluation develops a superior strategy for a comprehensive interrogation of the complex genomics of cancer cells by using multiplex-targeted DNA amplification from flow-sorted single cells followed by high-throughput quantitative PCR using the BioMark HD microfluidic platform. The platform demonstrated a successful rate of approximately 75%, a highly efficient single-cell sorting rate of 96-98%, a high-throughput analysis of 200-300 leukemic cells, and was able to simultaneously detected chimeric fusion genes, copy number alterations and single-nucleotide variants in a single cell sample.
Mutational Processes Molding the Genomes of 21 Breast Cancers

Serena Nik-Zainal,Ludmil B. Alexandrov,David C. Wedge,Peter Van Loo,Christopher D. Greenman,Keiran Raine,David Jones,Jonathan Hinton,John Marshall,Lucy A. Stebbings,Andrew Menzies,Sancha Martin,Kenric Leung,Lina Chen,Catherine Leroy,Manasa Ramakrishna,Richard Rance,King Wai Lau,Laura J. Mudie,Ignacio Varela,David J. McBride,Graham R. Bignell,Susanna L. Cooke,Adam Shlien,John Gamble,Ian Whitmore,Mark Maddison,Patrick S. Tarpey,Helen R. Davies,Elli Papaemmanuil,Philip J. Stephens,Stuart McLaren,Adam P. Butler,Jon W. Teague,Göran Jönsson,Judy E. Garber,Daniel Silver,Penelope Miron,Aquila Fatima,Sandrine Boyault,Anita Langerød,Andrew Tutt,John W.M. Martens,Samuel A.J.R. Aparicio,Åke Borg,Anne Vincent Salomon,Gilles Thomas,Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale,Andrea L. Richardson,Michael S. Neuberger,P. Andrew Futreal,Peter J. Campbell,Michael R. Stratton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.024

IF: 64.5

2012-05-01

Cell

Abstract:All cancers carry somatic mutations. The patterns of mutation in cancer genomes reflect the DNA damage and repair processes to which cancer cells and their precursors have been exposed. To explore these mechanisms further, we generated catalogs of somatic mutation from 21 breast cancers and applied mathematical methods to extract mutational signatures of the underlying processes. Multiple distinct single- and double-nucleotide substitution signatures were discernible. Cancers with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations exhibited a characteristic combination of substitution mutation signatures and a distinctive profile of deletions. Complex relationships between somatic mutation prevalence and transcription were detected. A remarkable phenomenon of localized hypermutation, termed "kataegis," was observed. Regions of kataegis differed between cancers but usually colocalized with somatic rearrangements. Base substitutions in these regions were almost exclusively of cytosine at TpC dinucleotides. The mechanisms underlying most of these mutational signatures are unknown. However, a role for the APOBEC family of cytidine deaminases is proposed.

cell biology,biochemistry & molecular biology
Gene signatures for cancer research: A 25-year retrospective and future avenues

Wei Liu,Huaqin He,Davide Chicco

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012512

2024-10-17

PLoS Computational Biology

Abstract:Over the past two decades, extensive studies, particularly in cancer analysis through large datasets like The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), have aimed at improving patient therapies and precision medicine. However, limited overlap and inconsistencies among gene signatures across different cohorts pose challenges. The dynamic nature of the transcriptome, encompassing diverse RNA species and functional complexities at gene and isoform levels, introduces intricacies, and current gene signatures face reproducibility issues due to the unique transcriptomic landscape of each patient. In this context, discrepancies arising from diverse sequencing technologies, data analysis algorithms, and software tools further hinder consistency. While careful experimental design, analytical strategies, and standardized protocols could enhance reproducibility, future prospects lie in multiomics data integration, machine learning techniques, open science practices, and collaborative efforts. Standardized metrics, quality control measures, and advancements in single-cell RNA-seq will contribute to unbiased gene signature identification. In this perspective article, we outline some thoughts and insights addressing challenges, standardized practices, and advanced methodologies enhancing the reliability of gene signatures in disease transcriptomic research.

biochemical research methods,mathematical & computational biology
Association of mutation signature effectuating processes with mutation hotspots in driver genes and non-coding regions

John K L Wong,Christian Aichmüller,Markus Schulze,Mario Hlevnjak,Shaymaa Elgaafary,Peter Lichter,Marc Zapatka

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-27792-6

2022-01-10

Abstract:Cancer driving mutations are difficult to identify especially in the non-coding part of the genome. Here, we present sigDriver, an algorithm dedicated to call driver mutations. Using 3813 whole-genome sequenced tumors from International Cancer Genome Consortium, The Cancer Genome Atlas Program, and a childhood pan-cancer cohort, we employ mutational signatures based on single-base substitution in the context of tri- and penta-nucleotide motifs for hotspot discovery. Knowledge-based annotations on mutational hotspots reveal enrichment in coding regions and regulatory elements for 6 mutational signatures, including APOBEC and somatic hypermutation signatures. APOBEC activity is associated with 32 hotspots of which 11 are known and 11 are putative regulatory drivers. Somatic single nucleotide variants clusters detected at hypermutation-associated hotspots are distinct from translocation or gene amplifications. Patients carrying APOBEC induced PIK3CA driver mutations show lower occurrence of signature SBS39. In summary, sigDriver uncovers mutational processes associated with known and putative tumor drivers and hotspots particularly in the non-coding regions of the genome.

Improved identification of cancer mutational processes

A practical framework and online tool for mutational signature analyses show intertissue variation and driver dependencies

Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer

Abstract 3563: Multi-modal mutational signatures elucidate the comprehensive consequences of mutational processes

Mutational Signatures in Colorectal Cancer: Translational Insights, Clinical Applications, and Limitations

A comprehensive comparison of tools for fitting mutational signatures

StarSignDNA: Signature tracing for accurate representation of mutational processes

Accurate and sensitive mutational signature analysis with MuSiCal

A practical guide for mutational signature analysis in hematological malignancies

The shaping of cancer genomes with the regional impact of mutation processes

A Bayesian framework to infer and cluster mutational signatures leveraging prior biological knowledge.

Benchmarking 13 tools for mutational signature attribution, including a new and improved algorithm

Interpretation of cancer mutations using a multiscale map of protein systems

Cancer mutational signatures identification in clinical assays using neural embedding-based representations

Mutational signatures of colorectal cancers according to distinct computational workflows

Abstract 7415: Assigning mutational signatures to individual samples and individual somatic mutations with SigProfilerAssignment

A superior strategy for single-cell mutational screening via multiplex-targeted QPCR using the BioMark HD microfluidic platform.

Mutational Processes Molding the Genomes of 21 Breast Cancers

Gene signatures for cancer research: A 25-year retrospective and future avenues

Association of mutation signature effectuating processes with mutation hotspots in driver genes and non-coding regions