Search

Clinical responses to anticancer therapies are often restricted to a subset of patients. In some cases, mutated cancer genes are potent biomarkers for responses to targeted agents. Here, to uncover new biomarkers of sensitivity and resistance to cancer therapeutics, we screened a panel of several hundred cancer cell lines--which represent much of the tissue-type and genetic diversity of human cancers--with 130 drugs under clinical and preclinical investigation. In aggregate, we found that mutated cancer genes were associated with cellular response to most currently available cancer drugs. Classic oncogene addiction paradigms were modified by additional tissue-specific or expression biomarkers, and some frequently mutated genes were associated with sensitivity to a broad range of therapeutic agents. Unexpected relationships were revealed, including the marked sensitivity of Ewing's sarcoma cells harbouring the EWS (also known as EWSR1)-FLI1 gene translocation to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. By linking drug activity to the functional complexity of cancer genomes, systematic pharmacogenomic profiling in cancer cell lines provides a powerful biomarker discovery platform to guide rational cancer therapeutic strategies.

The cancer genome is moulded by the dual processes of somatic mutation and selection. Homozygous deletions in cancer genomes occur over recessive cancer genes, where they can confer selective growth advantage, and over fragile sites, where they are thought to reflect an increased local rate of DNA breakage. However, most homozygous deletions in cancer genomes are unexplained. Here we identified 2,428 somatic homozygous deletions in 746 cancer cell lines. These overlie 11% of protein-coding genes that, therefore, are not mandatory for survival of human cells. We derived structural signatures that distinguish between homozygous deletions over recessive cancer genes and fragile sites. Application to clusters of unexplained homozygous deletions suggests that many are in regions of inherent fragility, whereas a small subset overlies recessive cancer genes. The results illustrate how structural signatures can be used to distinguish between the influences of mutation and selection in cancer genomes. The extensive copy number, genotyping, sequence and expression data available for this large series of publicly available cancer cell lines renders them informative reagents for future studies of cancer biology and drug discovery.

All cancers carry somatic mutations. A subset of these somatic alterations, termed driver mutations, confer selective growth advantage and are implicated in cancer development, whereas the remainder are passengers. Here we have sequenced the genomes of a malignant melanoma and a lymphoblastoid cell line from the same person, providing the first comprehensive catalogue of somatic mutations from an individual cancer. The catalogue provides remarkable insights into the forces that have shaped this cancer genome. The dominant mutational signature reflects DNA damage due to ultraviolet light exposure, a known risk factor for malignant melanoma, whereas the uneven distribution of mutations across the genome, with a lower prevalence in gene footprints, indicates that DNA repair has been preferentially deployed towards transcribed regions. The results illustrate the power of a cancer genome sequence to reveal traces of the DNA damage, repair, mutation and selection processes that were operative years before the cancer became symptomatic.

Multiple somatic rearrangements are often found in cancer genomes; however, the underlying processes of rearrangement and their contribution to cancer development are poorly characterized. Here we use a paired-end sequencing strategy to identify somatic rearrangements in breast cancer genomes. There are more rearrangements in some breast cancers than previously appreciated. Rearrangements are more frequent over gene footprints and most are intrachromosomal. Multiple rearrangement architectures are present, but tandem duplications are particularly common in some cancers, perhaps reflecting a specific defect in DNA maintenance. Short overlapping sequences at most rearrangement junctions indicate that these have been mediated by non-homologous end-joining DNA repair, although varying sequence patterns indicate that multiple processes of this type are operative. Several expressed in-frame fusion genes were identified but none was recurrent. The study provides a new perspective on cancer genomes, highlighting the diversity of somatic rearrangements and their potential contribution to cancer development.