Search

Background: RNA-Seq provides remarkable power in the area of biomarkers discovery and disease characterization. Two crucial steps that affect RNA-Seq experiment results are Library Sample Preparation (LSP) and Bioinformatics Analysis (BA). This work describes an evaluation of the combined effect of LSP methods and BA tools in the detection of splice variants. Results: Different LSPs (TruSeq unstranded/stranded, ScriptSeq, NuGEN) allowed the detection of a large common set of splice variants. However, each LSP also detected a small set of unique transcripts that are characterized by a low coverage and/or FPKM. This effect was particularly evident using the low input RNA NuGEN v2 protocol. A benchmark dataset, in which synthetic reads as well as reads generated from standard (Illumina TruSeq 100) and low input (NuGEN) LSPs were spiked-in was used to evaluate the effect of LSP on the statistical detection of alternative splicing events (AltDE). Statistical detection of AltDE was done using as prototypes for splice variant-quantification Cuffdiff2 and RSEM-EBSeq. As prototype for exon-level analysis DEXSeq was used. Exon-level analysis performed slightly better than splice variant-quantification approaches, although at most only 50% of the spiked-in transcripts was detected. The performances of both splice variant-quantification and exon-level analysis improved when raising the number of input reads. Conclusion: Data, derived from NuGEN v2, were not the ideal input for AltDE, especially when the exon-level approach was used. We observed that both splice variant-quantification and exon-level analysis performances were strongly dependent on the number of input reads. Moreover, the ribosomal RNA depletion protocol was less sensitive in detecting splicing variants, possibly due to the significant percentage of the reads mapping to non-coding transcripts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for 81% of all cases of lung cancer and they are often fatal because 60% of the patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage. Besides the need for earlier diagnosis, there is a high need for additional effective therapies. In this work, we investigated the feasibility of a lung cancer progression mouse model, mimicking features of human aggressive NSCLC, as biological reservoir for potential therapeutic targets and biomarkers. Results: We performed RNA-seq profiling on total RNA extracted from lungs of a 30 week-old K-rasLA1/p53R172HΔg and wild type (WT) mice to detect fusion genes and gene/exon-level differential expression associated to the increase of tumor mass. Fusion events were not detected in K-rasLA1/p53R172HΔg tumors. Differential expression at exon-level detected 33 genes with differential exon usage. Among them nine, i.e. those secreted or expressed on the plasma membrane, were used for a meta-analysis of more than 500 NSCLC RNA-seq transcriptomes. None of the genes showed a significant correlation between exon-level expression and disease prognosis. Differential expression at gene-level allowed the identification of 1513 genes with a significant increase in expression associated to tumor mass increase. 74 genes, i.e. those secreted or expressed on the plasma membrane, were used for a meta-analysis of two transcriptomics datasets of human NSCLC samples, encompassing more than 900 samples. SPP1 was the only molecule whose over-expression resulted statistically related to poor outcome regarding both survival and metastasis formation. Two other molecules showed over-expression associated to poor outcome due to metastasis formation: GM-CSF and ADORA3. GM-CSF is a secreted protein, and we confirmed its expression in the supernatant of a cell line derived by a K-rasLA1/p53R172HΔg mouse tumor. ADORA3 is instead involved in the induction of p53-mediated apoptosis in lung cancer cell lines. Since in our model p53 is inactivated, ADORA3 does not negatively affect tumor growth but remains expressed on tumor cells. Thus, it could represent an interesting target for the development of antibody-targeted therapy on a subset of NSCLC, which are p53 null and ADORA3 positive. Conclusions: Our study provided a complete transcription overview of the K-rasLA1/p53R172HΔg mouse NSCLC model. This approach allowed the detection of ADORA3 as a potential target for antibody-based therapy in p53 mutated tumors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: RNA-seq has the potential to discover genes created by chromosomal rearrangements. Fusion genes, also known as "chimeras", are formed by the breakage and re-joining of two different chromosomes. It is known that chimeras have been implicated in the development of cancer. Few publications in the past showed the presence of fusion events also in normal tissue, but with very limited overlaps between their results. More recently, two fusion genes in normal tissues were detected using both RNA-seq and protein data. Due to heterogeneous results in identifying chimeras in normal tissue, we decided to evaluate the efficacy of state of the art fusion finders in detecting chimeras in RNA-seq data from normal tissues. Results: We compared the performance of six fusion-finder tools: FusionHunter, FusionMap, FusionFinder, MapSplice, deFuse and TopHat-fusion. To evaluate the sensitivity we used a synthetic dataset of fusion-products, called positive dataset; in these experiments FusionMap, FusionFinder, MapSplice, and TopHat-fusion are able to detect more than 78% of fusion genes. All tools were error prone with high variability among the tools, identifying some fusion genes not present in the synthetic dataset. To better investigate the false discovery chimera detection rate, synthetic datasets free of fusion-products, called negative datasets, were used. The negative datasets have different read lengths and quality scores, which allow detecting dependency of the tools on both these features. FusionMap, FusionFinder, mapSplice, deFuse and TopHat-fusion were error-prone. Only FusionHunter results were free of false positive. FusionMap gave the best compromise in terms of specificity in the negative dataset and of sensitivity in the positive dataset. Conclusions: We have observed a dependency of the tools on read length, quality score and on the number of reads supporting each chimera. Thus, it is important to carefully select the software on the basis of the structure of the RNA-seq data under analysis. Furthermore, the sensitivity of chimera detection tools does not seem to be sufficient to provide results consistent with those obtained in normal tissues on the basis of fusion events extracted from published data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]