Search

Whole-genome analysis of cancer specimens is commonplace, and investigators frequently share or re-use specimens in later studies. Duplicate expression profiles in public databases will impact re-analysis if left undetected, a so-called "doppelgänger" effect. We propose a method that should be routine practice to accurately match duplicate cancer transcriptomes when nucleotide-level sequence data are unavailable, even for samples profiled by different microarray technologies or by both microarray and RNA sequencing. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the method in databases containing dozens of datasets and thousands of ovarian, breast, bladder, and colorectal cancer microarray profiles and of matching microarray and RNA sequencing expression profiles from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). We identified probable duplicates among more than 50% of studies, originating in different continents, using different technologies, published years apart, and even within the TCGA itself. Finally, we provide the doppelgangR Bioconductor package for screening transcriptome databases for duplicates. Given the potential for unrecognized duplication to falsely inflate prediction accuracy and confidence in differential expression, doppelgänger-checking should be a part of standard procedure for combining multiple genomic datasets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Ovarian cancer causes more than 15000 deaths per year in the United States. The survival of patients is quite heterogeneous, and accurate prognostic tools would help with the clinical management of these patients. Methods We developed and validated two gene expression signatures, the first for predicting survival in advanced-stage, serous ovarian cancer and the second for predicting debulking status. We integrated 13 publicly available datasets totaling 1525 subjects. We trained prediction models using a meta-analysis variation on the compound covariable method, tested models by a "leave-one-dataset-out" procedure, and validated models in additional independent datasets. Selected genes from the debulking signature were validated by immunohistochemistry and quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) in two further independent cohorts of 179 and 78 patients, respectively. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results The survival signature stratified patients into high- and low-risk groups (hazard ratio = 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.84 to 2.61) statistically significantly better than the TCGA signature (P=.04). POSTN, CXCL14, FAP, NUAK1, PTCH1, and TGFBR2 were validated by qRT-PCR (P< .05) and POSTN, CXCL14, and phosphorylated Smad2/3 were validated by immunohistochemistry (P < .001) as independent predictors of debulking status. The sum of immunohistochemistry intensities for these three proteins provided a tool that classified 92.8% of samples correctly in high- and low-risk groups for suboptimal debulking (area under the curve = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.93). Conclusions Our survival signature provides the most accurate and validated prognostic model for early- and advanced-stage high-grade, serous ovarian cancer. The debulking signature accurately predicts the outcome of cytoreductive surgery, potentially allowing for stratification of patients for primary vs secondary cytoreduction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer deaths in women in the United States. Numerous gene signatures of patient prognosis have been proposed, but diverse data and methods make these difficult to compare or use in a clinically meaningful way. We sought to identify successful published prognostic gene signatures through systematic validation using public data. Methods A systematic review identified 14 prognostic models for late-stage ovarian cancer. For each, we evaluated its 1) reimplementation as described by the original study, 2) performance for prognosis of overall survival in independent data, and 3) performance compared with random gene signatures. We compared and ranked models by validation in 10 published datasets comprising 1251 primarily high-grade, late-stage serous ovarian cancer patients. All tests of statistical significance were two-sided. Results Twelve published models had 95% confidence intervals of the C-index that did not include the null value of 0.5; eight outperformed 97.5% of signatures including the same number of randomly selected genes and trained on the same data. The four top-ranked models achieved overall validation C-indices of 0.56 to 0.60 and shared anti-correlation with expression of immune response pathways. Most models demonstrated lower accuracy in new datasets than in validation sets presented in their publication. Conclusions This analysis provides definitive support for a handful of prognostic models but also confirms that these require improvement to be of clinical value. This work addresses outstanding controversies in the ovarian cancer literature and provides a reproducible framework for meta-analytic evaluation of gene signatures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article introduces a manually curated data collection for gene expression meta-analysis of patients with ovarian cancer and software for reproducible preparation of similar databases. This resource provides uniformly prepared microarray data for 2970 patients from 23 studies with curated and documented clinical metadata. It allows users to efficiently identify studies and patient subgroups of interest for analysis and to perform meta-analysis immediately without the challenges posed by harmonizing heterogeneous microarray technologies, study designs, expression data processing methods and clinical data formats. We confirm that the recently proposed biomarker CXCL12 is associated with patient survival, independently of stage and optimal surgical debulking, which was possible only through meta-analysis owing to insufficient sample sizes of the individual studies. The database is implemented as the curatedOvarianData Bioconductor package for the R statistical computing language, providing a comprehensive and flexible resource for clinically oriented investigation of the ovarian cancer transcriptome. The package and pipeline for producing it are available from http://bcb.dfci.harvard.edu/ovariancancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Plant microRNAs (miRNAs) affect only a small number of targets with high sequence complementarity, while animal miRNAs usually have hundreds of targets with limited complementarity. We used artificial miRNAs (amiRNAs) to determine whether the narrow action spectrum of natural plant miRNAs reflects only intrinsic properties of the plant miRNA machinery or whether it is also due to past selection against natural miRNAs with broader specificity, amiRNAs were designed to target individual genes or groups of endogenous genes. Like natural miRNAs, they had varying numbers of target mismatches. Previously determined parameters of target selection for natural miRNAs could accurately predict direct targets of amiRNAs. The specificity of amiRNAs, as deduced from genome- wide expression profiling, was as high as that of natural plant miRNAs, supporting the notion that extensive base pairing with targets is required for plant miRNA function, amiRNAs make an effective tool for specific gone silencing in plants, especially when several related, but not identical, target genes need to be downregulated. We demonstrate that amiRNAs are also active when expressed under tissue-specific or inducible promoters, with limited nonautonomous effects. The design principles for amiRNAs have been generalized and integrated into a Web-based tool (http://wmd.weigelworld.org). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors reflect on the challenges involving the molecular subtyping of high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HSOC). They discuss a study by Konecny and colleagues of the existence and survival association of four HSOC molecular subtypes proposed by the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), showing that patients classified as immunoreactive have on average best prognosis, with mesenchymal subtype associated with poor outcome.

Motivation: Numerous competing algorithms for prediction in high-dimensional settings have been developed in the statistical and machine-learning literature. Learning algorithms and the prediction models they generate are typically evaluated on the basis of cross-validation error estimates in a few exemplary datasets. However, in most applications, the ultimate goal of prediction modeling is to provide accurate predictions for independent samples obtained in different settings. Cross-validation within exemplary datasets may not adequately reflect performance in the broader application context.Methods: We develop and implement a systematic approach to ‘cross-study validation’, to replace or supplement conventional cross-validation when evaluating high-dimensional prediction models in independent datasets. We illustrate it via simulations and in a collection of eight estrogen-receptor positive breast cancer microarray gene-expression datasets, where the objective is predicting distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). We computed the C-index for all pairwise combinations of training and validation datasets. We evaluate several alternatives for summarizing the pairwise validation statistics, and compare these to conventional cross-validation.Results: Our data-driven simulations and our application to survival prediction with eight breast cancer microarray datasets, suggest that standard cross-validation produces inflated discrimination accuracy for all algorithms considered, when compared to cross-study validation. Furthermore, the ranking of learning algorithms differs, suggesting that algorithms performing best in cross-validation may be suboptimal when evaluated through independent validation.Availability: The survHD: Survival in High Dimensions package (http://www.bitbucket.org/lwaldron/survhd) will be made available through Bioconductor.Contact: levi.waldron@hunter.cuny.eduSupplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]