4.7 Article

A Transcriptional Network Signature Characterizes Lung Cancer Subtypes

Journal

CANCER
Volume 117, Issue 2, Pages 353-360

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25592

Keywords

transcriptional networks; gene expression; disease diagnosis; lung cancer

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health/National Human Genome Research Institute [R01HG003354]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Transcriptional networks play a central role in cancer development. The authors described a systems biology approach to cancer classification based on the reverse engineering of the transcriptional network surrounding the 2 most common types of lung cancer: adenocarcinoma (AC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). METHODS: A transcriptional network classifier was inferred from the molecular profiles of 111 human lung carcinomas. The authors tested its classification accuracy in 7 independent cohorts, for a total of 422 subjects of Caucasian, African, and Asian descent. RESULTS: The model for distinguishing AC from SCC was a 25-gene network signature. Its performance on the 7 independent cohorts achieved 95.2% classification accuracy. Even more surprisingly, 95% of this accuracy was explained by the interplay of 3 genes (KRT6A, KRT6B, KRT6C) on a narrow cytoband of chromosome 12. The role of this chromosomal region in distinguishing AC and SCC was further confirmed by the analysis of another group of 28 independent subjects assayed by DNA copy number changes. The copy number variations of bands 12q12, 12q13, and 12q12-13 discriminated these samples with 84% accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest the existence of a robust signature localized in a relatively small area of the genome, and show the clinical potential of reverse engineering transcriptional networks from molecular profiles. Cancer 2011; 117:353-60. (C) 2010 American Cancer Society.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available