4.7 Article

DEPTH2: an mRNA-based algorithm to evaluate intratumor heterogeneity without reference to normal controls

期刊

JOURNAL OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE
卷 20, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12967-022-03355-1

关键词

Algorithm; Intratumor heterogeneity; Gene expression profiles; Cancer prognosis; Antitumor immunity; Genomic instability

资金

  1. China Pharmaceutical University [3150120001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study proposes a new mRNA-based ITH evaluation algorithm called DEPTH2, which effectively evaluates the levels of intratumor heterogeneity and is associated with various cancer characteristics such as tumor progression and genomic instability.
Background Intratumor heterogeneity (ITH) is associated with tumor progression, unfavorable prognosis, immunosuppression, genomic instability, and therapeutic resistance. Thus, evaluation of ITH levels is valuable in cancer diagnosis and treatment. Methods We proposed a new mRNA-based ITH evaluation algorithm (DEPTH2) without reference to normal controls. DEPTH2 evaluates ITH levels based on the standard deviations of absolute z-scored transcriptome levels in tumors, reflecting the asynchronous level of transcriptome alterations relative to the central tendency in a tumor. Results By analyzing 33 TCGA cancer types, we demonstrated that DEPTH2 ITH was effective in measuring ITH for its significant associations with tumor progression, unfavorable prognosis, genomic instability, reduced antitumor immunity and immunotherapy response, and altered drug response in diverse cancers. Compared to other five ITH evaluation algorithms (MATH, PhyloWGS, ABSOLUTE, DEPTH, and tITH), DEPTH2 ITH showed a stronger association with unfavorable clinical outcomes, and in characterizing other properties of ITH, such as its associations with genomic instability and antitumor immunosuppression, DEPTH2 also displayed competitive performance. Conclusions DEPTH2 is expected to have a wider spectrum of applications in evaluating ITH in comparison to other algorithms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据