RESUMO
Cancers display significant heterogeneity with respect to tissue of origin, driver mutations, and other features of the surrounding tissue. It is likely that individual tumors engage common patterns of the immune system-here "archetypes"-creating prototypical non-destructive tumor immune microenvironments (TMEs) and modulating tumor-targeting. To discover the dominant immune system archetypes, the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Immunoprofiler Initiative (IPI) processed 364 individual tumors across 12 cancer types using standardized protocols. Computational clustering of flow cytometry and transcriptomic data obtained from cell sub-compartments uncovered dominant patterns of immune composition across cancers. These archetypes were profound insofar as they also differentiated tumors based upon unique immune and tumor gene-expression patterns. They also partitioned well-established classifications of tumor biology. The IPI resource provides a template for understanding cancer immunity as a collection of dominant patterns of immune organization and provides a rational path forward to learn how to modulate these to improve therapy.
Assuntos
Censos , Neoplasias/genética , Neoplasias/imunologia , Transcriptoma/genética , Microambiente Tumoral/imunologia , Biomarcadores Tumorais , Análise por Conglomerados , Estudos de Coortes , Biologia Computacional/métodos , Citometria de Fluxo/métodos , Regulação Neoplásica da Expressão Gênica , Humanos , Neoplasias/classificação , Neoplasias/patologia , RNA-Seq/métodos , São Francisco , UniversidadesRESUMO
Synthetic lethality refers to a genetic interaction where the simultaneous perturbation of gene pairs leads to cell death. Synthetically lethal gene pairs (SL pairs) provide a potential avenue for selectively targeting cancer cells based on genetic vulnerabilities. The rise of large-scale gene perturbation screens such as the Cancer Dependency Map (DepMap) offers the opportunity to identify SL pairs automatically using machine learning. We build on a recently developed class of feature learning kernel machines known as Recursive Feature Machines (RFMs) to develop a pipeline for identifying SL pairs based on CRISPR viability data from DepMap. In particular, we first train RFMs to predict viability scores for a given CRISPR gene knockout from cell line embeddings consisting of gene expression and mutation features. After training, RFMs use a statistical operator known as average gradient outer product to provide weights for each feature indicating the importance of each feature in predicting cellular viability. We subsequently apply correlation-based filters to re-weight RFM feature importances and identify those features that are most indicative of low cellular viability. Our resulting pipeline is computationally efficient, taking under 3 minutes for analyzing all 17, 453 knockouts from DepMap for candidate SL pairs. We show that our pipeline more accurately recovers experimentally verified SL pairs than prior approaches. Moreover, our pipeline finds new candidate SL pairs, thereby opening novel avenues for identifying genetic vulnerabilities in cancer.
RESUMO
We perform an event study analysis that quantifies the market reaction to clinical trial result announcements for 13,807 trials from 2000 to 2020, one of the largest event studies of clinical trials to date. We first determine the specific dates in the clinical trial process on which the greatest impact on the stock prices of their sponsor companies occur. We then analyze the relationship between the abnormal returns observed on these dates due to the clinical trial outcome and the properties of the trial, such as its phase, target accrual, design category, and disease and sponsor company type (biotechnology or pharmaceutical). We find that the classification of a company as "early biotechnology" or "big pharmaceutical" had the most impact on abnormal returns, followed by properties such as disease, outcome, the phase of the clinical trial, and target accrual. We also find that these properties and classifications by themselves were insufficient to explain the variation in excess returns observed due to clinical trial outcomes.