2019
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-50720-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Modeling cancer drug response through drug-specific informative genes

Abstract: Recent advances in pharmacogenomics have generated a wealth of data of different types whose analysis have helped in the identification of signatures of different cellular sensitivity/resistance responses to hundreds of chemical compounds. Among the different data types, gene expression has proven to be the more successful for the inference of drug response in cancer cell lines. Although effective, the whole transcriptome can introduce noise in the predictive models, since specific mechanisms are required for … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

3
45
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
3
45
0
Order By: Relevance
“…8 and 9 ). These results supported recent observations that the expression profiles of drug targets alone as well as the network neighbors of drug targets were not predictive of drug response 6 , 7 , 30 , 31 , suggesting that utilization of network proximity allowed robust signals to be captured at the pathway level, but not at the gene level. Moreover, we also applied the feature selection procedure by Bolis et al, which leverages 10 iterations of leave-half-out cross-validation to select genes for ML training (see “Methods”).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 87%
“…8 and 9 ). These results supported recent observations that the expression profiles of drug targets alone as well as the network neighbors of drug targets were not predictive of drug response 6 , 7 , 30 , 31 , suggesting that utilization of network proximity allowed robust signals to be captured at the pathway level, but not at the gene level. Moreover, we also applied the feature selection procedure by Bolis et al, which leverages 10 iterations of leave-half-out cross-validation to select genes for ML training (see “Methods”).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Consistently throughout this study, we observed that the higher expression of CD36 in HT29 LuM3 cells ( 36 ) as compared to parental HT29 cells, makes these cells more sensitive to CD36 inhibition via CD36 shRNA and inhibits xenograft tumor growth to a higher extent as compared to HT29 xenografts. Furthermore, the mutational and metabolic profiles of tumors determine tumor cell response to multiple therapies including metabolic inhibitors ( 48 , 49 ). Different genetic profiles and metabolic features can explain the varying levels of response of cell lines to FASN and CD36 inhibition.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of computational methods have been proposed to predict drug responses for cell lines based on molecular data. Classical algorithms like decision trees and support vector machines have been used to predict the clinical efficiency of anti-cancer drugs and classify drug responses (Stetson et al, 2015;Borisov et al, 2018;Oskooei et al, 2018;Webber et al, 2018;Parca et al, 2019;Su et al, 2019). Neural networks (Menden et al, 2013) and deep neural networks (Chiu et al, 2019) have been used to predict drug response based on genomic profiles from cell lines.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other techniques have included elastic net regression (Basu et al, 2013;Webber et al, 2018;Parca et al, 2019), linear ridge regression (Geeleher et al, 2017), and LASSO regression (Huang et al, 2020). Alternative approaches based on computational linear algebra or network structures have also been applied to infer drug response in cell lines; these include matrix factorization (Guan et al, 2019), matrix completion (Nguyen and Le, 2018), and link prediction (Stanfield et al, 2017) methods.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation