Back

Massively parallel phenotyping of variant impact in cancer with Perturb-seq reveals a shift in the spectrum of cell states induced by somatic mutations

Ursu, O.; Neal, J. T.; Shea, E.; Thakore, P. I.; Jerby-Arnon, L.; Nguyen, L.; Dionne, D.; Diaz, C.; Bauman, J.; Mosaad, M.; Fagre, C.; Giacomelli, A.; Ly, S. H.; Rozenblatt-Rosen, O.; Hahn, W.; Aguirre, A.; Berger, A.; Regev, A.; Boehm, J. S.

2020-11-17 genomics
10.1101/2020.11.16.383307 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Genome sequencing studies have identified millions of somatic variants in cancer, but their phenotypic impact remains challenging to predict. Current experimental approaches to distinguish between functionally impactful and neutral variants require customized phenotypic assays that often report on average effects, and are not easily scaled. Here, we develop a generalizable, high-dimensional, and scalable approach to functionally assess variant impact in single cells by pooled Perturb-seq. Specifically, we assessed the impact of 200 TP53 and KRAS variants in >300,000 single lung cancer cells, and used the profiles to categorize variants into phenotypic subsets to distinguish gain-of-function, loss-of-function and dominant negative variants, which we validated by comparison to orthogonal assays. Surprisingly, KRAS variants did not merely fit into discrete functional categories, but rather spanned a continuum of gain-of-function phenotypes driven by quantitative shifts in cell composition at the single cell level. We further discovered novel gain-of-function KRAS variants whose impact could not have been predicted solely by their occurrence in patient samples. Our work provides a scalable, gene-agnostic method for coding variant impact phenotyping, which can be applied in cancer and other diseases driven by somatic or germline coding mutations.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.