Back

Group comparison based on genetic information reveals lineage-specific therapeutic vulnerabilities in acute myeloid leukemia

Nakahara, J.; Yamamoto, K.; Yabushita, T.; Chinen, T.; Ito, K.; Takeda, Y.; Kitagawa, D.; Goyama, S.

2023-05-22 cancer biology
10.1101/2023.05.18.541265 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Cancer is a genetic disease with specific mutations or fusions. Therapies targeting cancer cell-specific essential genes are expected to have efficient anticancer effects with fewer side effects. To explore such cancer cell-specific vulnerabilities, we established a two-group comparison system to predict essential genes in each cancer subtype using the data from the Cancer Dependency Map (DepMap). We applied this analytical method to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and identified PCYT1A and BCL2L1 as a specific vulnerability in MLL-rearranged AML and TP53-mutated AML, respectively. Interestingly, further investigation revealed that PCYT1A is in fact a critical regulator in monocytic AML including those with MLL-rearrangements, and BCL2L1 is essential in acute erythroid leukemia in which TP53 is frequently mutated. These results highlighted the importance of cell of origin, rather than the genetic aberrations alone, to identify subtype-specific vulnerabilities in AML. The DepMap-based two-group comparison approach could accelerate the discovery of subtype-specific therapeutic targets in diverse cancers.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Blood
● 74 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.5%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Leukemia
○ 42 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Cancers
○ 213 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
7.7%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Blood Advances
● 62 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 28%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
6
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 25%
5.1%
7
npj Precision Oncology
○ 53 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 35%
3.1%
9
Oncogenesis
○ 12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.1%
10
Haematologica
● 25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.4%
11
Journal of Hematology & Oncology
○ 10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.3%
12
Cell Death & Disease
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
13
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 20%
1.7%
14
Oncogene
○ 85 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
Clinical Cancer Research
● 64 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
16
Blood Cancer Journal
○ 14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
17
Clinical and Translational Medicine
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.4%
18
Experimental Hematology
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
19
Cell Reports
○ 1498 papers in training set
Top 23%
1.1%
20
Cancer Discovery
● 66 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
21
Molecular Cancer Research
● 49 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
22
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 57%
1.0%
23
Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy
○ 30 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
24
Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy
○ 42 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
25
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 37%
0.8%
26
EMBO Molecular Medicine
○ 95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
27
Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research
○ 25 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
28
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 31%
0.8%
29
PLOS Genetics
● 862 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.8%
30
Cancer Letters
○ 35 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%

"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.