Computationally reconstructing the evolution of cancer progression risk
Cao, K.; Schwartz, R.
Show abstract
Understanding the evolution of cancer in its early stages is critical to identifying key drivers of cancer progression and developing better early diagnostics or prophylactic treatments. Early cancer is difficult to observe, though, since it is generally asymptomatic until extensive genetic damage has accumulated. In this study, we develop a computational approach to infer how once-healthy cells enter into and become committed to a pathway of aggressive cancer. We accomplish this through a strategy of using tumor phylogenetics to look backwards in time to earlier stages of tumor development combined with machine learning to infer how progression risk changes over those stages. We apply this paradigm to point mutation data from a set of cohorts from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) to formulate models of how progression risk evolves from the earliest stages of tumor growth, as well as how this evolution varies within and between cohorts. The results suggest general mechanisms by which risk develops as a cell population commits to aggressive cancer, but with significant variability between cohorts and individuals. These results imply limits to the potential for earlier diagnosis and intervention while also providing grounds for hope in extending these beyond current practice. AvailabilityThe code used to conduct the analysis is available at: https://github.com/kefanc2/CancerRisk
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- BC-Predict: Mining of signal biomarkers and multilevel validation of cascade classifier for early-stage breast cancer subtyping and prognosis 88%
- Predicting GD2 expression across cancer types by the integration of pathway topology and transcriptome data 87%
- NOBIAS: Analyzing anomalous diffusion in single-molecule tracks with nonparametric Bayesian inference 87%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.