Back

Using Cancer Profiles to Identify Synthetic Lethal Therapeutic Targets and Predictive Biomarkers in Cancer Gene Dependency Data

Pearl, L. H.; Pearl, F.

2025-04-11 bioinformatics
10.1101/2025.04.07.647559 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Large scale loss-of-function screens utilising CRISPR or siRNA can provide profound insights into the importance of individual genes for the survival of a cancer cell and can drive the identification of therapeutic targets and biomarkers, and the development of targeted drugs. However, the analysis of these data and the substantial bodies of metadata that relate to them, is technically challenging and typically requires substantial expertise in data science and computer coding. To facilitate the analysis of cancer gene dependency data by cancer biologists and clinical scientists, we have developed DepMine - a computational toolkit providing a powerful system for framing complex queries relating cancer gene dependency to the underlying genetic changes that occur in cancer cells. DepMine identifies synthetic lethal relationships between putative target genes and complex cancer profiles built from user-specified combinations of mutations, copy-number variation, and expression levels, and can refine these to optimal biomarker definitions for target dependency.

Published in Bioinformatics (predicted rank #6) · training set

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 1%
12.5%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Molecular Systems Biology
○ 162 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.6%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Disease Models & Mechanisms
139 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
6.2%
4
Cell Systems
○ 201 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
5.4%
Similar papers in this journal
5
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
◐ 242 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.8%
Similar papers in this journal
Bioinformatics · published here
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.2%
7
Bioinformatics Advances
◐ 203 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
8
Genome Medicine
○ 183 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
9
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 7%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
10
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.2%
11
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 36%
3.1%
12
NAR Cancer
◐ 37 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.7%
13
Life Science Alliance
● 285 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.1%
14
Cell Genomics
○ 172 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
15
Cancer Research Communications
● 51 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
16
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.9%
17
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.9%
18
BMC Medical Genomics
○ 50 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
19
Cancer Research
● 130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
20
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 22%
1.5%
21
Frontiers in Bioinformatics
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.4%
22
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.3%
23
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
24
Cell Reports Medicine
○ 153 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
25
PLOS Genetics
● 862 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.0%
26
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
27
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
28
Human Mutation
○ 34 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
29
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 73%
0.8%
30
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 45%
0.6%

"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.