Identifying Combinations of Cancer Drivers in Individual Patients
Klein, M. I.; Cannataro, V. L.; Townsend, J. P.; Stern, D. F.; Zhao, H.
Show abstract
Identifying the subset of genetic alterations present in individual tumors that are essential and collectively sufficient for cancer initiation and progression would advance the development of effective personalized treatments. We present CRSO for inferring the combinations of alterations, i.e., rules, that cooperate to drive tumor formation in individual patients. CRSO prioritizes rules by integrating patient-specific passenger probabilities for individual alterations along with information about the recurrence of particular combinations throughout the population. We present examples in glioma, liver cancer and melanoma of significant differences in patient outcomes based on rule assignments that are not identifiable by consideration of individual alterations.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Ranking Cancer Drivers via Betweenness-based Outlier Detection and Random Walks 96%
- driveR: A Novel Method for Prioritizing Cancer Driver Genes Using Somatic Genomics Data 96%
- pyCancerSig: subclassifying human cancer with comprehensive single nucleotide, structural and microsatellite mutational signature deconstruction from whole genome sequencing 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- MFmap: A semi-supervised generative model matching cell lines to tumours and cancer subtypes 95%
- Assessing reliability of intra-tumor heterogeneity estimates from single sample whole exome sequencing data 95%
- Extreme value theory as a general framework for understanding mutation frequency distribution in cancer genomes 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Accuracy and Reproducibility of Somatic Point Mutation Calling in Clinical-Type Targeted Sequencing Data 94%
- A deep neural network approach to predicting clinical outcomes of neuroblastoma patients 94%
- Identification of single nucleotide variants using position-specific error estimation in deep sequencing data 94%
"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.