Back

Detecting context-dependent selection on cancer driver genes with DiffDriver

Zhou, J.; Zhang, Q.; Song, L.; He, X.; Zhao, S.

2026-04-09 genomics
10.64898/2026.04.06.716771 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Positive selection on somatic mutations is the driving force for cancer progression. Growing evidence shows that the emergence of a driver mutation in a tumor sample depends on individual-specific factors, for example environmental exposures or the individuals germline genetic background. We term these individual-level factors as the "contexts" of a tumor. Our hypothesis is that mutations in a driver gene can bring different growth advantages in different contexts, resulting in "differential selection" on these genes in varying contexts. Identifying which contexts modulate selection strength provides critical insights into the selection forces driving tumorigenesis. However, due to the sparsity of somatic mutations and heterogeneous background mutational process across positions and individuals, identification of differential selection has limited power with current statistical tools and is prone to false positives. To address this, we developed a powerful statistical method, DiffDriver, that identifies associations between "contexts" and selection strength on a driver gene across individuals. DiffDriver accounts for variations of mutation rates across bases and individuals, while taking advantage of functional information of sequences to improve the power. Through simulations, we show DiffDriver reduces false positives and boosts power compared to current methods. Our results highlight that multiple individual-level factors create significant heterogeneity in the strength of selection acting on driver genes and 33% of driver genes showed differential selection in at least one of the contexts studied, including tumor clinical traits and tumor immune microenvironment subtypes. These results provided new insights into the context-dependent forces driving cancer evolution.

Matching journals

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

1
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
37.9%
2
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 4%
6.4%
3
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 27%
4.3%
4
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.2%
50% of probability mass above
5
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.6%
6
PLOS Genetics
756 papers in training set
Top 6%
2.9%
7
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.6%
8
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.4%
9
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 10%
2.1%
10
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.9%
11
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.7%
12
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.5%
13
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 47%
1.3%
14
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 28%
1.2%
15
Cell Genomics
162 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
16
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 58%
1.0%
17
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
18
Genetic Epidemiology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.9%
19
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
189 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
20
NAR Genomics and Bioinformatics
214 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
21
Journal of Theoretical Biology
144 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
22
Journal of Molecular Evolution
21 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
23
Cancer Research
116 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
24
Physical Review E
95 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
25
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
26
GigaScience
172 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
27
BMC Genomics
328 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%