Back

Mechanistic Decoding of Pharmacodynamic Intratumoral Heterogeneity: A Pan-Cancer Regulatory Framework

Ren, Z.; Ren, Y.; Li, Z.; Ge, S.; Xu, Y.; Xu, H.

2026-10-05 cancer biology
10.64898/2026.10.01.756124 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Intratumoral heterogeneity (ITH) drives therapy failure through divergent drug response propensities among coexisting subclones - a phenomenon we term pharmacodynamic intratumoral heterogeneity (PharmITH). While single-cell technologies have catalogued transcriptional heterogeneity, which molecular programs shape differential drug responses remains unresolved. Here we decode PharmITH by linking single-cell transcriptomes from 1,279 samples across 24 cancer types with drug-response profiles for 1,218 compounds. We identify 425 hub genes consistently associated with predicted treatment-response heterogeneity and with potential therapeutic relevance and perform multi-omics network analysis in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) integrating transcriptional regulation, somatic mutations, cell-cell communication (CCC), and alternative splicing. This analysis identifies four classes of candidate regulatory associations observed in the LUAD case study: 3 transcription factors establishing pre-existing drug-response programs, 41 genomic alterations amplifying pathway signaling through intermediate networks, 5 ligand-receptor pairs coupling microenvironmental cues to intracellular circuits, and 8 genes producing opposing isoforms via differential splicing. These findings converge on 6 core pathways, revealing that PharmITH arises from tumor-intrinsic mechanisms. Experimental validation and an online platform PharmITH for pan-cancer therapy enable state-resolved drug-response analysis and candidate-gene exploration. This approach transforms ITH from descriptive phenotyping to mechanistic dissection, providing actionable targets to overcome therapy resistance.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.