Deep view of HCC gene expression signatures and their comparison with other cancers

• Verfasst von: Qian, Yuquan [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Itzel, Timo [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Ebert, Matthias [VerfasserIn]
• Verfasst von: Teufel, Andreas [VerfasserIn]
• Titel: Deep view of HCC gene expression signatures and their comparison with other cancers
• Verf.angabe: Yuquan Qian, Timo Itzel, Matthias Ebert and Andreas Teufel
• E-Jahr: 2022
• Jahr: 3 September 2022
• Umfang: 15 S.
• Illustrationen: Diagramme
• Fussnoten: Gesehen am 24.10.2022
• Titel Quelle: Enthalten in: Cancers
• Ort Quelle: Basel : MDPI, 2009
• Jahr Quelle: 2022
• Band/Heft Quelle: 14(2022), 17, Artikel-ID 4322, Seite 1-15
• ISSN Quelle: 2072-6694
• DOI: doi:10.3390/cancers14174322
• Datenträger: Online-Ressource
• Sprache: eng
• Sach-SW: gene expression signatures
• Sach-SW: hepatocellular carcinoma
• Sach-SW: prognostic
• Sach-SW: signature generation
• Sach-SW: specificity
• K10plus-PPN: 1819780503

Abstract

Background: Gene expression signatures correlate genetic alterations with specific clinical features, providing the potential for clinical usage. A plethora of HCC-dependent gene signatures have been developed in the last two decades. However, none of them has made its way into clinical practice. Thus, we investigated the specificity of public gene signatures to HCC by establishing a comparative transcriptomic analysis, as this may be essential for clinical applications. Methods: We collected 10 public HCC gene signatures and evaluated them by utilizing four different (commercial and non-commercial) gene expression profile comparison tools: Oncomine Premium, SigCom LINCS, ProfileChaser (modified version), and GENEVA, which can assign similar pre-analyzed profiles of patients with tumors or cancer cell lines to our gene signatures of interests. Among the query results of each tool, different cancer entities were screened. In addition, seven breast and colorectal cancer gene signatures were included in order to further challenge tumor specificity of gene expression signatures. Results: Although the specificity of the evaluated HCC gene signatures varied considerably, none of the gene signatures showed strict specificity to HCC. All gene signatures exhibited potential significant specificity to other cancers, particularly for colorectal and breast cancer. Since signature specificity proved challenging, we furthermore investigated common core genes and overlapping enriched pathways among all gene signatures, which, however, showed no or only very little overlap, respectively. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that specificity, independent validation, and clinical use of HCC genetic signatures solely relying on gene expression remains challenging. Furthermore, our work made clear that standards in signature generation and statistical methods but potentially also in tissue preparation are urgently needed.