ArticleEBioMedicine2019
Combined gene essentiality scoring improves the prediction of cancer dependency maps.
Article in EBioMedicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- TARGET-SL: precision essential gene prediction using driver prioritisation and synthetic lethality.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- PRODE recovers essential and context-essential genes through neighborhood-informed scores.Genome biology · 2025Article
- Gene essentiality in cancer is better predicted by mRNA abundance than by gene regulatory network-inferred activity.NAR cancer · 2023Article
- Editorial: Functional screening for cancer drug discovery: from experimental approaches to data integration.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Mendelian gene identification through mouse embryo viability screening.Genome medicine · 2022Article
- Synthetic Vulnerabilities in the KRAS Pathway.Cancers · 2022Review
- Predicting genetic interactions, cell line dependencies and drug sensitivities with variational graph auto-encoder.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Construction and Validation of a Newly Prognostic Signature for CRISPR-Cas9-Based Cancer Dependency Map Genes in Breast Cancer.Journal of oncology · 2022Article
- New Insights into the Therapeutic Applications of CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing in Breast Cancer.Genes · 2021Review
- Review
- Article
- Explainable drug sensitivity prediction through cancer pathway enrichment.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Derivation and Validation of a Prognostic Model for Cancer Dependency Genes Based on CRISPR-Cas9 in Gastric Adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Integration of CRISPR-Cas9, shRNA with other genomic data provides reliable predicions of gene essentiality.EBioMedicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProbing genetic dependencies of cancer cells can improve our understanding of tumour development and progression, as well as identify potential drug targets. CRISPR-Cas9-based and shRNA-based genetic screening are commonly utilized to identify essential genes that affect cancer growth. However, systematic methods leveraging these genetic screening techniques to derive consensus cancer dependency maps for individual cancer cell lines are lacking. FINDING: In this work, we first explored the CRISPR-Cas9 and shRNA gene essentiality profiles in 42 cancer cell lines representing 10 cancer types. We observed limited consistency between the essentiality profiles of these two screens at the genome scale. To improve consensus on the cancer dependence map, we developed a computational model called combined essentiality score (CES) to integrate the genetic essentiality profiles from CRISPR-Cas9 and shRNA screens, while accounting for the molecular features of the genes. We found that the CES method outperformed the existing gene essentiality scoring approaches in terms of ability to detect cancer essential genes. We further demonstrated the power of the CES method in adjusting for screen-specific biases and predicting genetic dependencies in individual cancer cell lines.
interpretationSystematic comparison of the CRISPR-Cas9 and shRNA gene essentiality profiles showed the limitation of relying on a single technique to identify cancer essential genes. The CES method provides an integrated framework to leverage both genetic screening techniques as well as molecular feature data to determine gene essentiality more accurately for cancer cells.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.