Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32101536›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2020

Individualized genetic network analysis reveals new therapeutic vulnerabilities in 6,700 cancer genomes.

Chuang Liu, Junfei Zhao, Weiqiang Lu, Yao Dai, Jennifer Hockings, Yadi Zhou, Ruth Nussinov, Charis Eng, Feixiong Cheng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Genetic landscape of cancer: mechanisms, key genes, and therapeutic implications.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Revolutionising Cardio-Oncology Care with Precision Genomics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Targeting the DNA Damage Response for Cancer Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Genomic Landscape and Potential Regulation of RNA Editing in Drug Resistance.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Chuang LiuAlibaba Research Center for Complexity Sciences, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Junfei ZhaoDepartment of Systems Biology, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States of America.
Weiqiang LuShanghai Key Laboratory of Regulatory Biology, Institute of Biomedical Sciences and School of Life Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.
Yao DaiAlibaba Research Center for Complexity Sciences, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China.
Jennifer HockingsGenomic Medicine Institute, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9864-205X
Yadi ZhouGenomic Medicine Institute, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.
Ruth NussinovCancer and Inflammation Program, Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, Frederick, Maryland, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8115-6415
Charis EngGenomic Medicine Institute, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.
Feixiong ChengGenomic Medicine Institute, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1736-2847
Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine · USHangzhou Normal University · CNCleveland Clinic · USColumbia University · USEast China Normal University · CNLeidos (United States) · US

Funding

Protein Structure, Stability, and Amyloid FormationZIABC010440 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI NUSSINOV, RUTH · 2009 to 2025
$11.8M
Biomolecular Recognition and Binding MechanismsZIABC010441 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI NUSSINOV, RUTH · 2009 to 2025
$9.4M
Method Development: Efficient Computer Vision Based AlgorithmsZIABC010442 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI NUSSINOV, RUTH · 2009 to 2025
$2.4M
NCI NIH HHS HHSN261200800001E
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tumor-specific genomic alterations allow systematic identification of genetic interactions that promote tumorigenesis and tumor vulnerabilities, offering novel strategies for development of targeted therapies for individual patients. We develop an Individualized Network-based Co-Mutation (INCM) methodology by inspecting over 2.5 million nonsynonymous somatic mutations derived from 6,789 tumor exomes across 14 cancer types from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Our INCM analysis reveals a higher genetic interaction burden on the significantly mutated genes, experimentally validated cancer genes, chromosome regulatory factors, and DNA damage repair genes, as compared to human pan-cancer essential genes identified by CRISPR-Cas9 screenings on 324 cancer cell lines. We find that genes involved in the cancer type-specific genetic subnetworks identified by INCM are significantly enriched in established cancer pathways, and the INCM-inferred putative genetic interactions are correlated with patient survival. By analyzing drug pharmacogenomics profiles from the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer database, we show that the network-predicted putative genetic interactions (e.g., BRCA2-TP53) are significantly correlated with sensitivity/resistance of multiple therapeutic agents. We experimentally validated that afatinib has the strongest cytotoxic activity on BT474 (IC50 = 55.5 nM, BRCA2 and TP53 co-mutant) compared to MCF7 (IC50 = 7.7 μM, both BRCA2 and TP53 wild type) and MDA-MB-231 (IC50 = 7.9 μM, BRCA2 wild type but TP53 mutant). Finally, drug-target network analysis reveals several potential druggable genetic interactions by targeting tumor vulnerabilities. This study offers a powerful network-based methodology for identification of candidate therapeutic pathways that target tumor vulnerabilities and prioritization of potential pharmacogenomics biomarkers for development of personalized cancer medicine.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorBRCA2 ProteinCarcinogenesisCell Line, TumorComputational BiologyCRISPR-Cas SystemsExomeGenetic TestingGenomicsHumansInhibitory Concentration 50Models, TheoreticalMutationNeoplasmsAntineoplastic AgentsBiomarkers, TumorBRCA2 ProteinBRCA2 protein, humanTP53 protein, humanTumor Suppressor Protein p53

Identifiers

PMID32101536
PMCPMC7062285
OpenAlexW3007090700

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.