Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34561273›Full record

ArticleCancer research2021

Combinatorial CRISPR/Cas9 Screening Reveals Epistatic Networks of Interacting Tumor Suppressor Genes and Therapeutic Targets in Human Breast Cancer.

Xiaoyu Zhao, Jinyu Li, Zhimin Liu, Scott Powers

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Using Biological Networks to Guide Biomedical Prediction.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Massively Parallel CRISPR-Based Genetic Perturbation Screening at Single-Cell Resolution.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaoyu ZhaoDepartment of Pathology and Cancer Center, Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-6081-2196
Jinyu LiDepartment of Pathology and Cancer Center, Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-7677-9992
Zhimin LiuMolecular and Cellular Biology Graduate Program, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York.ORCID 0000-0002-9333-8101
Scott PowersDepartment of Pathology and Cancer Center, Renaissance School of Medicine, Stony Brook, New York. scott.powers@stonybrook.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-2769-1932
Stony Brook School · USJanssen (United States) · US

Funding

Supplement to Multigenic copy number alterationsR01CA217206 · NCI · STATE UNIVERSITY NEW YORK STONY BROOK · PI POWERS, SCOTT · 2017 to 2021
$2.8M
High-throughput genetic interaction sequencing in mammalian cellsR21HG009255 · NHGRI · STATE UNIVERSITY NEW YORK STONY BROOK · PI LEVY, SASHA F, POWERS, SCOTT · 2016 to 2017
$399k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA217206NHGRI NIH HHS R21 HG009255
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The majority of cancers are driven by multiple genetic alterations, but how these changes collaborate during tumorigenesis remains largely unknown. To gain mechanistic insights into tumor-promoting genetic interactions among tumor suppressor genes (TSG), we conducted combinatorial CRISPR screening coupled with single-cell transcriptomic profiling in human mammary epithelial cells. As expected, different driver gene alterations in mammary epithelial cells influenced the repertoire of tumor suppressor alterations capable of inducing tumor formation. More surprisingly, TSG interaction networks were comprised of numerous cliques-sets of three or four genes such that each TSG within the clique showed oncogenic cooperation with all other genes in the clique. Genetic interaction profiling indicated that the predominant cooperating TSGs shared overlapping functions rather than distinct or complementary functions. Single-cell transcriptomic profiling of CRISPR double knockouts revealed that cooperating TSGs that synergized in promoting tumorigenesis and growth factor independence showed transcriptional epistasis, whereas noncooperating TSGs did not. These epistatic transcriptional changes, both buffering and synergistic, affected expression of oncogenic mediators and therapeutic targets, including CDK4, SRPK1, and DNMT1. Importantly, the epistatic expression alterations caused by dual inactivation of TSGs in this system, such as

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsEpistasis, GeneticGene Regulatory NetworksGenes, Tumor SuppressorAnimalsBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMice, NudeProtein Interaction MapsSingle-Cell AnalysisTranscriptomeBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID34561273
PMCPMC9762330
OpenAlexW3198941993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.