Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36474143›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2022

Identification of multiplicatively acting modulatory mutational signatures in cancer.

Dovydas Kičiatovas, Qingli Guo, Miika Kailas, Henri Pesonen, Jukka Corander, Samuel Kaski, Esa Pitkänen, Ville Mustonen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Dovydas KičiatovasInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Qingli GuoDepartment of Computer Science, University of Helsinki, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Miika KailasDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Jyväskylä, 40014, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Henri PesonenInstitute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, 0317, Oslo, Norway.
Jukka CoranderHelsinki Institute for Information Technology, University of Helsinki, 00014, Helsinki, Finland.
Samuel KaskiDepartment of Computer Science, Aalto University, 00076, Aalto, Finland.
Esa PitkänenInstitute for Molecular Medicine Finland (FIMM), HiLIFE, University of Helsinki, 00014, Helsinki, Finland. esa.pitkanen@helsinki.fi.
Ville MustonenDepartment of Computer Science, University of Helsinki, 00014, Helsinki, Finland. v.mustonen@helsinki.fi.

Funding

Academy of Finland 322675Academy of Finland 345829European Research Council 742158
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA deep understanding of carcinogenesis at the DNA level underpins many advances in cancer prevention and treatment. Mutational signatures provide a breakthrough conceptualisation, as well as an analysis framework, that can be used to build such understanding. They capture somatic mutation patterns and at best identify their causes. Most studies in this context have focused on an inherently additive analysis, e.g. by non-negative matrix factorization, where the mutations within a cancer sample are explained by a linear combination of independent mutational signatures. However, other recent studies show that the mutational signatures exhibit non-additive interactions.

resultsWe carefully analysed such additive model fits from the PCAWG study cataloguing mutational signatures as well as their activities across thousands of cancers. Our analysis identified systematic and non-random structure of residuals that is left unexplained by the additive model. We used hierarchical clustering to identify cancer subsets with similar residual profiles to show that both systematic mutation count overestimation and underestimation take place. We propose an extension to the additive mutational signature model-multiplicatively acting modulatory processes-and develop a maximum-likelihood framework to identify such modulatory mutational signatures. The augmented model is expressive enough to almost fully remove the observed systematic residual patterns.

conclusionWe suggest the modulatory processes biologically relate to sample specific DNA repair propensities with cancer or tissue type specific profiles. Overall, our results identify an interesting direction where to expand signature analysis.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsHumansMutationCancerModulatory processesMutational signatures

Identifiers

PMID36474143
PMCPMC9724449

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.