Advertisements
Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘BioIT: BioInformatics, NGS, Clinical & Translational, Pharmaceutical R&D Informatics, Clinical Genomics, Cancer Informatics’ Category


An Intelligent DNA Nanorobot to Fight Cancer by Targeting HER2 Expression

Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.

 

HER2 is an important prognostic biomarker for 20–30% of breast cancers, which is the most common cancer in women. Overexpression of the HER2 receptor stimulates breast cells to proliferate and differentiate uncontrollably, thereby enhancing the malignancy of breast cancer and resulting in a poor prognosis for affected individuals. Current therapies to suppress the overexpression of HER2 in breast cancer mainly involve treatment with HER2-specific monoclonal antibodies. However, these monoclonal anti-HER2 antibodies have severe side effects in clinical trials, such as diarrhea, abnormal liver function, and drug resistance. Removing HER2 from the plasma membrane or inhibiting the gene expression of HER2 is a promising alternative that could limit the malignancy of HER2-positive cancer cells.

 

DNA origami is an emerging field of DNA-based nanotechnology and intelligent DNA nanorobots show great promise in working as a drug delivery system in healthcare. Different DNA-based nanorobots have been developed as affordable and facile therapeutic drugs. In particular, many studies reported that a tetrahedral framework nucleic acid (tFNA) could serve as a promising DNA nanocarrier for many antitumor drugs, owing to its high biocompatibility and biosecurity. For example, tFNA was reported to effectively deliver paclitaxel or doxorubicin to cancer cells for reversing drug resistance, small interfering RNAs (siRNAs) have been modified into tFNA for targeted drug delivery. Moreover, the production and storage of tFNA are not complicated, and they can be quickly degraded in lysosomes by cells. Since both free HApt and tFNA can be diverted into lysosomes, so,  combining the HApt and tFNA as a novel DNA nanorobot (namely, HApt-tFNA) can be an effective strategy to improve its delivery and therapeutic efficacy in treating HER2-positive breast cancer.

 

Researchers reported that a DNA framework-based intelligent DNA nanorobot for selective lysosomal degradation of tumor-specific proteins on cancer cells. An anti-HER2 aptamer (HApt) was site-specifically anchored on a tetrahedral framework nucleic acid (tFNA). This DNA nanorobot (HApt-tFNA) could target HER2-positive breast cancer cells and specifically induce the lysosomal degradation of the membrane protein HER2. An injection of the DNA nanorobot into a mouse model revealed that the presence of tFNA enhanced the stability and prolonged the blood circulation time of HApt, and HApt-tFNA could therefore drive HER2 into lysosomal degradation with a higher efficiency. The formation of the HER2-HApt-tFNA complexes resulted in the HER2-mediated endocytosis and digestion in lysosomes, which effectively reduced the amount of HER2 on the cell surfaces. An increased HER2 digestion through HApt-tFNA further induced cell apoptosis and arrested cell growth. Hence, this novel DNA nanorobot sheds new light on targeted protein degradation for precision breast cancer therapy.

 

It was previously reported that tFNA was degraded by lysosomes and could enhance cell autophagy. Results indicated that free Cy5-HApt and Cy5-HApt-tFNA could enter the lysosomes; thus, tFNA can be regarded as an efficient nanocarrier to transmit HApt into the target organelle. The DNA nanorobot composed of HApt and tFNA showed a higher stability and a more effective performance than free HApt against HER2-positive breast cancer cells. The PI3K/AKT pathway was inhibited when membrane-bound HER2 decreased in SK-BR-3 cells under the action of HApt-tFNA. The research findings suggest that tFNA can enhance the anticancer effects of HApt on SK-BR-3 cells; while HApt-tFNA can bind to HER2 specifically, the compounded HER2-HApt-tFNA complexes can then be transferred and degraded in lysosomes. After these processes, the accumulation of HER2 in the plasma membrane would decrease, which could also influence the downstream PI3K/AKT signaling pathway that is associated with cell growth and death.

 

However, some limitations need to be noted when interpreting the findings: (i) the cytotoxicity of the nanorobot on HER2-positive cancer cells was weak, and the anticancer effects between conventional monoclonal antibodies and HApt-tFNA was not compared; (ii) the differences in delivery efficiency between tFNA and other nanocarriers need to be confirmed; and (iii) the confirmation of anticancer effects of HApt-tFNA on tumors within animals remains challenging. Despite these limitations, the present study provided novel evidence of the biological effects of tFNA when combined with HApt. Although the stability and the anticancer effects of HApt-tFNA may require further improvement before clinical application, this study initiates a promising step toward the development of nanomedicines with novel and intelligent DNA nanorobots for tumor treatment.

 

References:

 

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b01320

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27939064

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11694782

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27082923

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25365825

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26840503

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29802035

 

Advertisements

Read Full Post »


Single-cell RNA-seq helps in finding intra-tumoral heterogeneity in pancreatic cancer

Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.

 

Pancreatic cancer is a significant cause of cancer mortality; therefore, the development of early diagnostic strategies and effective treatment is essential. Improvements in imaging technology, as well as use of biomarkers are changing the way that pancreas cancer is diagnosed and staged. Although progress in treatment for pancreas cancer has been incremental, development of combination therapies involving both chemotherapeutic and biologic agents is ongoing.

 

Cancer is an evolutionary disease, containing the hallmarks of an asexually reproducing unicellular organism subject to evolutionary paradigms. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a particularly robust example of this phenomenon. Genomic features indicate that pancreatic cancer cells are selected for fitness advantages when encountering the geographic and resource-depleted constraints of the microenvironment. Phenotypic adaptations to these pressures help disseminated cells to survive in secondary sites, a major clinical problem for patients with this disease.

 

The immune system varies in cell types, states, and locations. The complex networks, interactions, and responses of immune cells produce diverse cellular ecosystems composed of multiple cell types, accompanied by genetic diversity in antigen receptors. Within this ecosystem, innate and adaptive immune cells maintain and protect tissue function, integrity, and homeostasis upon changes in functional demands and diverse insults. Characterizing this inherent complexity requires studies at single-cell resolution. Recent advances such as massively parallel single-cell RNA sequencing and sophisticated computational methods are catalyzing a revolution in our understanding of immunology.

 

PDAC is the most common type of pancreatic cancer featured with high intra-tumoral heterogeneity and poor prognosis. In the present study to comprehensively delineate the PDAC intra-tumoral heterogeneity and the underlying mechanism for PDAC progression, single-cell RNA-seq (scRNA-seq) was employed to acquire the transcriptomic atlas of 57,530 individual pancreatic cells from primary PDAC tumors and control pancreases. The diverse malignant and stromal cell types, including two ductal subtypes with abnormal and malignant gene expression profiles respectively, were identified in PDAC.

 

The researchers found that the heterogenous malignant subtype was composed of several subpopulations with differential proliferative and migratory potentials. Cell trajectory analysis revealed that components of multiple tumor-related pathways and transcription factors (TFs) were differentially expressed along PDAC progression. Furthermore, it was found a subset of ductal cells with unique proliferative features were associated with an inactivation state in tumor-infiltrating T cells, providing novel markers for the prediction of antitumor immune response. Together, the findings provided a valuable resource for deciphering the intra-tumoral heterogeneity in PDAC and uncover a connection between tumor intrinsic transcriptional state and T cell activation, suggesting potential biomarkers for anticancer treatment such as targeted therapy and immunotherapy.

 

References:

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31273297

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21491194

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27444064

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28983043

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24976721

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27693023

 

Read Full Post »


scPopCorn: A New Computational Method for Subpopulation Detection and their Comparative Analysis Across Single-Cell Experiments

Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.

 

Present day technological advances have facilitated unprecedented opportunities for studying biological systems at single-cell level resolution. For example, single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) enables the measurement of transcriptomic information of thousands of individual cells in one experiment. Analyses of such data provide information that was not accessible using bulk sequencing, which can only assess average properties of cell populations. Single-cell measurements, however, can capture the heterogeneity of a population of cells. In particular, single-cell studies allow for the identification of novel cell types, states, and dynamics.

 

One of the most prominent uses of the scRNA-seq technology is the identification of subpopulations of cells present in a sample and comparing such subpopulations across samples. Such information is crucial for understanding the heterogeneity of cells in a sample and for comparative analysis of samples from different conditions, tissues, and species. A frequently used approach is to cluster every dataset separately, inspect marker genes for each cluster, and compare these clusters in an attempt to determine which cell types were shared between samples. This approach, however, relies on the existence of predefined or clearly identifiable marker genes and their consistent measurement across subpopulations.

 

Although the aligned data can then be clustered to reveal subpopulations and their correspondence, solving the subpopulation-mapping problem by performing global alignment first and clustering second overlooks the original information about subpopulations existing in each experiment. In contrast, an approach addressing this problem directly might represent a more suitable solution. So, keeping this in mind the researchers developed a computational method, single-cell subpopulations comparison (scPopCorn), that allows for comparative analysis of two or more single-cell populations.

 

The performance of scPopCorn was tested in three distinct settings. First, its potential was demonstrated in identifying and aligning subpopulations from single-cell data from human and mouse pancreatic single-cell data. Next, scPopCorn was applied to the task of aligning biological replicates of mouse kidney single-cell data. scPopCorn achieved the best performance over the previously published tools. Finally, it was applied to compare populations of cells from cancer and healthy brain tissues, revealing the relation of neoplastic cells to neural cells and astrocytes. Consequently, as a result of this integrative approach, scPopCorn provides a powerful tool for comparative analysis of single-cell populations.

 

This scPopCorn is basically a computational method for the identification of subpopulations of cells present within individual single-cell experiments and mapping of these subpopulations across these experiments. Different from other approaches, scPopCorn performs the tasks of population identification and mapping simultaneously by optimizing a function that combines both objectives. When applied to complex biological data, scPopCorn outperforms previous methods. However, it should be kept in mind that scPopCorn assumes the input single-cell data to consist of separable subpopulations and it is not designed to perform a comparative analysis of single cell trajectories datasets that do not fulfill this constraint.

 

Several innovations developed in this work contributed to the performance of scPopCorn. First, unifying the above-mentioned tasks into a single problem statement allowed for integrating the signal from different experiments while identifying subpopulations within each experiment. Such an incorporation aids the reduction of biological and experimental noise. The researchers believe that the ideas introduced in scPopCorn not only enabled the design of a highly accurate identification of subpopulations and mapping approach, but can also provide a stepping stone for other tools to interrogate the relationships between single cell experiments.

 

References:

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405471219301887

 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23307706.2017.1397554

 

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/4031383

 

https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-016-0927-y

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405471216302666

 

 

Read Full Post »


eProceedings for BIO 2019 International Convention, June 3-6, 2019 Philadelphia Convention Center; Philadelphia PA, Real Time Coverage by Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

 

CONFERENCE OVERVIEW

Real Time Coverage of BIO 2019 International Convention, June 3-6, 2019 Philadelphia Convention Center; Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/05/31/real-time-coverage-of-bio-international-convention-june-3-6-2019-philadelphia-convention-center-philadelphia-pa/

 

LECTURES & PANELS

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence: Realizing Precision Medicine One Patient at a Time, 6/5/2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/05/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-machine-learning-and-artificial-intelligence-realizing-precision-medicine-one-patient-at-a-time/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Genome Editing and Regulatory Harmonization: Progress and Challenges, 6/5/2019. Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/05/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-genome-editing-and-regulatory-harmonization-progress-and-challenges/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Precision Medicine Beyond Oncology June 5, 2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J Williams PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/05/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-precision-medicine-beyond-oncology-june-5-philadelphia-pa/

 

Real Time @BIOConvention #BIO2019:#Bitcoin Your Data! From Trusted Pharma Silos to Trustless Community-Owned Blockchain-Based Precision Medicine Data Trials, 6/5/2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/05/real-time-bioconvention-bio2019bitcoin-your-data-from-trusted-pharma-silos-to-trustless-community-owned-blockchain-based-precision-medicine-data-trials/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Keynote Address Jamie Dimon CEO @jpmorgan June 5, 2019, Philadelphia, PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/05/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-keynote-address-jamie-dimon-ceo-jpmorgan-june-5-philadelphia/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Chat with @FDA Commissioner, & Challenges in Biotech & Gene Therapy June 4, 2019, Philadelphia, PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/04/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-chat-with-fda-commissioner-challenges-in-biotech-gene-therapy-june-4-philadelphia/

 

Falling in Love with Science: Championing Science for Everyone, Everywhere June 4 2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/04/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-falling-in-love-with-science-championing-science-for-everyone-everywhere/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: June 4 Morning Sessions; Global Biotech Investment & Public-Private Partnerships, 6/4/2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J Williams PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/04/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-june-4-morning-sessions-global-biotech-investment-public-private-partnerships/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Understanding the Voices of Patients: Unique Perspectives on Healthcare; June 4, 2019, 11:00 AM, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/04/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-understanding-the-voices-of-patients-unique-perspectives-on-healthcare-june-4/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Keynote: Siddhartha Mukherjee, Oncologist and Pulitzer Author; June 4 2019, 9AM, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD. @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/04/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-keynote-siddhartha-mukherjee-oncologist-and-pulitzer-author-june-4-9am-philadelphia-pa/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019:  Issues of Risk and Reproduceability in Translational and Academic Collaboration; 2:30-4:00 June 3, 2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/03/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-issues-of-risk-and-reproduceability-in-translational-and-academic-collaboration-230-400-june-3-philadelphia-pareal-time-coverage-bioconvention-bi/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: What’s Next: The Landscape of Innovation in 2019 and Beyond. 3-4 PM June 3, 2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/03/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-whats-next-the-landscape-of-innovation-in-2019-and-beyond-3-4-pm-june-3-philadelphia-pa/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: After Trump’s Drug Pricing Blueprint: What Happens Next? A View from Washington; June 3, 2019 1:00 PM, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/03/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-after-trumps-drug-pricing-blueprint-what-happens-next-a-view-from-washington-june-3-2019-100-pm-philadelphia-pa/

 

Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: International Cancer Clusters Showcase June 3, 2019, Philadelphia PA

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams PhD @StephenJWillia2

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/06/03/real-time-coverage-bioconvention-bio2019-international-cancer-clusters-showcase-june-3-philadelphia-pa/

Read Full Post »


Real Time Coverage @BIOConvention #BIO2019: Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence: Realizing Precision Medicine One Patient at a Time

Reporter: Stephen J Williams, PhD @StephenJWillia2

The impact of Machine Learning (ML) and Artificial Intelligence (AI) during the last decade has been tremendous. With the rise of infobesity, ML/AI is evolving to an essential capability to help mine the sheer volume of patient genomics, omics, sensor/wearables and real-world data, and unravel the knot of healthcare’s most complex questions.

Despite the advancements in technology, organizations struggle to prioritize and implement ML/AI to achieve the anticipated value, whilst managing the disruption that comes with it. In this session, panelists will discuss ML/AI implementation and adoption strategies that work. Panelists will draw upon their experiences as they share their success stories, discuss how to implement digital diagnostics, track disease progression and treatment, and increase commercial value and ROI compared against traditional approaches.

  • most of trials which are done are still in training AI/ML algorithms with training data sets.  The best results however have been about 80% accuracy in training sets.  Needs to improve
  • All data sets can be biased.  For example a professor was looking at heartrate using a IR detector on a wearable but it wound up that different types of skin would generate a different signal to the detector so training sets maybe population biases (you are getting data from one group)
  • clinical grade equipment actually haven’t been trained on a large set like commercial versions of wearables, Commercial grade is tested on a larger study population.  This can affect the AI/ML algorithms.
  • Regulations:  The regulatory bodies responsible is up to debate.  Whether FDA or FTC is responsible for AI/ML in healtcare and healthcare tech and IT is not fully decided yet.  We don’t have the guidances for these new technologies
  • some rules: never use your own encryption always use industry standards especially when getting personal data from wearables.  One hospital corrupted their system because their computer system was not up to date and could not protect against a virus transmitted by a wearable.
  • pharma companies understand they need to increase value of their products so very interested in how AI/ML can be used.

Please follow LIVE on TWITTER using the following @ handles and # hashtags:

@Handles

@pharma_BI

@AVIVA1950

@BIOConvention

# Hashtags

#BIO2019 (official meeting hashtag)

Read Full Post »


Simulation Tools of Genomic Next Generation Sequencing Data: Comparative Analysis & Genetic Simulation Resources

Reporting: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

INTRODUCTION

What is next generation sequencing?

Behjati S, Tarpey PS.

Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed. 2013 Dec;98(6):236-8. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2013-304340. Epub 2013 Aug 28. Review.

Computational pan-genomics: status, promises and challenges.

Computational Pan-Genomics Consortium.

Brief Bioinform. 2018 Jan 1;19(1):118-135. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbw089. Review.

Tracking the NGS revolution: managing life science research on shared high-performance computing clusters.

Dahlö M, Scofield DG, Schaal W, Spjuth O.

Gigascience. 2018 May 1;7(5). doi: 10.1093/gigascience/giy028.

NGS IN THE CLINIC

[Clinical Applications of Next-Generation Sequencing].

Rebollar-Vega RG, Arriaga-Canon C, de la Rosa-Velázquez IA.

Rev Invest Clin. 2018;70(4):153-157. doi: 10.24875/RIC.18002544.

PMID:
30067721

Free Article

 

Clinical Genomics: Challenges and Opportunities.

Vijay P, McIntyre AB, Mason CE, Greenfield JP, Li S.

Crit Rev Eukaryot Gene Expr. 2016;26(2):97-113. doi: 10.1615/CritRevEukaryotGeneExpr.2016015724. Review.

Next-generation sequencing in the clinic: promises and challenges.

Xuan J, Yu Y, Qing T, Guo L, Shi L.

Cancer Lett. 2013 Nov 1;340(2):284-95. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2012.11.025. Epub 2012 Nov 19. Review.

The Future of Whole-Genome Sequencing for Public Health and the Clinic.

Allard MW.

J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Aug;54(8):1946-8. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01082-16. Epub 2016 Jun 15.

PMID:
27307454

Free PMC Article

 

Standards and Guidelines for Validating Next-Generation Sequencing Bioinformatics Pipelines: A Joint Recommendation of the Association for Molecular Pathology and the College of American Pathologists.

Roy S, Coldren C, Karunamurthy A, Kip NS, Klee EW, Lincoln SE, Leon A, Pullambhatla M, Temple-Smolkin RL, Voelkerding KV, Wang C, Carter AB.

J Mol Diagn. 2018 Jan;20(1):4-27. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2017.11.003. Epub 2017 Nov 21. Review.

PMID:
29154853

MUTATION ANALYSIS – GENE ENCODING

Next-Generation Sequencing and Mutational Analysis: Implications for Genes Encoding LINC Complex Proteins.

Nagy PL, Worman HJ.

Methods Mol Biol. 2018;1840:321-336. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-8691-0_22.

PMID:
30141054

Genome-wide genetic marker discovery and genotyping using next-generation sequencing.

Davey JW, Hohenlohe PA, Etter PD, Boone JQ, Catchen JM, Blaxter ML.

Nat Rev Genet. 2011 Jun 17;12(7):499-510. doi: 10.1038/nrg3012. Review.

PMID:
21681211

 

Best practices for evaluating mutation prediction methods.

Rogan PK, Zou GY.

Hum Mutat. 2013 Nov;34(11):1581-2. doi: 10.1002/humu.22401. Epub 2013 Sep 10. No abstract available.

PMID:
23955774

MITOCHONDRIAL VATIATIONS

mit-o-matic: a comprehensive computational pipeline for clinical evaluation of mitochondrial variations from next-generation sequencing datasets.

Vellarikkal SK, Dhiman H, Joshi K, Hasija Y, Sivasubbu S, Scaria V.

Hum Mutat. 2015 Apr;36(4):419-24. doi: 10.1002/humu.22767.

PMID:
25677119

VARIANT ANALYSIS

A survey of tools for variant analysis of next-generation genome sequencing data.

Pabinger S, Dander A, Fischer M, Snajder R, Sperk M, Efremova M, Krabichler B, Speicher MR, Zschocke J, Trajanoski Z.

Brief Bioinform. 2014 Mar;15(2):256-78. doi: 10.1093/bib/bbs086. Epub 2013 Jan 21.

PMID:
23341494

Free PMC Article

 

Variant callers for next-generation sequencing data: a comparison study.

Liu X, Han S, Wang Z, Gelernter J, Yang BZ.

PLoS One. 2013 Sep 27;8(9):e75619. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075619. eCollection 2013.

VARIANT DETECTION IN HEREDITARY CANCER GENES

ICO amplicon NGS data analysis: a Web tool for variant detection in common high-risk hereditary cancer genes analyzed by amplicon GS Junior next-generation sequencing.

Lopez-Doriga A, Feliubadaló L, Menéndez M, Lopez-Doriga S, Morón-Duran FD, del Valle J, Tornero E, Montes E, Cuesta R, Campos O, Gómez C, Pineda M, González S, Moreno V, Capellá G, Lázaro C.

Hum Mutat. 2014 Mar;35(3):271-7.

PMID:
24227591

 

Development and analytical validation of a 25-gene next generation sequencing panel that includes the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes to assess hereditary cancer risk.

Judkins T, Leclair B, Bowles K, Gutin N, Trost J, McCulloch J, Bhatnagar S, Murray A, Craft J, Wardell B, Bastian M, Mitchell J, Chen J, Tran T, Williams D, Potter J, Jammulapati S, Perry M, Morris B, Roa B, Timms K.

BMC Cancer. 2015 Apr 2;15:215. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1224-y.

Clinical Applications of Next-Generation Sequencing in Cancer Diagnosis.

Sabour L, Sabour M, Ghorbian S.

Pathol Oncol Res. 2017 Apr;23(2):225-234. doi: 10.1007/s12253-016-0124-z. Epub 2016 Oct 8. Review.

PMID:
27722982

 

Studying cancer genomics through next-generation DNA sequencing and bioinformatics.

Doyle MA, Li J, Doig K, Fellowes A, Wong SQ.

Methods Mol Biol. 2014;1168:83-98. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-0847-9_6. Review.

PMID:
24870132

IMMUNOINFORMATICS

Immunoinformatics and epitope prediction in the age of genomic medicine.

Backert L, Kohlbacher O.

Genome Med. 2015 Nov 20;7:119. doi: 10.1186/s13073-015-0245-0. Review.

IgSimulator: a versatile immunosequencing simulator.

Safonova Y, Lapidus A, Lill J.

Bioinformatics. 2015 Oct 1;31(19):3213-5. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btv326. Epub 2015 May 25.

PMID:
26007226

 

Computational genomics tools for dissecting tumour-immune cell interactions.

Hackl H, Charoentong P, Finotello F, Trajanoski Z.

Nat Rev Genet. 2016 Jul 4;17(8):441-58. doi: 10.1038/nrg.2016.67. Review.

PMID:
27376489

RNA SEQUENCING

SimBA: A methodology and tools for evaluating the performance of RNA-Seq bioinformatic pipelines.

Audoux J, Salson M, Grosset CF, Beaumeunier S, Holder JM, Commes T, Philippe N.

BMC Bioinformatics. 2017 Sep 29;18(1):428. doi: 10.1186/s12859-017-1831-5.

PMID:
28969586

Free PMC Article

COMPLEX INSERTIONS AND DELETIONS

INDELseek: detection of complex insertions and deletions from next-generation sequencing data.

Au CH, Leung AY, Kwong A, Chan TL, Ma ES.

BMC Genomics. 2017 Jan 5;18(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s12864-016-3449-9.

PMID:
28056804

Free PMC Article

EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY

The State of Software for Evolutionary Biology.

Darriba D, Flouri T, Stamatakis A.

Mol Biol Evol. 2018 May 1;35(5):1037-1046. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msy014. Review.

SIMULATION PROGRAMS

PMCID: PMC5224698
EMSID: EMS70941
PMID: 27320129

Systematic review of next-generation sequencing simulators: computational tools, features and perspectives.

Zhao M, Liu D, Qu H.

Brief Funct Genomics. 2017 May 1;16(3):121-128. doi: 10.1093/bfgp/elw012. Review.

PMID:
27069250

 

A comparison of tools for the simulation of genomic next-generation sequencing data

Online Summary

  1. There is a large number of tools for the simulation of genomic data for all currently available NGS platforms, with partially overlapped functionality. Here we review 23 of these tools, highlighting their distinct functionalities, requirements and potential applications.

  2. The parameterization of these simulators is often complex. The user may decide between using existing sets of parameters values called profiles or re-estimating them from its own data.

  3. Parameters than can be modulated in these simulations include the effects of the PCR amplification of the libraries, read features and quality scores, base call errors, variation of sequencing depth across the genomes and the introduction of genomic variants.

  4. Several types of genomic variants can be introduced in the simulated reads, such as SNPs, indels, inversions, translocations, copy-number variants and short-tandem repeats.

  5. Reads can be generated from single or multiple genomes, and with distinct ploidy levels. NGS data from metagenomic communities can be simulated given an “abundance profile” that reflects the proportion of taxa in a given sample.

  6. Many of the simulators have not been formally described and/or tested in dedicated publications. We encourage the formal publication of these tools and the realization of comprehensive, comparative benchmarkings.

  7. Choosing among the different genomic NGS simulators is not easy. Here we provide a guidance tree to help users choosing a suitable tool for their specific interests.

Abstract

Computer simulation of genomic data has become increasingly popular for assessing and validating biological models or to gain understanding about specific datasets. Multiple computational tools for the simulation of next-generation sequencing (NGS) data have been developed in recent years, which could be used to compare existing and new NGS analytical pipelines. Here we review 23 of these tools, highlighting their distinct functionality, requirements and potential applications. We also provide a decision tree for the informed selection of an appropriate NGS simulation tool for the specific question at hand.

Image source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5224698/

An overview of current NGS technologies

The most popular NGS technologies on the market are Illumina’s sequencing by synthesis, which is probably the most widely used platform at present, Roche’s 454 pyrosequencing (454), SOLiD sequencing-by-ligation (SOLiD), IonTorrent semiconductor sequencing (IonTorrent), Pacific Biosciences’s (PacBio) single molecule real-time sequencing, and Oxford Nanopore Technologies (Nanopore) single-cell DNA template strand sequencing. These strategies can differ, for example, regarding the type of reads they produce or the kind of sequencing errors they introduce (Table 1). Only two of the current technologies (Illumina and SOLiD) are capable of producing all three sequencing read types —single endpaired end and mate pair. Read length is also dependent on the machine and the kit used; in platforms like Illumina, SOLiD, or IonTorrent it is possible to specify the number of desired base pairs per read. According to the sequencing run type selected it is possible to obtain reads with maximum lengths of 75 bp (SOLiD), 300 bp (Illumina) or 400bp (IonTorrent). On the other hand, in platforms like 454, Nanopore or PacBio, information is only given about the mean and maximum read length that can be obtained, with average lengths of 700 bp, 10 kb and 15 kb and maximum lengths of 1 kb, 10 kb and 15 kb, respectively. Error rates vary depending on the platform from <=1% in Illumina to ~30% in Nanopore. Further overviews and comparisons of NGS strategies can be found in ,.

Table 1

Main characteristics of current NGS technologies.
Technology Run Type Maximum Read Length Quality Scores Error Rates References
Single-read Paired-end Mate-pair
Illumina X X X 300 bp > Q30 0.0034 – 1%
SOLiD X X X 75 bp > Q30 0.01 – 1%
IonTorrent X X 400 bp ~ Q20 1.78%
454 X X ~700 bp (up to 1 Kb) > Q20 1.07 – 1.7% ,
Nanopore X 5.4 – 10 Kb NAY 10 – 40%
PacBio X ~15 Kb (up to 40 Kb) < Q10 5 – 10% ,

Simulation parameters

The existing sequencing platforms use distinct protocols that result in datasets with different characteristics. Many of these attributes can be taken into account by the simulators (Fig. 2), although there is not a single tool that incorporates all possible variations. The main characteristics of the 23 simulators considered here are summarized in Tables 2 and and3.3. These tools differ in multiple aspects, such as sequencing technology, input requirements or output format, but maintain several common aspects. With some exceptions, all programs need a reference sequence, multiple parameter values indicating the characteristics of the sequencing experiment to be simulated (read length, error distribution, type of variation to be generated, if any, etc.) and/or a profile (a set of parameter values, conditions and/or data used for controlling the simulation), which can be provided by the simulator or estimated de novo from empirical data. The outcome will be aligned or unaligned reads in different standard file formats, such as FASTQ, FASTA or BAM. An overview of the NGS data simulation process is represented in Fig. 3. In the following sections we delve into the different steps involved.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is emss-70941-f002.jpg

General overview of the sequencing process and steps that can be parameterized in the simulations.

NGS simulators try to imitate the real sequencing process as closely as possible by considering all the steps that could influence the characteristics of the reads. a | NGS simulators do not take into account the effect of the different DNA extraction protocols in the resulting data. However, they can consider whether the sample we want to sequence includes one or more individuals, from the same or different organisms (e.g., pool-sequencing, metagenomics). Pools of related genomes can be simulated by replicating the reference sequence and introducing variants on the resulting genomes. Some tools can also simulate metagenomes with distinct taxa abundance. b | Simulators can try to mimic the length range of DNA fragmentation (empirically obtained by sonication or digestion protocols) or assume a fixed amplicon length. c | Library preparation involves ligating sequencing–platform dependent adaptors and/or barcodes to the selected DNA fragments (inserts). Some simulators can control the insert size, and produce reads with adaptors/barcodes. d | | Most NGS techniques include an amplification step for the preparation of libraries. Several simulators can take this step into account (for example, by introducing errors and/or chimaeras), with the possibility of specifying the number of reads per amplicons. e | Sequencing runs imply a decision about coverage, read length, read type (single-end, paired-end, mate-pair) and a given platform (with their specific errors and biases). Simulators exist for the different platforms, and they can use particular parameter profiles, often estimated from real data.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is emss-70941-f003.jpg

General overview of NGS simulation.

The simulation process begins with the input of a reference sequence (most cases) and simulation parameters. Some of the parameters can be given via a profile, that is estimated (by the simulator or other tools) from other reads or alignments. The outcome of this process may be reads (with or without quality information) or genome alignments in different formats.

CONCLUSIONS

NGS is having a big impact in a broad range of areas that benefit from genetic information, from medical genomics, phylogenetic and population genomics, to the reconstruction of ancient genomes, epigenomics and environmental barcoding. These applications include approaches such as de novo sequencing, resequencing, target sequencing or genome reduction methods. In all cases, caution is necessary in choosing a proper sequencing design and/or a reliable analytical approach for the specific biological question of interest. The simulation of NGS data can be extremely useful for planning experiments, testing hypotheses, benchmarking tools and evaluating particular results. Given a reference genome or dataset, for instance, one can play with an array of sequencing technologies to choose the best-suited technology and parameters for the particular goal, possibly optimizing time and costs. Yet, this is still not the standard practice and researchers often base their choices on practical considerations like technology and money availability. As shown throughout this Review, simulation of NGS data from known genomes or transcriptomes can be extremely useful when evaluating assembly, mapping, phasing or genotyping algorithms e.g. ,,,, exposing their advantages and drawbacks under different circumstances.

Altogether, current NGS simulators consider most, if not all, of the important features regarding the generation of NGS data. However, they are not problem-free. The different simulators are largely redundant, implementing the same or very similar procedures. In our opinion, many are poorly documented and can be difficult to use for non-experts, and some of them are no longer maintained. Most importantly, for the most part they have not been benchmarked or validated. Remarkably, among the 23 tools considered here, only 13 have been described in dedicated application notes, 3 have been mentioned as add-ons in the methods section of bigger articles, and 5 have never been referenced in a journal. Indeed, peer-reviewed publication of these tools in dedicated articles would be highly desirable. While this would not definitively guarantee quality, at least it would encourage authors to reach minimum standards in terms of validation, benchmarking, and documentation. Collaborative efforts like the Assemblathon e.g.  or iEvo (http://www.ievobio.org/) might be also a source of inspiration. Meanwhile, we hope that the decision tree presented in Fig. 1 helps users making appropriate choices.

SOURCE
REFERENCES
Serghei Mangul, Lana S. Martin, Brian L. Hill, Angela Ka-Mei Lam, Margaret G. Distler, Alex Zelikovsky, Eleazar Eskin, Jonathan Flint
Nat Commun. 2019; 10: 1393. Published online 2019 Mar 27. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09406-4
PMCID:
PMC6437167
Ge Tan, Lennart Opitz, Ralph Schlapbach, Hubert Rehrauer
Sci Rep. 2019; 9: 2856. Published online 2019 Feb 27. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-39076-7
PMCID:
PMC6393434
Apostolos Dimitromanolakis, Jingxiong Xu, Agnieszka Krol, Laurent Briollais
BMC Bioinformatics. 2019; 20: 26. Published online 2019 Jan 15. doi: 10.1186/s12859-019-2611-1
PMCID:
PMC6332552
Kathleen E. Lotterhos, Jason H. Moore, Ann E. Stapleton
PLoS Biol. 2018 Dec; 16(12): e3000070. Published online 2018 Dec 10. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000070
PMCID:
PMC6301703
Hayley Cassidy, Randy Poelman, Marjolein Knoester, Coretta C. Van Leer-Buter, Hubert G. M. Niesters
Front Microbiol. 2018; 9: 2677. Published online 2018 Nov 13. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.02677
PMCID:
PMC6243117
Genetic Simulation Resources and the GSR Certification Program
Bo Peng, Man Chong Leong, Huann-Sheng Chen, Melissa Rotunno, Katy R Brignole, John Clarke, Leah E Mechanic
Bioinformatics. 2019 Feb 15; 35(4): 709–710. Published online 2018 Aug 7. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty666
PMCID:
PMC6378936
Hadrien Gourlé, Oskar Karlsson-Lindsjö, Juliette Hayer, Erik Bongcam-Rudloff
Bioinformatics. 2019 Feb 1; 35(3): 521–522. Published online 2018 Jul 19. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty630
PMCID:
PMC6361232
Ze-Gang Wei, Shao-Wu Zhang
BMC Bioinformatics. 2018; 19: 177. Published online 2018 May 22. doi: 10.1186/s12859-018-2208-0
PMCID:
PMC5964698
Yu Li, Renmin Han, Chongwei Bi, Mo Li, Sheng Wang, Xin Gao
Bioinformatics. 2018 Sep 1; 34(17): 2899–2908. Published online 2018 Apr 6. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bty223
PMCID:
PMC6129308
Roberto Semeraro, Valerio Orlandini, Alberto Magi
PLoS One. 2018; 13(4): e0194472. Published online 2018 Apr 5. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194472
PMCID:
PMC5886411
Soroush Samadian, Jeff P. Bruce, Trevor J. Pugh
PLoS Comput Biol. 2018 Mar; 14(3): e1006080. Published online 2018 Mar 28. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006080
PMCID:
PMC5891060
Brandon J. Varela, David Lesbarrères, Roberto Ibáñez, David M. Green
Front Microbiol. 2018; 9: 298. Published online 2018 Feb 22. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00298
PMCID:
PMC5826957
Fedor M. Naumenko, Irina I. Abnizova, Nathan Beka, Mikhail A. Genaev, Yuriy L. Orlov
BMC Genomics. 2018; 19(Suppl 3): 92. Published online 2018 Feb 9. doi: 10.1186/s12864-018-4475-6
PMCID:
PMC5836841
Weizhi Song, Kerrin Steensen, Torsten Thomas
PeerJ. 2017; 5: e4015. Published online 2017 Nov 8. doi: 10.7717/peerj.4015
PMCID:
PMC5681852
Haibao Tang, Ewen F. Kirkness, Christoph Lippert, William H. Biggs, Martin Fabani, Ernesto Guzman, Smriti Ramakrishnan, Victor Lavrenko, Boyko Kakaradov, Claire Hou, Barry Hicks, David Heckerman, Franz J. Och, C. Thomas Caskey, J. Craig Venter, Amalio Telenti
Am J Hum Genet. 2017 Nov 2; 101(5): 700–715. Published online 2017 Nov 2. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.09.013
PMCID:
PMC5673627
Minh Duc Cao, Devika Ganesamoorthy, Chenxi Zhou, Lachlan J M Coin
Bioinformatics. 2018 Mar 1; 34(5): 873–874. Published online 2017 Oct 28. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx691
PMCID:
PMC6192212
Yair Motro, Jacob Moran-Gilad
Biomol Detect Quantif. 2017 Dec; 14: 1–6. Published online 2017 Oct 23. doi: 10.1016/j.bdq.2017.10.002
PMCID:
PMC5727008
Jacquiline W Mugo, Ephifania Geza, Joel Defo, Samar S M Elsheikh, Gaston K Mazandu, Nicola J Mulder, Emile R Chimusa
Bioinformatics. 2017 Oct 1; 33(19): 2995–3002. Published online 2017 Jun 24. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx369
PMCID:
PMC5870573
Ryan R. Wick, Louise M. Judd, Claire L. Gorrie, Kathryn E. Holt
PLoS Comput Biol. 2017 Jun; 13(6): e1005595. Published online 2017 Jun 8. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1005595
PMCID:
PMC5481147
Chen Yang, Justin Chu, René L Warren, Inanç Birol
Gigascience. 2017 Apr; 6(4): 1–6. Published online 2017 Feb 24. doi: 10.1093/gigascience/gix010
PMCID:
PMC5530317

Read Full Post »


Seven Alternative Designs to Quantum Computing Platform – The Race by IBM, Google, Microsoft, and Others

 

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Business Bets on a Quantum Leap

Quantum computing could help companies address problems as huge as supply chains and climate change. Here’s how IBM, Google, Microsoft, and others are racing to bring the tech from theory to practice.
May 21, 2019

quantum computer at IonQ, an Alphabet-backed startup

A version of this article appears in the June 2019 issue of Fortune with the headline “The Race for Quantum Domination.”

Medicine

One day, your health may depend on a quantum leap.

  • Pharmaceutical giant Biogen teamed up with consultancy Accenture and startup 1QBit on a quantum computing experiment in 2017 aimed at molecular modeling, one of the more complex disciplines in medicine. The goal: finding candidate drugs to treat neurodegenerative diseases.
  • Microsoft is collaborating with Case Western Reserve University to improve the accuracy of MRI machines, which help detect cancer, using so-called quantum-inspired algorithms.

 

7 ways to win the quantum race

There are multiple ways that quantum computing could work.

Here’s a guide to which companies are backing which tech.

Superconducting uses an electrical current, flowing through special semiconductor chips cooled to near absolute zero, to produce computational “qubits.” Google, IBM, and Intel are pursuing this approach, which has so far been the front-runner.

Ion trap relies on charged atoms that are manipulated by lasers in a vacuum, which helps to reduce noisy interference that can contribute to errors. Industrial giant Honeywell is betting on this technique. So is IonQ, a startup with backing from Alphabet.

Neutral Atom Similar to the ion-trap method, except it uses, you guessed it, neutral atoms. Physicist Mikhail Lukin’s lab at Harvard is a pioneer.

Annealing designed to find the lowest-energy (and therefore speediest) solutions to math problems. Canadian firm D-Wave has sold multimillion-dollar machines based on the idea to Google and NASA. They’re fast, but skeptics question whether they qualify as “quantum.”

Silicon spin uses single electrons trapped in transistors. Intel is hedging its bets between the more mature superconducting qubits and this younger, equally semiconductor-friendly method.

Topological uses exotic, highly stable quasi-particles called “anyons.” Microsoft deems this unproven moonshot as the best candidate in the long run, though the company has yet to produce a single one.

Photonics uses light particles sent through special silicon chips. The particles interact with one another very little (good), but can scatter and disappear (bad). Three-year-old stealth startup Psi Quantum is tinkering away on this idea.

SOURCE

http://fortune.com/longform/business-quantum-computing/

 

Other related articles published in this Open Access Online Scientific Journal include the following:

 

  • R&D for Artificial Intelligence Tools & Applications: Google’s Research Efforts in 2018

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/01/16/rd-for-artificial-intelligence-tools-applications-googles-research-efforts-in-2018/

 

  • LIVE Day Two – World Medical Innovation Forum ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, Boston, MA USA, Monday, April 9, 2019

www.worldmedicalinnovation.org

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/04/09/live-day-two-world-medical-innovation-forum-artificial-intelligence-boston-ma-usa-monday-april-9-2019/

 

  • Research and Development (R&D) Expenditure by Country represent time, capital, and effort being put into researching and designing the products of the future – Data from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics adjusted for purchasing-power parity (PPP).

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/05/26/research-and-development-rd-expenditure-by-country-represent-time-capital-and-effort-being-put-into-researching-and-designing-the-products-of-the-future-data-from-the-unesco-institute-for-s/

 

  • Resources on Artificial Intelligence in Health Care and in Medicine: Articles of Note at PharmaceuticalIntelligence.com @AVIVA1950 @pharma_BI

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/resources-artificial-intelligence-health-care-note-lev-ari-phd-rn/

 

  • IBM’s Watson Health division – How will the Future look like?I

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2019/04/24/ibms-watson-health-division-how-will-the-future-look-like/

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »