Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘oncoproteomics’

Live Conference Coverage @MedCity news Converge 2018 Philadelphia: Early Diagnosis Through Predictive Biomarkers, NonInvasive Testing, Volume 2 (Volume Two: Latest in Genomics Methodologies for Therapeutics: Gene Editing, NGS and BioInformatics, Simulations and the Genome Ontology), Part 1: Next Generation Sequencing (NGS)

5:00 – 5:45 PM Early Diagnosis Through Predictive Biomarkers, NonInvasive Testing

Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

 

Diagnosing cancer early is often the difference between survival and death. Hear from experts regarding the new and emerging technologies that form the next generation of cancer diagnostics.

Moderator: Heather Rose, Director of Licensing, Thomas Jefferson University
Speakers:
Bonnie Anderson, Chairman and CEO, Veracyte @BonnieAndDx
Kevin Hrusovsky, Founder and Chairman, Powering Precision Health @KevinHrusovsky

Bonnie Anderson and Veracyte produces genomic tests for thyroid and other cancer diagnosis.  Kevin Hrusovksy and Precision Health uses peer reviewed evidence based medicine to affect precision medicine decision.

Bonnie: aim to get a truth of diagnosis.  Getting tumor tissue is paramount as well as properly preserved tissue.  They use deep RNA sequencing  and machine learning  in their clinically approved tests.

Kevin: Serial biospace entrepreneur.  Two diseases, cancer and neurologic, have been diseases which have been hardest to get reproducible and validated biomarkers of early disease.  He concentrates on protein biomarkers.

Heather:  FDA has recently approved drugs for early disease intervention.  However the use of biomarkers can go beyond patient stratification in clinical trials.

Kevin: 15 approved drugs for MS but the markers are scans looking for brain atrophy which is too late of an endpoint.  So we need biomarkers of early disease progression.  We can use those early biomarkers of disease progression so pharma can target those early biomarkers and or use those early biomarkers of disease progression  for endpoint

Bonnie: exciting time in the early diagnostics field. She prefers transcriptomics to DNA based methods such as WES or WGS (whole exome or whole genome sequencing).  It was critical to show data on the cost savings imparted by their transcriptomic based thryoid cancer diagnostic test for payers to consider this test eligible for reimbursement.

Kevin: There has been 20 million  CAT scans for  cancer but it is estimated 90% of these scans led to misdiagnosis. Biomarker  development  has revolutionized diagnostics in this disease area.  They have developed a breakthrough panel of ten protein biomarkers in serum which he estimates may replace 5 million mammograms.

All panelists agreed on the importance of regulatory compliance and the focus of new research should be on early detection.  In addition they believe that Dr. Gotlieb’s appointment to the FDA is a positive for the biomarker development field, as Dr. Gotlieb understands the potential and importance of early detection and prevention of disease.  Kevin also felt Dr. Gotlieb understands the importance of incorporating biomarkers as endpoints in clinical trials.  Over 750 phase 1,2, and 3 clinical trials use biomarker endpoints but the pharma companies still need to prove the biomarkers clinical relevance to the FDA.They also agreed it would be helpful to involve advocacy groups in putting more pressure on the healthcare providers and policy makers on this importance of diagnostics as a preventative measure.

In addition, the discovery and use of biomarkers as disease endpoints has led to a resurgence of Alzheimer’s disease drug development by companies which have previously given up on these type of neurodegenerative diseases.

Kevin feels proteomics offers great advantages over DNA-based diagnostics, especially in cancer such as ovarian cancer, where a high degree of specificity for a diagnostic test is required to ascertain if a woman should undergo prophylactic oophorectomy.  He suggests that a new blood-based protein biomarker panel is being developed for early detection of some forms of ovarian cancer.

Please follow on Twitter using the following #hash tags and @pharma_BI

#MCConverge

#cancertreatment

#healthIT

#innovation

#precisionmedicine

#healthcaremodels

#personalizedmedicine

#healthcaredata

And at the following handles:

@pharma_BI

@medcitynews

 

Please see related articles on Live Coverage of Previous Meetings on this Open Access Journal

LIVE – Real Time – 16th Annual Cancer Research Symposium, Koch Institute, Friday, June 16, 9AM – 5PM, Kresge Auditorium, MIT

Real Time Coverage and eProceedings of Presentations on 11/16 – 11/17, 2016, The 12th Annual Personalized Medicine Conference, HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL, Joseph B. Martin Conference Center, 77 Avenue Louis Pasteur, Boston

Tweets Impression Analytics, Re-Tweets, Tweets and Likes by @AVIVA1950 and @pharma_BI for 2018 BioIT, Boston, 5/15 – 5/17, 2018

BIO 2018! June 4-7, 2018 at Boston Convention & Exhibition Center

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/press-coverage/

Read Full Post »

Cancer Companion Diagnostics

Curator: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP

 

Companion Diagnostics for Cancer: Will NGS Play a Role?

Patricia Fitzpatrick Dimond, Ph.D.

http://www.genengnews.com/insight-and-intelligence/companion-diagnostics-for-cancer/77900554/

Companion diagnostics (CDx), in vitro diagnostic devices or imaging tools that provide information essential to the safe and effective use of a corresponding therapeutic product, have become indispensable tools for oncologists.  As a result, analysts expect the global CDx market to reach $8.73 billion by 2019, up from from $3.14 billion in 2014.

Use of CDx during a clinical trial to guide therapy can improve treatment responses and patient outcomes by identifying and predicting patient subpopulations most likely to respond to a given treatment.

These tests not only indicate the presence of a molecular target, but can also reveal the off-target effects of a therapeutic, predicting toxicities and adverse effects associated with a drug.

For pharma manufacturers, using CDx during drug development improves the success rate of drugs being tested in clinical trials. In a study estimating the risk of clinical trial failure during non-small cell lung cancer drug development in the period between 1998 and 2012 investigators analyzed trial data from 676 clinical trials with 199 unique drug compounds.

The data showed that Phase III trial failure proved the biggest obstacle to drug approval, with an overall success rate of only 28%. But in biomarker-guided trials, the success rate reached 62%. The investigators concluded from their data analysis that the use of a CDx assay during Phase III drug development substantially improves a drug’s chances of clinical success.

The Regulatory Perspective

According to Patricia Keegen, M.D., supervisory medical officer in the FDA’s Division of Oncology Products II, the agency requires a companion diagnostic test if a new drug works on a specific genetic or biological target that is present in some, but not all, patients with a certain cancer or disease. The test identifies individuals who would benefit from the treatment, and may identify patients who would not benefit but could also be harmed by use of a certain drug for treatment of their disease. The agency classifies companion diagnosis as Class III devices, a class of devices requiring the most stringent approval for medical devices by the FDA, a Premarket Approval Application (PMA).

On August 6, 2014, the FDA finalized its long-awaited “Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff: In Vitro Companion Diagnostic Devices,” originally issued in July 2011. The final guidance stipulates that FDA generally will not approve any therapeutic product that requires an IVD companion diagnostic device for its safe and effective use before the IVD companion diagnostic device is approved or cleared for that indication.

Close collaboration between drug developers and diagnostics companies has been a key driver in recent simultaneous pharmaceutical-CDx FDA approvals, and partnerships between in vitro diagnostics (IVD) companies have proliferated as a result.  Major test developers include Roche Diagnostics, Abbott Laboratories, Agilent Technologies, QIAGEN), Thermo Fisher Scientific, and Myriad Genetics.

But an NGS-based test has yet to make it to market as a CDx for cancer.  All approved tests include PCR–based tests, immunohistochemistry, and in situ hybridization technology.  And despite the very recent decision by the FDA to grant marketing authorization for Illumina’s MiSeqDx instrument platform for screening and diagnosis of cystic fibrosis, “There still seems to be a number of challenges that must be overcome before we see NGS for targeted cancer drugs,” commented Jan Trøst Jørgensen, a consultant to DAKO, commenting on presentations at the European Symposium of Biopathology in June 2013.

Illumina received premarket clearance from the FDA for its MiSeqDx system, two cystic fibrosis assays, and a library prep kit that enables laboratories to develop their own diagnostic test. The designation marked the first time a next-generation sequencing system received FDA premarket clearance. The FDA reviewed the Illumina MiSeqDx instrument platform through its de novo classification process, a regulatory pathway for some novel low-to-moderate risk medical devices that are not substantially equivalent to an already legally marketed device.

Dr. Jørgensen further noted that “We are slowly moving away from the ‘one biomarker: one drug’ scenario, which has characterized the first decades of targeted cancer drug development, toward a more integrated approach with multiple biomarkers and drugs. This ‘new paradigm’ will likely pave the way for the introduction of multiplexing strategies in the clinic using gene expression arrays and next-generation sequencing.”

The future of CDxs therefore may be heading in the same direction as cancer therapy, aimed at staying ahead of the tumor drug resistance curve, and acknowledging the reality of the shifting genomic landscape of individual tumors. In some cases, NGS will be applied to diseases for which a non-sequencing CDx has already been approved.

Illumina believes that NGS presents an ideal solution to transforming the tumor profiling paradigm from a series of single gene tests to a multi-analyte approach to delivering precision oncology. Mya Thomae, Illumina’s vice president, regulatory affairs, said in a statement that Illumina has formed partnerships with several drug companies to develop a universal next-generation sequencing-based oncology test system. The collaborations with AstraZeneca, Janssen, Sanofi, and Merck-Serono, announced in 2014 and 2015 respectively, seek to  “redefine companion diagnostics for oncology  focused on developing a system for use in targeted therapy clinical trials with a goal of developing and commercializing a multigene panel for therapeutic selection.”

On January 16, 2014 Illumina and Amgen announced that they would collaborate on the development of a next-generation sequencing-based companion diagnostic for colorectal cancer antibody Vectibix (panitumumab). Illumina will develop the companion test on its MiSeqDx instrument.

In 2012, the agency approved Qiagen’s Therascreen KRAS RGQ PCR Kit to identify best responders to Erbitux (cetuximab), another antibody drug in the same class as Vectibix. The label for Vectibix, an EGFR-inhibiting monoclonal antibody, restricts the use of the drug for those metastatic colorectal cancer patients who harbor KRAS mutations or whose KRAS status is unknown.

The U.S. FDA, Illumina said, hasn’t yet approved a companion diagnostic that gauges KRAS mutation status specifically in those considering treatment with Vectibix.  Illumina plans to gain regulatory approval in the U.S. and in Europe for an NGS-based companion test that can identify patients’ RAS mutation status. Illumina and Amgen will validate the test platform and Illumina will commercialize the test.

Treatment Options

Foundation Medicine says its approach to cancer genomic characterization will help physicians reveal the alterations driving the growth of a patient’s cancer and identify targeted treatment options that may not have been otherwise considered.

FoundationOne, the first clinical product from Foundation Medicine, interrogates the entire coding sequence of 315 cancer-related genes plus select introns from 28 genes often rearranged or altered in solid tumor cancers.  Based on current scientific and clinical literature, these genes are known to be somatically altered in solid cancers.

These genes, the company says, are sequenced at great depth to identify the relevant, actionable somatic alterations, including single base pair change, insertions, deletions, copy number alterations, and selected fusions. The resultant fully informative genomic profile complements traditional cancer treatment decision tools and often expands treatment options by matching each patient with targeted therapies and clinical trials relevant to the molecular changes in their tumors.

As Foundation Medicine’ s NGS analyses are increasingly applied, recent clinical reports describe instances in which comprehensive genomic profiling with the FoundationOne NGS-based assay result in diagnostic reclassification that can lead to targeted drug therapy with a resulting dramatic clinical response. In several reported instances, NGS found, among the spectrum of aberrations that occur in tumors, changes unlikely to have been discovered by other means, and clearly outside the range of a conventional CDx that matches one drug to a specific genetic change.

TRK Fusion Cancer

In July 2015, the University of Colorado Cancer Center and Loxo Oncology published a research brief in the online edition of Cancer Discovery describing the first patient with a tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK) fusion cancer enrolled in a LOXO-101 Phase I trial. LOXO-101 is an orally administered inhibitor of the TRK kinase and is highly selective only for the TRK family of receptors.

While the authors say TRK fusions occur rarely, they occur in a diverse spectrum of tumor histologies. The research brief described a patient with advanced soft tissue sarcoma widely metastatic to the lungs. The patient’s physician submitted a tumor specimen to Foundation Medicine for comprehensive genomic profiling with FoundationOne Heme, where her cancer was demonstrated to harbor a TRK gene fusion.

Following multiple unsuccessful courses of treatment, the patient was enrolled in the Phase I trial of LOXO-101 in March 2015. After four months of treatment, CT scans demonstrated almost complete tumor disappearance of the largest tumors.

The FDA’s Elizabeth Mansfield, Ph.D., director, personalized medicine staff, Office of In Vitro Diagnostics and Radiological Health, said in a recent article,  “FDA Perspective on Companion Diagnostics: An Evolving Paradigm” that “even as it seems that many questions about co-development have been resolved, the rapid accumulation of new knowledge about tumor biology and the rapid evolution of diagnostic technology are challenging FDA to continually redefine its thinking on companion diagnostics.” It seems almost inevitable that a consolidation of diagnostic testing should take place, to enable a single test or a few tests to garner all the necessary information for therapeutic decision making.”

Whether this means CDx testing will begin to incorporate NGS sequencing remains to be seen.

Read Full Post »

The Human Proteome Map Completed

Reporter and Curator: Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP

UPDATED 6/02/2024

The genetic, pharmacogenomic, and immune landscapes associated with protein expression across human cancers.

Source: Chen C, Liu Y, Li Q, Zhang Z, Luo M, Liu Y, Han L. The Genetic, Pharmacogenomic, and Immune Landscapes Associated with Protein Expression across Human Cancers. Cancer Res. 2023 Nov 15;83(22):3673-3680. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-23-0758. PMID: 37548539; PMCID: PMC10843800.

Abstract

Proteomics is a powerful approach that can rapidly enhance our understanding of cancer development. Detailed characterization of the genetic, pharmacogenomic, and immune landscape in relation to protein expression in cancer patients could provide new insights into the functional roles of proteins in cancer. By taking advantage of the genotype data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and protein expression data from The Cancer Proteome Atlas (TCPA), we characterized the effects of genetic variants on protein expression across 31 cancer types and identified approximately 100,000 protein quantitative trait loci (pQTL). Among these, over 8000 pQTL were associated with patient overall survival. Furthermore, characterization of the impact of protein expression on more than 350 imputed anticancer drug responses in patients revealed nearly 230,000 significant associations. In addition, approximately 21,000 significant associations were identified between protein expression and immune cell abundance. Finally, a user-friendly data portal, GPIP (https://hanlaboratory.com/GPIP), was developed featuring multiple modules that enable researchers to explore, visualize, and browse multidimensional data. This detailed analysis reveals the associations between the proteomic landscape and genetic variation, patient outcome, the immune microenvironment, and drug response across cancer types, providing a resource that may offer valuable clinical insights and encourage further functional investigations of proteins in cancer.

Introduction

Functional proteomics is a powerful approach that helps us understand cancer pathophysiology and identify potential therapeutic strategies (). Functional protein analysis using reverse-phase protein arrays (RPPA) has already proven highly effective in studying large numbers of TCGA samples, especially when integrated with genomic, transcriptomic, and clinical information (). Previous works demonstrated that a QTL mapping approach is effective to understand the genetic basis of multiple molecular features in human diseases (). Identifying the sequence determinants of protein levels (pQTLs) may guide the search for causal genes and facilitate understanding the underlying mechanisms of human diseases. However, it remains challenging to further understand the functional roles of protein expression in cancers. For example, it is unclear whether proteins are associated with drug response and/or immune features in patients. In this study, we systematically investigated the effects of genetic variants on protein expression and characterized the impact of protein expression on imputed drug responses and immune cell abundances from different sources (Fig. 1). To facilitate broad access of these data for the biomedical research community, we developed a user-friendly database, GPIP (https://hanlaboratory.com/GPIP). We expect this study to have a significant clinical impact on the future development of protein-based targeted therapies.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1924390-f0001.jpg
Impact of genetic variants on protein expression.

A Workflow of GPIP to identify pQTLs and survival-associated pQTLs. B The number of pQTLs identified for each cancer type. C Association between CYCLINB1 protein expression level and rs12576855 in LUAD patients. D Association between CYCLINB1 protein expression level and rs2722796 in LGG patients. E The number of survival-associated pQTLs identified for each cancer type. F Kaplan–Meier plot showing the association between rs10918659 (pQTL of HER2_pY1248) genotypes and overall survival times of STAD patients. G Kaplan–Meier plot showing the association between rs13158796 (pQTL of HER2_pY1248) genotypes and overall survival times of STAD patients.

Identification of protein–drug associations

To investigate potential associations between protein expression and drug response, we calculated the Spearman rank correlation between protein expression data and drug response from DrVAEN and cancerRxTissue. These two datasets employed distinct predictive models that integrated omics data from CCLE and drug response data from GDSC to predict drug response in TCGA samples (Fig. 2A) (,). Association with |Rs| > 0.3 and FDR < 0.05 were considered as significant associations in each cancer type.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1924390-f0002.jpg
Exploring the pharmacogenomics of protein in human cancer.

A Workflow of GPIP to identify Drug-associated proteins. B The number of protein-drug response pairs identified from DrVAEN (left) and cancerRxTissue (right) for each cancer type. C Visualization of the associations between proteins and drugs (DrVAEN) within and across different cancer signaling pathways. Blue links represent associations within a single pathway, while orange links represent associations cross pathways. D Enrichment analysis of drug target pathways among significant protein-drug response pairs. The color represents the log2 (odds ratio) of Fisher’s exact test. The size represents the FDR value.

Identification of protein–immune cell associations

To examine the relationship between protein expression and immune cell abundance, we utilized Spearman rank correlation coefficient to calculate the associations between protein expression data and immune cell abundance data from TIMER, CIBERSORT, ImmuneCellAI, and ImmuneCellGSVA (Fig. 3). These datasets utilized different methods to evaluate immune cell abundance by leveraging immune gene signatures as a proxy (). We considered correlations with |Rs| > 0.3 and FDR < 0.05 as significant associations.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1924390-f0003.jpg
Exploring the immune landscapes of protein in human cancer.

A Workflow of GPIP to identify Immune cell-associated proteins. B The number of protein-drug response pairs identified from ImmuneCellsGSVA (purple), ImmuCellAI (yellow), TIMER (red) and CIBERSORT (green) for each cancer type. C The top 10 proteins with the highest number of significantly associated immune cell types in HNSC. The color represents the Rs between protein expression and immune cell abundance (ImmuneCellGSVA). The size represents the FDR value. D Association between PREX1expression and impute MDSC abundance in HNSC patients.

Database construction

GPIP was developed using Python Flask-RESTful API frameworks (https://flask-restful.readthedocs.io/), AngularJS (https://angularjs.org), and Bootstrap (https://getbootstrap.com/). The database for GPIP was implemented using the NoSQL database program MongoDB (https://www.mongodb.com/). The user-friendly interface of the GPIP web application was served through the Apache HTTP Server, allowing users to access the database and perform queries and analysis through a web browser.

Data availability

All results generated in this study can be found in GPIP database, (https://hanlaboratory.com/GPIP). Publicly available data generated by others were used by the authors in this study: The genotype data and clinical data were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data portal at https://tcga-data.nci.nih.gov/tcga/. The reverse-phase protein array (RPPA) protein expression data was obtained from The Cancer Proteome Atlas (TCPA) data portal at https://www.tcpaportal.org/. The imputed pharmacogenomic data were obtained from DrVAEN at https://bioinfo.uth.edu/drvaen/ and cancerRxTissue at https://manticore.niehs.nih.gov/cancerRxTissue/. The immune-cell infiltration data were obtained from Tumor Immune Estimation Resource (TIMER) at http://timer.cistrome.org/, Immune Cell Abundance Identifier (ImmuCellAI) at http://bioinfo.life.hust.edu.cn/ImmuCellAI/, and CIBERSORT at https://cibersort.stanford.edu/.

A comprehensive data portal

We developed a user-friendly data portal, GPIP (https://hanlaboratory.com/GPIP), to facilitate visualizing, searching, and browsing of our results by the biomedical research community (Fig. 4A). GPIP contains four main modules: Protein-QTLs, Surivial-QTLs, Drug Response, and Immune Infiltration (Fig. 4B). Querying can be easily performed by selecting cancer type, protein, drug, immune cell abundance, or entering the SNP ID of interest (Fig. 4C). For example, in the Protein-QTLs and Survival-QTLs modules, users can search for pQTLs by selecting a cancer type (e.g., LUAD) and entering a protein name (e.g., CYCLINB1) or an SNP ID (e.g., rs12576855). In the Drug Response module, users can search for protein-drug response associations by selecting a data source for imputed drug response (e.g., DrVAEN) and selecting an anticancer drug (e.g., Talazoparib) or a protein (e.g., PARP1). In the Immune Infiltration module, users can search for protein-immune infiltration pairs by selecting a data source for imputed immune cell abundance (e.g., ImmuneCellsGSVA), and selecting an immune cell type (e.g., Activated B cell) or a protein (e.g., PDL1). In addition, on the bottom of the main page, we developed a cancer type module where users can click on a specific cancer type (e.g., BLCA) to search for related information across all 4 modules (Fig. 4D). The search results for each module included a table to list related information accordingly (Fig. 4E). A “Details” button for each result item was clicked for generating a box plot in protein-QTLs module (Fig. 4F), a Kaplan–Meier plot in Survival-QTLs module (Fig. 4G) and a scatter plot in Drug Response and Immune Infiltration modules, respectively (Fig. 4H,I).I). Our database provides a valuable resource for cancer research and will be of great interest to the research community.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms-1924390-f0004.jpg
Content and interface of GPIP.

A GPIP homepage and browser bar. B The four main modules of GPIP. C Search boxes in the pQTLs module. D Search boxes in the cancer type-specific search module. E An example of resulting list in the pQTL module. F An example of boxplot for the pQTLs module result. G An example of Kaplan–Meier plot for the Survival protein-QTLs module result. H An example of scatter plot for the Drug Response module result. I An example of scatter plot for the Immune Infiltration module result.

Discussion

Proteomics plays a crucial role in identifying potential therapeutic strategies and understanding cancer pathophysiology (). In this study, we investigated the effects of genetic variants on protein expression and characterized the impact of protein expression on imputed drug responses and immune cell abundances across human cancers. We also developed the user-friendly data portal, GPIP, to provide access to these results. Our study provides a comprehensive analysis of protein expression in different cancer types and their association with drug response and immune cell abundance.

Identifying genetic variants associated with cancer has revolutionized our understanding of the disease and holds promise for improved diagnosis and treatment. In GPIP, we identified ~100,000 pQTLs across 31 cancer types and 8.8% of them were found to be associated with patient survival (Fig. 1). These genetic variants hold significant promise for unraveling the underlying biological mechanisms of disease progression and response to treatments. For example, a survival-associated pQTL may help to identify a genetic variant that controls the expression of a protein crucial for tumor growth or immune response, thus impacting patient survival. Our results suggest that pQTLs have the potential to serve as prognostic biomarkers and aid in the development of precision medicine.

Despite the promising implications, it is crucial to consider potential limitations of pQTL identification. One limitation is the small number of tumor samples in rare cancers, which limits statistical power and the detection of significant pQTLs. For example, only 8 proteins with pQTLs were found in CHOL, likely due to the small sample size (Table S1). Additionally, we observed that some cancer types with large sample sizes identified only a small number of pQTLs (e.g., BRAC), possibly due to the data quality of protein abundance. Tumors originating from different tissues may have variations in protein extraction quality or protein measurement accuracy (). Furthermore, cancer type heterogeneity can impact pQTL identification, as tumors from different tissues exhibit distinct protein expression profiles and genetic landscapes. Addressing these limitations is necessary to ensure valid and reliable results.

Protein expression levels in tumors can impact response of cancer cells to therapeutic drugs due to their role as targets of drug action, with alterations in expression potentially modifying drug sensitivity or resistance. In GPIP, we utilized the imputed drug response and protein expression data in TCGA patients to identify the potential associations between protein expression and drug response (Fig. 2). Our results revealed that certain proteins were significantly associated with drug sensitivity or resistance, suggesting that protein expression levels could potentially be used as biomarkers to predict drug response in cancer patients. Recent studies have shown that the impact of genetic variants on drug response can be mediated through protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks (,). Integrating genetic variants and PPI to further understand the associations between protein expression and drug response may provide further insights.

The protein expression level in tumors is crucial in the context of tumor immune microenvironment and immunotherapy, as it might impact immune cell abundance and response, and potentially improve the efficacy of immunotherapy. In GPIP, we examined the association between protein expression levels and imputed immune cell abundance across multiple cancer types. Our study identified ~21,000 significant correlations between proteins and immune cell types, highlighting the potential role of protein expression levels in shaping the tumor immune microenvironment (Fig. 3). Our results offer a promising avenue for future research to understand the interplay between protein expression and the tumor immune microenvironment, leading to personalized immunotherapy strategies and better treatment outcomes for cancer patients.

In summary, GPIP is a comprehensive and multifaceted data platform designed to aid functional and clinical research on protein in cancer patients. As more relevant datasets become available, we will continually update GPIP to ensure its relevance and usefulness to the research community.

Significance:

Comprehensive characterization of the relationship between protein expression and the genetic, pharmacogenomic, and immune landscape of tumors across cancer types provides a foundation for investigating the role of protein expression in cancer development and treatment.

Researchers Produce First Map of Human Proteome, and Reveal New
Significance in The Human Proteome

HAHNE, TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT MÜNCHENTwo international teams have
independently produced the first drafts of the human proteome. These curated
catalogs of the proteins expressed in most non-diseased human tissues and
organs can be used as a baseline to better understand changes that occur in
disease states. Their findings were published today (May 29) in Nature.

Both teams uncovered new complexities of the human genome, identifying novel
proteins from regions of the genome previously thought to be non-coding.

“the real breakthrough with these two projects is the comprehensive coverage of
more than 80 percent of the expected human proteome” said Hanno Steen, director
of proteomics at Boston Children’s Hospital, who was not involved in the work.

The human proteome map provides a catalog of proteins expressed in nondiseased tissues and organs to use as baseline in understanding changes that occur in disease

Given the growing importance of proteins in medical laboratory testing,

Experts are comparing this to the first complete map of the human genome

  • and this information provides for rapid advances
  • in understanding transcriptomics and metabolomics

Map of Human Proteome Expected to Advance Medical Science

“Housekeeping genes” that are expressed in all tissues and cell types

  • have been thought to be involved in basic cellular functions.

Two teams developing a Human Proteome Map

  • detected proteins encoded by 2,350 genes
  • across all human cells and tissues.

The corresponding housekeeping proteins comprised
about 75% of total protein mass.

  •  histones,
  • ribosomal proteins,
  • metabolic enzymes, and
  • cytoskeletal proteins

The two international teams produced

  • the first drafts of the human protoeome,
  • a catalog of proteins expressed in most
  • nondiseased human issues and organs.

The evidence suggests there is translation from DNA regions

  • that were not thought to be translated—including
  • more than 400 translated long, intergenic non-coding RNAs (lincRNAs)—
    found by the Küster team—and
  • 193 new proteins—uncovered by the Pandey team.

This proteome map can be used as a baseline to understand

  • changes that occur in the disease state

These studies are part of the Human Proteome Project,

  1. an international effort by the Human Proteome Organization
  2. to revolutionize our understanding of the human proteome
  3. by coordinating research at laboratories around the world directed
  4. at mapping the entire human proteome.

This new information about the human proteome

  • is expected to trigger rapid advances in medical science
  • and a better understanding of the underlying causes of human diseases.

One Study Team Was at Johns Hopkins University

  • In one study, which was headed by Ahilesh Pandey, M.D.,
    at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore,
  • and colleague Harsha Gowda, Ph.D.,
    of the Institute of Bioinformatics in Bangalore, India,
  • the research team used an advanced form of mass spectrometry to analyze proteins
  • to create the human proteome map,

according to a report published in NIH Research Matters.

The research team examined

  1. 30 normal human tissue and cell types:
  2. 17 adult tissues,
  3. 7 fetal tissue and
  4. 6 blood cell types.

Samples from three people per tissue type

  • were processed through several steps.

The protein fragments, or peptides, were analyzed on

The amino acid sequences were

  • then compared to known sequences.

Their results were published in the May 28, 2014, issue of Nature.

The resulting draft map of the human proteome map includes

  • proteins encoded by more than 17,000 genes,
  • noted the Research Matters article.

Among these are hundreds of proteins from regions

  • previously thought to be non-coding.

This study also provided a new understanding of

  • how genes are expressed.

For example, almost 200 genes begin in locations

  • other than those predicted based on genetic sequence.

“The fact that 193 of the proteins came from DNA sequences

  • predicted to be non-coding means that
  • we don’t fully understand how cells read DNA,
  • since the sequences code for proteins

This study also produced the Human Proteome Map,

  • an interactive online portal.

This can be accessed at this link.

The study data will soon be accessible through

German’s ProteomicsDB Analyzed a Mix of Available and New Tissue Data

The other study was conducted by a team lead by  Bernhard Küster
of the Technische Universität München in Germany.

Küster and his colleagues created a

This database contains 92% of the

  • estimated 19,629 human proteins,

noted The Scientist article.

Küster’s team also used mass spectrometry

  • to analyze human tissue samples.

This team’s approach differed from Johns Hopkins’ in that

  • it compiled about 60% of the information
  • in the ProteomicsDB database
  1. by using existing raw mass spec (MS) data
  2. from databases and colleagues’ contributions.

To fill data gaps, the Küster lab generated its own
MS data after analyzing

  1. 60 human tissues,
  2. 13 body fluids, and
  3. 147 cancer cell lines.

High-resolution public data

  • was selected and computationally processed
  • for strict quality

The database for ProteomicsDB is

  • public and searchable.

It can be accessed at this link.

German Study Added New Insights to Transcription Process

Comparing the ratio of protein to mRNA levels for every protein globally,

  • the Küster lab found that the translation rate
  • is a constant feature of each mRNA transcript. 

The proteomics community has viewed

  • transcriptome and proteome data as two sides of a coin.

But this analysis shows that at least, at steady state,

  • once the ratio for an mRNA/protein pair has been calculated,
  1. protein levels can be determined
  2. just from specific mRNA levels.

Proteomics researchers in Toronto maintaining ionic balance and in Boston commented on the
importance of the findings, even a “new paradigm” because of

  • the fixed ratio of protein to mRNA

This is quite in keeping with what we have been learning

  • with respect to homeostasis.

In 2003, the Human Genome Project created a

  • draft map of the human genome—
  • all the genes in the human body.

Genomics has since driven many advances in medical science.

This was a progress from the classic discovery of Watson and Crick –

  • the classical dogma holds that
  • DNA makes RNA makes protein.
  • no constraints are place on this

But the cell is functioning in contact with other cells,

  • immersed in interstitial fluid
  • maintaining cationic and anionic balance
  • and mitochondrial energy balance and ubiquitin systems interact
  • and protein interacts with the chromatin and transcriptional RNA

So the restriction that has been discovered has credence,

  • the classical diagram has to be redrawn

Deeper Knowledge of Proteome to Improve Diagnostics and Therapeutics

In the two projects is:

  • the comprehensive coverage of more than 80% of
  • the expected human proteome,

These studies indicate that to get to

  • a deep level of proteome coverage,
  • many different tissue types must be probed.

the  studies are  complimentary.

  1. The Hopkins group provided a survey of human proteins from a single source, which allows for easy comparisons within their data.
  2. The ProteomeDB effort connected new information with existing data

A deeper knowledge of the human proteome could help

  • fill the gap between genomes and phenotypes.

As this occurs, it has the potential to transform

  • the way diagnostics and therapeutics are developed,
  •  enhancing overall biomedical research and healthcare,

it was noted in a report presented to scientific leaders at a NIH workshop

  • on advances in proteomics and its applications.

Having completed a draft map of the human proteome—
the set of all proteins in the human body

  • It opens another window to cell function.

It has been ASSUMED –

  • genes control the most basic functions of the cell,
  • including what proteins to make and when.
  • but we have assumed for too much in assigning
    full control to the genome

Researchers have identified more than 20,000 protein- coding genes.

However, scientific understanding of the proteome has

  • lagged behind that of the genome,
  • partly because of the proteome’s complexities.

The relationship between genes and proteins isn’t a simple matter of

  • one gene coding for one protein.

Stretches of DNA can be read and translated

  • into proteins in different ways.

Proteins are also more difficult to sequence than genes.

The importance of these latest studies to pathologists and Ph.D.s working

  • in molecular diagnostics laboratories is that
  • this information will expedite further research into the human proteome.

Such research is expected to lead to

  • novel methods of diagnosis and complex
  • “multi-analyte” clinical laboratory tests that
  • look for multiple proteins in a single assay.

“The prevalent view was that information transfer was from genome to transcriptome to proteome.
What these efforts show is that it’s a two-way road— proteomics can be used to annotate the genome.
The importance is that, using these datasets, we can improve the annotation of the genome and the
algorithms that predict transcription and translation,” said Steen. “The genomics field can now hugely
benefit from proteomics data.”

Wilhelm et al., “Mass-spectrometry- based draft of the human proteome,”
Nature,  http://dx.doi.doi:/10.1038/nature13319, 2014

M.S. Kim et al. “A draft map of the human proteome,”
Nature,  http://dx.doi.org:/10.1038/nature13302, 2014.

Tags

proteomicsnoncoding RNAhuman researchhuman proteome projecthuman genetics and genomics

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/40083/title/Human-Proteome-Mapped/

 

__Patricia Kirk

__by Harrison Wein, Ph.D.

__by Anna Azvolinsky

Related Information:

Revealing The Human Proteome

Human Proteome Mapped

The human proteome – a scientific opportunity for transforming diagnostics, therapeutics, and healthcare

Reference: A draft map of the human proteome.
Kim MS, Pinto SM, Getnet D, Nirujogi RS, Manda SS, Donahue CA, Gowda H, Pandey A.
Nature. 2014 May 29;509(7502):575-81. http://dx.doi.org:/10.1038/nature13302. PMID: 24870542

Funding: NIH’s National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), National Cancer Institute (NCI),
and National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI); the Sol Goldman Pancreatic Cancer Research Center;
India’s Council of Scientific and Industrial Research; and Wellcome Trust/DBT India Alliance.

http://nihprod.cit.nih.gov/researchmatters/june2014/06092014proteome.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »