» Articles » PMID: 28938601

Mutation-profile-based Methods for Understanding Selection Forces in Cancer Somatic Mutations: a Comparative Analysis

Overview
Journal Oncotarget
Specialty Oncology
Date 2017 Sep 24
PMID 28938601
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Human genes exhibit different effects on fitness in cancer and normal cells. Here, we present an evolutionary approach to measure the selection pressure on human genes, using the well-known ratio of the nonsynonymous to synonymous substitution rate in both cancer genomes ( / ) and normal populations ( / ). A new mutation-profile-based method that adopts sample-specific mutation rate profiles instead of conventional substitution models was developed. We found that cancer-specific selection pressure is quite different from the selection pressure at the species and population levels. Both the relaxation of purifying selection on passenger mutations and the positive selection of driver mutations may contribute to the increased / values of human genes in cancer genomes compared with the / values in human populations. The / values also contribute to the improved classification of cancer genes and a better understanding of the onco-functionalization of cancer genes during oncogenesis. The use of our computational pipeline to identify cancer-specific positively and negatively selected genes may provide useful information for understanding the evolution of cancers and identifying possible targets for therapeutic intervention.

Citing Articles

Neutral evolution of rare cancer mutations in the computer and the clinic.

Beckman R NPJ Syst Biol Appl. 2024; 10(1):110.

PMID: 39358357 PMC: 11447017. DOI: 10.1038/s41540-024-00436-3.


Evolutionary dependency of cancer mutations in gene pairs inferred by nonsynonymous-synonymous mutation ratios.

Han D, Kim S, Lee S, Moon Y, Kang S, Yoo J Genome Med. 2024; 16(1):103.

PMID: 39160568 PMC: 11331682. DOI: 10.1186/s13073-024-01376-7.


Unraveling the Drivers of Tumorigenesis in the Context of Evolution: Theoretical Models and Bioinformatics Tools.

Zhu X, Zhao W, Zhou Z, Gu X J Mol Evol. 2023; 91(4):405-423.

PMID: 37246992 DOI: 10.1007/s00239-023-10117-0.


Use of Publication Dynamics to Distinguish Cancer Genes and Bystander Genes.

Banyai L, Trexler M, Patthy L Genes (Basel). 2022; 13(7).

PMID: 35885888 PMC: 9315931. DOI: 10.3390/genes13071105.


Use of signals of positive and negative selection to distinguish cancer genes and passenger genes.

Banyai L, Trexler M, Kerekes K, Csuka O, Patthy L Elife. 2021; 10.

PMID: 33427197 PMC: 7877913. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.59629.


References
1.
Kim J, Yu J, Cho Y, Jung C, Ahn S, Gong G . Expression of SPRR3 is associated with tumor cell proliferation in less advanced stages of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011; 133(3):909-16. DOI: 10.1007/s10549-011-1868-5. View

2.
Martincorena I, Roshan A, Gerstung M, Ellis P, Van Loo P, McLaren S . Tumor evolution. High burden and pervasive positive selection of somatic mutations in normal human skin. Science. 2015; 348(6237):880-6. PMC: 4471149. DOI: 10.1126/science.aaa6806. View

3.
Beckman R, Loeb L . Negative clonal selection in tumor evolution. Genetics. 2005; 171(4):2123-31. PMC: 1456124. DOI: 10.1534/genetics.105.040840. View

4.
Merlo L, Pepper J, Reid B, Maley C . Cancer as an evolutionary and ecological process. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006; 6(12):924-35. DOI: 10.1038/nrc2013. View

5.
Stratton M, Campbell P, Futreal P . The cancer genome. Nature. 2009; 458(7239):719-24. PMC: 2821689. DOI: 10.1038/nature07943. View