» Articles » PMID: 33420139

Prognostic Gene Expression Signatures of Breast Cancer Are Lacking a Sensible Biological Meaning

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2021 Jan 9
PMID 33420139
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The identification of prognostic biomarkers for predicting cancer progression is an important problem for two reasons. First, such biomarkers find practical application in a clinical context for the treatment of patients. Second, interrogation of the biomarkers themselves is assumed to lead to novel insights of disease mechanisms and the underlying molecular processes that cause the pathological behavior. For breast cancer, many signatures based on gene expression values have been reported to be associated with overall survival. Consequently, such signatures have been used for suggesting biological explanations of breast cancer and drug mechanisms. In this paper, we demonstrate for a large number of breast cancer signatures that such an implication is not justified. Our approach eliminates systematically all traces of biological meaning of signature genes and shows that among the remaining genes, surrogate gene sets can be formed with indistinguishable prognostic prediction capabilities and opposite biological meaning. Hence, our results demonstrate that none of the studied signatures has a sensible biological interpretation or meaning with respect to disease etiology. Overall, this shows that prognostic signatures are black-box models with sensible predictions of breast cancer outcome but no value for revealing causal connections. Furthermore, we show that the number of such surrogate gene sets is not small but very large.

Citing Articles

Defining hypoxia in cancer: A landmark evaluation of hypoxia gene expression signatures.

Di Giovannantonio M, Hartley F, Elshenawy B, Barberis A, Hudson D, Shafique H Cell Genom. 2025; 5(2):100764.

PMID: 39892389 PMC: 11872601. DOI: 10.1016/j.xgen.2025.100764.


Inferring gene regulatory networks of ALS from blood transcriptome profiles.

Pappalardo X, Jansen G, Amaradio M, Costanza J, Umeton R, Guarino F Heliyon. 2024; 10(23):e40696.

PMID: 39687198 PMC: 11648123. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40696.


Gene signatures for cancer research: A 25-year retrospective and future avenues.

Liu W, He H, Chicco D PLoS Comput Biol. 2024; 20(10):e1012512.

PMID: 39413055 PMC: 11482671. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1012512.


High NTRK2 protein expression levels may be associated with poorer prognosis of breast cancer patients.

Zhang R, Zhao J, Zhao L J Int Med Res. 2024; 52(9):3000605241281322.

PMID: 39340251 PMC: 11440626. DOI: 10.1177/03000605241281322.


A triple hormone receptor ER, AR, and VDR signature is a robust prognosis predictor in breast cancer.

Omar M, Harrell J, Tamimi R, Marchionni L, Erdogan C, Nakshatri H Breast Cancer Res. 2024; 26(1):132.

PMID: 39272208 PMC: 11395215. DOI: 10.1186/s13058-024-01876-9.


References
1.
Kim S . Effects of sample size on robustness and prediction accuracy of a prognostic gene signature. BMC Bioinformatics. 2009; 10:147. PMC: 2689196. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2105-10-147. View

2.
Begley C, Ioannidis J . Reproducibility in science: improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circ Res. 2015; 116(1):116-26. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819. View

3.
Domany E . Using high-throughput transcriptomic data for prognosis: a critical overview and perspectives. Cancer Res. 2014; 74(17):4612-21. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-3338. View

4.
Shipitsin M, Campbell L, Argani P, Weremowicz S, Bloushtain-Qimron N, Yao J . Molecular definition of breast tumor heterogeneity. Cancer Cell. 2007; 11(3):259-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2007.01.013. View

5.
Shahzad A, Gilden D, Cohrs R . Translational medicine and varicella zoster virus: need for disease modeling. New Horiz Transl Med. 2015; 2(3):89-91. PMC: 4465079. DOI: 10.1016/j.nhtm.2015.03.001. View