» Articles » PMID: 36617985

Transmicron: Accurate Prediction of Insertion Probabilities Improves Detection of Cancer Driver Genes from Transposon Mutagenesis Screens

Overview
Specialty Biochemistry
Date 2023 Jan 9
PMID 36617985
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Transposon screens are powerful in vivo assays used to identify loci driving carcinogenesis. These loci are identified as Common Insertion Sites (CISs), i.e. regions with more transposon insertions than expected by chance. However, the identification of CISs is affected by biases in the insertion behaviour of transposon systems. Here, we introduce Transmicron, a novel method that differs from previous methods by (i) modelling neutral insertion rates based on chromatin accessibility, transcriptional activity and sequence context and (ii) estimating oncogenic selection for each genomic region using Poisson regression to model insertion counts while controlling for neutral insertion rates. To assess the benefits of our approach, we generated a dataset applying two different transposon systems under comparable conditions. Benchmarking for enrichment of known cancer genes showed improved performance of Transmicron against state-of-the-art methods. Modelling neutral insertion rates allowed for better control of false positives and stronger agreement of the results between transposon systems. Moreover, using Poisson regression to consider intra-sample and inter-sample information proved beneficial in small and moderately-sized datasets. Transmicron is open-source and freely available. Overall, this study contributes to the understanding of transposon biology and introduces a novel approach to use this knowledge for discovering cancer driver genes.

Citing Articles

Toward Transgene-Free Transposon-Mediated Biological Mutagenesis for Plant Breeding.

Kirov I Int J Mol Sci. 2023; 24(23).

PMID: 38069377 PMC: 10706983. DOI: 10.3390/ijms242317054.


interrogation of regulatory genomes reveals extensive quasi-insufficiency in cancer evolution.

Fischer A, Lersch R, de Andrade Kratzig N, Strong A, Friedrich M, Weber J Cell Genom. 2023; 3(3):100276.

PMID: 36950387 PMC: 10025556. DOI: 10.1016/j.xgen.2023.100276.

References
1.
de Ridder J, Uren A, Kool J, Reinders M, Wessels L . Detecting statistically significant common insertion sites in retroviral insertional mutagenesis screens. PLoS Comput Biol. 2006; 2(12):e166. PMC: 1676030. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0020166. View

2.
Sondka Z, Bamford S, Cole C, Ward S, Dunham I, Forbes S . The COSMIC Cancer Gene Census: describing genetic dysfunction across all human cancers. Nat Rev Cancer. 2018; 18(11):696-705. PMC: 6450507. DOI: 10.1038/s41568-018-0060-1. View

3.
Li M, Pettitt S, Eckert S, Ning Z, Rice S, Cadinanos J . The piggyBac transposon displays local and distant reintegration preferences and can cause mutations at noncanonical integration sites. Mol Cell Biol. 2013; 33(7):1317-30. PMC: 3624274. DOI: 10.1128/MCB.00670-12. View

4.
Bergemann T, Starr T, Yu H, Steinbach M, Erdmann J, Chen Y . New methods for finding common insertion sites and co-occurring common insertion sites in transposon- and virus-based genetic screens. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012; 40(9):3822-33. PMC: 3351147. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkr1295. View

5.
Liu G, Geurts A, Yae K, Srinivasan A, Fahrenkrug S, Largaespada D . Target-site preferences of Sleeping Beauty transposons. J Mol Biol. 2005; 346(1):161-73. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2004.09.086. View