Prediction of Cancer Driver Genes and Mutations: the Potential of Integrative Computational Frameworks

Overview

Journal Brief Bioinform

Publisher Oxford University Press

Specialty Biology

Date 2024 Jan 23

PMID 38261338

Authors

Mona Nourbakhsh

Kristine Degn

Astrid Saksager

Matteo Tiberti

Elena Papaleo

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

The vast amount of available sequencing data allows the scientific community to explore different genetic alterations that may drive cancer or favor cancer progression. Software developers have proposed a myriad of predictive tools, allowing researchers and clinicians to compare and prioritize driver genes and mutations and their relative pathogenicity. However, there is little consensus on the computational approach or a golden standard for comparison. Hence, benchmarking the different tools depends highly on the input data, indicating that overfitting is still a massive problem. One of the solutions is to limit the scope and usage of specific tools. However, such limitations force researchers to walk on a tightrope between creating and using high-quality tools for a specific purpose and describing the complex alterations driving cancer. While the knowledge of cancer development increases daily, many bioinformatic pipelines rely on single nucleotide variants or alterations in a vacuum without accounting for cellular compartments, mutational burden or disease progression. Even within bioinformatics and computational cancer biology, the research fields work in silos, risking overlooking potential synergies or breakthroughs. Here, we provide an overview of databases and datasets for building or testing predictive cancer driver tools. Furthermore, we introduce predictive tools for driver genes, driver mutations, and the impact of these based on structural analysis. Additionally, we suggest and recommend directions in the field to avoid silo-research, moving towards integrative frameworks.

Citing Articles

An ensemble machine learning-based performance evaluation identifies top In-Silico pathogenicity prediction methods that best classify driver mutations in cancer.

Das S, Patel V, Chakravarty S, Ghosh A, Mukhopadhyay A, Biswas N BioData Min. 2025; 18(1):7.

PMID: 39833905 PMC: 11744934. DOI: 10.1186/s13040-024-00420-x.

Decoding the functional impact of the cancer genome through protein-protein interactions.

Fu H, Mo X, Ivanov A Nat Rev Cancer. 2025; 25(3):189-208.

PMID: 39810024 DOI: 10.1038/s41568-024-00784-6.

Enhancing Molecular Network-Based Cancer Driver Gene Prediction Using Machine Learning Approaches: Current Challenges and Opportunities.

Zhang H, Lin C, Chen Y, Shen X, Wang R, Chen Y J Cell Mol Med. 2025; 29(1):e70351.

PMID: 39804102 PMC: 11726689. DOI: 10.1111/jcmm.70351.

Novel Computational and Artificial Intelligence Models in Cancer Research.

Liu L, Li F, Liu X, Wang K, Zhao Z Cancers (Basel). 2025; 17(1.

PMID: 39796743 PMC: 11719689. DOI: 10.3390/cancers17010116.

CDMPred: a tool for predicting cancer driver missense mutations with high-quality passenger mutations.

Wang L, Sun H, Yue Z, Xia J, Li X PeerJ. 2024; 12:e17991.

PMID: 39253604 PMC: 11382650. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.17991.

References

Zhou Z, Li M . Targeted therapies for cancer. BMC Med. 2022; 20(1):90. PMC: 8915534. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-022-02287-3. View

Kumar S, Clarke D, Gerstein M . Leveraging protein dynamics to identify cancer mutational hotspots using 3D structures. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019; 116(38):18962-18970. PMC: 6754584. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1901156116. View

Ahmed R, Baali I, Erten C, Hoxha E, Kazan H . MEXCOwalk: mutual exclusion and coverage based random walk to identify cancer modules. Bioinformatics. 2019; 36(3):872-879. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz655. View

Rogers M, Shihab H, Mort M, Cooper D, Gaunt T, Campbell C . FATHMM-XF: accurate prediction of pathogenic point mutations via extended features. Bioinformatics. 2017; 34(3):511-513. PMC: 5860356. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx536. View

Iqbal S, Hoksza D, Perez-Palma E, May P, Jespersen J, Ahmed S . MISCAST: MIssense variant to protein StruCture Analysis web SuiTe. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020; 48(W1):W132-W139. PMC: 7319582. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkaa361. View

Zhu H, Uuskula-Reimand L, Isaev K, Wadi L, Alizada A, Shuai S . Candidate Cancer Driver Mutations in Distal Regulatory Elements and Long-Range Chromatin Interaction Networks. Mol Cell. 2020; 77(6):1307-1321.e10. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2019.12.027. View

Zhang P, Itan Y . Biological Network Approaches and Applications in Rare Disease Studies. Genes (Basel). 2019; 10(10). PMC: 6827097. DOI: 10.3390/genes10100797. View

Vaser R, Adusumalli S, Leng S, Sikic M, Ng P . SIFT missense predictions for genomes. Nat Protoc. 2015; 11(1):1-9. DOI: 10.1038/nprot.2015.123. View

Wei P, Wu F, Xia J, Su Y, Wang J, Zheng C . Prioritizing Cancer Genes Based on an Improved Random Walk Method. Front Genet. 2020; 11:377. PMC: 7198854. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2020.00377. View

10.

Song J, Peng W, Wang F . A random walk-based method to identify driver genes by integrating the subcellular localization and variation frequency into bipartite graph. BMC Bioinformatics. 2019; 20(1):238. PMC: 6518800. DOI: 10.1186/s12859-019-2847-9. View

11.

Tiberti M, Terkelsen T, Degn K, Beltrame L, Cremers T, da Piedade I . MutateX: an automated pipeline for in silico saturation mutagenesis of protein structures and structural ensembles. Brief Bioinform. 2022; 23(3). DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbac074. View

12.

Shi X, Teng H, Shi L, Bi W, Wei W, Mao F . Comprehensive evaluation of computational methods for predicting cancer driver genes. Brief Bioinform. 2022; 23(2). PMC: 8921613. DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbab548. View

13.

Learned K, Durbin A, Currie R, Kephart E, Beale H, Sanders L . Barriers to accessing public cancer genomic data. Sci Data. 2019; 6(1):98. PMC: 6586850. DOI: 10.1038/s41597-019-0096-4. View

14.

Zeng Z, Mao C, Vo A, Li X, Nugent J, Khan S . Deep learning for cancer type classification and driver gene identification. BMC Bioinformatics. 2021; 22(Suppl 4):491. PMC: 8543824. DOI: 10.1186/s12859-021-04400-4. View

15.

Mao Y, Chen H, Liang H, Meric-Bernstam F, Mills G, Chen K . CanDrA: cancer-specific driver missense mutation annotation with optimized features. PLoS One. 2013; 8(10):e77945. PMC: 3813554. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077945. View

16.

Paiva V, de Souza Gomes I, Monteiro C, Mendonca M, Martins P, Santana C . Protein structural bioinformatics: An overview. Comput Biol Med. 2022; 147:105695. DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.105695. View

17.

Lin Z, Akin H, Rao R, Hie B, Zhu Z, Lu W . Evolutionary-scale prediction of atomic-level protein structure with a language model. Science. 2023; 379(6637):1123-1130. DOI: 10.1126/science.ade2574. View

18.

Nourbakhsh M, Saksager A, Tom N, Chen X, Colaprico A, Olsen C . A workflow to study mechanistic indicators for driver gene prediction with Moonlight. Brief Bioinform. 2023; 24(5). PMC: 10516357. DOI: 10.1093/bib/bbad274. View

19.

Cheng F, Zhao J, Wang Y, Lu W, Liu Z, Zhou Y . Comprehensive characterization of protein-protein interactions perturbed by disease mutations. Nat Genet. 2021; 53(3):342-353. PMC: 8237108. DOI: 10.1038/s41588-020-00774-y. View

20.

Chen H, Li J, Wang Y, Ng P, Tsang Y, Shaw K . Comprehensive assessment of computational algorithms in predicting cancer driver mutations. Genome Biol. 2020; 21(1):43. PMC: 7033911. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-020-01954-z. View