The Prominent Pervasive Oncogenic Role and Tissue Specific Permissiveness of RAS Gene Mutations

Overview

Journal Sci Rep

Specialty Science

Date 2024 Oct 25

PMID 39455841

Authors

Ming Yi

Daniel Soppet

Frank McCormick

Dwight V Nissley

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

In cancer research, RAS biology has been focused on only a handful of tumor types. While RAS genes have long been suspected as common contributors to a wide spectrum of cancer types, robust evidence is required to firmly establish their critical oncogenic significance. We present a data mining study using DepMap genome-wide CRISPR screening data, which provide substantial evidence to support the prominent pervasive oncogenic role and tissue-specific permissiveness of RAS gene mutations. Differential analysis of CRISPR effect scores identifies K- or N-RAS genes as the most differential gene in contrasts of (K-, N-, combined) RAS mutant versus wild-type cell lines across multiple tissue types. The distinguished tissue-specific pattern of KRAS vs. NRAS as top differential genes in subsets of tissue types and evidence from genome data supported the idea of KRAS- and NRAS-engaged tissue types. To our knowledge, this is the first report of prominent pervasive oncogenic role of RAS mutations revealed by gene dependency data that is beyond the current understanding of the oncogenic role of RAS genes and their well-known involved tissue types. Our findings strongly support RAS mutations as primary oncogenic drivers beyond traditionally recognized cancer types and offer insights into their tissue-specific permissiveness.

References

Mukhopadhyay S, Vander Heiden M, McCormick F . The Metabolic Landscape of RAS-Driven Cancers from biology to therapy. Nat Cancer. 2021; 2(3):271-283. PMC: 8045781. DOI: 10.1038/s43018-021-00184-x. View

Prior I, Hood F, Hartley J . The Frequency of Ras Mutations in Cancer. Cancer Res. 2020; 80(14):2969-2974. PMC: 7367715. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-19-3682. View

Stephen A, Esposito D, Bagni R, McCormick F . Dragging ras back in the ring. Cancer Cell. 2014; 25(3):272-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2014.02.017. View

Cook J, Melloni G, Gulhan D, Park P, Haigis K . The origins and genetic interactions of KRAS mutations are allele- and tissue-specific. Nat Commun. 2021; 12(1):1808. PMC: 7985210. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-22125-z. View

Simanshu D, Nissley D, McCormick F . RAS Proteins and Their Regulators in Human Disease. Cell. 2017; 170(1):17-33. PMC: 5555610. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.009. View

Bailey M, Tokheim C, Porta-Pardo E, Sengupta S, Bertrand D, Weerasinghe A . Comprehensive Characterization of Cancer Driver Genes and Mutations. Cell. 2018; 173(2):371-385.e18. PMC: 6029450. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2018.02.060. View

Tokheim C, Karchin R . CHASMplus Reveals the Scope of Somatic Missense Mutations Driving Human Cancers. Cell Syst. 2019; 9(1):9-23.e8. PMC: 6857794. DOI: 10.1016/j.cels.2019.05.005. View

Tsherniak A, Vazquez F, Montgomery P, Weir B, Kryukov G, Cowley G . Defining a Cancer Dependency Map. Cell. 2017; 170(3):564-576.e16. PMC: 5667678. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.010. View

Meyers R, Bryan J, McFarland J, Weir B, Sizemore A, Xu H . Computational correction of copy number effect improves specificity of CRISPR-Cas9 essentiality screens in cancer cells. Nat Genet. 2017; 49(12):1779-1784. PMC: 5709193. DOI: 10.1038/ng.3984. View

10.

Dempster J, Pacini C, Pantel S, Behan F, Green T, Krill-Burger J . Agreement between two large pan-cancer CRISPR-Cas9 gene dependency data sets. Nat Commun. 2019; 10(1):5817. PMC: 6925302. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-019-13805-y. View

11.

Pacini C, Dempster J, Boyle I, Goncalves E, Najgebauer H, Karakoc E . Integrated cross-study datasets of genetic dependencies in cancer. Nat Commun. 2021; 12(1):1661. PMC: 7955067. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-21898-7. View

12.

Dempster J, Boyle I, Vazquez F, Root D, Boehm J, Hahn W . Chronos: a cell population dynamics model of CRISPR experiments that improves inference of gene fitness effects. Genome Biol. 2021; 22(1):343. PMC: 8686573. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-021-02540-7. View

13.

Yi M, Nissley D, McCormick F, Stephens R . ssGSEA score-based Ras dependency indexes derived from gene expression data reveal potential Ras addiction mechanisms with possible clinical implications. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):10258. PMC: 7314760. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-66986-8. View

14.

Weinstein I . Cancer. Addiction to oncogenes--the Achilles heal of cancer. Science. 2002; 297(5578):63-4. DOI: 10.1126/science.1073096. View

15.

Aregger M, Lawson K, Billmann M, Costanzo M, Tong A, Chan K . Systematic mapping of genetic interactions for de novo fatty acid synthesis identifies C12orf49 as a regulator of lipid metabolism. Nat Metab. 2020; 2(6):499-513. PMC: 7566881. DOI: 10.1038/s42255-020-0211-z. View

16.

Shimada K, Bachman J, Muhlich J, Mitchison T . shinyDepMap, a tool to identify targetable cancer genes and their functional connections from Cancer Dependency Map data. Elife. 2021; 10. PMC: 7924953. DOI: 10.7554/eLife.57116. View

17.

Ritchie M, Phipson B, Wu D, Hu Y, Law C, Shi W . limma powers differential expression analyses for RNA-sequencing and microarray studies. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015; 43(7):e47. PMC: 4402510. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkv007. View

18.

Love M, Huber W, Anders S . Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 2014; 15(12):550. PMC: 4302049. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-014-0550-8. View

19.

Robinson M, McCarthy D, Smyth G . edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics. 2009; 26(1):139-40. PMC: 2796818. DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp616. View

20.

Nissley D, McCormick F . RAS at 40: Update from the RAS Initiative. Cancer Discov. 2022; 12(4):895-898. DOI: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-1554. View