Integrating phenotypic small-molecule profiling and human genetics: The next phase in drug discovery

Trends in Genetics

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 16-23

  Johannessen, Cory M ^a   Clemons, Paul A ^a   Wagner, Bridget K ^a  

^a BROAD INSTITUTE OF MIT AND HARVARD   (United States)

Author keywords

Cell line profiling; Genotype phenotype; Small molecule

Indexed keywords

HEPATOCYTE NUCLEAR FACTOR 4; MOLECULAR LIBRARY;

CANCER CELL; DRUG SENSITIVITY; EPITHELIAL MESENCHYMAL TRANSITION; GENE EXPRESSION; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENE MUTATION; GENOMICS; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; PHENOTYPIC SMALL MOLECULE PROFILING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT LOCUS; REVIEW; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; DRUG DEVELOPMENT; DRUG RESISTANCE; GENETICS; HUMAN GENOME; MEDICAL GENETICS; MOLECULAR LIBRARY; PHARMACOLOGY; PHENOTYPE;

DRUG DISCOVERY; DRUG RESISTANCE; GENETICS, MEDICAL; GENOME, HUMAN; HUMANS; PHENOTYPE; SMALL MOLECULE LIBRARIES;

EID: 84920683698     PISSN: 01689525     EISSN: 13624555     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2014.11.002     Document Type: Review

References (77)

1. Wagner B.K., et al. Large-scale chemical dissection of mitochondrial function. Nat. Biotechnol. 2008, 26:343-351.
2. Clemons P.A., et al. Small molecules of different origins have distinct distributions of structural complexity that correlate with protein-binding profiles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107:18787-18792.
3. Kauvar L.M., et al. Predicting ligand binding to proteins by affinity fingerprinting. Chem. Biol. 1995, 2:107-118.
4. Wagner B.K., Clemons P.A. Connecting synthetic chemistry decisions to cell and genome biology using small-molecule phenotypic profiling. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2009, 13:539-548.
5. Weinstein J.N., et al. An information-intensive approach to the molecular pharmacology of cancer. Science 1997, 275:343-349.
6. Garnett M.J., et al. Systematic identification of genomic markers of drug sensitivity in cancer cells. Nature 2012, 483:570-575.
7. Barretina J., et al. The Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia enables predictive modelling of anticancer drug sensitivity. Nature 2012, 483:603-607.
8. Basu A., et al. An interactive resource to identify cancer genetic and lineage dependencies targeted by small molecules. Cell 2013, 154:1151-1161.
9. Ruden D.M. Personalized medicine and quantitative trait transcripts. Nat. Genet. 2007, 39:144-145.
10. van't Veer L.J., Bernards R. Enabling personalized cancer medicine through analysis of gene-expression patterns. Nature 2008, 452:564-570.
11. Beckman R.A., et al. Impact of genetic dynamics and single-cell heterogeneity on development of nonstandard personalized medicine strategies for cancer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:14586-14591.
12. Paull K.D., et al. Identification of novel antimitotic agents acting at the tubulin level by computer-assisted evaluation of differential cytotoxicity data. Cancer Res. 1992, 52:3892-3900.
13. Paull K.D., et al. Display and analysis of patterns of differential activity of drugs against human tumor cell lines: development of mean graph and COMPARE algorithm. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1989, 81:1088-1092.
14. Shoemaker R.H., et al. Development of human tumor cell line panels for use in disease-oriented drug screening. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 1988, 276:265-286.
15. Shoemaker R.H. The NCI60 human tumour cell line anticancer drug screen. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2006, 6:813-823.
16. Golub T.R., et al. Molecular classification of cancer: class discovery and class prediction by gene expression monitoring. Science 1999, 286:531-537.
17. Staunton J.E., et al. Chemosensitivity prediction by transcriptional profiling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98:10787-10792.
18. Dry J.R., et al. Transcriptional pathway signatures predict MEK addiction and response to selumetinib (AZD6244). Cancer Res. 2010, 70:2264-2273.
19. International HapMap C. A haplotype map of the human genome. Nature 2005, 437:1299-1320.
20. Choy E., et al. Genetic analysis of human traits in vitro: drug response and gene expression in lymphoblastoid cell lines. PLoS Genet. 2008, 4:e1000287.
21. Shaw S.Y., et al. Disease allele-dependent small-molecule sensitivities in blood cells from monogenic diabetes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2011, 108:492-497.
22. Subramanian A., et al. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102:15545-15550.
23. McDermott U., et al. Identification of genotype-correlated sensitivity to selective kinase inhibitors by using high-throughput tumor cell line profiling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007, 104:19936-19941.
24. Winter G.E., et al. An integrated chemical biology approach identifies specific vulnerability of Ewing's sarcoma to combined inhibition of Aurora kinases A and B. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2011, 10:1846-1856.
25. Solit D.B., et al. BRAF mutation predicts sensitivity to MEK inhibition. Nature 2006, 439:358-362.
26. Bollag G., et al. Clinical efficacy of a RAF inhibitor needs broad target blockade in BRAF-mutant melanoma. Nature 2010, 467:596-599.
27. Flaherty K.T., et al. Combined BRAF and MEK inhibition in melanoma with BRAF V600 mutations. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 367:1694-1703.
28. Sos M.L., et al. Predicting drug susceptibility of non-small cell lung cancers based on genetic lesions. J. Clin. Invest. 2009, 119:1727-1740.
29. Puissant A., et al. Targeting MYCN in neuroblastoma by BET bromodomain inhibition. Cancer Discov. 2013, 3:308-323.
30. Konieczkowski D.J., et al. A melanoma cell state distinction influences sensitivity to MAPK pathway inhibitors. Cancer Discov. 2014, 4:816-827.
31. Haibe-Kains B., et al. Inconsistency in large pharmacogenomic studies. Nature 2013, 504:389-393.
32. Weinstein J.N., Lorenzi P.L. Cancer: discrepancies in drug sensitivity. Nature 2013, 504:381-383.
33. Bateman A.R., et al. Importance of collection in gene set enrichment analysis of drug response in cancer cell lines. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4:4092.
34. Olsen C., et al. Relevance of different prior knowledge sources for inferring gene interaction networks. Front. Genet. 2014, 5:177.
35. Zhu J., Hastie T. Classification of gene microarrays by penalized logistic regression. Biostatistics 2004, 5:427-443.
36. Jang I.S., et al. Systematic assessment of analytical methods for drug sensitivity prediction from cancer cell line data. Pac. Symp. Biocomput. 2014, 2014:63-74.
37. Ramanathan A., et al. Perturbational profiling of a cell-line model of tumorigenesis by using metabolic measurements. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102:5992-5997.
38. Gohil V.M., et al. Nutrient-sensitized screening for drugs that shift energy metabolism from mitochondrial respiration to glycolysis. Nat. Biotechnol. 2010, 28:249-255.
39. Luo B., et al. Highly parallel identification of essential genes in cancer cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105:20380-20385.
40. Yang X., et al. A public genome-scale lentiviral expression library of human ORFs. Nat. Methods 2011, 8:659-661.
41. Serra V., et al. RSK3/4 mediate resistance to PI3K pathway inhibitors in breast cancer. J. Clin. Invest. 2013, 123:2551-2563.
42. Cheung H.W., et al. Amplification of CRKL induces transformation and epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor resistance in human non-small cell lung cancers. Cancer Discov. 2011, 1:608-625.
43. Moody S.E., et al. PRKACA mediates resistance to HER2-targeted therapy in breast cancer cells and restores anti-apoptotic signaling. Oncogene 2014, Published online June 9, 2014, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/onc.2014.153.
44. Johannessen C.M., et al. A melanocyte lineage program confers resistance to MAP kinase pathway inhibition. Nature 2013, 504:138-142.
45. Azam M., et al. Mechanisms of autoinhibition and STI-571/imatinib resistance revealed by mutagenesis of BCR-ABL. Cell 2003, 112:831-843.
46. Emery C.M., et al. MEK1 mutations confer resistance to MEK and B-RAF inhibition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2009, 106:20411-20416.
47. Wagle N., et al. Dissecting therapeutic resistance to RAF inhibition in melanoma by tumor genomic profiling. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 29:3085-3096.
48. Antony R., et al. C-RAF mutations confer resistance to RAF inhibitors. Cancer Res. 2013, 73:4840-4851.
49. Melnikov A., et al. Comprehensive mutational scanning of a kinase in vivo reveals substrate-dependent fitness landscapes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014, 42:e112.
50. Neve R.M., et al. A collection of breast cancer cell lines for the study of functionally distinct cancer subtypes. Cancer Cell 2006, 10:515-527.
51. Yuan J., et al. Chemical genomic profiling for antimalarial therapies, response signatures, and molecular targets. Science 2011, 333:724-729.
52. Glickman M.S., Sawyers C.L. Converting cancer therapies into cures: lessons from infectious diseases. Cell 2012, 148:1089-1098.
53. Mair B., et al. Exploiting epigenetic vulnerabilities for cancer therapeutics. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2014, 35:136-145.
54. McCabe M.T., et al. EZH2 inhibition as a therapeutic strategy for lymphoma with EZH2-activating mutations. Nature 2012, 492:108-112.
55. Daigle S.R., et al. Potent inhibition of DOT1L as treatment of MLL-fusion leukemia. Blood 2013, 122:1017-1025.
56. Wee Z.N., et al. EZH2-mediated inactivation of IFN-gamma-JAK-STAT1 signaling is an effective therapeutic target in MYC-driven prostate cancer. Cell Rep. 2014, 8:204-216.
57. Fagerberg L., et al. Large-scale protein profiling in human cell lines using antibody-based proteomics. J. Proteome Res. 2011, 10:4066-4075.
58. Pernemalm M., et al. Quantitative proteomics profiling of primary lung adenocarcinoma tumors reveals functional perturbations in tumor metabolism. J. Proteome Res. 2013, 12:3934-3943.
59. Locasale J.W., et al. Phosphoglycerate dehydrogenase diverts glycolytic flux and contributes to oncogenesis. Nat. Genet. 2011, 43:869-874.
60. Brunelli L., et al. Capturing the metabolomic diversity of KRAS mutants in non-small-cell lung cancer cells. Oncotarget 2014, 5:4722-4731.
61. Wang B., et al. Similarity network fusion for aggregating data types on a genomic scale. Nat. Methods 2014, 11:333-337.
62. Sharma S.V., et al. Cell line-based platforms to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of candidate anticancer agents. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2010, 10:241-253.
63. International HapMap C. The International HapMap Project. Nature 2003, 426:789-796.
64. Brennand K.J., et al. Modelling schizophrenia using human induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 2011, 473:221-225.
65. Israel M.A., et al. Probing sporadic and familial Alzheimer's disease using induced pluripotent stem cells. Nature 2012, 482:216-220.
66. Gafni O., et al. Derivation of novel human ground state naive pluripotent stem cells. Nature 2013, 504:282-286.
67. Petrone P.M., et al. Rethinking molecular similarity: comparing compounds on the basis of biological activity. ACS Chem. Biol. 2012, 7:1399-1409.
68. Dancik V., et al. Connecting small molecules with similar assay performance profiles leads to new biological hypotheses. J. Biomol. Screen. 2014, 19:771-781.
69. de Souza A., et al. An overview of the challenges in designing, integrating, and delivering BARD: a public chemical-biology resource and query portal for multiple organizations, locations, and disciplines. J. Biomol. Screen. 2014, 19:614-627.
70. Young D.W., et al. Integrating high-content screening and ligand-target prediction to identify mechanism of action. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2008, 4:59-68.
71. Futamura Y., et al. Morphobase, an encyclopedic cell morphology database, and its use for drug target identification. Chem. Biol. 2012, 19:1620-1630.
72. Ljosa V., et al. Comparison of methods for image-based profiling of cellular morphological responses to small-molecule treatment. J. Biomol. Screen. 2013, 18:1321-1329.
73. Gustafsdottir S.M., et al. Multiplex cytological profiling assay to measure diverse cellular states. PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e80999.
74. Hughes T.R., et al. Functional discovery via a compendium of expression profiles. Cell 2000, 102:109-126.
75. Lamb J., et al. The Connectivity Map: using gene-expression signatures to connect small molecules, genes, and disease. Science 2006, 313:1929-1935.
76. Wawer M.J., et al. Toward performance-diverse small-molecule libraries for cell-based phenotypic screening using multiplexed high-dimensional profiling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2014, 111:10911-10916.
77. Wawer M.J., et al. Automated structure-activity relationship mining: connecting chemical structure to biological profiles. J. Biomol. Screen. 2014, 19:738-748.