Unraveling the Genomic-Epigenomic Interaction Landscape in Triple Negative and Non-Triple Negative Breast Cancer

被引:13
|
作者
Wu, Jiande [1 ]
Mamidi, Tarun Karthik Kumar [2 ,3 ]
Zhang, Lu [4 ]
Hicks, Chindo [1 ]
机构
[1] Louisiana State Univ, Sch Med, Dept Genet, Hlth Sci Ctr, 533 Bolivar St, New Orleans, LA 70112 USA
[2] Univ Alabama Birmingham, Sch Med, Dept Pediat, Ctr Computat Genom & Data Sci, Birmingham, AL 35233 USA
[3] Univ Alabama Birmingham, Sch Med, Dept Pathol, Ctr Computat Genom & Data Sci, Birmingham, AL 35233 USA
[4] Clemson Univ, Dept Publ Hlth Sci, 513 Edwards Hall, Clemson, SC 29634 USA
关键词
gene expression; somatic; genomics; epigenomics; interactions; breast cancer; DISPARITIES; SURVIVAL; FEATURES; APELIN;
D O I
10.3390/cancers12061559
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Background: The recent surge of next generation sequencing of breast cancer genomes has enabled development of comprehensive catalogues of somatic mutations and expanded the molecular classification of subtypes of breast cancer. However, somatic mutations and gene expression data have not been leveraged and integrated with epigenomic data to unravel the genomic-epigenomic interaction landscape of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and non-triple negative breast cancer (non-TNBC).Methods: We performed integrative data analysis combining somatic mutation, epigenomic and gene expression data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) to unravel the possible oncogenic interactions between genomic and epigenomic variation in TNBC and non-TNBC. We hypothesized that within breast cancers, there are differences in somatic mutation, DNA methylation and gene expression signatures between TNBC and non-TNBC. We further hypothesized that genomic and epigenomic alterations affect gene regulatory networks and signaling pathways driving the two types of breast cancer.Results: The investigation revealed somatic mutated, epigenomic and gene expression signatures unique to TNBC and non-TNBC and signatures distinguishing the two types of breast cancer. In addition, the investigation revealed molecular networks and signaling pathways enriched for somatic mutations and epigenomic changes unique to each type of breast cancer. The most significant pathways for TNBC were: retinal biosynthesis, BAG2, LXR/RXR, EIF2 and P2Y purigenic receptor signaling pathways. The most significant pathways for non-TNBC were: UVB-induced MAPK, PCP, Apelin endothelial, Endoplasmatic reticulum stress and mechanisms of viral exit from host signaling Pathways.Conclusion: The investigation revealed integrated genomic, epigenomic and gene expression signatures and signing pathways unique to TNBC and non-TNBC, and a gene signature distinguishing the two types of breast cancer. The study demonstrates that integrative analysis of multi-omics data is a powerful approach for unravelling the genomic-epigenomic interaction landscape in TNBC and non-TNBC.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 21
页数:21
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Deconvolution of the Genomic and Epigenomic Interaction Landscape of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
    Wu, Jiande
    Mamidi, Tarun Karthik Kumar
    Zhang, Lu
    Hicks, Chindo
    CANCERS, 2019, 11 (11)
  • [2] Quantification of immune cells in triple negative and non-triple negative of breast cancer
    Sikandar, B.
    VIRCHOWS ARCHIV, 2016, 469 : S23 - S23
  • [3] HSET Expression in Triple Negative and Non-Triple Negative Breast Cancers
    Oprea-Ilies, G. M.
    Pannu, V.
    Liu, Y.
    Nickleach, D.
    Pambuccian, S. E.
    Aneja, R.
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2013, 26 : 60A - 60A
  • [4] HSET Expression in Triple Negative and Non-Triple Negative Breast Cancers
    Oprea-Ilies, G. M.
    Pannu, V.
    Liu, Y.
    Nickleach, D.
    Pambuccian, S. E.
    Aneja, R.
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2013, 93 : 60A - 60A
  • [5] LncRNAs as new biomarkers to differentiate triple negative breast cancer from non-triple negative breast cancer
    Lv, Mingming
    Xu, Pengfei
    Wu, Ying
    Huang, Lei
    Li, Wenqu
    Lv, Shanshan
    Wu, Xiaowei
    Zeng, Xin
    Shen, Rong
    Jia, Xuemei
    Yin, Yongmei
    Gu, Yun
    Yuan, Hongyan
    Xie, Hui
    Fu, Ziyi
    ONCOTARGET, 2016, 7 (11) : 13047 - 13059
  • [6] Comparison of Clinicopathological Features and Prognosis in Triple-Negative and Non-Triple Negative Breast Cancer
    Qiu, Jingdan
    Xue, Xinying
    Hu, Chao
    Xu, Hu
    Kou, Deqiang
    Li, Rong
    Li, Ming
    JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2016, 7 (02): : 167 - 173
  • [7] Analysis of the differences of serum protein mass spectrometry in patients with triple negative breast cancer and non-triple negative breast cancer
    Liu, Ai-na
    Sun, Ping
    Liu, Jian-nan
    Yu, Cai-yan
    Qu, Hua-jun
    Jiao, Ai-hong
    Zhang, Liang-ming
    TUMOR BIOLOGY, 2014, 35 (10) : 9751 - 9757
  • [8] Clinical outcome and pattern of recurrence in patients with triple negative breast cancer as compared with non-triple negative breast cancer group
    Saha, Aramita
    Chattopadhyay, Subrata
    Azam, Mohammad
    Sur, Prabir K.
    CLINICAL CANCER INVESTIGATION JOURNAL, 2012, 1 (04): : 201 - 205
  • [9] DIFFERENCES IN MULTI-MODAL ULTRASOUND IMAGING BETWEEN TRIPLE NEGATIVE AND NON-TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER
    Li, Ziyao
    Tian, Jiawei
    Wang, Xiaowei
    Wang, Ying
    Wang, Zhenzhen
    Zhang, Lei
    Jing, Hui
    Wu, Tong
    ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2016, 42 (04): : 882 - 890
  • [10] Clinicopathologic Characteristics and Prognosis of Early Stage Triple Negative Breast Cancer: Comparison with Non-triple Negative Group
    Ahn, Jae Seok
    Cho, Jihyoung
    Kwon, Sun Young
    Kang, Sun Hee
    JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN SURGICAL SOCIETY, 2009, 77 (01): : 37 - 42