Cited by 25Lung Cancer Research StudiesLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsGene expression and cancer classification

Gene-expression data integration to squamous cell lung cancer subtypes reveals drug sensitivity

Open access
Wu, D, Pang, Y, Wilkerson, M D, Wang, D, Hammerman, P S, Liu, J S·2013·British Journal of Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Squamous cell lung cancer (SqCC) is the second most common type of lung cancer in the United States. Previous studies have used gene-expression data to classify SqCC samples into four subtypes, including the primitive, classical, secretory and basal subtypes. These subtypes have different survival outcomes, although it is unknown whether these molecular subtypes predict response to therapy. METHODS: Here, we analysed RNAseq data of 178 SqCC tumour samples and characterised the features of the different SqCC subtypes to define signature genes and pathway alterations specific to each subtype. Further, we compared the gene-expression features of each molecular subtype to specific time points in models of airway development. We also classified SqCC-derived cell lines and their reported therapeutic vulnerabilities. RESULTS: We found that the primitive subtype may come from a later stage of differentiation, whereas the basal subtype may be from an early time. Most SqCC cell lines responded to one of five anticancer drugs (Panobinostat, 17-AAG, Irinotecan, Topotecan and Paclitaxel), whereas the basal-type cell line EBC-1 was sensitive to three other drugs (PF2341066, AZD6244 and PD-0325901). CONCLUSION: Compared with the other three subtypes of cell lines, the secretory-type cell lines were significantly less sensitive to the five most effective drugs, possibly because of their low proliferation activity. We provide a bioinformatics framework to explore drug repurposing for cancer subtypes based on the available genomic profiles of tumour samples, normal cell types, cancer cell lines and data of drug sensitivity in cell lines.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/bjc.2013.452

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wu, D., Pang, Y., Wilkerson, M. D., Wang, D., Hammerman, P. S., & Liu, J. S.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Broad Institute (US)
Corresponding author
  • Wu, D
  • Liu, J S
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Published
2013-09
Volume
109
Issue
6
Pages
1599-1608
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
OpenAlex
W1988541647
Cited by
25
References
28
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1017967)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Health and Medical Research Council
  • National Cancer Institute (K08CA163677)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Lung Cancer Research Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gene expression and cancer classification
Keywords
lung squamous cell carcinoma, molecular subtypes, drug sensitivity, drug repurposing, RNA-seq, signature genes, airway development, lung cancer cell lines, panobinostat, 17-AAG, irinotecan, topotecan, paclitaxel, basal subtype, classical subtype
MeSH terms
Antineoplastic Agents, Carcinoma, Squamous Cell, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, RNA, Neoplasm, Gene Expression, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Computational Biology, Cell Line, Tumor, Cell Growth Processes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review