| Literature DB >> 30906836 |
G Pranavathiyani1, Raja Rajeswary Thanmalagan1, Naorem Leimarembi Devi1, Amouda Venkatesan1.
Abstract
Breast cancer is the leading cause for mortality among women worldwide. Dysregulation of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes is the major reason for the cause of cancer. Understanding these genes will provide clues and insights about their regulatory mechanism and their interplay in cancer. In the present study, an attempt is made to compare the functional characteristics and interactions of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes to understand their biological role. 431 breast cancer samples from seven publicly available microarray datasets were collected and analysed using GEO2R tool. The identified 416 differentially expressed genes were classified into five gene sets as oncogenes (OG), tumor suppressor genes (TSG), druggable genes, essential genes and other genes. The gene sets were subjected to various analysis such as enrichment analysis (viz., GO, Pathways, Diseases and Drugs), network analysis, calculation of mutation frequencies and Guanine-Cytosine (GC) content. From the results, it was observed that the OG were having high GC content as well as high interactions than TSG. Moreover, the OG are found to have frequent mutations than TSG. The enrichment analysis results suggest that the oncogenes are involved in positive regulation of cellular protein metabolic process, macromolecule biosynthetic process and majorly in cell cycle and focal adhesion pathway in cancer. It was also found that these oncogenes are involved in other diseases such as skin diseases and viral infections. Collagenase, paclitaxel and docetaxel are some of the drugs found to be enriched for oncogenes.Entities:
Keywords: Breast cancer; Differential gene expression; Network analysis; Oncogenes; Tumor suppressor genes
Year: 2018 PMID: 30906836 PMCID: PMC6411624 DOI: 10.1016/j.gendis.2018.10.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Genes Dis ISSN: 2352-3042
Figure 1Overview of methodology adopted in the present study.
Gene expression omnibus (GEO) datasets used in the present study with number of samples, platform information along with the number of identified differentially expressed genes (DEG).
| Sl. No. | Dataset accession | No. of samples | Platform | No. of DEG | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Upregulated genes | Downregulated genes | ||||
| 1 | GSE45584 | 90 | GPL6480 | 98 | 124 |
| 2 | GSE45581 | 45 | GPL6480 | 707 | 1279 |
| 3 | GSE21422 | 19 | GPL570 | 1020 | 1155 |
| 4 | GSE6883 | 24 | GPL96 | 606 | 495 |
| 5 | GSE79058 | 76 | GPL19956 | 39 | 35 |
| 6 | GSE45827 | 155 | GPL570 | 2917 | 1118 |
| 7 | GSE1299 | 22 | GOL96 | 212 | 346 |
Figure 2Comprehensive bar chart of gene ontology (GO) results for differentially expressed genes showing number of genes in various biological process, cellular components and molecular function.
Enrichment analysis result of pathways, diseases and drugs for the identified differentially expressed genes.
| KEGG Pathway Enrichment | Disease Enrichment | Drug Enrichment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pathways | No. of Genes | Diseases | No. of Genes | Drugs | No. of Genes |
| Cell cycle | 27 | Cancer or viral infections | 86 | Collagenase | 26 |
| ECM-receptor interaction | 20 | Neoplasms | 72 | Paclitaxel | 15 |
| Pathways in cancer | 28 | Breast Diseases | 50 | Heparin | 17 |
| Focal adhesion | 23 | Breast Neoplasms | 51 | Urokinase | 11 |
| p53 signalling pathway | 12 | Neoplastic Processes | 52 | Progesterone | 12 |
| Small cell lung cancer | 12 | Carcinoma | 55 | Epirubicin | 7 |
| Amoebiasis | 13 | Neoplasm Invasiveness | 40 | Doxorubicin | 10 |
| Progesterone-mediated oocyte maturation | 11 | Neoplasm Metastasis | 40 | Alteplase | 9 |
| Toll-like receptor signalling pathway | 11 | Skin and Connective Tissue Diseases | 45 | Podofilox | 9 |
| Bladder cancer | 8 | Adenocarcinoma | 40 | Zidovudine | 6 |
Figure 3Comparison of guanine-cytosine (GC) content percentage (A) and mutation frequency percentage (B) of the five gene sets.
Top 10 clusters of highly interconnected genes among the differentially expressed genes.
| Cluster | Score (Density × No. of Nodes) | No. of Nodes | No. of Edges | Node IDs |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 29.444 | 37 | 530 | DLGAP5, AURKB, ECT2, CDCA5, RAD21, CASC5, ZWINT, KIF23, RACGAP1, CCNB2, MLF1IP, AURKA, TOP2A, CENPA, CDK1, NCAPG, NDC80, NEK2, KIF11, KIF4A, BUB1, PRC1, CDCA8, CCNA2, CDC20, BIRC5, BUB1B, MAD2L1, ZWILCH, CKAP5, KIF18A, KIF2C, CENPE, CENPF, CENPK, KIF20A, CCNB1 |
| 2 | 11 | 13 | 66 | ITGA6, COL11A1, ITGB6, COL5A2, COMP, COL1A2, COL12A1, COL5A1, COL4A6, ITGB4, COL10A1, COL3A1, ITGB1 |
| 3 | 6.1 | 21 | 61 | FOXM1, ANLN, MCM4, PLK4, MELK, CDC45, CEP55, NUF2, CDC6, PCNA, CKS2, MCM2, TACC3, TTK, CCNE2, KIFC1, UBE2C, SMC4, PBK, RRM2, NUSAP1 |
| 4 | 6.08 | 26 | 76 | POSTN, COL1A1, FPR3, RGS1, EZH2, MMP1, MYB, MYBL1, CXCR4, PIK3CA, TBL1XR1, THBS1, LAMA3, SPP1, LAMB3, CXCL11, CCR5, SERPINE1, CCL5, LAMC2, SDC1, FN1, CXCL9, TIMP3, RGS20, CXCL10 |
| 5 | 5.417 | 25 | 65 | VEGFA, EIF5A, HMOX1, OAS2, CUL2, SQLE, RET, CTSS, IFI30, OASL, FGFR3, SRGN, MMP9, IFI6, OAS3, HAPLN1, VCAN, MAPK13, IRF6, FOS, MMP11, PLAUR, MMP3, MAX, STAT1 |
| 6 | 4 | 4 | 6 | FEN1, EXO1, TRIP13, RAD51 |
| 7 | 4 | 4 | 6 | HIST1H2BD, HIST1H3H, HIST1H2BH, HIST1H2BK |
| 8 | 4 | 4 | 6 | KYNU, KMO, QPRT, TDO2 |
| 9 | 3.333 | 4 | 5 | DBF4, CDC7, CCNG2, CHEK1 |
| 10 | 3 | 3 | 3 | ISG15, RSAD2, DDX58 |
Calculated average network topological parameters for the five gene sets. OG: Oncogenes; TSG: Tumor Suppressor Genes; DG: Druggable Genes; EG: Essential Genes; OtG: Other Genes.
| Network topological parameters | OG | TSG | DG | EG | OtG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Degree | 11.1364 | 4.5334 | 7.1045 | 17.5 | 1.7074 |
| Average Shortest Path Length | 2.3984 | 2.4276 | 2.8151 | 2.6036 | 1.3701 |
| Betweenness Centrality | 0.0163 | 0.051 | 0.028 | 0.0077 | 0.1056 |
| Closeness Centrality | 0.4291 | 0.4272 | 0.3689 | 0.3963 | 0.798 |
| Clustering Coefficient | 0.444 | 0.2828 | 0.4779 | 0.4716 | 0.2651 |
Figure 4Comparison of various network topological parameters of five sets of genes, where oncogenes are showing high centrality measures compared to tumor suppressor genes.
Figure 5Interaction network of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes, where high degree nodes are represented with larger node size. The nodes coloured in green and red are oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes respectively.