title: Inferring active and prognostic ligand-receptor pairs with interactions in survival regression models.
abstract: Modeling signal transduction in cancer cells has implications for targeting new therapies and inferring the mechanisms that improve or threaten a patient's treatment response. For transcriptome-wide studies, it has been proposed that simple correlation between a ligand and receptor pair implies a relationship to the disease process. Statistically, a differential correlation (DC) analysis across groups stratified by prognosis can link the pair to clinical outcomes. While the prognostic effect and the apparent change in correlation are both biological consequences of activation of the signaling mechanism, a correlation-driven analysis does not clearly capture this assumption and makes inefficient use of continuous survival phenotypes. To augment the correlation hypothesis, we propose that a regression framework assuming a patient-specific, latent level of signaling activation exists and generates both prognosis and correlation. Data from these systems can be inferred via interaction terms in survival regression models allowing signal transduction models beyond one pair at a time and adjusting for other factors. We illustrate the use of this model on ovarian cancer data from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and discuss how the finding may be used to develop markers to guide targeted molecular therapies.
authors: Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
authors: Christina
authors: C
authors: Ruggeri
authors: Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
authors: Kevin H
authors: KH
authors: Eng
keywords: differential correlation; gene expression; ovarian cancer; signal transduction; survival analysis
references: Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2011 Mar;8(3):151-60
references: 21364688
references: Nat Genet. 2001 Nov;29(3):295-300
references: 11685206
references: Chin J Cancer Res. 2012 Jun;24(2):130-7
references: 23359769
references: J Ovarian Res. 2014 May 19;7:57
references: 24864163
references: PLoS One. 2014 Sep 22;9(9):e107193
references: 25244152
references: N Engl J Med. 2011 Dec 29;365(26):2473-83
references: 22204724
references: Nat Rev Cancer. 2013 Nov;13(11):772-87
references: 24132104
references: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003 Jun 18;95(12 ):851-67
references: 12813169
references: Nat Rev Cancer. 2004 May;4(5):361-70
references: 15122207
references: Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Feb 15;19(4):809-20
references: 23344261
references: Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Aug 15;14(16):5198-208
references: 18698038
references: Nat Rev Cancer. 2011 Sep 23;11(10):719-25
references: 21941283
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 2012 Jan;40(Database issue):D109-14
references: 22080510
references: CA Cancer J Clin. 2014 Jan-Feb;64(1):9-29
references: 24399786
references: Cancer Res. 2006 Nov 15;66(22):10709-19
references: 17090524
references: Eur J Cancer. 2001 Sep;37 Suppl 4:S3-8
references: 11597398
references: Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Feb 15;31(4):e15
references: 12582260