bioRxivCancer BiologyPreprint
Biological misinterpretation of transcriptional signatures in tumour samples can unknowingly undermine mechanistic understanding and faithful alignment with preclinical data
N. C. Fisher, R. Byrne, H. Leslie, C. Wood, A. Legrini, A. Cameron, B. Ahmaderaghi, S. Corry, S. Malla, R. Amirkhah, A. McCooey, E. Rogan, K. Redmond, S. Sakhnevych, E. Domingo, J. Jackson, M. Loughrey, S. Leedham, T. Maughan, M. Lawler, O. J. Sansom, F. Lamrock, V. H. Koelzer, N. Jamieson, P. D. Dunne
Abstract
Precise mechanism-based gene expression signatures (GESs) have been developed in appropriate in vitro and in vivo model systems, to identify important cancer-related signalling processes. However, some GESs originally developed to represent specific disease processes, primarily with an epithelial cell focus, are being applied to heterogeneous tumour samples where the expression of the genes in the signature may no longer be epithelial-specific. Therefore, unknowingly, even small changes in tumour stroma percentage can directly influence GESs, undermining the intended mechanistic signalling. Using colorectal cancer as an exemplar, we deployed numerous orthogonal profiling methodologies, including laser capture microdissection, flow cytometry, bulk and multiregional biopsy clinical samples, single cell RNAseq and finally spatial transcriptomics, to perform a comprehensive assessment of the potential for the most widely-used GESs to be influenced, or confounded, by stromal content in tumour tissue. To complement this work, we generated a freely-available resource, ConfoundR; https://confoundr.qub.ac.uk/, that enables users to test the extent of stromal influence on an unlimited number of the genes/signatures simultaneously across colorectal, breast, pancreatic, ovarian and prostate cancer datasets. Findings presented here demonstrate the clear potential for misinterpretation of the meaning of GESs, due to widespread stromal influences, which in-turn can undermine faithful alignment between clinical samples and preclinical data/models, particularly cell lines and organoids, or tumour models not fully recapitulating the stromal and immune microenvironment. As such, efforts to faithfully align preclinical models of disease using phenotypically-designed GESs must ensure that the signatures themselves remain representative of the same biology when applied to clinical samples.
- organism: human
- assay: bulk RNA-seq
- assay: spatial transcriptomics
- assay: scRNA-seq
- research focus: cell type annotation
- research focus: differential expression
- research focus: gene regulatory network inference
- approach: statistical model
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Adjusting for systematic technical biases in risk assessment of gene signatures in transcriptomic cancer cohorts
Adrià Caballé, Antonio Berenguer, Camille Stephan‐Otto Attolini·bioRxiv·Jul 2, 2018
- Stromal signals dominate gene expression signature scores that aim to describe cancer-intrinsic stemness or mesenchymality characteristics
Julian Kreis, Bogac Aybey, … Eike Staub·bioRxiv·Aug 25, 2023
- signifinder enables the identification of tumor cell states and cancer expression signatures in bulk, single-cell and spatial transcriptomic data
Stefania Pirrotta, Laura Masatti, … Enrica Calura·bioRxiv·Mar 7, 2023
- Evaluation of Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) tools highlights the value of single sample approaches over pairwise for robust biological discovery.
C. Bull, R. M. Byrne, … S. B. Malla·bioRxiv·Mar 15, 2024
- The impact of stroma on the discovery of molecular subtypes and prognostic gene signatures in serous ovarian cancer
Matthew Schwede, Levi Waldron, … Aedín C. Culhane·Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & PreventionPeer-reviewed·Dec 23, 2019
- A fibroblast-rich transcriptomic axis reflects stromal remodeling within the CMS4 phenotype in colorectal cancer
Yuxi Zheng, Shuqiang Hao, Chonghe Jiang·bioRxiv·Sep 22, 2026