Centrosome amplification (CA) is a common feature of human tumours and a promising target for cancer therapy. However, CA's pan-cancer prevalence, molecular role in tumourigenesis and therapeutic value in the clinical setting are still largely unexplored. Here, we used a transcriptomic signature (CA20) to characterise the landscape of CA-associated gene expression in 9,721 tumours from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). CA20 is upregulated in cancer and associated with distinct clinical and molecular features of breast cancer, consistently with our experimental CA quantification in patient samples. Moreover, we show that CA20 upregulation is positively associated with genomic instability, alteration of specific chromosomal arms and C>T mutations, and we propose novel molecular players associated with CA in cancer. Finally, high CA20 is associated with poor prognosis and, by integrating drug sensitivity with drug perturbation profiles in cell lines, we identify candidate compounds for selectively targeting cancer cells exhibiting transcriptomic evidence for CA.

BACKGROUND: Illumina bead-based arrays are becoming increasingly popular due to their high degree of replication and reported high data quality. However, little attention has been paid to the pre-processing of Illumina data. In this paper, we present our experience of analysing the raw data from an Illumina spike-in experiment and offer guidelines for those wishing to analyse expression data or develop new methodologies for this technology. RESULTS: We find that the local background estimated by Illumina is consistently low, and subtracting this background is beneficial for detecting differential expression (DE). Illumina's summary method performs well at removing outliers, producing estimates which are less biased and are less variable than other robust summary methods. However, quality assessment on summarised data may miss spatial artefacts present in the raw data. Also, we find that the background normalisation method used in Illumina's proprietary software (BeadStudio) can cause problems with a standard DE analysis. We demonstrate that variances calculated from the raw data can be used as inverse weights in the DE analysis to improve power. Finally, variability in both expression levels and DE statistics can be attributed to differences in probe composition. These differences are not accounted for by current analysis methods and require further investigation. CONCLUSION: Analysing Illumina expression data using BeadStudio is reasonable because of the conservative estimates of summary values produced by the software. Improvements can however be made by not using background normalisation. Access to the raw data allows for a more detailed quality assessment and flexible analyses. In the case of a gene expression study, data can be analysed on an appropriate scale using established tools. Similar improvements can be expected for other Illumina assays.

MOTIVATION: Elucidating the molecular taxonomy of cancers and finding biological and clinical markers from microarray experiments is problematic due to the large number of variables being measured. Feature selection methods that can identify relevant classifiers or that can remove likely false positives prior to supervised analysis are therefore desirable. RESULTS: We present a novel feature selection procedure based on a mixture model and a non-gaussianity measure of a gene's expression profile. The method can be used to find genes that define either small outlier subgroups or major subdivisions, depending on the sign of kurtosis. The method can also be used as a filtering step, prior to supervised analysis, in order to reduce the false discovery rate. We validate our methodology using six independent datasets by rediscovering major classifiers in ER negative and ER positive breast cancer and in prostate cancer. Furthermore, our method finds two novel subtypes within the basal subgroup of ER negative breast tumours, associated with apoptotic and immune response functions respectively, and with statistically different clinical outcome. AVAILABILITY: An R-function pack that implements the methods used here has been added to vabayelMix, available from (www.cran.r-project.org). CONTACT: [email protected] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary information is available at Bioinformatics online.

MOTIVATION: Accurate subcategorization of tumour types through gene-expression profiling requires analytical techniques that estimate the number of categories or clusters rigorously and reliably. Parametric mixture modelling provides a natural setting to address this problem. RESULTS: We compare a criterion for model selection that is derived from a variational Bayesian framework with a popular alternative based on the Bayesian information criterion. Using simulated data, we show that the variational Bayesian method is more accurate in finding the true number of clusters in situations that are relevant to current and future microarray studies. We also compare the two criteria using freely available tumour microarray datasets and show that the variational Bayesian method is more sensitive to capturing biologically relevant structure.