1 of 102

Population scale transcriptomics for

precision oncology

Jeff Leek

VP & CDO

Professor Biostatistics Program, PHS

J Orin Edson Foundation Chair

@jtleek

1

2 of 102

www.jtleek.com

“Talks”

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

2

3 of 102

jtleek@fredhutch.org

Seeking new collaborations in

machine learning for clinical translation

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

3

4 of 102

Precision oncology:

A tour of data plumbing challenges

Jeff Leek

VP & CDO

Professor Biostatistics Program, PHS

J Orin Edson Foundation Chair

@jtleek

4

5 of 102

5

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

6 of 102

What gene expression patterns are prognostic of colorectal cancer metastasis ?

6

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

7 of 102

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25049118/

8 of 102

Q: What genes are prognostic of colorectal cancer metastasis?

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

A: This gene signature is/isn’t a potential prognostic biomarker.

8

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

9 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

10 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

Collect patient samples and information

3~6 months

11 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

Collect patient samples and information

Extract DNA/RNA from samples

Sequence samples

3~6 months

1-2 wks

2-4 wks

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

12 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

Collect patient samples and information

Extract DNA/RNA from samples

Sequence samples

Process sequencing data

33-6 months

1-3 months

1 month - 1+ years

3~6 months

1-2 wks

2-4 wks

Analyze data and answer biological question

Data cleaning

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

13 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

Collect patient samples and information

Extract DNA/RNA from samples

Sequence samples

Process sequencing data

33-6 months

1-3 months

1 month - 1+ years

3~6 months

1-2 wks

2-4 wks

Total: 2+ years

Analyze data and answer biological question

Data cleaning

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

14 of 102

15 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

15

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

16 of 102

16

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

17 of 102

17

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

18 of 102

SAMPLE SIZE

N =

18

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

19 of 102

N =

($ YOU HAVE)

($ PER SAMPLE)

19

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

20 of 102

Langmead & Nellore, Nat Rev. Genet. 2018

20

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

21 of 102

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/06/27/watsons-next-feat-taking-on-cancer/

22 of 102

23 of 102

Data sharing is improving over time

24 of 102

...but data aren’t always easy to use

Data sharing is improving over time

25 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

25

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

26 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

Collect patient samples and information

Extract DNA/RNA from samples

Sequence samples

Process sequencing data

33-6 months

1-3 months

1 month - 1+ years

~6 months

1-2 wks

2-4 wks

Total: 1.5+ years

Analyze data and answer biological question

Data cleaning

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

27 of 102

AUCAGUCGAUCACCGAU

transcription

RNA

translation

protein

ACTGACCTAGATCAGTCGATCGATCGTATACGATTACAAAATCATCGGCAT

DNA

M

M

M

slide adapted from alyssa frazee

28 of 102

AUCAGUCGAUCACCGAU

transcription

RNA

translation

protein

ACTGACCTAGATCAGTCGATCGATCGTATACGATTACAAAATCATCGGCAT

DNA

M

M

M

RNA

slide adapted from alyssa frazee

29 of 102

Genome

Transcripts

Reads

30 of 102

@22:16362385-16362561W:ENST00000440999:2:177:-40:244:S/2

CCAGCCCACCTGAGGCTTCTTTTTCCTTCCCAAGCCACATCACCATCCTGGTGGAACTCTCCTGTGAGGACAGCCA

+

GGFF<BB=>GBGIIIIIIIIIIIIIIEGEHGHHIIIIIIIIHFHBB2/:=??EGGGEGFHHIHHEDBD?@@DDHHD

@22:16362385-16362561W:ENST00000440999:3:177:-56:294:S/2

GCGTGAGCCACAGGGCCCAGCCCACCTGAGGCTTCTTTTTCCTTCCCAAGCCACATCACCATCCTGGTGGAACTCT

+

@=ABBBBIIIIIIIIHHGGGGIIDBDIIIIIIGIIIIHIIIIHFDD@BBDBGGFIDEE8DCC/29>BGFCGHHHGF

@22:16362385-16362561W:ENST00000440999:4:177:137:254:S/1

TCACCATCCTGGTGGAACTCTCCTGTGAGGACAGCCAAGGCCTGAACTACCTGCaGTGGGGAGCACCTCAGGGTTT

+

DDGBBCGGGIGGGBDDDHIIGGDGD77=BDIIIIIIIIFHHHHIIIHEFFHGGDD8A>DEGHHIFDDHH8@BEDDI

@22:16362385-16362561W:ENST00000440999:5:177:68:251:S/2

AGGGTTTGCCCAGGCAACCAGCCAGCCCTGGTCCAAGGCATCCTGGAGCGAGTTGTGGATGGCAAAAAGACNCGCC

+

HIGHIHFHEGE4111:.;8@?@HDIIIIIIIEGGIHHHIIGA?=:FIIIDD8.02506A8=AC#############

@22:16362385-16362561W:ENST00000440999:6:177:348:453:S/1

AAGGCCTGAACTACCTGCGGTGGGGAGCACCTCAGGGTTTGCCCAGGCAACCAGCCAGCCCTGGTCCAAGGCATCC

+

B9?@8=42:E@GDEDIIIIIGGHIIIFBEEAGIIDIIDHHGGHIIEGEIIIIIHIHFHFFEEFGGGGGB88>:DGH

@22:51205934-51222090C:ENST00000464740:132:612:223:359:S/2

GGAAGTATGATGCTGATGACAACGTGAAGATCATCTGCCTGGGAGACAGCGCAGTGGGCAAATCCAAACTCATGGA

+

IIEHHHHHIIIIIIIHGGDGHHEDDG8=;?==19;<<>D@@GGGIIHIIHGGDDHGBA=ABEG@@DFCCAA<:=>8

@22:51205934-51222090C:ENST00000464740:125:612:-1:185:S/1

TGGAGTGCGCTGCGGCGCGAGCTGGGCCGGCGGGCGTGGTTCGAGAGCGCGCAGAGTCCAGACTGGCGGCAGGGCC

+

HHIIIHIDGG@;=@GIIIIIDDGBBBEDB@8>5554,/':9B@@C?==@1:2@?=GG=;<HHHHGIIHHEC-;;3?

3 gb

31 of 102

32 of 102

Carefully!!

33 of 102

34 of 102

coverage vector

2

6

0

11

6

Genome

(DNA)

35 of 102

junction

counts

3

3

Genome

(DNA)

36 of 102

~71.7 mb

37 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

37

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

38 of 102

SRA

Human

RNA-seq

Illumina

≈22,000 samples

≈50,000 samples

≈60,000 samples

≈247,000 samples

39 of 102

http://rail.bio/

Slide courtesy Ben Langmead

40 of 102

http://blogs.citrix.com/2012/10/17/announcing-general-availability-of-sharefile-with-storagezones/

41 of 102

slide adapted from andrew jaffe

42 of 102

Obstacle: our research moves (spot) markets

Spike in market price due to preprocessing job flows

43 of 102

expression data for ~70,000 human samples

GTEx

N=9,962

TCGA

N=11,284

SRA

N=49,848

samples

expression estimates

gene

exon

junctions

ERs

44 of 102

< 1,000 junctions

> 20,000 junctions

45 of 102

=

46 of 102

A global view of transcript variability

Nellore et al. Genome Biology 2016

46

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

47 of 102

Re-annotating the transcriptome

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04558-8

47

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

48 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

48

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

49 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

Collect patient samples and information

Extract DNA/RNA from samples

Sequence samples

Process sequencing data

33-6 months

1-3 months

1 month - 1+ years

~6 months

1-2 wks

2-4 wks

Total: 1.5+ years

Analyze data and answer biological question

Data cleaning

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

50 of 102

What % expressed?

New genes?

Important outliers?

Prognostic signatures

Sequence data

Process/quantify

ACTACTTT

Metadata

Clean/predict

51 of 102

expression data for ~70,000 human samples

GTEx

N=9,962

TCGA

N=11,284

SRA

N=49,848

samples

expression estimates

gene

exon

junctions

ERs

Answer meaningful questions about human biology and expression

52 of 102

expression data for ~70,000 human samples

samples

phenotypes

?

GTEx

N=9,962

TCGA

N=11,284

SRA

N=49,848

samples

expression estimates

gene

exon

junctions

ERs

Answer meaningful questions about human biology and expression

53 of 102

SRA phenotype information is far from complete

Sex

Tissue

Race

Age

6620

female

liver

NA

NA

6621

female

liver

NA

NA

6622

female

liver

NA

NA

6623

female

liver

NA

NA

6624

female

liver

NA

NA

6625

male

liver

NA

NA

6626

male

liver

NA

NA

6627

male

liver

NA

NA

6628

male

liver

NA

NA

6629

male

liver

NA

NA

6630

male

liver

NA

NA

6631

NA

blood

NA

NA

6632

NA

blood

NA

NA

6633

NA

blood

NA

NA

6634

NA

blood

NA

NA

6635

NA

blood

NA

NA

6636

NA

blood

NA

NA

z

z

z

54 of 102

Even when information is provided, it’s not always clear…

Level

Frequency

F

95

female

2036

Female

51

M

77

male

1240

Male

141

Total

3640

Sex across the SRA:

55 of 102

Even when information is provided, it’s not always clear…

Level

Frequency

F

95

female

2036

Female

51

M

77

male

1240

Male

141

Total

3640

Sex across the SRA:

“1 Male, 2 Female”, “2 Male, 1 Female”, “3 Female”, “DK”, “male and female” “Male (note: ….)”, “missing”, “mixed”, “mixture”, “N/A”, “Not available”, “not applicable”, “not collected”, “not determined”, “pooled male and female”, “U”, “unknown”, “Unknown”

# of NAs

# w/sex assigned

44,957

4,700

56 of 102

57 of 102

Goal :��to accurately predict critical phenotype information for all samples in recount2

gene, exon, exon-exon junction and expressed region RNA-Seq data

SRA

Sequence Read Archive

N=49,848

TCGA

The Cancer Genome Atlas

N=11,284

GTEx

Genotype Tissue Expression Project

N=9,662

58 of 102

Missingness limited in GTEx phenotype data

level

Frequency

female

3,626

male

6,036

NA

0

Sex

Tissue

Race

Age

1

male

Lung

White

59

2

male

Brain

White

27

3

female

Heart

Black or African American

23

4

male

Brain

White

51

5

male

Skin

White

27

6

male

Lung

White

68

7

female

Brain

White

61

8

female

Adipose Tissue

White

42

9

male

Brain

White

40

10

female

Uterus

White

33

11

female

Nerve

White

60

12

male

Muscle

White

54

13

female

Ovary

White

31

14

male

Blood

White

53

15

female

Brain

White

56

16

male

Muscle

White

44

GTEx

Sex across GTEx:

59 of 102

Goal :��to accurately predict critical phenotype information for all samples in recount2

Ellis et al. Nuc. Acids Res. 2018

gene, exon, exon-exon junction and expressed region RNA-Seq data

SRA

Sequence Read Archive

N=49,848

divide samples

build and optimize phenotype predictor

predict phenotypes across SRA samples

test accuracy of predictor

TCGA

The Cancer Genome Atlas

N=11,284

GTEx

Genotype Tissue Expression Project

N=9,662

predict phenotypes across samples in TCGA

Training Data

Validation

Data

Test

Data

Validation

Data

60 of 102

61 of 102

Number of Regions

40

40

40

40

Number of Samples (N)

4,769

4,769

11,245

3,640

99.9%

Sex prediction is accurate across data sets

99.8%

99.0%

86.3%

GTEx (training)

GTEx (validation)

TCGA (test)

SRA

62 of 102

To assess misreporting of sex in the SRA, we can use Y-chromosome expression

XX

XY

reported female

reported male

predicted female

predicted male

62

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

63 of 102

Expression from the Y chromosome suggests misreporting of sex in the SRA

63

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

64 of 102

65 of 102

Ellis et al. Nuc. Acids Res. 2018

expression data for ~70,000 human samples

samples

phenotypes

GTEx

N=9,962

TCGA

N=11,284

SRA

N=49,848

samples

expression estimates

gene

exon

junctions

ERs

Answer meaningful questions about human biology and expression

sex

tissue

Cell line?

M

Blood

yes

F

Heart

no

F

Liver

no

66 of 102

What % expressed?

New genes?

Important outliers?

Sequence data

Process/quantify

Metadata

Clean/predict

ACTACTTT

Primary vs.

Metastatic

67 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

67

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

68 of 102

Find a researcher with access to patient samples

Collect patient samples and information

Extract DNA/RNA from samples

Sequence samples

Process sequencing data

3-6 months

1-3 months

1 month - 1+ years

~6 months

1-2 wks

2-4 wks

Total: 1mo - 1+years

Analyze data and answer biological question

Data cleaning

What genes are prognostic for metastasis?

69 of 102

What gene expression patterns are prognostic of colorectal cancer metastasis ?

69

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

70 of 102

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25049118/

71 of 102

Kim et al. analysis looked to identify genes that contribute to metastasis in colon cancer.

N=18

3. Liver Metastasis (MC)

1. Healthy Colon (NC)

2. Primary Cancer (PC)

72 of 102

Predictions can be used to:��(1) Identify studies of interest��(2) appropriately analyze data

NC: non-cancerous

PC: primary cancer

MC: metastatic cancer

NC: non-cancerous

PC: primary cancer

MC: metastatic cancer

Are the same genes found when sex is included in the analysis?

73 of 102

Predictions can be used to:��(1) Identify studies of interest��(2) appropriately analyze data

NC: non-cancerous

PC: primary cancer

MC: metastatic cancer

74 of 102

Concordance at the Top (CAT) Plots

How similar are the results from Analysis A and Analysis B ?

Analysis A

Analysis B

74

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

75 of 102

Concordance at the Top (CAT) Plots

How similar are the results from Analysis A and Analysis B ?

Analysis A

Analysis B

10

10

75

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

76 of 102

Concordance at the Top (CAT) Plots

How similar are the results from Analysis A and Analysis B ?

Analysis A

Analysis B

10

10

76

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

77 of 102

Concordance at the Top (CAT) Plots

How similar are the results from Analysis A and Analysis B ?

Analysis A

Analysis B

The top results from A and B are the same

Some differences at less significant genes

77

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

78 of 102

Concordance at the Top (CAT) Plots

How similar are the results from Analysis A and Analysis B ?

Analysis A

Analysis B

The results of the orange condition are less similar between Analysis A and B than the green condition

78

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

79 of 102

Predictions can be used to:��(1) Identify studies of interest��(2) appropriately analyze data

NC: non-cancerous

PC: primary cancer

MC: metastatic cancer

80 of 102

Predictions can be used to:��(1) Identify studies of interest��(2) appropriately analyze data

NC: non-cancerous

PC: primary cancer

MC: metastatic cancer

81 of 102

Predictions can be used to:��(1) Identify studies of interest��(2) appropriately analyze data

NC: non-cancerous

PC: primary cancer

MC: metastatic cancer

82 of 102

Predictions can be used to:��(1) Identify studies of interest��(2) appropriately analyze data

83 of 102

Loss of concordance suggests that differential expression is detecting tissue differences, not cancer-related changes.

84 of 102

We have expression data from both healthy liver and colon samples (GTEx)...

84

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

85 of 102

So…what if we compared the MC:PC results with differential expression between colon and liver?

Hypothesis: MC:PC results should be most similar to GTEx colon vs. liver

85

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

86 of 102

Comparison of results with GTEx colon vs. liver suggests differential expression results detecting tissue differences

86

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

87 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

87

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

88 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

Software

88

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

89 of 102

Study explorer

https://jhubiostatistics.shinyapps.io/recount3-study-explorer/

89

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

90 of 102

Bioconductor packages

recount3

snaptron

dasper

90

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

91 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

Software

Training

91

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

92 of 102

General purpose training

https://www.coursera.org/specializations/genomic-data-science#instructors

92

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

93 of 102

recount workshops

http://research.libd.org/recountWorkshop/

93

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

94 of 102

Cell specific regulation of gene expression

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-33523-2

94

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

95 of 102

Data Science Lab (DaSL)

Pronounced “Dazzle”

www.hutchdatascience.org

95

96 of 102

Data

Processing

Computing

Metadata

Analysis

Software

Training

96

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

97 of 102

DaSL Mission

The mission of the DaSL is to coordinate data activities, build community, make data easier to use, and create value for Hutch clinical and research teams with data resources, training, support, partnerships, philanthropy and infrastructure.

97

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

98 of 102

First Year DaSL Activities

Data Needs Study

Data Sharing Support

Training/Community

98

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

99 of 102

FH Data Needs Study

Comprehensive data needs study

Lead by HCI Expert

Resulting in a report of data needs

Driving resources to support needs

Sean Kross

data@fredhutch.org

99

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

100 of 102

Data Sharing Plumbing

Amy Paguirigan

data@fredhutch.org

100

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

101 of 102

fhdata.slack.com

virtual data community!

Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

101

102 of 102

Thank you