DNA-framework-based multidimensional molecular classifiers for cancer diagnosis
Source abstract
Abstract
A molecular classification of diseases that accurately reflects clinical behaviour lays the foundation of precision medicine. The development of in silico classifiers coupled with molecular implementation based on DNA reactions marks a key advance in more powerful molecular classification, but it nevertheless remains a challenge to process multiple molecular datatypes. Here we introduce a DNA-encoded molecular classifier that can physically implement the computational classification of multidimensional molecular clinical data. To produce unified electrochemical sensing signals across heterogeneous molecular binding events, we exploit DNA-framework-based programmable atom-like nanoparticles with n valence to develop valence-encoded signal reporters that enable linearity in translating virtually any biomolecular binding events to signal gains. Multidimensional molecular information in computational classification is thus precisely assigned weights for bioanalysis. We demonstrate the implementation of a molecular classifier based on programmable atom-like nanoparticles to perform biomarker panel screening and analyse a panel of six biomarkers across three-dimensional datatypes for a near-deterministic molecular taxonomy of prostate cancer patients.
Source: europepmc · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques · RNA and protein synthesis mechanisms · Nanopore and Nanochannel Transport Studies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Collins, F. S. & Varmus, H. A new initiative on precision medicine. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 793–795 (2015).10.1056/NEJMp1500523 ↗
2. Thomasian, N. M., Kamel, I. R. & Bai, H. X. Machine intelligence in non-invasive endocrine cancer diagnostics. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 18, 81–95 (2022).10.1038/s41574-021-00543-9 ↗
3. Vargas, A. J. & Harris, C. C. Biomarker development in the precision medicine era: lung cancer as a case study. Nat. Rev. Cancer 16, 525–537 (2016).10.1038/nrc.2016.56 ↗
4. Nassiri, F. et al. Detection and discrimination of intracranial tumors using plasma cell-free DNA methylomes. Nat. Med. 26, 1044–1047 (2020).10.1038/s41591-020-0932-2 ↗
5. Krzywinski, M. & Savig, E. Multidimensional data. Nat. Methods 10, 595 (2013).10.1038/nmeth.2531 ↗
6. Luo, Y. et al. A multidimensional precision medicine approach identifies an autism subtype characterized by dyslipidemia. Nat. Med. 26, 1375–1379 (2020).10.1038/s41591-020-1007-0 ↗
7. Larance, M. & Lamond, A. I. Multidimensional proteomics for cell biology. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 16, 269–280 (2015).10.1038/nrm3970 ↗
8. Cohen, J. D. et al. Detection and localization of surgically resectable cancers with a multi-analyte blood test. Science 359, 926–930 (2018).10.1126/science.aar3247 ↗
9. Berger, B., Peng, J. & Singh, M. Computational solutions for omics data. Nat. Rev. Genet. 14, 333–346 (2013).10.1038/nrg3433 ↗
10. Crichton, D. J. et al. Cancer biomarkers and big data: a planetary science approach. Cancer Cell 38, 757–760 (2020).10.1016/j.ccell.2020.09.006 ↗
11. Liang, H. et al. Evaluation and accurate diagnoses of pediatric diseases using artificial intelligence. Nat. Med. 25, 433–438 (2019).10.1038/s41591-018-0335-9 ↗
12. Kristensen, V. N. et al. Principles and methods of integrative genomic analyses in cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 14, 299–313 (2014).10.1038/nrc3721 ↗
13. Komori, T. The 2021 WHO classification of tumors, 5th edition, central nervous system tumors: the 10 basic principles. Brain Tumor Pathol. 39, 47–50 (2022).10.1007/s10014-022-00428-3 ↗
14. Blanc, T., El Beheiry, M., Caporal, C., Masson, J. B. & Hajj, B. Genuage: visualize and analyze multidimensional single-molecule point cloud data in virtual reality. Nat. Methods 17, 1100–1102 (2020).10.1038/s41592-020-0946-1 ↗
15. Adamcova, M. & Šimko, F. Multiplex biomarker approach to cardiovascular diseases. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 39, 1068–1072 (2018).10.1038/aps.2018.29 ↗
16. Subramanian, I., Verma, S., Kumar, S., Jere, A. & Anamika, K. Multi-omics data integration, interpretation, and its application. Bioinf. Biol. Insights https://doi.org/10.1177/1177932219899051 (2020).10.1177/1177932219899051 ↗
17. Montaner, J. et al. Multilevel omics for the discovery of biomarkers and therapeutic targets for stroke. Nat. Rev. Neurol. 16, 247–264 (2020).10.1038/s41582-020-0350-6 ↗
18. Tarazona, S., Arzalluz-Luque, A. & Conesa, A. Undisclosed, unmet and neglected challenges in multi-omics studies. Nat. Comput. Sci. 1, 395–402 (2021).10.1038/s43588-021-00086-z ↗
19. Tarazona, S. et al. Harmonization of quality metrics and power calculation in multi-omic studies. Nat. Commun. 11, 3092 (2020).10.1038/s41467-020-16937-8 ↗
20. Lopez de Maturana, E. et al. Challenges in the integration of omics and non-omics data. Genes 10, 238 (2019).10.3390/genes10030238 ↗
21. Benenson, Y., Gil, B., Ben-Dor, U., Adar, R. & Shapiro, E. An autonomous molecular computer for logical control of gene expression. Nature 429, 423–429 (2004).10.1038/nature02551 ↗
22. Seelig, G., Soloveichik, D., Zhang, D. Y. & Winfree, E. Enzyme-free nucleic acid logic circuits. Science 314, 1585–1588 (2006).10.1126/science.1132493 ↗
23. Lopez, R., Wang, R. & Seelig, G. A molecular multi-gene classifier for disease diagnostics. Nat. Chem. 10, 746–754 (2018).10.1038/s41557-018-0056-1 ↗
24. Zhang, C. et al. Cancer diagnosis with DNA molecular computation. Nat. Nanotechnol. 15, 709–715 (2020).10.1038/s41565-020-0699-0 ↗
25. Yao, G. et al. Meta-DNA structures. Nat. Chem. 12, 1067–1075 (2020).10.1038/s41557-020-0539-8 ↗
26. Yao, G. et al. Programming nanoparticle valence bonds with single-stranded DNA encoders. Nat. Mater. 19, 781–788 (2020).10.1038/s41563-019-0549-3 ↗
27. Li, J. et al. Encoding quantized fluorescence states with fractal DNA frameworks. Nat. Commun. 11, 2185 (2020).
28. Wiraja, C. et al. Framework nucleic acids as programmable carrier for transdermal drug delivery. Nat. Commun. 10, 1147 (2019).10.1038/s41467-019-09029-9 ↗
29. Zhang, T. et al. Design, fabrication and applications of tetrahedral DNA nanostructure-based multifunctional complexes in drug delivery and biomedical treatment. Nat. Protoc. 15, 2728–2757 (2020).10.1038/s41596-020-0355-z ↗
30. Song, P. et al. Programming bulk enzyme heterojunctions for biosensor development with tetrahedral DNA framework. Nat. Commun. 11, 838 (2020).
31. Lin, M. et al. Programmable engineering of a biosensing interface with tetrahedral DNA nanostructures for ultrasensitive DNA detection. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 54, 2151–2155 (2015).10.1002/anie.201410720 ↗
32. Woehrstein, J. B. et al. 100-nm metafluorophores with digitally tunable optical properties self-assembled from DNA. Sci. Adv. 3, e1602128 (2017).10.1126/sciadv.1602128 ↗
33. Ulbrich, M. H. & Isacoff, E. Y. Subunit counting in membrane-bound proteins. Nat. Methods 4, 319–321 (2007).10.1038/nmeth1024 ↗
34. Hearty, S., Leonard, P. & O’Kennedy, R. Barcodes check out prostate cancer. Nat. Nanotechnol. 5, 9–10 (2010).10.1038/nnano.2009.459 ↗
35. Hill, H. D. & Mirkin, C. A. The bio-barcode assay for the detection of protein and nucleic acid targets using DTT-induced ligand exchange. Nat. Protoc. 1, 324–336 (2006).10.1038/nprot.2006.51 ↗
36. Nam, J.-M., Thaxton, C. S. & Mirkin, C. A. Nanoparticle-based bio-bar codes for the ultrasensitive detection of proteins. Science 301, 1884–1886 (2003).10.1126/science.1088755 ↗
37. Zebda, A. et al. Mediatorless high-power glucose biofuel cells based on compressed carbon nanotube-enzyme electrodes. Nat. Commun. 2, 370 (2011).10.1038/ncomms1365 ↗
38. de Jong, O. G. et al. A CRISPR-Cas9-based reporter system for single-cell detection of extracellular vesicle-mediated functional transfer of RNA. Nat. Commun. 11, 1113 (2020).
39. Zhao, Z. et al. Nanocaged enzymes with enhanced catalytic activity and increased stability against protease digestion. Nat. Commun. 7, 10619 (2016).
40. He, L. et al. Transducing complex biomolecular interactions by temperature-output artificial DNA signaling networks. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 14234–14239 (2020).10.1021/jacs.0c05453 ↗
41. Li, H., Brouwer, C. R. & Luo, W. A universal deep neural network for in-depth cleaning of single-cell RNA-Seq data. Nat. Commun. 13, 1901 (2022).
42. Lin, M. et al. Electrochemical detection of nucleic acids, proteins, small molecules and cells using a DNA-nanostructure-based universal biosensing platform. Nat. Protoc. 11, 1244–1263 (2016).10.1038/nprot.2016.071 ↗
43. Gorog, D. A. et al. Current and novel biomarkers of thrombotic risk in COVID-19: a Consensus Statement from the International COVID-19 Thrombosis Biomarkers Colloquium. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. 19, 475–495 (2022).10.1038/s41569-021-00665-7 ↗
44. Schwarzenbach, H., Hoon, D. S. B. & Pantel, K. Cell-free nucleic acids as biomarkers in cancer patients. Nat. Rev. Cancer 11, 426–437 (2011).10.1038/nrc3066 ↗
45. Xiao, B. et al. Plasma microRNA panel is a novel biomarker for focal segmental glomerulosclerosis and associated with podocyte apoptosis. Cell Death Dis. 9, 533 (2018).
46. Bhanvadia, R. R. et al. MEIS1 and MEIS2 expression and prostate cancer progression: a role for HOXB13 binding partners in metastatic disease. Clin. Cancer Res. 24, 3668–3680 (2018).10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-3673 ↗
47. Kumar, D., Gupta, A., Mandhani, A. & Sankhwar, S. N. Metabolomics-derived prostate cancer biomarkers: fact or fiction? J. Proteome Res. 14, 1455–1464 (2015).10.1021/pr5011108 ↗
48. Rajakumar, T. et al. A blood-based miRNA signature with prognostic value for overall survival in advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer treated with immunotherapy. npj Precis. Oncol. 6, 19 (2022).10.1038/s41698-022-00262-y ↗
49. Nassiri, F. et al. A clinically applicable integrative molecular classification of meningiomas. Nature 597, 119–125 (2021).10.1038/s41586-021-03850-3 ↗
50. Li, F. et al. Ultrafast DNA sensors with DNA framework-bridged hybridization reactions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 9975–9981 (2020).10.1021/jacs.9b13737 ↗