Systems Cytogenomics: Are We Ready Yet?

The Spiral Model of Evolution: Stable Life Forms of Organisms and Unstable Life Forms of Cancers

If one must prioritize among the vast array of contributing factors to cancer evolution, environmental-stress-mediated chromosome instability (CIN) should easily surpass individual gene mutations. CIN leads to the emergence of genomically unstable life forms, enabling them to grow dominantly within the stable life form of the host. In contrast, stochastic gene mutations play a role in aiding the growth of the cancer population, with their importance depending on the initial emergence of the new system. Furthermore, many specific gene mutations among the many available can perform this function, decreasing the clinical value of any specific gene mutation. Since these unstable life forms can respond to treatment differently than stable ones, cancer often escapes from drug treatment by forming new systems, which leads to problems during the treatment for patients. To understand how diverse factors impact CIN-mediated macroevolution and genome integrity-ensured microevolution, the concept of two-phased cancer evolution is used to reconcile some major characteristics of cancer, such as bioenergetic, unicellular, and multicellular evolution. Specifically, the spiral of life function model is proposed, which integrates major historical evolutionary innovations and conservation with information management. Unlike normal organismal evolution in the microevolutionary phase, where a given species occupies a specific location within the spiral, cancer populations are highly heterogenous at multiple levels, including epigenetic levels. Individual cells occupy different levels and positions within the spiral, leading to supersystems of mixed cellular populations that exhibit both macro and microevolution. This analysis, utilizing karyotype to define the genetic networks of the cellular system and CIN to determine the instability of the system, as well as considering gene mutation and epigenetics as modifiers of the system for information amplification and usage, explores the high evolutionary potential of cancer. It provides a new, unified understanding of cancer as a supersystem, encouraging efforts to leverage the dynamics of CIN to develop improved treatment options. Moreover, it offers a historically contingent model for organismal evolution that reconciles the roles of both evolutionary innovation and conservation through macroevolution and microevolution, respectively.

A Paradoxical Role for Somatic Chromosomal Mosaicism and Chromosome Instability in Cancer: Theoretical and Technological Aspects

Somatic chromosomal mosaicism, chromosome instability, and cancer are intimately linked together. Addressing the role of somatic genome variations (encompassing chromosomal mosaicism and instability) in cancer yields paradoxical results. Firstly, somatic mosaicism for specific chromosomal rearrangement causes cancer per se. Secondly, chromosomal mosaicism and instability are associated with a variety of diseases (chromosomal disorders demonstrating less severe phenotypes, complex diseases), which exhibit cancer predisposition. Chromosome instability syndromes may be considered the best examples of these diseases. Thirdly, chromosomal mosaicism and instability are able to result not only in cancerous diseases but also in non-cancerous disorders (brain diseases, autoimmune diseases, etc.). Currently, the molecular basis for these three outcomes of somatic chromosomal mosaicism and chromosome instability remains incompletely understood. Here, we address possible mechanisms for the aforementioned scenarios using a system analysis model. A number of theoretical models based on studies dedicated to chromosomal mosaicism and chromosome instability seem to be valuable for disentangling and understanding molecular pathways to cancer-causing genome chaos. In addition, technological aspects of uncovering causes and consequences of somatic chromosomal mosaicism and chromosome instability are discussed. In total, molecular cytogenetics, cytogenomics, and system analysis are likely to form a powerful technological alliance for successful research against cancer.

The New Era of Cancer Cytogenetics and Cytogenomics

The promises of the cancer genome sequencing project, combined with various -omics technologies, have raised questions about the importance of cancer cytogenetic analyses. It is suggested that DNA sequencing provides high resolution, speed, and automation, potentially replacing cytogenetic testing. We disagree with this reductionist prediction. On the contrary, various sequencing projects have unexpectedly challenged gene theory and highlighted the importance of the genome or karyotype in organizing gene network interactions. Consequently, profiling the karyotype can be more meaningful than solely profiling gene mutations, especially in cancer where karyotype alterations mediate cellular macroevolution dominance. In this chapter, recent studies that illustrate the ultimate importance of karyotype in cancer genomics and evolution are briefly reviewed. In particular, the long-ignored non-clonal chromosome aberrations or NCCAs are linked to genome or chromosome instability, genome chaos is linked to genome reorganization under cellular crisis, and the two-phased cancer evolution reconciles the relationship between genome alteration-mediated punctuated macroevolution and gene mutation-mediated stepwise microevolution. By further synthesizing, the concept of karyotype coding is discussed in the context of information management. Altogether, we call for a new era of cancer cytogenetics and cytogenomics, where an array of technical frontiers can be explored further, which is crucial for both basic research and clinical implications in the cancer field.

Tracking Karyotype Changes in Treatment-Induced Drug-Resistant Evolution

Karyotype coding, which encompasses the complete chromosome sets and their topological genomic relationships within a given species, encodes system-level information that organizes and preserves genes' function, and determines the macroevolution of cancer. This new recognition emphasizes the crucial role of karyotype characterization in cancer research. To advance this cancer cytogenetic/cytogenomic concept and its platforms, this study outlines protocols for monitoring the karyotype landscape during treatment-induced rapid drug resistance in cancer. It emphasizes four key perspectives: combinational analyses of phenotype and karyotype, a focus on the entire evolutionary process through longitudinal analysis, a comparison of whole landscape dynamics by including various types of NCCAs (including genome chaos), and the use of the same process to prioritize different genomic scales. This protocol holds promise for studying numerous evolutionary aspects of cancers, and it further enhances the power of karyotype analysis in cancer research.

Cytogenomic epileptology

Molecular cytogenetic and cytogenomic studies have made a contribution to genetics of epilepsy. However, current genomic research of this devastative condition is generally focused on the molecular genetic aspects (i.e. gene hunting, detecting mutations in known epilepsy-associated genes, searching monogenic causes of epilepsy). Nonetheless, chromosomal abnormalities and copy number variants (CNVs) represent an important part of genetic defects causing epilepsy. Moreover, somatic chromosomal mosaicism and genome/chromosome instability seem to be a possible mechanism for a wide spectrum of epileptic conditions. This idea becomes even more attracting taking into account the potential of molecular neurocytogenetic (neurocytogenomic) studies of the epileptic brain. Unfortunately, analyses of chromosome numbers and structure in the affected brain or epileptogenic brain foci are rarely performed. Therefore, one may conclude that cytogenomic area of genomic epileptology is poorly researched. Accordingly, molecular cytogenetic and cytogenomic studies of the clinical cohorts and molecular neurocytogenetic analyses of the epileptic brain appear to be required. Here, we have performed a theoretical analysis to define the targets of the aforementioned studies and to highlight future directions for molecular cytogenetic and cytogenomic research of epileptic disorders in the widest sense. To succeed, we have formed a consortium, which is planned to perform at least a part of suggested research. Taking into account the nature of the communication, "cytogenomic epileptology" has been introduced to cover the research efforts in this field of medical genomics and epileptology. Additionally, initial results of studying cytogenomic variations in the Russian neurodevelopmental cohort are reviewed with special attention to epilepsy. In total, we have concluded that (i) epilepsy-associated cytogenomic variations require more profound research; (ii) ontological analyses of epilepsy genes affected by chromosomal rearrangements and/or CNVs with unraveling pathways implicating epilepsy-associated genes are beneficial for epileptology; (iii) molecular neurocytogenetic (neurocytogenomic) analysis of postoperative samples are warranted in patients suffering from epileptic disorders.

Somatic mosaicism in the diseased brain

It is hard to believe that all the cells of a human brain share identical genomes. Indeed, single cell genetic studies have demonstrated intercellular genomic variability in the normal and diseased brain. Moreover, there is a growing amount of evidence on the contribution of somatic mosaicism (the presence of genetically different cell populations in the same individual/tissue) to the etiology of brain diseases. However, brain-specific genomic variations are generally overlooked during the research of genetic defects associated with a brain disease. Accordingly, a review of brain-specific somatic mosaicism in disease context seems to be required. Here, we overview gene mutations, copy number variations and chromosome abnormalities (aneuploidy, deletions, duplications and supernumerary rearranged chromosomes) detected in the neural/neuronal cells of the diseased brain. Additionally, chromosome instability in non-cancerous brain diseases is addressed. Finally, theoretical analysis of possible mechanisms for neurodevelopmental and neurodegenerative disorders indicates that a genetic background for formation of somatic (chromosomal) mosaicism in the brain is likely to exist. In total, somatic mosaicism affecting the central nervous system seems to be a mechanism of brain diseases.