Abstract
Whilst the use of single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) to understand target biology is well established, its predictive role in increasing the clinical success of therapeutic targets remains underexplored. Inspired by previous work on an association between genetic evidence and clinical success, we used retrospective analysis of known drug target genes to identify potential predictors of target clinical success from scRNA-seq data. We investigated whether successful drug targets are associated with cell type specific expression in a disease-relevant tissue (cell type specificity), and with cell type specific over-expression in disease patients compared to healthy controls (disease cell specificity). Analysing scRNA-seq data across diseases and tissues, we found that both cell type and disease cell specificity are features enriched in targets entering clinical development, and that cell type specificity in the disease-relevant tissue is robustly predictive of target progression from Phase I to II. While scRNA-seq analysis identifies a larger and complementary target space to that of direct genetic evidence, its association with specificity and drug approval appears less clear. We discuss how further expansion and harmonization of single-cell datasets, more sophisticated integration of this data in target discovery, and improved methods for tracking clinical trial outcomes could enhance our ability to leverage scRNA-seq insights in drug development in future.
Competing Interest Statement
ED has consulted for Ensocell Therapeutics. ET, GG, EdR are employees of Sanofi and own Sanofi stock. VS is a part-time employee of Scailyte AG. FN is a full time employee of Deerfield. RE is a co-founder and employee of Ensocell Therapeutics. SAT has consulted for or been a member of scientific advisory boards at Qiagen, Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline, OMass, Xaira and ForeSite Labs, and a non-executive director of 10x Genomics. She is a consultant and equity holder for TransitionBio and Ensocell Therapeutics, and a part-time employee of GlaxoSmithKline since January 2024.
Funding Statement
ED, KBM and SAT. acknowledge Wellcome Sanger core funding (WT206194).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
https://cellxgene.cziscience.com/collections
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵6 Current affiliation: GSK, Gunnels Wood Road, Stevenage SG1 2NFX, UK
↵7 Current affiliation: Deerfield, 345 Park Ave South, New York, NY 10010, USA
8 Current affiliation: Scailyte AG, Lichtstrasse 35, 4056 Basel, CH
↵‡ Sanofi employee at the time research was conducted
We revised the main analyses using data on target-disease clinical success from Citeline Pharmaprojects as processed and shared by Minikel et al. 2024. This includes information about which target-disease pairs are in active development, which was missing from the previous version of this study. We also included association testing for cell type specificity on a larger set of indications for which we could annotate a disease-relevant tissue. Since these revised analyses substantially changed our interpretation of the original results, some follow-up analyses present in the first version have been removed.
