| Literature DB >> 29534679 |
Peng Wu1,2, Jia-Li Liu3, Shi-Mei Pei2,4, Chang-Peng Wu3, Kai Yang1,2, Shu-Peng Wang1,2, Song Wu5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) account for over 80% of renal malignancies. The most common type of RCC can be classified into three subtypes including clear cell, papillary and chromophobe. ccRCC (the Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma) is the most frequent form and shows variations in genetics and behavior. To improve accuracy and personalized care and increase the cure rate of cancer, molecular typing for individuals is necessary.Entities:
Keywords: Gene expression; Molecular classification; Pathway; ccRCC
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29534679 PMCID: PMC5851245 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-018-4176-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cancer ISSN: 1471-2407 Impact factor: 4.430
Fig. 1a Consensus matrices. Both rows and columns represent samples and consensus values range from 0(never clustered together) to 1 (always clustered together) marked by white to dark blue. The cluster memberships are marked by colored rectangles. b Consensus Cumulative Distribution Function (CDF) Plot. CDF plot shows the cumulative distribution functions of the consensus matrix for each k (indicated by colors) c Delta Area Plot. This graphic shows the relative change in area under the CDF curve. In k = 3, the shape of the curve approaches the ideal step function, and shape hardly changes as we increase K past 3
Fig. 2a Kaplan-Meier Overall Survival Curves. survival plot by Kaplan-Meier method, EC1 has worse prognosis compared with the other. b The heatmap of ccRCC expression data. Using consensus clustering algorithm, samples are classified into three types. The heatmap shows that EC1 subtype has higher mortality and more patients in stage III, IV than the other groups
Mutation frequency of genes with single nucleotide variations in two groups
| Genes | EC1 | EC2–3 | All | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VHL | 42.57% | 54.41% | 0.0480 | 51.70% |
| PBRM1 | 25.74% | 35.35% | 0.0948 | 33.10% |
| MUC4 | 20.79% | 18.25% | 0.3941 | 18.82% |
| BAP1 | 19.80% | 5.89% | 4.508e-05 | 9.07% |
| SETD2 | 13.86% | 12.93% | 0.9421 | 13.15% |
Known cancer genes in the high-level copy number variation regions
| EC1 | Known cancer related genes in Region | EC2–3 | Known cancer related genes in Region | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High-level amplified events | ||||
| Cytoband | 5q35 | FGFR4/DOCK2 (9.09%) | 5q35 | FGFR4/DOCK2 (19.94%) |
| 5q32 | CD74/CSF1R (9.09%) | 5q31 | CTNNA1/NR3C1 (17.86%) | |
| 5q33 | PDGFRB/ZNF300 (9.09%) | 5q33 | PDGFRB/ZNF300 (17.86%) | |
| High-level deletion events | ||||
| Cytoband | 9p21 | CDKN2A/CDKN2B (11.11%) | 3p25 | PPARG/RAF1/VHL (15.18%) |
| 9p23 | PTPRD (7.07%) | 3p21 | PBRM1/SETD2/BAP1 (15.18%) | |
| 3p25 | PPARG/RAF1/VHL (6.06%) | 3p22 | TGFBR2/MYD88 (14.58%) | |
Clinical characteristics of subtypes
| TCGA data | GEO data | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EC1 | EC2–3 | EC1 | EC2–3 | ||||
| Age (mean ± SD) | 63.5 ± 10.9 | 60.2 ± 12.5 | 0.01168 | NA | NA | NA | |
| Gender | male | 66 | 224 | 1 | 81 | 79 | 0.04636 |
| female | 35 | 116 | 38 | 64 (3NA) | |||
| Pathological grade | Grade 1 + 2 | 20 | 174 | 4.67e-08 | 43 | 69 | 0.05186 |
| Grade 3 + 4 | 81 | 166 | 74(2NA) | 70 (7NA) | |||
| Stage | Stage I–II | 35 | 220 | 1.478e-07 | 22 | 31 | 0.09323 |
| Stage III-IV | 66 | 120 | 42 (55NA) | 30 (85NA) | |||
Fig. 3a Enrichment plot of upregulation pathways in EC1. GSEA of expression data from EC1 441 with worse prognosis, as compared to EC2–3. X-axis is the enrichment score of each gene. Y-axis represents the order of the gene in dataset. b Volcano plot of differential genes. Red color: up-regulated in EC1. blue color: down-regulated in EC1. Grey: not differential genes. Size of the bubble: mean expression of each gene C box plot of mean expression level on G1/S and G2/M gene set. EC1 is higher than EC2–3
Enrich pathways in blue module
| Blue Module | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | Genes in Gene Set (K) | Genes in Overlap (k) | k/K ratio | FDR q-value | |
| Cell adhesion molecules(CAMs) | 134 | 9 | 0.0672 | 1.06E-08 | 1.97E-06 |
| Regulation of actin cytoskeleton | 216 | 10 | 0.0463 | 5.56E-08 | 5.17E-06 |
| Chemokine signaling pathway | 190 | 9 | 0.0474 | 2.14E-07 | 1.33E-05 |
| Cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction | 267 | 10 | 0.0375 | 3.97E-07 | 1.82E-05 |
| Primary immunodeficiency | 35 | 5 | 0.1429 | 4.90E-07 | 1.82E-05 |
| Leukocyte transendothelial migration | 118 | 7 | 0.0593 | 1.10E-06 | 3.41E-05 |
| Natural killer cell mediated cytotoxicity | 137 | 7 | 0.0511 | 2.99E-06 | 7.94E-05 |
| Complement and coagulation cascades | 69 | 5 | 0.0725 | 1.50E-05 | 3.49E-04 |
| Hematopoietic cell lineage | 88 | 5 | 0.0568 | 4.88E-05 | 1.01E-03 |
| Jak-STAT signaling pathway | 155 | 6 | 0.0387 | 7.36E-05 | 1.37E-03 |
| Toll-like receptor signaling pathway | 102 | 5 | 0.049 | 9.86E-05 | 1.67E-03 |
Fig. 4a Volcano plot of differential methylation sites. Data are obtained from HM450K methylation data. β-values represent mean methylation level of CpG sites. b Kaplan meier survival plot of four genes. Red line indicates the median survival time