| Literature DB >> 29785036 |
Qiang Fu1,2, Fan Yang3, Tengxiao Xiang4, Guoli Huai1,2, Xingxing Yang1,2, Liang Wei1,2, Hongji Yang5,6, Shaoping Deng7,8,9.
Abstract
Liver hepatocellular carcinoma (LIHC) is the most common type of primary liver cancer. In the current study, genome-wide miRNA-Seq and mRNA profiles in 318 LIHC patients derived from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were analysed to identify miRNA-based signatures for LIHC prognosis with survival analysis and a semi-supervised principal components (SPC) method. A seven-miRNA signature was confirmed for overall survival (OS) prediction by comparing miRNA profiles in paired primary tumour and solid tumour normal tissues. Thereafter, a linear prognostic model that consisted of seven miRNAs was established and used to divide patients into high- and low-risk groups according to prognostic scores. Subsequent Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the seven-miRNA signature correlated with a good predictive clinical outcome for 5-year survival in LIHC patients. Additionally, this miRNA-based prognostic model could also be used for OS prognosis of LIHC patients in early stages, which could guide the future therapy of those patients and promote the OS rate. Moreover, the seven-miRNA signature was an independent prognostic factor. In conclusion, this signature may serve as a prognostic biomarker and guide LIHC therapy, and it could even be used as an LIHC therapeutic target in the future.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29785036 PMCID: PMC5962561 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-26374-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Clinical covariates for the TCGA LIHC cohort in the training and testing set.
| Covariates | Total | Training set | Testing set | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N = 318 | N = 159 | N = 159 | |||
| Age (years), no (%) | <65 | 177 (55.7) | 86 (54.1) | 91 (57.2) | 0.6517 |
| ≥65 | 141 (44.3) | 73 (45.9) | 68 (42.8) | ||
| Sex, no (%) | Male | 213 (66.8) | 110 (69.2) | 103 (64.8) | 0.4039 |
| Female | 105 (33.2) | 49 (30.8) | 56 (35.2) | ||
| Vital status, no (%) | Alive | 209 (65.5) | 106 (66.7) | 103 (64.8) | 0.723 |
| Dead | 109 (34.5) | 53 (33.3) | 56 (35.2) | ||
| Stage, no (%) | I | 161 (50.5) | 82 (51.6) | 79 (49.7) | 0.8894 |
| II | 74 (23.2) | 38 (23.9) | 36 (22.6) | ||
| III | 58 (18.5) | 26 (16.4) | 32 (20.1) | ||
| IV | 5 (1.6) | 2 (1.3) | 3 (1.9) | ||
| Unknowm | 20 (6.3) | 11 (6.9) | 9 (5.7) | ||
| T stage, no (%) | T0 | 1 | 1 (0.6) | 0 (0.0) | 0.6515 |
| T1 | 169 (53.0) | 85 (53.5) | 84 (52.8) | ||
| T2 | 80 (25.1) | 38 (23.9) | 42 (26.4) | ||
| T3 | 55 (17.6) | 28 (17.6) | 27 (17.0) | ||
| T4 | 11 (3.4) | 5 (3.1) | 6 (3.8) | ||
| Tx | 2 (0.9) | 2 (1.3) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| N stage, no (%) | N0 | 222 (69.9) | 110 (69.2) | 112 (70.4) | 0.1933 |
| N1 | 3 (0.9) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (1.9) | ||
| Nx | 93 (29.2) | 49 (30.8) | 44 (29.6) | ||
| M stage, no (%) | M0 | 229 (72.1) | 114 (71.7) | 115 (72.3) | 0.8446 |
| M1 | 3 (0.9) | 2 (1.3) | 1 (0.6) | ||
| Mx | 86 (27.0) | 43 (27.0) | 43 (27.7) | ||
| Adjuvant treatment, no (%) | Ablation embolization + Pharmaceutical therapy | 5 (1.6) | 3 (1.9) | 2 (1.3) | 0.3566 |
| Pharmaceuticaltherapy | 19 (6.3) | 6 (3.8) | 13 (8.2) | ||
| Radiation + Pharmaceutical therapy | 1 (0.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.6) | ||
| Ablation embolization | 17 (6.6) | 11 (6.9) | 6 (3.8) | ||
| Radiationtherapy | 7 (2.2) | 2 (1.3) | 5 (3.1) | ||
| None | 269 (83.1) | 137 (86.2) | 132 (86.2) | ||
Figure 1Heatmap and predictor-score of seven-miRNA signature of LIHC cohort. (A) MicroRNA predictor-score distribution. (B) Heatmap of seven-miRNAs expression profiles of LIHC patients.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier and ROC curves for the seven-miRNA signature in LIHC patients. The Kaplan–Meier curves for training set (A), entire LIHC cohort (C) and in early stages (E) divided by the optimum cutoff point. Patients with high scores had the poor outcome in terms of OS (Median OS of testing set: 3258 days vs. 1153 days, P < 0.0001; Median OS of entire LIHC cohort: 2486 days vs. 1490 days, P = 0.0015; Median OS of entire LIHC cohort: 3258 days vs. 1294 days, P = 0.0014). The ROC curve for predicting 60-month survival for training set (B), entire LIHC cohort (D) and patients in early stages.
Multivariate analysis of overall survival of patients.
| Characteristic | Hazard ratio | Lower limit (95%) | Upper limit (95%) | p value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (male vs. female) | 0.977 | 0.681 | 1.404 | 0.902 |
| Age (<65 vs. ≥65 years) | 1.219 | 0.861 | 1.726 | 0.265 |
| Grade (Grade 1–2 vs 3–4) | 1.64 | 1.125 | 2.391 |
|
| T stage (T1–2 vs T3–4) | 1.953 | 1.361 | 2.802 | 0 |
| N stage (N0 vs N1–3) | 1.164 | 0.718 | 1.886 | 0.539 |
| M stage (M0 vs M1) | 2.099 | 1.307 | 3.371 |
|
| miRNA signature | 1.034 | 1.009 | 1.06 |
|
Figure 3In silico analysis of target genes, pathways. (A) There were 29 DEGs were predicted by the seven-miRNA signature. (B) Those 29 DEGs were respectively predicted and regulated by the seven miRNAs. (C) KEGG enrichment analysis results showed that those genes mainly were involved in 8 KEGG pathways (P < 0.05 after FDR adjustment), and deep color represented 18 DEGs, which were enriched and involved in those 8 KEGG pathways.
Figure 4Results of pathway analysis of the target genes. (A) In the enriched KEGG genes, 18 ones were confirmed as DEGs. (B) Heat map of the miRNA expressions of all 18 DEGs. (C) MiRNA expression of miR-187 targeted GABRP, miR-551a targeted GRIN2B and miR-9-3 targeted COL9A1.