| Literature DB >> 31950035 |
Hui Zhang1, Jianing Zhong2, Youbing Tu1, Benquan Liu1, Zhibo Chen3, Yunchen Luo4, Yaping Tang1, Fei Xiao1, Jincai Zhong5.
Abstract
Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) accounts for over 90% of all esophageal tumors. However, the molecular mechanism underlying ESCC development and prognosis remains unclear, and there are still no effective molecular biomarkers for diagnosing or predicting the clinical outcome of patients with ESCC. Here, using bioinformatics analyses, we attempted to identify potential biomarkers and therapeutic targets for ESCC. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between ESCC and normal esophageal tissue samples were obtained through comprehensive analysis of three publicly available gene expression profile datasets from the Gene Expression Omnibus database. The biological roles of the DEGs were identified by Gene Ontology (GO) annotation and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analysis. Moreover, the Cytoscape 3.7.1 platform and subsidiary tools such as Molecular Complex Detection (MCODE) and CytoHubba were used to visualize the protein-protein interaction (PPI) network of the DEGs and identify hub genes. A total of 345 DEGs were identified between normal esophageal and ESCC samples, which were enriched in the KEGG pathways of the cell cycle, endocytosis, pancreatic secretion, and fatty acid metabolism. Two of the highest scoring models were selected from the PPI network using Molecular Complex Detection. Moreover, CytoHubba revealed 21 hub genes with a valuable influence on the progression of ESCC in these patients. Among these, the high expression levels of five genes-SPP1, SPARC, BGN, POSTN, and COL1A2-were associated with poor disease-free survival of ESCC patients, as indicated by survival analysis. Taken together, we identified that elevated expression of five hub genes, including SPP1, is associated with poor prognosis in ESCC patients, which may serve as potential prognostic biomarkers or therapeutic target for ESCC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31950035 PMCID: PMC6948276 DOI: 10.1155/2019/2615921
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Workflow to identify molecular signature markers associated with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) from the GEO database.
Information of three GEO datasets in this study.
| Datasets | Platform | Samples (tumor/normal) |
|---|---|---|
| GSE20347 | Affymetrix human genome U133A 2.0 array | 17/17 |
| GSE23400 | Affymetrix human genome U133A array | 53/53 |
| GSE26886 | Affymetrix human genome U133 plus 2.0 array | 19/9 |
Figure 2Identification of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in ESCC. (a) A total of 345 overlapping genes were identified from the three datasets with the venn diagrams package. (b) Heat map of overlapping DEGs in ESCC and normal esophageal tissues; each column represents one sample and each row represents one gene.
Figure 3GO and KEGG pathway analyses of DEGs in ESCC. (a) BP, CC, and MF of the DEGs with GO annotation. (b) KEGG pathway enrichment analysis of the DEGs and the two modules.
Figure 4Protein-protein interaction (PPI) network and hub clustering modules. (a) The PPI network of overlapping DEGs. (b) Module 1 (MCODE score = 19.368). (c) Module 2 (MCODE score = 15.566). Red rectangles represent hub genes.
71 genes were identified by 12 differential analysis methods, and 21 genes were detached by at least 5 methods.
| Genes | Times | Genes | Times | Genes | Times | Genes | Times |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMP1 | 9 | PLAU | 5 | MCM3 | 3 | COL5A2 | 1 |
| MMP9 | 9 | SPARC | 5 | MCM7 | 3 | COL6A3 | 1 |
| COL3A1 | 8 | VCAN | 5 | SCEL | 3 | CRABP2 | 1 |
| CXCL8 | 8 | CDKN3 | 4 | THBS2 | 3 | CRCT1 | 1 |
| UBE2C | 8 | COL5A1 | 4 | TTK | 3 | CXCL1 | 1 |
| BGN | 7 | ISG15 | 4 | ANO1 | 2 | GABRP | 1 |
| MMP13 | 7 | KRT4 | 4 | CDH11 | 2 | GMPS | 1 |
| POSTN | 7 | MCM2 | 4 | CENPF | 2 | IFI44L | 1 |
| SPP1 | 7 | MCM4 | 4 | CKS1B | 2 | IFI6 | 1 |
| ITGA6 | 6 | MUC1 | 4 | COL11A1 | 2 | IRS1 | 1 |
| LUM | 6 | ASPM | 3 | CXCR2 | 2 | LCN2 | 1 |
| RFC4 | 6 | CKS2 | 3 | MCM6 | 2 | MMP12 | 1 |
| SNAI2 | 6 | DLGAP5 | 3 | SLPI | 2 | MYH11 | 1 |
| COL1A2 | 5 | DTL | 3 | TYMS | 2 | PSCA | 1 |
| COL4A1 | 5 | ERBB3 | 3 | ADH7 | 1 | PTHLH | 1 |
| ECT2 | 5 | ESPL1 | 3 | ALCAM | 1 | S100A9 | 1 |
| IGFBP3 | 5 | FANCI | 3 | ANXA1 | 1 | SAMD9 | 1 |
| MMP3 | 5 | KIF14 | 3 | CCNG2 | 1 |
Figure 5Expression of hub genes in ESCC and normal tissues from GEPIA (http://gepia.cancer-pku.cn/index.html). The expression levels of all hub genes in cancer patients were significantly higher than those in healthy controls, except for SNAI2.
Figure 6Prognostic value of five hub genes in ESCC obtained from GEPIA (http://gepia.cancer-pku.cn/index.html). High expression levels of SPP1 (a), SPARC (b), BGN (c), POSTN (d), and COL1A2 (e) were associated with poor disease-free survival.