| Literature DB >> 33072067 |
Rui-Lian Chen1, Jing-Xu Zhou1, Yang Cao1, Ling-Ling Sun1, Shan Su2, Xiao-Jie Deng3, Jie-Tao Lin1, Zhi-Wei Xiao1, Zhuang-Zhong Chen1, Si-Yu Wang4, Li-Zhu Lin1.
Abstract
Background: Limited treatment strategies are available for squamous-cell lung cancer (SQLC) patients. Few studies have addressed whether immune-related genes (IRGs) or the tumor immune microenvironment can predict the prognosis for SQLC patients. Our study aimed to construct a signature predict prognosis for SQLC patients based on IRGs.Entities:
Keywords: immune cells; immune-related genes; mutation profiles; prognostic; signature; squamous-cell lung cancer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33072067 PMCID: PMC7533590 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01933
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
FIGURE 1Identification and functional enrichment analyses of differentially expressed immune-related genes in SQLC from training cohort. (A) Heatmap of differentially expressed immune-related genes. (B) Volcano plot of differentially expressed immune-related genes. (C) Gene ontology analysis. (D) The top 10 most significant Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathways.
FIGURE 2Forest plot of the multivariable Cox model of each gene in 8-IRG risk signature.
FIGURE 3Construction of an 8-IRG signature in the training cohort. (A) Kaplan-Meier curve analysis of overall survival of SQLC patients in high- and low-risk groups. (B) ROC curves analysis of 1 year. Risk score distribution (C), survival status (D), and heatmap of expression profiles (E) for patients in high- and low-risk groups by the 8-IRG signature.
FIGURE 4Validation of an 8-IRG signature in the validating cohort. (A) Kaplan-Meier curve analysis of overall survival of SQLC patients in high- and low-risk groups. (B) ROC curves analysis of 1 year. Risk score distribution (C), survival status (D), and heatmap of expression profiles (E) for patients in high- and low-risk groups by the 8-IRG signature.
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of SQLC.
| Variables | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) | Hazard ratio (95% CI) | |||
| Age (≤65 vs. >65) | 1.237 (0.908–1.686) | 0.178 | 1.285 (0.932–1.771) | 0.126 |
| Gender (male vs. female) | 0.899 (0.637–1.268) | 0.544 | 0.800(0.562–1.138) | 0.215 |
| T1 | 1 | 1 | ||
| T2 | 1.274 (0.859–1.890) | 0.229 | 1.302(0.862–1.969) | 0.210 |
| T3 | 1.972 (1.204–3.231) | 0.007 | 2.245 (1.093–4.612) | 0.028 |
| T4 | 2.491 (1.308–4.744) | 0.005 | 3.250 (1.288–8.196) | 0.013 |
| N0 | 1 | 1 | ||
| N1 | 1.205 (0.862–1.684) | 0.275 | 1.361 (0.780–2.374) | 0.278 |
| N2 | 1.405 (0.862–2.292) | 0.173 | 1.521 (0.622–3.722) | 0.358 |
| N3 | 2.987 (0.733–12.174) | 0.127 | 5.574 (1.005–30.929) | 0.049 |
| I | 1 | 1 | ||
| II | 1.235 (0.871–1.750) | 0.236 | 0.918 (0.507–1.661) | 0.777 |
| III | 1.784 (1.229–2.591) | 0.002 | 0.874 (0.330–2.315) | 0.787 |
| IV | 2.251 (0.707–7.166) | 0.170 | 1.579 (0.419–5.959) | 0.500 |
| 8-IRG risk score (low vs high) | 1.600 (1.168–2.193) | 0.003 | 1.937 (1.382–2.715) | <0.001 |
FIGURE 5(A) Bar chart of the relative proportion of the 22 immune cells in each SQLC sample. (B) The association of immune cells infiltration and the immune-related risk signature in SQLC. A red violin and a blue violin represent the 8-IRG signature high-risk and low-risk groups. The white points inside the violin represent median values. (C–F) The association of immune cells infiltration and OS in TCGA SQLC dataset. (C) Naïve B cells; (D) Resting memory CD4 T cells; (E) M2 macrophages; (F) Follicular helper T cells.
FIGURE 6The mutation profiles and TMB among low-risk and high-risk groups. Mutation profile of low-risk (A) and high-risk (B) groups. (C) The relationship between the immune-related risk signature and TMB. (D) The association of TMB and OS in TCGA SQLC dataset.