Huaide Qiu1, Yongqiang Li1, Shupeng Cheng1, Jiahui Li1, Chuan He2, Jianan Li1. 1. Center of Rehabilitation Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China. 2. Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, The Affiliated Jiangsu Shengze Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Suzhou, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the development of immunotherapies in gliomas, the tumor microenvironment (TME) needs to be investigated. We aimed to construct a prognostic microenvironment-related immune signature via ESTIMATE (PROMISE model) for glioma. METHODS: Stromal score (SS) and immune score (IS) were calculated via ESTIMATE for each glioma sample in the cancer genome atlas (TCGA), and differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified between high-score and low-score groups. Prognostic DEGs were selected via univariate Cox regression analysis. Using the lower-grcade glioma (LGG) data set in TCGA, we performed LASSO regression based on the prognostic DEGs and constructed a PROMISE model for glioma. The model was validated with survival analysis and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) in TCGA glioma data sets (LGG, glioblastoma multiforme [GBM] and LGG+GBM) and Chinese glioma genome atlas (CGGA). A nomogram was developed to predict individual survival chances. Further, we explored the underlying mechanisms using gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) and Cibersort analysis of tumor-infiltrating immune cells between risk groups as defined by the PROMISE model. RESULTS: We obtained 220 upregulated DEGs and 42 downregulated DEGs in both high-IS and high-SS groups. The Cox regression highlighted 155 prognostic DEGs, out of which we selected 4 genes (CD86, ANXA1, C5AR1, and CD5) to construct a PROMISE model. The model stratifies glioma patients in TCGA as well as in CGGA with distinct survival outcome (P<0.05, Hazard ratio [HR]>1) and acceptable predictive accuracy (AUCs>0.6). With the nomogram, an individualized survival chance could be predicted intuitively with specific age, tumor grade, Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) status, and the PROMISE risk score. ROC showed significant discrimination with the area under curves (AUCs) of 0.917 and 0.817 in TCGA and CGGA, respectively. GSEA between risk groups in both data sets were significantly enriched in multiple immune-related pathways. The Cibersort analysis highlighted four immune cells, i.e., CD 8 T cells, neutrophils, follicular helper T (Tfh) cells, and Natural killer (NK) cells. CONCLUSIONS: The PROMISE model can further stratify both LGG and GBM patients with distinct survival outcomes.These findings may help further our understanding of TME in gliomas and shed light on immunotherapies.
OBJECTIVE: In the development of immunotherapies in gliomas, the tumor microenvironment (TME) needs to be investigated. We aimed to construct a prognostic microenvironment-related immune signature via ESTIMATE (PROMISE model) for glioma. METHODS: Stromal score (SS) and immune score (IS) were calculated via ESTIMATE for each glioma sample in the cancer genome atlas (TCGA), and differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified between high-score and low-score groups. Prognostic DEGs were selected via univariate Cox regression analysis. Using the lower-grcade glioma (LGG) data set in TCGA, we performed LASSO regression based on the prognostic DEGs and constructed a PROMISE model for glioma. The model was validated with survival analysis and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) in TCGA glioma data sets (LGG, glioblastoma multiforme [GBM] and LGG+GBM) and Chinese glioma genome atlas (CGGA). A nomogram was developed to predict individual survival chances. Further, we explored the underlying mechanisms using gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) and Cibersort analysis of tumor-infiltrating immune cells between risk groups as defined by the PROMISE model. RESULTS: We obtained 220 upregulated DEGs and 42 downregulated DEGs in both high-IS and high-SS groups. The Cox regression highlighted 155 prognostic DEGs, out of which we selected 4 genes (CD86, ANXA1, C5AR1, and CD5) to construct a PROMISE model. The model stratifies glioma patients in TCGA as well as in CGGA with distinct survival outcome (P<0.05, Hazard ratio [HR]>1) and acceptable predictive accuracy (AUCs>0.6). With the nomogram, an individualized survival chance could be predicted intuitively with specific age, tumor grade, Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) status, and the PROMISE risk score. ROC showed significant discrimination with the area under curves (AUCs) of 0.917 and 0.817 in TCGA and CGGA, respectively. GSEA between risk groups in both data sets were significantly enriched in multiple immune-related pathways. The Cibersort analysis highlighted four immune cells, i.e., CD 8 T cells, neutrophils, follicular helper T (Tfh) cells, and Natural killer (NK) cells. CONCLUSIONS: The PROMISE model can further stratify both LGG and GBM patients with distinct survival outcomes.These findings may help further our understanding of TME in gliomas and shed light on immunotherapies.
Authors: Elizabeth B Claus; Kyle M Walsh; John K Wiencke; Annette M Molinaro; Joseph L Wiemels; Joellen M Schildkraut; Melissa L Bondy; Mitchel Berger; Robert Jenkins; Margaret Wrensch Journal: Neurosurg Focus Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 4.047
Authors: Joshua R Kane; Junfei Zhao; Takashi Tsujiuchi; Brice Laffleur; Víctor A Arrieta; Aayushi Mahajan; Ganesh Rao; Angeliki Mela; Crismita Dmello; Li Chen; Daniel Y Zhang; Edgar González-Buendia; Catalina Lee-Chang; Ting Xiao; Gerson Rothschild; Uttiya Basu; Craig Horbinski; Maciej S Lesniak; Amy B Heimberger; Raul Rabadan; Peter Canoll; Adam M Sonabend Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-05-19 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Hanne Locy; Sven de Mey; Wout de Mey; Mark De Ridder; Kris Thielemans; Sarah K Maenhout Journal: Front Immunol Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 7.561