| Literature DB >> 33794777 |
Sheng Zheng1,2, Zizhen Zhang1,2, Ning Ding1,2, Jiawei Sun1,2, Yifeng Lin1,2, Jingyu Chen1,2, Jing Zhong1,2, Liming Shao1, Zhenghua Lin1,2, Meng Xue3,4.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Angiogenesis is a key factor in promoting tumor growth, invasion and metastasis. In this study we aimed to investigate the prognostic value of angiogenesis-related genes (ARGs) in gastric cancer (GC).Entities:
Keywords: Angiogenesis; Gastric cancer; Gene; Prognostic
Year: 2021 PMID: 33794777 PMCID: PMC8017607 DOI: 10.1186/s12876-021-01734-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Gastroenterol ISSN: 1471-230X Impact factor: 3.067
Fig. 1Differentially expressed ARGs between GC and normal gastric tissues. a The heatmap for the 338 ARGs from TCGA-STAD cohort; b volcano plot for screened ARGs
Fig. 2Functional enrichment analysis of differentially expressed ARGs. a Significantly enriched gene ontology (GO) terms of differentially expressed ARGs based on biological processes. b Significantly enriched of differentially expressed ARGs in GO terms based on cellular components and molecular functions. c The heatmap shows the LogFC values enriched by ARGs genes in different KEGG pathways. d Significantly enriched KEGG pathways of differentially expressed ARGs by Volcano
Fig. 3PPI network and module analysis. a The PPI network of all the differentially expressed ARGs visualized by Cytoscape. b Critical module 1 in PPI network. c Critical module 2 in PPI network
Fig. 4Establishment of ARGs prognostic model related to the prognosis of GC by lasso regression model. a LASSO coefficient profiles of the 18 ARGs. b A coefficient profile plot was generated against the log (lambda) sequence. c Univariate COX regression analysis for RS of GC patients in TCGA database. d Multivariate Cox regression analysis for RS of GC cancer patients in TCGA datasets
Fig. 5Development of RS based on the 9 ARGs signature of patients with GC in TCGA and GEO. a, b The RS distribution, vital status of patients and heatmap of the 9 ARGs expression profiles between high risk group and low risk group in training or validation group. c, e Kaplan–Meier analysis of the prognostic model in TCGA or GEO datasets. d, f Time-dependent ROC analysis showing the optimal AUC of the gene signature in the two cohorts
Fig. 6Stratified analysis of the relationship between RS score and survival rate of patients with gastric cancer in TCGA cohorts. a Age > 65 years and age ≤ 65 years. b female sex and male sex. c G1-2 and G3. d Stage I&II and stage II&III. e NO stage and N1-3 stage. (f) M0 stage and M1 stage
Fig. 7Nomogram for predicting of 1-, 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) based on the nine ARGs signature. a A nomogram based on the risk scores, clinical stage and age of GC patients. b ROC analysis of the nomogram for predicting the 1-, 3- and 5-year OS. c Calibration curves of nomogram for survival prediction at 1-, 3- and 5-year