| Literature DB >> 33815468 |
Xiao-Yu Guo1, Sheng Zhong1, Zhen-Ning Wang1, Tian Xie1, Hao Duan1, Jia-Yu Zhang2, Guan-Hua Zhang3, Lun Liang1, Run Cui1, Hong-Rong Hu1, Jie Lu1, Yi Wu4, Jia-Jun Dong4, Zhen-Qiang He1, Yong-Gao Mou1.
Abstract
Enhancer RNAs, a type of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), play a critical role in the occurrence and development of glioma. RNA-seq data from 161 glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) samples were acquired from The Cancer Genome Atlas database. Then, 70 eRNAs were identified as prognosis-related genes, which had significant relations with overall survival (log-rank test, p < 0.05). AC003092.1 was demonstrated as an immune-related eRNA by functional enrichment analysis. We divided samples into two groups based on AC003092.1 expression: AC003092.1 High (AC003092.1_H) and AC003092.1 Low (AC003092.1_L) and systematically analyzed the influence of AC003092.1 on the immune microenvironment by single-sample gene-set enrichment analysis and CIBERSORTx. We quantified AC003092.1 and TFPI2 levels in 11 high-grade gliomas, 5 low-grade gliomas, and 7 GBM cell lines. Our study indicates that AC003092.1 is related to glioma-immunosuppressive microenvironment, and these results offer innovative sights into GBM immune therapy.Entities:
Keywords: AC003092.1; TFPI2; eRNA; glioblastoma multiforme; immunogenomic; lncRNA
Year: 2021 PMID: 33815468 PMCID: PMC8012670 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2021.633812
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Genet ISSN: 1664-8021 Impact factor: 4.599
FIGURE 1Data analysis workflow.
List of eRNAs-target gene pairs with significant correlation.
| Ensembl ID | Symbol | Predicted target | Correlation between | |
| eRNA and target gene | ||||
| Correlation coefficient | ||||
| ENSG00000224081 | 0.71047562 | 0 | ||
| 0.55370945 | 0 | |||
| 0.44193984 | 6.39E-09 | |||
| ENSG00000230461 | 0.51493846 | 0 | ||
| ENSG00000186056 | 0.47032724 | 4.58E-10 | ||
| ENSG00000230402 | 0.4614477 | 7.24E-10 | ||
| ENSG00000237980 | 0.53947507 | 1.54E-13 | ||
| ENSG00000232973 | 0.60617955 | 0 | ||
| ENSG00000249307 | 0.43993559 | 7.60E-09 | ||
| 0.72891919 | 5.89E-28 | |||
| ENSG00000249896 | 0.85887401 | 4.62E-48 | ||
| 0.47094143 | 2.89E-10 | |||
| ENSG00000232021 | 0.5998476 | 0 | ||
| ENSG00000231185 | 0.52109788 | 0 | ||
| ENSG00000248859 | 0.49949671 | 1.53E-11 | ||
| 0.45996451 | 8.34E-10 | |||
| ENSG00000237742 | 0.4490942 | 3.41E-09 | ||
| ENSG00000232618 | 0.49455303 | 2.60E-11 | ||
| ENSG00000136213 | 0.54750115 | 0 | ||
| ENSG00000232930 | 0.59304633 | 1.14E-16 | ||
| ENSG00000236453 | 0.59621591 | 7.16E-17 | ||
| ENSG00000253824 | 0.45265526 | 1.65E-09 | ||
| ENSG00000236924 | 0.58796584 | 0 | ||
| ENSG00000254605 | 0.542206 | 1.10E-13 | ||
| ENSG00000255521 | 0.6796834 | 3.67E-23 | ||
| ENSG00000254810 | 0.73750898 | 6.67E-29 | ||
| ENSG00000228630 | 0.83311395 | 9.65E-43 | ||
| 0.91198659 | 2.04E-63 | |||
| 0.82528477 | 2.65E-41 | |||
| 0.67094596 | 2.08E-22 | |||
| ENSG00000251151 | 0.80140219 | 2.54E-37 | ||
| 0.82631259 | 1.73E-41 | |||
| 0.7446111 | 1.03E-29 | |||
| 0.74653909 | 6.16E-30 | |||
| ENSG00000245694 | 0.73179779 | 0 | ||
| ENSG00000232677 | 0.5952841 | 0 | ||
| 0.47718254 | 2.23E-10 | |||
| 0.4823729 | 1.25E-10 | |||
| 0.72020646 | 0 | |||
| ENSG00000213742 | 0.40530826 | 1.26E-07 | ||
| ENSG00000230736 | 0.45212332 | 7.65E-10 | ||
| ENSG00000228274 | 0.4013285 | 1.71E-07 | ||
FIGURE 2Effect of lncRNA AC003092.1, as an immune-related gene, in GBM. (A) Heatmap of enriched terms across input gene lists, colored by p values. (B) Enriched terms colored by cluster ID, where nodes that share the same cluster ID are typically close to each other in AC003092.1-related genes. (C) Enriched terms colored by p value, where terms containing more genes tend to have a more significant p value in AC003092.1-related genes. (D) Scatterplot showing the correlation between AC003092.1 and TFPI2 levels. (E) Comparison of overall survival between AC003092.1_H and AC003092.1_L by log-rank test.
FIGURE 3Immunogenomic analysis of AC003092.1_H and AC003092.1_L from TCGA. (A) The enrichment levels of the 29 immune signatures by ssGSEA score in each GBM sample. (B) Comparison of immune checkpoint gene expression levels between AC003092.1_H and AC003092.1_L (ANOVA test). (C) Comparison of the immune score, stromal score, ESTIMATE score, and tumor purity between AC003092.1_H and AC003092.1_L (Kruskal–Wallis test). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
FIGURE 4The landscape of infiltrating immune cells in AC003092.1_H and AC003092.1_L. (A) The bar plot of immune infiltration between AC003092.1_L and AC003092.1_H. (B) Comparison of the immune cell proportion between AC003092.1_H and AC003092.1_L by CIBERSORTx (Mann–Whitney U test).
FIGURE 5Validation of AC003092.1 and TFPI2 levels by RT-qPCR. Scatterplot showing correlation between AC003092.1 and TFPI2 levels in HGG (A), GBM cell lines (B), LGG (C), and patients with LGG in TCGA (D).