| Literature DB >> 34077304 |
Rui-Ji Liu1,2, Shu-Ying- Li3, Li-Quan Liu4, Bin Xu1,2, Ming Chen1,2,5.
Abstract
Docetaxel has been proved to provide survival benefit for advanced prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Resistance to docetaxel further reduces the survival of these patients. Herein, we performed a comprehensive bioinformatic analysis to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between docetaxel sensitive and resistant PCa (DRPC) cell based on Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) analyses were applied for functional and pathway analysis of DEGs. The STRING database, cytoscape software and plug-in 'cytoHubba' were used to construct protein-protein interaction (PPI) networks and identify hub genes. Survival analysis were performed via GEPIA database. Finally, we conducted immune infiltration analysis by TIMER. A total of 460 DEGs were identified. GO functional analysis showed that these DEGs are mainly enriched in chemotaxis, negative regulation of intracellular signal transduction, and regulation of cell adhesion, positive regulation of inflammatory response, regulation of response to cytokine stimulus. According to the results of KEGG pathway analysis, these DEGs are mainly involved in signaling by Rho GTPases, Miro GTPases and RHOBTB3; interferon Signaling; arginine biosynthesis; PI3K-Akt signaling pathway; cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction; MAPK signaling pathway. Finally, CCNB1 and EZH2 were identified as prognostic hub genes and the expression of these two genes were associated with immune infiltration. The present study may helps to improve the understanding of the molecular mechanisms of DRPC and facilitate the selection of therapeutic and prognostic biomarkers for DRPC.Entities:
Keywords: CRPC; GEO; docetaxel resistance; prognosis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34077304 PMCID: PMC8806863 DOI: 10.1080/21655979.2021.1936831
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Bioengineered ISSN: 2165-5979 Impact factor: 3.269
The detailed information of the two datasets
| Dataset | Number of samples | Array types | Cell lines |
|---|---|---|---|
| (Sensitive/Resistant) | |||
| GSE33455 [ | 6-Jun | GPL570 platform (Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array) | PC3, Du145 |
| GSE36135 [ | 6-Jun | GPL570 platform (Affymetrix Human Genome U133 Plus 2.0 Array) and GPL571 platform (Affymetrix Human Genome U133A 2.0 Array) | 22 Rv1, Du145 |
Figure 1.Volcano plot distribution and heatmap of the DEGs. (a) Volcano plot of GSE33455 and GSE36135. The red points indicate upregulated DEGs, the blue points indicate downregulated DEGs, and the gray points indicate DEGs with no significant difference in expression; (b) DEG heatmap of GSE33455 and GSE36135. From red to green, the expression level of the genes in the samples gradually decreases. All DEGs are screened based on adj. P value < 0.05, |log2 FC | > 1. (DEGs, differentially expressed genes; S, docetaxel-sensitive; R, docetaxel-resistant)
Figure 2.Functional enrichment analysis of DEGs
Figure 3.(a) Protein-Protein Interaction (PPI) network of differentially expressed genes (DEGs); (b) hub gene network construction using ‘cytoHubba.’
Figure 4.(a) Gene expression of the 10 hub genes between tumor and normal tissues; (b) Disease-free survival (DFS) analysis of the hub genes (P < 0.05)
Figure 5.Immunohistochemical analyses confirmed the differential expression of (a) CCNB1 and (b) EZH2.
Figure 6.The relationship between immune cell infiltration and altered gene copy numbers of (a) CCNB1 and (c) EZH2; the association between immune cell infiltration level and gene expression of (b) CCNB1 and (d) EZH2 (P < 0.05)