Yuan Chen1, Ruiyuan Xu1, Rexiati Ruze1, Jinshou Yang1, Huanyu Wang1, Jianlu Song1, Lei You1, Chengcheng Wang2, Yupei Zhao3. 1. Department of General Surgery, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100023, People's Republic of China. 2. Department of General Surgery, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100023, People's Republic of China. wangchengcheng3638@163.com. 3. Department of General Surgery, State Key Laboratory of Complex Severe and Rare Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100023, People's Republic of China. zhao8028@263.net.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly fatal and aggressive disease with its incidence and mortality quite discouraging. An effective prediction model is urgently needed for the accurate assessment of patients' prognosis to assist clinical decision-making. METHODS: Gene expression data and clinicopathological data of the samples were acquired from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx), and Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) databases. Differential expressed genes (DEGs) analysis, univariate Cox regression analysis, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression analysis, random forest screening and multivariate Cox regression analysis were applied to construct the risk signature. The effectiveness and independence of the model were validated by time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis and survival point graph in training set, test set, TCGA entire set and GSE57495 set. The validity of the core gene was verified by immunohistochemistry and our own independent cohort. Meanwhile, functional enrichment analysis of DEGs between the high and low risk groups revealed the potential biological pathways. Finally, CMap database and drug sensitivity assay were utilized to identify potential small molecular drugs as the risk model-related treatments for PC patients. RESULTS: Four histone modification-related genes were identified to establish the risk signature, including CBX8, CENPT, DPY30 and PADI1. The predictive performance of risk signature was validated in training set, test set, TCGA entire set and GSE57495 set, with the areas under ROC curve (AUCs) for 3-year survival were 0.773, 0.729, 0.775 and 0.770 respectively. Furthermore, KM survival analysis, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis proved it as an independent prognostic factor. Mechanically, functional enrichment analysis showed that the poor prognosis of high-risk population was related to the metabolic disorders caused by inadequate insulin secretion, which was fueled by neuroendocrine aberration. Lastly, a cluster of small molecule drugs were identified with significant potentiality in treating PC patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a histone modification-related gene signature, our model can serve as a reliable prognosis assessment tool and help to optimize the treatment for PC patients. Meanwhile, a cluster of small molecule drugs were also identified with significant potentiality in treating PC patients.
BACKGROUND:Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly fatal and aggressive disease with its incidence and mortality quite discouraging. An effective prediction model is urgently needed for the accurate assessment of patients' prognosis to assist clinical decision-making. METHODS: Gene expression data and clinicopathological data of the samples were acquired from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx), and Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) databases. Differential expressed genes (DEGs) analysis, univariate Cox regression analysis, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression analysis, random forest screening and multivariate Cox regression analysis were applied to construct the risk signature. The effectiveness and independence of the model were validated by time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis and survival point graph in training set, test set, TCGA entire set and GSE57495 set. The validity of the core gene was verified by immunohistochemistry and our own independent cohort. Meanwhile, functional enrichment analysis of DEGs between the high and low risk groups revealed the potential biological pathways. Finally, CMap database and drug sensitivity assay were utilized to identify potential small molecular drugs as the risk model-related treatments for PCpatients. RESULTS: Four histone modification-related genes were identified to establish the risk signature, including CBX8, CENPT, DPY30 and PADI1. The predictive performance of risk signature was validated in training set, test set, TCGA entire set and GSE57495 set, with the areas under ROC curve (AUCs) for 3-year survival were 0.773, 0.729, 0.775 and 0.770 respectively. Furthermore, KM survival analysis, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis proved it as an independent prognostic factor. Mechanically, functional enrichment analysis showed that the poor prognosis of high-risk population was related to the metabolic disorders caused by inadequate insulin secretion, which was fueled by neuroendocrine aberration. Lastly, a cluster of small molecule drugs were identified with significant potentiality in treating PCpatients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a histone modification-related gene signature, our model can serve as a reliable prognosis assessment tool and help to optimize the treatment for PCpatients. Meanwhile, a cluster of small molecule drugs were also identified with significant potentiality in treating PCpatients.
Authors: Peter J Allen; Deborah Kuk; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Olca Basturk; Christopher L Wolfgang; John L Cameron; Keith D Lillemoe; Cristina R Ferrone; Vicente Morales-Oyarvide; Jin He; Matthew J Weiss; Ralph H Hruban; Mithat Gönen; David S Klimstra; Mari Mino-Kenudson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Romualdo Barroso-Sousa; Tanya E Keenan; Eliezer M Van Allen; Sara M Tolaney; Sonia Pernas; Pedro Exman; Esha Jain; Ana C Garrido-Castro; Melissa Hughes; Brittany Bychkovsky; Renato Umeton; Janet L Files; Neal I Lindeman; Laura E MacConaill; F Stephen Hodi; Ian E Krop; Deborah Dillon; Eric P Winer; Nikhil Wagle; Nancy U Lin; Elizabeth A Mittendorf Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Daniel C Koboldt; Karyn Meltz Steinberg; David E Larson; Richard K Wilson; Elaine R Mardis Journal: Cell Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Stijn van Roessel; Gyulnara G Kasumova; Joanne Verheij; Robert M Najarian; Laura Maggino; Matteo de Pastena; Giuseppe Malleo; Giovanni Marchegiani; Roberto Salvia; Sing Chau Ng; Susanna W de Geus; Sanne Lof; Francesco Giovinazzo; Jacob L van Dam; Tara S Kent; Olivier R Busch; Casper H van Eijck; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Mohammed Abu Hilal; Claudio Bassi; Jennifer F Tseng; Marc G Besselink Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2018-12-19 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Matthew A Reyna; David Haan; Marta Paczkowska; Lieven P C Verbeke; Miguel Vazquez; Abdullah Kahraman; Sergio Pulido-Tamayo; Jonathan Barenboim; Lina Wadi; Priyanka Dhingra; Raunak Shrestha; Gad Getz; Michael S Lawrence; Jakob Skou Pedersen; Mark A Rubin; David A Wheeler; Søren Brunak; Jose M G Izarzugaza; Ekta Khurana; Kathleen Marchal; Christian von Mering; S Cenk Sahinalp; Alfonso Valencia; Jüri Reimand; Joshua M Stuart; Benjamin J Raphael Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 14.919