| Literature DB >> 34185683 |
Jian-Ying Ma1, Qin Liu2, Gang Liu2, Shasha Peng3, Gaosong Wu1.
Abstract
Despite a relatively low mortality rate, high recurrence rates represent a significant problem for breast cancer (BC) patients. Autophagy affects the development, progression, and prognosis of various cancers, including BC. The aim of the present study was to identify candidate autophagy-related genes (ARGs) and construct a molecular-clinicopathological signature to predict recurrence risk in BC. A 10-ARG-based signature was established in a training cohort (GEO-BC dataset GSE25066) with LASSO Cox regression and assessed in an independent validation cohort (GEO-BC GSE22219). Significant differences in recurrence-free survival were observed for high- and low-risk patients segregated based on their signature-based risk score. Time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (tdROC) analysis of signature performance demonstrated satisfactory accuracy and predictive power in both the training and validation cohorts. Moreover, we developed a nomogram to predict 3- and 5-year recurrence-free survival by combining the autophagy-related risk score and clinicopathological data. Both the tdROC and calibration curves indicated high discriminating ability for the nomogram. This study indicates that our ARG-based signature is an independent prognostic classifier for recurrence-free survival in BC. In addition, individualized survival risk assessment and treatment decisions might be effectively improved by implementing the proposed nomogram.Entities:
Keywords: GEO; autophagy; breast cancer; risk
Year: 2021 PMID: 34185683 PMCID: PMC8266368 DOI: 10.18632/aging.203187
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Aging (Albany NY) ISSN: 1945-4589 Impact factor: 5.682
Figure 1Study workflow and parameter selection. (A) Workflow of the construction and validation of the signature. (B) Ten-time cross-validation for tuning parameter selection in the LASSO Cox regression model. (C) Coefficient profiles of 18 autophagy genes.
Baseline characteristics of study patients.
| No. of patients | 303 | 216 |
| Age (years) | 49 (26–75) | 55 (26–80) |
| ER status | ||
| Negative | 131 (43.2) | / |
| Positive | 172 (56.8) | / |
| PR status | ||
| Negative | 162 (53.5) | 82 (38.0) |
| Positive | 141 (46.5) | 134 (62.0) |
| HER2 status | ||
| Negative | 389 (95.4) | / |
| Positive | 3 (1.00) | / |
| Unknown | 11 (3.6) | / |
| Grade | ||
| I | 19 (6.3) | 41 (19.0) |
| II | 114 (37.6) | 87 (40.3) |
| III | 149 (49.2) | 63 (29.2) |
| Unknown | 21 (6.9) | 25 (11.5) |
| T stage | ||
| T1 | 22 (7.3) | / |
| T2 | 162 (53.5) | / |
| T3 | 71 (23.4) | / |
| T4 | 48 (15.8) | / |
| N stage | ||
| N0 | 86 (28.4) | / |
| N1 | 149 (49.1) | / |
| N2 | 38 (12.5) | / |
| N3 | 30 (1.0) | / |
| Stage | ||
| I | 9 (3.0) | / |
| II | 163 (53.8) | / |
| III | 131 (43.2) | / |
Figure 2Analysis of candidate ARGs. Distribution of risk score, heatmap representation, Kaplan-Meier survival curves, and ROC curves for the autophagy-related signature in (A) the training cohort and (B) the validation cohort.
Figure 3Immunohistochemistry of ARG expression. BC tumor and normal breast tissue images are shown for the signature’s ARG-coded proteins. (A) ATF4 expression. (B) BAK1 expression. (C) BCL2 expression. (D) BIRC5 expression. (E) CCL2 expression. (F) DDIT3 expression. (G) HIF1A expression. (H) PRKAB1 expression. (I) RPS6KB1 expression. (J) TM9SF1 expression. Images were obtained from the Human Protein Atlas database (https://www.proteinatlas.org/).
The AUC of ROC curve show the sensitivity and specificity of the known signatures in predicting the prognosis of BC patients.
| Tang et al. | 2019 | 13-miRNA signature | 0.676 (5-year) |
| Chen et al. | 2020 | 9-TF signature | 0.794 (1-year), 0.822 (3-year), 0.843 (5-year) |
| Zhang et al. | 2020 | 10-lncRNA signature | 0.741 (1-year), 0.752 (3-year), 0.781 (5-year) |
| Feng et al. | 2021 | 5-gene metabolic signature | 0.769 (3-year) |
| Zhou et al. | 2016 | 12-lncRNA signature | 0.847 (5-year) |
| Lai et al. | 2019 | 5-miRNA signature | 0.710 (5-year) |
Figure 4Association between the ARG-based signature and clinicopathological characteristics. (A) Tumor grade. (B) T stage. (C) N stage.
Figure 5Nomogram for predicting 3- and 5-year RFS of BC patients. The nomogram was constructed by integrating ARG signature’s risk score and patient’s T and N stage data.
Figure 6Nomogram validation. (A) Time-dependent ROC analysis. (B) Calibration curves for predicting 3- and 5-year RFS in BC patients.