| Literature DB >> 34930244 |
Zhihui Zhang1,2, Yuejun Luo1,2, Chaoqi Zhang1,2, Peng Wu1,2, Guochao Zhang1, Qingpeg Zeng1, Lide Wang1, Liyan Xue3, Zhaoyang Yang3, Hua Zeng3, Bo Zheng3, Fengwei Tan1, Qi Xue1, Shugeng Gao1, Nan Sun4,5, Jie He6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) are burdened by limited treatment options and the disease's dismal prognosis. Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are essential regulators of genetic alteration and are actively involved in tumor immunity. However, few studies have examined interactions between immune genes and lncRNAs in SCLC.Entities:
Keywords: Chemotherapy; Immune response; Individualized medicine; Small cell lung cancer; lncRNAs
Year: 2021 PMID: 34930244 PMCID: PMC8691030 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-021-02357-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Cell Int ISSN: 1475-2867 Impact factor: 5.722
Clinical characteristics of the patients from different cohorts
| Characteristics | Training cohort ( | Validation cohort ( |
|---|---|---|
| Age, year | ||
| < 60 | 27 (56.25%) | 79 (53.38%) |
| ≥ 60 | 21 (43.75%) | 69 (46.62%) |
| Sex | ||
| Male | 43 (89.58%) | 116 (78.38%) |
| Female | 5 (10.42%) | 32 (21.62%) |
| Smoking history | ||
| Yes | 33 (68.75%) | 92 (62.16%) |
| No | 15 (31.25%) | 56 (37.84%) |
| SCLC staging | ||
| I | 8 (16.67%) | 54 (36.49%) |
| II | 8 (16.67%) | 48 (32.43%) |
| III | 31 (62.50%) | 46 (31.08%) |
| IV | 1 (2.08%) | 0 (0.00%) |
| OS state | ||
| Alive | 25 (52.08%) | 68 (45.95%) |
| Death | 23 (47.92%) | 80 (54.05%) |
SCLC small cell lung cancer; OS overall survival
Fig. 1Flow chart of this study
Fig. 2Filter out the most significant prognostic irlncRNAs in small cell lung cancer. a Univariate cox regression analysis filtered out 20 significant prognostic irlncRNAs. b Forest plot of the association between irlncRNAs and prognosis in SCLC. c Correlation between irlncRNAs and immune genes
Fig. 3The irlncRNA signature distribution and survival of patients in the training cohort. a LASSO Cox coefficient profiles of the selected prognostic irlncRNAs. b Correlation between the expression of selected irlncRNAs and risk score. c Risk score distribution with patient survival status in the training cohort, with red color indicating that patients have died and blue color indicating survival. Expression distribution of the eight irlncRNAs in the training cohort, with red color indicating higher expression and blue indicating lower expression. d Kaplan–Meier curves of OS in 48 patients from the training cohort based on risk score. e ROC analysis of the irlncRNA signature for prediction of survival at 1, 3, and 5 years in the training cohort
Fig. 4Validating the irlncRNA signature in the validation cohort with qPCR data. a Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for 148 patients of the validation cohort based on risk score. b ROC analysis of risk score for prediction of survival at 1, 3, and 5 years for the validation cohort. c ROC analysis of risk score and different clinical parameters for OS for the validation cohort. d Kaplan–Meier curves of RFS for 148 patients of the validation cohort based on risk score. e ROC analysis of risk score for prediction of RFS at 1, 3, and 5 years for the independent cohort. f ROC analysis of risk score and different clinical parameters for RFS for the independent cohort. g Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for the ACT subgroup of the validation cohort based on risk score. h ROC analysis of risk score for prediction of OS at 1, 3, and 5 years for the ACT subgroup of the validation cohort. i ROC analysis of risk score and different clinical parameters for RFS for the ACT subgroup of the validation cohort
Fig. 5Validation of the OS and RFS predictive performance of the risk score across clinical subgroups. a Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for males from the training cohort. b Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for older patients from the training cohort. c Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for smokers from the training cohort. d Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for males from the validation cohort. e Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for older patients from the validation cohort. f Kaplan–Meier curves of OS for smokers from the validation cohort. g Kaplan–Meier curves of RFS for males from the validation cohort. h Kaplan–Meier curves of RFS for older patients from the validation cohort. i Kaplan–Meier curves of RFS for smokers from the validation cohort
Fig. 6Cox regression analyses of the irlncRNA signature in the training and validation cohorts. a Univariate Cox regression analyses of the risk score and clinical parameters. b Multivariate Cox regression analyses of the risk score and clinical parameters
Fig. 7Functional analysis of the irlncRNA signature in the training cohort. a Details of the risk score and the most relevant genes. b Gene enrichment with the GO terms of the selected genes. c–f Gene set enrichment analysis indicated a significantly activated immune phenotype in the low-risk cases
Fig. 8Relationship between risk scores and inflammatory metagenes and immune checkpoints. a, b Metagene heatmap and corrgram for the training cohort. c, d Correlation between risk score and immune checkpoint expression