| Literature DB >> 35004669 |
Xiaonan Zheng1,2, Xinyang Liao1, Ling Nie3, Tianhai Lin1, Hang Xu1, Lu Yang1, Bairong Shen2, Shi Qiu1, Jianzhong Ai1, Qiang Wei1.
Abstract
Background: Studies have demonstrated the significance of multiple biomarkers for bladder cancer. Here, we attempt to present biomarkers potentially predictive of the prognosis and immunotherapy response of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). Method: Immune and stromal scores were calculated for MIBC patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Core differential expression genes (DEGs) with prognostic value were identified and validated using an independent dataset GSE31684. The clinical implications of prognostic genes and the inter-gene correlation were presented. The distribution of tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TICs), the correlation with tumor mutation burden (TMB), and the expression of eight immune checkpoint-relevant genes and CD39 were accordingly compared. Two bladder cancer cohorts (GSE176307 and IMvigor210) receiving immunotherapy were recruited to validate the prognostic value of LCK and CD3E for immunotherapy.Entities:
Keywords: CD3e; LCK; immunotherapy; muscle-invasive bladder cancer; tumor microenvironment
Year: 2021 PMID: 35004669 PMCID: PMC8740181 DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2021.748280
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Dev Biol ISSN: 2296-634X
Characteristics of included patients from TCGA and GSE31684 datasets.
| TCGA MIBC | GEO GSE31684 | |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | ||
| <65 | 129 (35.73%) | 24 (30.77%) |
| ≥65 | 232 (64.27%) | 54 (69.23%) |
| Sex | ||
| Female | 95 (26.32%) | 21 (26.92%) |
| Male | 266 (73.68%) | 57 (73.08%) |
| T stage | ||
| T2 | 114 (31.58%) | 17 (21.79%) |
| T3 | 190 (52.63%) | 42 (53.85%) |
| T4 | 57 (15.79%) | 19 (24.36%) |
| Mean follow-up (days) | 785.07 | 1209.45 |
FIGURE 1Prediction of the level of tumor-infiltrating immune cells and stromal cells. (A–B) The optimal cutoff value of the immune score and stromal score was calculated. (C–D) Prognostic value of the immune score and stromal score. (E–F) Identification of differential expressed genes according to the immune and stromal scores. A p value < 0.05 indicates statistical significance.
FIGURE 2Identification and validation of prognostic genes of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. (A) Intersection of differential expressed genes. (B–C) Enrichment analyses and the protein–protein network construction of the intersected differential expressed genes. (D–E) Partial presentation of the prognostic genes with the core module of the protein–protein network found through TCGA samples. (F–G) External validation with the GSE31684 dataset identifies that LCK and CD3E were the prognostic genes of muscle-invasive bladder cancer. A p value < 0.05 indicates statistical significance.
FIGURE 3Correlation between LCK and CD3E. (A–B) co-expressed genes of LCK and CD3E. (C–D) Spearman correlation and co-expression analysis between LCK and CD3E. (E) Intersection of the first 100 genes co-expressed with LCK and CD3E. (F–G) Enrichment analyses and the network pathway of the 85 intersected genes.
FIGURE 4Clinical implication of LCK and CD3E. (A) Comparison of the expression value of LCK between normal tissue and bladder cancer tissue from TCGA; immunohistochemical staining of LCK in normal tissue (C)and bladder tumor tissue (D). (B) Comparison of the expression value of CD3E between normal tissue and bladder cancer tissue from TCGA. Immunohistochemical staining of LCK in normal tissue (E) and bladder tumor tissue (F). (G–H) Correlation of LCK and CD3E with clinical information of muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
FIGURE 5Association of LCK and CD3E with the distribution of tumor-infiltrating immune cells and with the expression of immune checkpoint genes in muscle-invasive bladder cancer. (A–B) Distribution of tumor-infiltrating immune cells based on the expression level of LCK and CD3E. (C–D) Expression level of immune checkpoint genes based on the expression level of LCK and CD3E. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
FIGURE 6Correlation between tumor-infiltrating immune cells with the expression of LCK (A) and CD3E (B) across pan-cancers.
FIGURE 7Correlation of LCK/CD3E with immune checkpoint genes and tumor mutation burden across pan-cancers. (A–B) Correlation of LCK/CD3E with immune checkpoint genes across pan-cancers. (C–D) Correlation of LCK/CD3E with tumor mutation burden across pan-cancers. (E–F) Spearman correlation between LCK/CD3E and tumor mutation burden in bladder cancer. (G–H) Spearman correlation between ENTPD1 (CD39) with LCK/CD3E in bladder cancer.
FIGURE 8Prognostic value of LCK and CD3E for MIBC in predicting immune response and survival after immunotherapy among two independent validation cohorts. (A–D) Percentage of high/low LCK/CD3E expression in responders and non-responders. (E–H) Proportion of responder and non-responder in high/low-LCK/CD3E groups. (I–J) Percentage of high/low-LCK/CD3E expression in different immune phenotypes. (K–L) Proportion of different immune phenotypes in high/low-LCK/CD3E groups. (M–P) Kaplan–Meier curves showing the prognostic value of LCK and CD3E for MIBC overall survival in GSE176306 and IMvior210.