| Literature DB >> 35280441 |
Xuxu Liu1,2, Yuanhang He1,2, Pengfei Wang1,2, Jie Hu3, Chenjun Hao1,2, Qiang Wang1,2, Yang Yang1,2, Yuanyuan Sun1,2, Biao Ma1,2, Hezheng Sun4, Dongbo Xue1,2, Xianzhi Meng1,2.
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common tumors worldwide, with high incidence and mortality rate. There is an urgent need to identify effective diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for HCC. Members of the acidic leucine-rich nucleophosphoprotein 32 (ANP32) family, which mainly includes ANP32A, ANP32B, and ANP32E, are abnormally expressed and have prognostic value in certain cancers. However, the diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic value of ANP32 family members in HCC has not yet been fully studied. In this study, we identified the diagnostic and prognostic value of ANP32 family members in HCC. Transcriptome data from public databases, such as the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx) databases, suggested that ANP32A, ANP32B, and ANP32E were upregulated in HCC tissues, and high expression of ANP32 family members was associated with advanced pathologic stage and histologic grade. Our immunohistochemistry and western blot results further verified the differential expression of ANP32 family members. ANP32A, ANP32B, and ANP32E had an outstanding diagnostic potential. Survival analysis of HCC patients in TCGA databases demonstrated that ANP32A, ANP32B, and ANP32E were associated with poor overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses suggested the capability of ANP32B and ANP32E to independently predict the OS and DSS of HCC patients. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) showed that ANP32 family members were associated with immune response, epidermal cell differentiation, and stem cell proliferation. Expression of ANP32 family members was associated with immune cell infiltration and immune status in the tumor microenvironment of HCC, and patients with high ANP32 family expression had poor sensitivity to immunotherapy. Finally, we identified potential chemotherapy drugs for HCC patients with high ANP32 family expression by CellMiner database. This study suggested the diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic roles of the ANP32 family in HCC patients, providing potential therapeutic targets for HCC.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35280441 PMCID: PMC8913125 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5791471
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Dis Markers ISSN: 0278-0240 Impact factor: 3.434
Figure 1Expression and diagnostic value of ANP32 family members in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). (a) Differential expression of ANP32 family members between HCC tissues and normal liver tissues in the TCGA + GETx cohort. (b) Differential expression of ANP32 family members between HCC tissues and normal liver tissues in paired samples from the TCGA cohort. (c) Expression of ANP32 family members in normal liver tissues, primary HCC tissues, and metastatic HCC tissues by TNM plot. (d) Expression of ANP32 family members in HCC tissues and normal liver tissues by immunohistochemistry. (e) Expression of ANP32 family members in HCC tissues and normal liver tissues by western blot. (f) Quantification of western blot data. (g)–(i) Diagnostic ROC curves of ANP32A (g), ANP32B (h), and ANP32E (i) in the TCGA + GETx cohort.
The association between ANP32A expression and clinical features of HCC patitents in TCGA cohort.
| Characteristic | Low expression of | High expression of |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 187 | 187 | |
| T stage, | 0.188 | ||
| T1 | 100 (27%) | 83 (22.4%) | |
| T2 | 44 (11.9%) | 51 (13.7%) | |
| T3 | 36 (9.7%) | 44 (11.9%) | |
| T4 | 4 (1.1%) | 9 (2.4%) | |
| N stage, | >0.999 | ||
| N0 | 124 (48.1%) | 130 (50.4%) | |
| N1 | 2 (0.8%) | 2 (0.8%) | |
| M stage, | 0.122 | ||
| M0 | 134 (49.3%) | 134 (49.3%) | |
| M1 | 0 (0%) | 4 (1.5%) | |
| Pathologic stage, | 0.264 | ||
| Stage I | 94 (26.9%) | 79 (22.6%) | |
| Stage II | 44 (12.6%) | 43 (12.3%) | |
| Stage III | 38 (10.9%) | 47 (13.4%) | |
| Stage IV | 1 (0.3%) | 4 (1.1%) | |
| Tumor status, | 0.122 | ||
| Tumor free | 109 (30.7%) | 93 (26.2%) | |
| With tumor | 69 (19.4%) | 84 (23.7%) | |
| Gender, | 0.047 | ||
| Female | 51 (13.6%) | 70 (18.7%) | |
| Male | 136 (36.4%) | 117 (31.3%) | |
| Age, | 0.034 | ||
| ≤60 | 78 (20.9%) | 99 (26.5%) | |
| >60 | 109 (29.2%) | 87 (23.3%) | |
| Weight, | 0.126 | ||
| ≤70 | 86 (24.9%) | 98 (28.3%) | |
| >70 | 90 (26%) | 72 (20.8%) | |
| Height, | 0.046 | ||
| < 170 | 93 (27.3%) | 108 (31.7%) | |
| ≥170 | 81 (23.8%) | 59 (17.3%) | |
| BMI, | 0.470 | ||
| ≤25 | 86 (25.5%) | 91 (27%) | |
| >25 | 85 (25.2%) | 75 (22.3%) | |
| Histologic grade, | < 0.001 | ||
| G1 | 39 (10.6%) | 16 (4.3%) | |
| G2 | 97 (26.3%) | 81 (22%) | |
| G3 | 46 (12.5%) | 78 (21.1%) | |
| G4 | 3 (0.8%) | 9 (2.4%) | |
| AFP (ng/ml), | < 0.001 | ||
| ≤400 | 131 (46.8%) | 84 (30%) | |
| >400 | 16 (5.7%) | 49 (17.5%) | |
| Vascular invasion, | 0.019 | ||
| No | 119 (37.4%) | 89 (28%) | |
| Yes | 47 (14.8%) | 63 (19.8%) | |
| Age, median (IQR) | 62 (53, 69) | 59 (51, 68) | 0.171 |
The association between ANP32B expression and clinical features of HCC patitents in TCGA cohort.
| Characteristic | Low expression of | High expression of |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 187 | 187 | |
| T stage, | 0.005 | ||
| T1 | 106 (28.6%) | 77 (20.8%) | |
| T2 | 46 (12.4%) | 49 (13.2%) | |
| T3 | 29 (7.8%) | 51 (13.7%) | |
| T4 | 4 (1.1%) | 9 (2.4%) | |
| N stage, | >0.999 | ||
| N0 | 118 (45.7%) | 136 (52.7%) | |
| N1 | 2 (0.8%) | 2 (0.8%) | |
| M stage, | 0.626 | ||
| M0 | 126 (46.3%) | 142 (52.2%) | |
| M1 | 1 (0.4%) | 3 (1.1%) | |
| Pathologic stage, | 0.024 | ||
| Stage I | 97 (27.7%) | 76 (21.7%) | |
| Stage II | 42 (12%) | 45 (12.9%) | |
| Stage III | 31 (8.9%) | 54 (15.4%) | |
| Stage IV | 2 (0.6%) | 3 (0.9%) | |
| Tumor status, | 0.036 | ||
| Tumor free | 111 (31.3%) | 91 (25.6%) | |
| With tumor | 66 (18.6%) | 87 (24.5%) | |
| Gender, | 0.185 | ||
| Female | 54 (14.4%) | 67 (17.9%) | |
| Male | 133 (35.6%) | 120 (32.1%) | |
| Age, | 0.133 | ||
| ≤60 | 81 (21.7%) | 96 (25.7%) | |
| >60 | 106 (28.4%) | 90 (24.1%) | |
| Weight, | 0.010 | ||
| ≤70 | 80 (23.1%) | 104 (30.1%) | |
| >70 | 94 (27.2%) | 68 (19.7%) | |
| Height, | 0.006 | ||
| < 170 | 89 (26.1%) | 112 (32.8%) | |
| ≥170 | 84 (24.6%) | 56 (16.4%) | |
| BMI, | 0.024 | ||
| ≤25 | 79 (23.4%) | 98 (29.1%) | |
| >25 | 92 (27.3%) | 68 (20.2%) | |
| Histologic grade, | < 0.001 | ||
| G1 | 35 (9.5%) | 20 (5.4%) | |
| G2 | 102 (27.6%) | 76 (20.6%) | |
| G3 | 47 (12.7%) | 77 (20.9%) | |
| G4 | 1 (0.3%) | 11 (3%) | |
| AFP (ng/ml), | < 0.001 | ||
| ≤400 | 126 (45%) | 89 (31.8%) | |
| >400 | 13 (4.6%) | 52 (18.6%) | |
| Vascular invasion, | 0.147 | ||
| No | 110 (34.6%) | 98 (30.8%) | |
| Yes | 48 (15.1%) | 62 (19.5%) | |
| Age, median (IQR) | 62 (54, 69) | 60 (51, 69) | 0.141 |
The association between ANP32E expression and clinical features of HCC patitents in TCGA cohort.
| Characteristic | Low expression of | High expression of |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 187 | 187 | |
| T stage, | 0.056 | ||
| T1 | 104 (28%) | 79 (21.3%) | |
| T2 | 43 (11.6%) | 52 (14%) | |
| T3 | 32 (8.6%) | 48 (12.9%) | |
| T4 | 6 (1.6%) | 7 (1.9%) | |
| N stage, | >0.999 | ||
| N0 | 122 (47.3%) | 132 (51.2%) | |
| N1 | 2 (0.8%) | 2 (0.8%) | |
| M stage, | 0.622 | ||
| M0 | 133 (48.9%) | 135 (49.6%) | |
| M1 | 1 (0.4%) | 3 (1.1%) | |
| Pathologic stage, | 0.055 | ||
| Stage I | 99 (28.3%) | 74 (21.1%) | |
| Stage II | 42 (12%) | 45 (12.9%) | |
| Stage III | 34 (9.7%) | 51 (14.6%) | |
| Stage IV | 2 (0.6%) | 3 (0.9%) | |
| Tumor status, | 0.204 | ||
| Tumor free | 106 (29.9%) | 96 (27%) | |
| With tumor | 69 (19.4%) | 84 (23.7%) | |
| Gender, | 0.122 | ||
| Female | 53 (14.2%) | 68 (18.2%) | |
| Male | 134 (35.8%) | 119 (31.8%) | |
| Age, | 0.196 | ||
| ≤60 | 82 (22%) | 95 (25.5%) | |
| >60 | 105 (28.2%) | 91 (24.4%) | |
| Weight, | 0.050 | ||
| ≤70 | 84 (24.3%) | 100 (28.9%) | |
| >70 | 92 (26.6%) | 70 (20.2%) | |
| Height, | 0.415 | ||
| < 170 | 96 (28.2%) | 105 (30.8%) | |
| ≥170 | 74 (21.7%) | 66 (19.4%) | |
| BMI, | 0.409 | ||
| ≤25 | 85 (25.2%) | 92 (27.3%) | |
| >25 | 85 (25.2%) | 75 (22.3%) | |
| Histologic grade, | 0.002 | ||
| G1 | 36 (9.8%) | 19 (5.1%) | |
| G2 | 97 (26.3%) | 81 (22%) | |
| G3 | 46 (12.5%) | 78 (21.1%) | |
| G4 | 6 (1.6%) | 6 (1.6%) | |
| AFP (ng/ml), | < 0.001 | ||
| ≤400 | 122 (43.6%) | 93 (33.2%) | |
| >400 | 19 (6.8%) | 46 (16.4%) | |
| Vascular invasion, | 0.249 | ||
| No | 112 (35.2%) | 96 (30.2%) | |
| Yes | 51 (16%) | 59 (18.6%) | |
| Age, median (IQR) | 63 (53, 70) | 60 (51, 67.75) | 0.031 |
Figure 2ANP32 family member expression was related to Ki-67. Relationships between Ki-67 and ANP32A (a), ANP32B (b), and ANP32E (c).
Figure 3Prognostic value of ANP32 family members in HCC. (a)–(c) Association between the expression of ANP32 family members and overall survival (OS). (d)-(f) Association between the expression of ANP32 family members and disease-specific survival (DSS). (g) Combination of ANP32B and ANP32E for OS in HCC patients. (h) Combination of ANP32B and ANP32E for DSS in HCC patients.
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses of selected variables on OS.
| Characteristics | Total (N) | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) |
| ||
|
| 373 | 1.534 (1.073-2.192) | 0.019 | 0.791 (0.484-1.291) | 0.348 |
|
| 373 | 1.776 (1.351-2.334) | <0.001 | 1.745 (1.212-2.514) | 0.003 |
|
| 373 | 1.636 (1.279-2.092) | <0.001 | 1.350 (1.017-1.793) | 0.038 |
| Pathologic stage | 349 | ||||
| Stage I | 173 | Reference | |||
| Stage II | 86 | 1.417 (0.868-2.312) | 0.164 | 1.190 (0.723-1.960) | 0.494 |
| Stage III | 85 | 2.734 (1.792-4.172) | <0.001 | 2.253 (1.458-3.484) | <0.001 |
| Stage IV | 5 | 5.597 (1.726-18.148) | 0.004 | 7.589 (2.195-26.242) | 0.001 |
| Gender | 373 | ||||
| Male | 252 | Reference | |||
| Female | 121 | 1.261 (0.885-1.796) | 0.200 | ||
| Histologic grade | 368 | ||||
| G1 | 55 | Reference | |||
| G2 | 178 | 1.162 (0.686-1.969) | 0.576 | ||
| G3 | 123 | 1.185 (0.683-2.057) | 0.545 | ||
| G4 | 12 | 1.681 (0.621-4.549) | 0.307 | ||
| Age | 373 | ||||
| ≤60 | 177 | Reference | |||
| >60 | 196 | 1.205 (0.850-1.708) | 0.295 | ||
Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses of selected variables on DSS.
| Characteristics | Total (N) | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) |
| Hazard ratio (95% CI) |
| ||
|
| 365 | 1.539 (0.975-2.430) | 0.064 | ||
|
| 365 | 1.637 (1.146-2.337) | 0.007 | 1.547 (1.019-2.347) | 0.040 |
|
| 365 | 1.840 (1.338-2.530) | <0.001 | 1.495 (1.035-2.159) | 0.032 |
| Pathologic stage | 341 | ||||
| Stage I | 170 | Reference | |||
| Stage II | 84 | 1.561 (0.776-3.141) | 0.212 | 1.306 (0.642-2.655) | 0.461 |
| Stage III | 83 | 4.288 (2.438-7.543) | <0.001 | 3.669 (2.066-6.515) | <0.001 |
| Stage IV | 4 | 9.369 (2.171-40.437) | 0.003 | 11.499 (2.640-50.092) | 0.001 |
| Gender | 365 | ||||
| Male | 247 | Reference | |||
| Female | 118 | 1.230 (0.780-1.937) | 0.373 | ||
| Histologic grade | 360 | ||||
| G1 | 55 | Reference | |||
| G2 | 172 | 1.177 (0.599-2.314) | 0.636 | ||
| G3 | 121 | 1.232 (0.610-2.486) | 0.561 | ||
| G4 | 12 | 1.181 (0.260-5.361) | 0.829 | ||
| Age | 365 | ||||
| ≤60 | 174 | Reference | |||
| >60 | 191 | 0.846 (0.543-1.317) | 0.458 | ||
Figure 4Protein-protein interaction (PPI) network of the ANP32 family.
Figure 5Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) of the ANP32 family. (a) and (b) GSEA for ANP32A based on Reactome pathways and GO. (c) and (d) GSEA for ANP32B based on Reactome pathways and GO. (e) and (f) GSEA for ANP32E based on Reactome pathways and GO.
Figure 6Relationships between ANP32 family members and immune characteristics. (a)–(c) Relationship between ANP32 family member expression and immune cell infiltration by ssGSEA. (d)–(f) Relationship between ANP32 family member expression and immune status by ssGSEA. (g) Associations between ANP32A, ANP32B, and ANP32E with immune subtypes in HCC by TISIDB.
Figure 7Relationship between ANP32 family members and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICB) therapy sensitivity. (a)–(c) Relationship between ANP32 family member expression and TIDE score. (d)–(f) Relationship between ANP32 family member expression and the responders of HCC patients to ICB treatment. (g) Relationship between ANP32 family members and chemosensitivity to selected drugs.
Figure 8Genetic alterations of ANP32 family members in HCC. (a) ANP32 family member mutation in HCC. (b) Association between ANP32 family member mutations and OS in HCC patients. (c) Association between ANP32 family member mutations and DSS in HCC patients.