| Literature DB >> 35568859 |
Huizhong Wang1,2,3, Ruonan Shao1,2,3, Wenjian Liu1,2,3, Shumei Peng4, Shenrui Bai1,2,3, Bibo Fu1,2,3, Congling Zhao5, Yue Lu6,7,8.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The interaction between tumor cells and tumor microenvironment (TME) has an important impact on progression and prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM), and has been proven to be promising therapeutic targets. This study intended to explore the relationship between TME and prognosis and identify valuable biomarkers of MM.Entities:
Keywords: CXCL11; Macrophages; Multiple myeloma; Prognostic model; Tumor microenvironment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35568859 PMCID: PMC9107742 DOI: 10.1186/s12935-022-02608-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Cell Int ISSN: 1475-2867 Impact factor: 6.429
Fig. 1Flow chart of the evaluation and selection of IRGPI
Fig. 2Time-dependent ROC analysis, survival outcome analysis and Kaplan- Meier analysis and risk score analysis for the IRGPI accurately predicts survival of MM patients in LR and HR. A Kaplan–Meier curve of the prognostic model in the training cohort the validation cohorts, B Time-dependent ROC curves analyses of the model in all cohorts, C Risk score distribution of the prognostic model on the training cohort the validation cohorts
Fig. 3IRGPI is significantly correlated with a variety of clinicopathological factors in MM patients and validates survival prediction. A Univariate(top) and Multivariate(bottom) COX analysis in training cohort and internal validation cohort. B The heatmap of the IRGPI and clinicopathological characteristics at different risk levels for training cohort and internal validation cohort. Each column showing gene expression or clinicopathological state represents a sample, and each row represents one characteristic or gene in the model. C A nomogram was built based on R-ISS and risk score, with calibration plot of the nomogram and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves of nomograms were compared based on 1-, 5-, and > 5-year OS of the cohort. D GO analysis and KEGG pathway analysis shows the top 20 representative pathways in HR in the training cohort (p < 0.05)
Fig. 4Analyses of immune cell infiltration. A Correlations of IRGPI with immune cell infiltration (The blue and red violin represented the IRGPI LR and HR group, respectively. The white points inside the violin implicated median values). B, C Significant correlations of 3-IRGs (CD70, CXCL11, HGF) with M0 macrophages, M1 macrophages and M2 macrophages in MM. D A brief process for M2 macrophage induction. The CD206 expression of M2 macrophages was determined by flow Cytometry (E) and Western blot analysis (F). G qRT-PCR analysis of 3-IRGs after MM cells co-cultured with M2 macrophages. Data were presented as the mean ± SD from three independent experiments. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
Fig. 5CXCL11 expression is associated with prognosis of MM. A Western blot analysis, qRT-PCR analysis (B) of CXCL11 expression in MM tissues and normal control. C The CXCL11 expression varies with the stage of the patient. DThe relationship between the expression of overall survival and CXCL11. E The images of immunohistochemistry for MM and normal tissues. (The date in C, D were collected from GSE136324). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
Fig. 6Knock-down of CXCL11 affects MM cells proliferation, apoptosis and macrophages M2-like polarization in vitro. A The mRNA expression of CXCL11 in MM cell lines. B CCK-8 assays revealed that CXCL11 downregulation decreased MM cell proliferation. C, D. Apoptosis analysis by flow cytometry in U266 and RPMI 8226 cell lines (C.U266; D.RPMI 8226). E CD206 protein expression in macrophages was analyzed by western blot assay at 72 h following co-culture. F The expression of M1 and M2 polarization-related markers in macrophages co-cultured with U266 and RPMI 8226 cells transfected with sh-CXCL11 or control was detected by qRT-PCR. Data were presented as the mean ± SD from three independent experiments. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001
Fig. 7Downregulation of CXCL11 suppressed tumorigenesis in vivo. A Representative images of tumors removed from the mice. B Body weight and tumor volumes in two groups were observed on the indicated days and tumor weight were shown after removed. C Flow cytometry to detect the expression of CD206 in macrophages in primary tumors in the two groups. D IHC analysis of CXCL11 and CD206 in primary tumors of two groups. Data were presented as the mean ± SD from three independent experiments. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01