| Literature DB >> 35756990 |
Zhijie Xu1,2,3, Bi Peng2,4, Fanhua Kang3, Wenqin Zhang3, Muzhang Xiao5, Jianbo Li3, Qianhui Hong3, Yuan Cai2, Wei Liu6, Yuanliang Yan7, Jinwu Peng2,3,4.
Abstract
Background: The different pharmacological effects of drugs in different people can be explained by the polymorphisms of drug metabolism-related genes. Emerging studies have realized the importance of drug metabolism-related genes in the treatment and prognosis of cancers, including ovarian cancer (OV). In this study, using comprehensive bioinformatics and western blot, we identified that the drug metabolism-related gene, ADH1B, was significantly down-regulated in OV cells and tissues. The patients with a high level of ADH1B presented a good prognosis. We also found a negative correlation between ADH1B expression and the activity of chemotherapeutic agents, such as cyclophosphamide. In addition, positive correlations were observed between ADH1B expression and multiple immune checkpoints, including LAG3 and HAVCR2. The immune infiltration analysis further indicated that aberrantly expressed ADH1B might have important roles in regulating the infiltration of macrophages and neutrophils in OV tissues. Then, the co-expression analysis was conducted and the top three enriched KEGG pathways were spliceosome, RNA transport, and DNA replication. In conclusion, the drug metabolism-related gene ADH1B and its interactive network play an essential role in the immune regulation and therapeutic response and maybe identified as promising therapeutic targets for OV patients.Entities:
Keywords: ADH1B; drug metabolism-related genes; immune infiltration; ovarian cancer; therapeutic response
Year: 2022 PMID: 35756990 PMCID: PMC9218672 DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2022.877254
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Dev Biol ISSN: 2296-634X
FIGURE 1Venn plot for identifying co-DEGs. (A,B) Two GEO datasets and the drug metabolism-related gene dataset were used to identify the upregulated and downregulated co-DEGs, respectively.
FIGURE 2Kaplan-Meier curves of ADH1B in GSE30161. Kaplan-Meier plotter database was applied to obtain the OS and PPS curves of ADH1B in patients with ovarian cancer.
FIGURE 3The expression of ADH1B in ovarian cancer tissues. (A–D) Compared with normal ovarian tissue, a significantly reduced ADH1B could be obtained in GSE18520 (A), GSE26712 (B), TCGA-OV (C), and GEPTA2 (D). (E,F) The verification of down-regulated expression level of ADH1B using TNMplot database from gene chip data (E) and RNA-seq data (F). (G,H) ADH1B was downregulated in two OV cells, A2780 and TOV112D. (I) Immunohistochemical analysis indicated the downregulated ADH1B in OV patients. *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001.
The demographic parameters for ovarian cancer patients from the TCGA database based on the ADH1B levels.
| Characteristic | Low expression of ADH1B | High expression of ADH1B |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| n | 189 | 190 | — |
| FIGO stage, n (%) | — | — | 0.247 |
| Stage I | 1 (0.3%) | 0 (0%) | — |
| Stage II | 13 (3.5%) | 10 (2.7%) | — |
| Stage III | 151 (40.2%) | 144 (38.3%) | — |
| Stage IV | 23 (6.1%) | 34 (9%) | — |
| Primary therapy outcome, n (%) | — | — | 0.511 |
| Progressive disease (PD) | 12 (3.9%) | 15 (4.9%) | — |
| Stable disease (SD) | 9 (2.9%) | 13 (4.2%) | — |
| Partial response (PR) | 19 (6.2%) | 24 (7.8%) | — |
| Complete response (CR) | 114 (37%) | 102 (33.1%) | — |
| Race, n (%) | — | — | 0.289 |
| Asian | 7 (1.9%) | 5 (1.4%) | — |
| Black or African American | 16 (4.4%) | 9 (2.5%) | — |
| White | 160 (43.8%) | 168 (46%) | — |
| Age, n (%) | — | — | 0.015 |
| < =60 | 116 (30.6%) | 92 (24.3%) | — |
| >60 | 73 (19.3%) | 98 (25.9%) | — |
| Histologic grade, n (%) | — | — | 0.051 |
| G1 | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.3%) | — |
| G2 | 16 (4.3%) | 29 (7.9%) | — |
| G3 | 167 (45.3%) | 155 (42%) | — |
| G4 | 1 (0.3%) | 0 (0%) | — |
| Anatomic neoplasm subdivision, n (%) | — | — | 0.011 |
| Unilateral | 63 (17.6%) | 39 (10.9%) | — |
| Bilateral | 118 (33.1%) | 137 (38.4%) | — |
| Venous invasion, n (%) | — | — | 0.100 |
| No | 28 (26.7%) | 13 (12.4%) | — |
| Yes | 32 (30.5%) | 32 (30.5%) | — |
| Lymphatic invasion, n (%) | — | — | 0.023 |
| No | 34 (22.8%) | 14 (9.4%) | — |
| Yes | 50 (33.6%) | 51 (34.2%) | — |
| Tumor residual, n (%) | — | — | 0.015 |
| No residual disease (NRD) | 42 (12.5%) | 25 (7.5%) | — |
| Residual disease (RD) | 121 (36.1%) | 147 (43.9%) | — |
| Tumor status, n (%) | — | — | 0.034 |
| Tumor-free | 45 (13.4%) | 27 (8%) | — |
| With tumor | 126 (37.4%) | 139 (41.2%) | — |
| Age, median (IQR) | 57 (50, 67) | 61 (52, 69.75) | 0.041 |
FIGURE 4The co-expression analysis of ADH1B in ovarian cancer. (A) The identification of co-expressed genes remarkably related to ADH1B using the LinkedOmics database. (B,C) The top 50 genes positively and negatively in connection with ADH1B were shown on the heat map. Red indicated positive correlations while blue negative. (D,E) The top 50 genes having positive and negative associations with ADH1B were presented on the survival heat map. (F) Bar chart of the KEGG enrichment analysis of ADH1B.
FIGURE 5The relationship between ADH1B and immune infiltration. (A) 24 kinds of immune-infiltrating cells related to ADH1B expression. (B–E) Scatter plots were drawn through TIMER2.0 and TISIDB database to validate the correlations between ADH1B and immune-infiltrating cells, including macrophages and neutrophils.
FIGURE 6Treatment correlation analysis of ADH1B. (A) The associations between ADH1B with LAG3 and HAVCR2. (B,C) the Human Protein Atlas portal validated the downregulated ADH1B, LAG3, and HAVCR2 in OV tissues.