Huan Wu1,2, Hanchu Wang3, Yue Chen4. 1. Department of Medical Laboratory, The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University (Shenzhen People's Hospital), Shenzhen, 518020, China. 2. Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine Postdoctoral Research Station, Jinan University, Guangzhou, 510632, China. 3. The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University, Shenzhen, 518020, China. 4. Department of Medical Laboratory, The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University (Shenzhen People's Hospital), Shenzhen, 518020, China. chenyue_dr@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High tumor mutation burden (TMB) failed to serve as a favorable prognostic biomarker for immunotherapy across all tumors. This study aimed to explore TMB-sensitive tumors on a pan-cancer level and construct their immune infiltration phenotypes in TMB-high groups. METHODS: Pan-cancer patients were separated into TMB-high and TMB-low groups based on the median TMB values per tumor. TMB-related genes were identified using differently expressed genes (DEGs) and differently mutated genes (DMGs) between the above two TMB groups. CIBERSORT algorithm was used to estimate the abundance of 22 tumor immune infiltrating cells (TIICs). Consensus clustering analysis was applied to predict molecular subtypes. Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the correlations between hub genes and TIICs and immunomodulator genes. RESULTS: Nine TMB-sensitive tumors were identified by high-frequency of TMB-related genes. A total of 126 tumor-specific hub genes (1 in BLCA, 19 in BRCA, 4 in COAD, 4 in HNSC, 25 in LUAD, 2 in LUSC, 27 in SKCM, 37 in STAD, and 7 UCEC) were identified. In five out of nine TMB-sensitive tumors, the molecular subtypes based on hub gene expression were characterized by TMB values, prognostic values and tumor-specific TIICs levels. In TMB-high groups, hub genes associated immune infiltration phenotypes were constructed with key TIICs and immunomodulators spanning TMB-sensitive tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Our tumor-specific analysis revealed hub genes associated immune infiltration features may serve as potential therapeutic targets and prognostic markers of immunotherapy, providing the potential underlying mechanism of immune infiltration in TMB-high groups across TMB-sensitive tumors.
BACKGROUND: High tumor mutation burden (TMB) failed to serve as a favorable prognostic biomarker for immunotherapy across all tumors. This study aimed to explore TMB-sensitive tumors on a pan-cancer level and construct their immune infiltration phenotypes in TMB-high groups. METHODS: Pan-cancer patients were separated into TMB-high and TMB-low groups based on the median TMB values per tumor. TMB-related genes were identified using differently expressed genes (DEGs) and differently mutated genes (DMGs) between the above two TMB groups. CIBERSORT algorithm was used to estimate the abundance of 22 tumor immune infiltrating cells (TIICs). Consensus clustering analysis was applied to predict molecular subtypes. Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the correlations between hub genes and TIICs and immunomodulator genes. RESULTS: Nine TMB-sensitive tumors were identified by high-frequency of TMB-related genes. A total of 126 tumor-specific hub genes (1 in BLCA, 19 in BRCA, 4 in COAD, 4 in HNSC, 25 in LUAD, 2 in LUSC, 27 in SKCM, 37 in STAD, and 7 UCEC) were identified. In five out of nine TMB-sensitive tumors, the molecular subtypes based on hub gene expression were characterized by TMB values, prognostic values and tumor-specific TIICs levels. In TMB-high groups, hub genes associated immune infiltration phenotypes were constructed with key TIICs and immunomodulators spanning TMB-sensitive tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Our tumor-specific analysis revealed hub genes associated immune infiltration features may serve as potential therapeutic targets and prognostic markers of immunotherapy, providing the potential underlying mechanism of immune infiltration in TMB-high groups across TMB-sensitive tumors.
Authors: Romualdo Barroso-Sousa; Tanya E Keenan; Eliezer M Van Allen; Sara M Tolaney; Sonia Pernas; Pedro Exman; Esha Jain; Ana C Garrido-Castro; Melissa Hughes; Brittany Bychkovsky; Renato Umeton; Janet L Files; Neal I Lindeman; Laura E MacConaill; F Stephen Hodi; Ian E Krop; Deborah Dillon; Eric P Winer; Nikhil Wagle; Nancy U Lin; Elizabeth A Mittendorf Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2020-02-04 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Volker Endris; Ivo Buchhalter; Michael Allgäuer; Eugen Rempel; Amelie Lier; Anna-Lena Volckmar; Martina Kirchner; Moritz von Winterfeld; Jonas Leichsenring; Olaf Neumann; Roland Penzel; Wilko Weichert; Hanno Glimm; Stefan Fröhling; Hauke Winter; Felix Herth; Michael Thomas; Peter Schirmacher; Jan Budczies; Albrecht Stenzinger Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2019-02-04 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: R Barroso-Sousa; E Jain; O Cohen; D Kim; J Buendia-Buendia; E Winer; N Lin; S M Tolaney; N Wagle Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2020-01-09 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: David A Fabrizio; Thomas J George; Richard F Dunne; Garrett Frampton; James Sun; Kyle Gowen; Mark Kennedy; Joel Greenbowe; Alexa B Schrock; Aram F Hezel; Jeffrey S Ross; Phillip J Stephens; Siraj M Ali; Vincent A Miller; Marwan Fakih; Samuel J Klempner Journal: J Gastrointest Oncol Date: 2018-08
Authors: Zachary R Chalmers; Caitlin F Connelly; David Fabrizio; Laurie Gay; Siraj M Ali; Riley Ennis; Alexa Schrock; Brittany Campbell; Adam Shlien; Juliann Chmielecki; Franklin Huang; Yuting He; James Sun; Uri Tabori; Mark Kennedy; Daniel S Lieber; Steven Roels; Jared White; Geoffrey A Otto; Jeffrey S Ross; Levi Garraway; Vincent A Miller; Phillip J Stephens; Garrett M Frampton Journal: Genome Med Date: 2017-04-19 Impact factor: 11.117