| Literature DB >> 36091015 |
Ying Xiao1,2,3, Yipeng Dong2,4, Tiannan Yu1,2,3, Rujie Wang1,2, Yang Gao1,2, Song Li1,2, Shaojun Nong1, Wenguang Li1.
Abstract
Bladder cancer (BLCA) is the 10th most common form of cancer worldwide. Currently, the response rate of BLCA patients to novel immunotherapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) treatment is around 30% or less. Therefore, there is an urgent clinical demand to understand the regulation of immune function in BLCA patients. LncRNAs are known to play fundamental roles in the regulation of the immune system in the tumor microenvironment. In this report, we performed a comprehensive analysis to identify immune-related lncRNAs (IRLs) in BLCA patients using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) databases. BLCA patients were divided into five TME subtypes. Subtype HMIE was strongly related to survival and high anti-tumor activity of patients. Through a four-step analysis, we identified 34 IRLs as subtype HMIE related lncRNAs (HMIE-lncs).The correlation analysis with immune cell infiltration and target gene pathway enrichment showed that 34 HMIE-lncs were correlated with immune cell activation and tumor cell killing. Among them, 24 lncRNAs were related to good prognosis. We constructed a risk model to predict BLCA. Cross tumor validation was performed, and the results showed that the 34 HMIE-lncs identified in the BLCA patients in this study were highly expressed in the immune-favorable TME subtype (IE) in most of the other cancer types.Entities:
Keywords: TME subtypes; anti-tumor activity; bladder cancer; immunotherapy; lncRNAs
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36091015 PMCID: PMC9462669 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.941189
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 8.786
Figure 1Five distinct TME subtypes identified in bladder cancer. (A) Overall survival of bladder cancer patients is stratified by TME subtype classification in the TCGA-BLCA cohort. The P-value was determined by log-rank. (B) Violin plots showing the difference in PD-L1expression, neoantigen load and log2 transformed total mutational burden across the five TME subtypes. Statistical significance was calculated by the one-way ANOVA test. (C) Heatmap of cell type specific gene signature scores retrieved from the MCP-counter cell deconvolution algorithm. Samples in the column were grouped according to TME subtypes and cell types in the row were clustered by the ‘Ward’ algorithm. (D) Heatmap of relative signaling pathway activity scores by PROGENy. Samples in the column were grouped according to TME subtypes and pathway activity scores in the row were clustered by the ‘Ward’ algorithm. (E) Boxplot of 10 gene signature scores across five TME subtypes measured by ssGSEA algorithm. Statistical significance was calculated by the one-way ANOVA test. These gene signatures were defined as anti-tumor microenvironments (11). ***p<0.001 ****p<0.0001.
Figure 2Identification of HMIE subtype specific lncRNAs. (A) Correlation between https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/WGCNA/versions/1.70-3/topics/moduleEigengenes (first principal component of modules) and TME subtypes on TCGA-BLCA cohort. The correlation was shown as a heatmap which was gradually colored with lower in blue and higher in red according to the Pearson correlation coefficient. The first line of the values in the heatmap represents the correlation coefficient, and the second line are the p-values from the correlation test. Genes that belong to M3 and M8 modules were identified with high expression in immune enriched subtypes of IE/F, LMIE, and HMIE. (B) Gene expression clustering of lncRNA assigned to M3 and M8 modules. lncRNAs were clustered into three groups. The heatmap showed the expression profiles of these three groups of lncRNAs, which are colored with lower in green and higher in red according to the expression of the lncRNA. (C) A boxplot showing the difference in expression across the three groups of lncRNAs. (D) A heatmap of 34 lncRNAsthat are highly expressed in the HMIE subtype, and they were defined as HMIE-lncs. (E) GO enrichment of trans-targets that are co-expressed with 34 HMIE-lncs. (F) KEGG enrichment of trans-targets that are co-expressed with 34 HMIE-lncs. (G) Correlation analysis between 34 HMIE-lncs expression and immune cell infiltration. The positive correlation coefficient was shown in orange and the negative correlation coefficient was shown in blue. Only pairs having a p-value of <0.05 with a correlation test were plotted. (H) Venn plot of three gene sets: trans-target of and cis-targets of the 34 HMIE-lnc, and genes annotated from Immport database. (I) Network plot of HMIE-lncs and its immune related targets. lncRNAs were shown in hexagon shapes and colored in orange; target genes were shown in circle shapes and colored in skyblue. All nodes in the network were sized gradually by the value of outdegree.
Figure 3LncRNA expression and clinical prognosis. (A) Result of HMIE-lncs by univariate Cox regression analysis. HR and p-values were displayed. Only the lncRNAs with a p-value of <0.05 were plotted. All plotted lncRNA have an HR value <1. (B) The Kaplan–Meier survival curve of six lncRNAs that are significantly related to the survival of bladder cancer. Log-rank p-values were shown. Higher expression was related to a good prognosis. (C) The Kaplan–Meier curves compared patients with low or high immune risk in the TCGA-BLCA cohort. Patients were divided into two groups according to the median value of lncRNA risk scores. Higher risk scores were correlated with poorer prognosis. (D) Univariate COX regression analysis of clinical factors. (E) Multivariate Cox regression analysis of clinical factors. (F) The distribution of lncRNA risk score across five TME subtypes. The risk score is low in the HMIE subtype and high in both the D and F subtypes. (G) The distribution of anti-tumor scores between high and low-risk groups. (H) The distribution of expression of three immune checkpoint molecules between high and low-risk groups was determined. (I) The distribution of somatic mutation, neoantigen load and log2-transformed TMB score between high and low-risk groups. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001, ****p<0.0001.
Figure 4Differential expression of 34 HMIE-lncs in 25 solid tumors. (A) The differential expression of 34 HMIE-lncs in 25 solid tumors. The heatmap plot showed the value of log2-foldchange between IE and other TME subtypes for each lncRNA. Log2-foldchange <0 was colored in blue, while log2-foldchange >0 were colored in red. The dark color of the red or blue indicates higher log2-Foldchanges. (B) Barplot shows the number of lncRNAs that met the requirements of p-value <0.05 in each cancer from the TCGA database. Bars were colored with an HR ratio <1 (orange) or ≥1 (blue). Twelve cancers containing more than 66% of lncRNAs with HR <1 were highlighted in the red box. (C) Heatmap showing lncRNAs that are good prognosis related across 12 cancers.
Figure 5Validation of identified 34 HMIE-lncs in immunotherapy dataset of the IMvigor 210 cohort. (A–E) Overall survival of 5lncRNAs that met log-rank p-value <0.05 in PD-L1 treated immunotherapy dataset of the IMvigor 210 cohort. (F) Correlation analysis between five survival related lncRNA expression and immune cell infiltration. Positive correlation coefficients are shown in orange and negative correlation coefficients are shown in blue. The darker color indicates a bigger value. Only the pairs with a correlation test p-value <0.05 were plotted. (G) Boxplot showing the difference of five lncRNA expression across four therapy response group. CR represents complete response, PD represents progressive disease, PR represents partial response, and SD represents steady disease.