Cargando…

Development of a novel prognostic score combining clinicopathologic variables, gene expression, and mutation profiles for lung adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND: Integrating phenotypic and genotypic information to improve prognostic prediction is under active investigation for lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). In this study, we developed a new prognostic model for event-free survival (EFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) based on the combination of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Guofeng, Wang, Guangsuo, Guo, Yanhua, Li, Shixuan, Zhang, Youlong, Li, Jialu, Peng, Bin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7502202/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32950055
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-02025-0
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Integrating phenotypic and genotypic information to improve prognostic prediction is under active investigation for lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). In this study, we developed a new prognostic model for event-free survival (EFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) based on the combination of clinicopathologic variables, gene expression, and mutation data. METHODS: We enrolled a total of 408 patients from the Cancer Genome Atlas Lung Adenocarcinoma (TCGA-LUAD) project for the study. We pre-selected gene expression or mutation features and constructed 14 different input feature sets for predictive model development. We assessed model performance with multiple evaluation metrics including the distribution of C-index on testing dataset, risk score significance, and time-dependent AUC under competing risks scenario. We stratified patients into higher- and lower-risk subgroups by the final risk score and further investigated underlying immune phenotyping variations associated with the differential risk. RESULTS: The model integrating all three types of data achieved the best prediction performance. The resultant risk score provided a higher-resolution risk stratification than other models within pathologically defined subgroups. The score could account for extra EFS-related variations that were not captured by clinicopathologic scores. Being validated for RFS prediction under a competing risks modeling framework, the score achieved a significantly higher time-dependent AUC as compared to that of the conventional clinicopathologic variables-based model (0.772 vs. 0.646, p value < 0.001). The higher-risk patients were characterized with transcriptional aberrations of multiple immune-related genes, and a significant depletion of mast cells and natural killer cells. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a novel prognostic risk score with improved prediction accuracy, using clinicopathologic variables, gene expression and mutation profiles as input, for LUAD. Such score was a significant predictor of both EFS and RFS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was based on public open data from TCGA and hence the study objects were retrospectively registered.