Identification and validation of lncRNAs involved in m6A regulation for patients with ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND: Both N6-methyladenosine (m6A) modification and lncRNAs play an important role in the carcinogenesis and cancer inhibition of ovarian cancer (OC). However, lncRNAs involved in m6A regulation (LI-m6As) have never been reported in OC. Herein, we aimed to identify and validate a signature based on LI-m6A for OC. METHODS: RNA sequencing profiles with corresponding clinical information associated with OC and 23 m6A regulators were extracted from TCGA. The Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC) between lncRNAs and 23 m6A regulators (|PCC|> 0.4 and p < 0.01) was calculated to identify LI-m6As. The LI-m6As with significant prognostic value were screened based on univariate Cox regression analysis to construct a risk model by LASSO Cox regression. Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) was implemented to survey the biological functions of the risk groups. Several clinicopathological characteristics were utilized to evaluate their ability to predict prognosis, and a nomogram was constructed to evaluate the accuracy of survival prediction. Besides, immune microenvironment, checkpoint, and drug sensitivity in the two risk groups were compared using comprehensive algorithms. Finally, real-time qPCR analysis and cell counting kit-8 assays were performed on an alternative lncRNA, CACNA1G-AS1. RESULTS: The training cohort involving 258 OC patients and the validation cohort involving 111 OC patients were downloaded from TCGA. According to the PCC between the m6A regulators and lncRNAs, 129 LI-m6As were obtained to perform univariate Cox regression analysis and then 10 significant prognostic LI-m6As were identified. A prognostic signature containing four LI-m6As (AC010894.3, ACAP2-IT1, CACNA1G-AS1, and UBA6-AS1) was constructed according to the LASSO Cox regression analysis of the 10 LI-m6As. The prognostic signature was validated to show completely opposite prognostic value in the two risk groups and adverse overall survival (OS) in several clinicopathological characteristics. GSEA indicated that differentially expressed genes in disparate risk groups were enriched in several tumor-related pathways. At the same time, we found significant differences in some immune cells and chemotherapeutic agents between the two groups. An alternative lncRNA, CACNA1G-AS1, was proven to be upregulated in 30 OC specimens and 3 OC cell lines relative to control. Furthermore, knockdown of CACNA1G‐AS1 was proven to restrain the multiplication capacity of OC cells. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the four LI-m6As (AC010894.3, ACAP2-IT1, CACNA1G-AS1, and UBA6-AS1), the risk model we identified can independently predict the OS and therapeutic value of OC. CACNA1G‐AS1 was preliminarily proved to be a malignant lncRNA. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12935-021-02076-7.