Cargando…
A four-gene prognostic signature for predicting the overall survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma
BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients for lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is known to vary widely; the 5-year overall survival rate is just 63% even for the pathological IA stage. Thus, in order to identify high-risk patients and facilitate clinical decision making, it is vital that we identify new progn...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
PeerJ Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8465999/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34631307 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.11911 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients for lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is known to vary widely; the 5-year overall survival rate is just 63% even for the pathological IA stage. Thus, in order to identify high-risk patients and facilitate clinical decision making, it is vital that we identify new prognostic markers that can be used alongside TNM staging to facilitate risk stratification. METHODS: We used mRNA expression from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) cohort to identify a prognostic gene signature and combined this with clinical data to develop a predictive model for the prognosis of patients for lung adenocarcinoma. Kaplan-Meier curves, Lasso regression, and Cox regression, were used to identify specific prognostic genes. The model was assessed via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) and validated in an independent dataset (GSE50081) from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO). RESULTS: Our analyses identified a four-gene prognostic signature (CENPH, MYLIP, PITX3, and TRAF3IP3) that was associated with the overall survival of patients with T1-4N0-2M0 in the TCGA dataset. Multivariate regression suggested that the total risk score for the four genes represented an independent prognostic factor for the TCGA and GEO cohorts; the hazard ratio (HR) (high risk group vs low risk group) were 2.34 (p < 0.001) and 2.10 (p = 0.017). Immune infiltration estimations, as determined by an online tool (TIMER2.0) showed that CD4+ T cells were in relative abundance in the high risk group compared to the low risk group in both of the two cohorts (both p < 0.001). We established a composite prognostic model for predicting OS, combined with risk-grouping and clinical factors. The AUCs for 1-, 3-, 5- year OS in the training set were 0.750, 0.737, and 0.719; and were 0.645, 0.766, and 0.725 in the validation set. The calibration curves showed a good match between the predicted probabilities and the actual probabilities. CONCLUSIONS: We identified a four-gene predictive signature which represents an independent prognostic factor and can be used to identify high-risk patients from different TNM stages of LUAD. A new prognostic model that combines a prognostic gene signature with clinical features exhibited better discriminatory ability for OS than traditional TNM staging. |
---|