The m6A/m5C/m1A regulator genes signature reveals the prognosis and is related with immune microenvironment for hepatocellular carcinoma.
Hepatocellular carcinoma
Prognostic model
Tumor immune microenvironment
m6A/ m5C/m1A regulatory genes
Journal
BMC gastroenterology
ISSN: 1471-230X
Titre abrégé: BMC Gastroenterol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968547
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 May 2023
11 May 2023
Historique:
received:
21
06
2022
accepted:
20
04
2023
medline:
15
5
2023
pubmed:
12
5
2023
entrez:
11
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
RNA methylation is a crucial in many biological functions, and its aberrant regulation is associated with cancer progression. N6-Methyladenosine (m6A), 5-Methylcytosine (m5C), N1-methyladenosine (m1A) are common modifications of RNA methylation. However, the effect of methylation of m6A/m5C/m1A in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear. The transcriptome datasets, clinic information, and mutational data of 48 m6A/m5C/m1A regulator genes were acquired from the TCGA database, and the prognostic hazard model was established by univariate and Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) regression. The multivariate regression was performed to determine whether the risk score was an independent prognostic indicator. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and ROC curve analysis were used to evaluate the predictive ability of the risk model. Decision curve analysis（DCA）analysis was conducted to estimate the clinical utility of the risk model. We further analyzed the association between risk score and functional enrichment, tumor immune microenvironment, and somatic mutation. The four-gene (YTHDF1, YBX1, TRMT10C, TRMT61A) risk signature was constructed. The high-risk group had shorter overall survival (OS) than the low-risk group. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis indicated that risk score was an independent prognostic indicator. Risk scores in male group, T3 + T4 group and Stage III + IV group were higher in female group, T1 + T2 group and stage I + II group. The AUC values for 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS in the TCGA dataset were 0.764, 0.693, and 0.689, respectively. DCA analysis showed that the risk score had a higher clinical net benefit in 1- and 2-year OS than other clinical features.The risk score was positively related to some immune cell infiltration and most immune checkpoints. We developed a novel m6A/m5C/m1A regulator genes' prognostic model, which could be applied as a latent prognostic tool for HCC and might guide the choice of immunotherapies.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
RNA methylation is a crucial in many biological functions, and its aberrant regulation is associated with cancer progression. N6-Methyladenosine (m6A), 5-Methylcytosine (m5C), N1-methyladenosine (m1A) are common modifications of RNA methylation. However, the effect of methylation of m6A/m5C/m1A in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains unclear.
METHOD
METHODS
The transcriptome datasets, clinic information, and mutational data of 48 m6A/m5C/m1A regulator genes were acquired from the TCGA database, and the prognostic hazard model was established by univariate and Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) regression. The multivariate regression was performed to determine whether the risk score was an independent prognostic indicator. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and ROC curve analysis were used to evaluate the predictive ability of the risk model. Decision curve analysis（DCA）analysis was conducted to estimate the clinical utility of the risk model. We further analyzed the association between risk score and functional enrichment, tumor immune microenvironment, and somatic mutation.
RESULT
RESULTS
The four-gene (YTHDF1, YBX1, TRMT10C, TRMT61A) risk signature was constructed. The high-risk group had shorter overall survival (OS) than the low-risk group. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis indicated that risk score was an independent prognostic indicator. Risk scores in male group, T3 + T4 group and Stage III + IV group were higher in female group, T1 + T2 group and stage I + II group. The AUC values for 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS in the TCGA dataset were 0.764, 0.693, and 0.689, respectively. DCA analysis showed that the risk score had a higher clinical net benefit in 1- and 2-year OS than other clinical features.The risk score was positively related to some immune cell infiltration and most immune checkpoints.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
We developed a novel m6A/m5C/m1A regulator genes' prognostic model, which could be applied as a latent prognostic tool for HCC and might guide the choice of immunotherapies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37170222
doi: 10.1186/s12876-023-02776-6
pii: 10.1186/s12876-023-02776-6
pmc: PMC10173529
doi:
Substances chimiques
RNA
63231-63-0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
147Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Genomics Proteomics Bioinformatics. 2018 Jun;16(3):155-161
pubmed: 29908293
Oncogene. 2018 Jan 25;37(4):522-533
pubmed: 28991227
Front Genet. 2021 Dec 06;12:782699
pubmed: 34938324
Integr Biol (Camb). 2016 Jan;8(1):104-19
pubmed: 26686751
Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2018 May 01;48(5):426-433
pubmed: 29635473
Front Immunol. 2021 Mar 10;12:641507
pubmed: 33777035
Cancer Res. 2006 Jan 15;66(2):605-12
pubmed: 16423985
BMC Bioinformatics. 2013 Jan 16;14:7
pubmed: 23323831
RNA Biol. 2020 Nov;17(11):1560-1575
pubmed: 31994439
J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2019 Sep 6;38(1):393
pubmed: 31492150
J Hematol Oncol. 2020 Jan 8;13(1):5
pubmed: 31915027
Mol Ther Nucleic Acids. 2020 Oct 04;22:750-765
pubmed: 33230473
Front Cell Dev Biol. 2022 Feb 16;10:842220
pubmed: 35252205
Nat Cell Biol. 2019 Aug;21(8):978-990
pubmed: 31358969
J Cell Mol Med. 2021 Sep;25(17):8405-8418
pubmed: 34288419
Biomark Res. 2022 Apr 1;10(1):15
pubmed: 35365216
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Feb 7;:
pubmed: 29415318
Trends Cell Biol. 2022 Jan;32(1):30-44
pubmed: 34304958
OMICS. 2012 May;16(5):284-7
pubmed: 22455463
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020 Jun;9(3):575-586
pubmed: 32676321
Genes (Basel). 2019 Jan 30;10(2):
pubmed: 30704115
Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Sep 24;22(19):
pubmed: 34638642
Trends Cancer. 2016 Oct 1;2(1):20-34
pubmed: 26949745
Nat Methods. 2015 May;12(5):453-7
pubmed: 25822800
Int J Biol Sci. 2021 Aug 2;17(13):3369-3380
pubmed: 34512153
Front Immunol. 2022 Mar 24;13:805967
pubmed: 35401564
Nat Chem Biol. 2016 May;12(5):311-6
pubmed: 26863410
Sci Rep. 2021 Apr 13;11(1):8069
pubmed: 33850225
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2018 Jan;141(1):59-68.e4
pubmed: 28669558
Front Oncol. 2019 Sep 18;9:903
pubmed: 31620363
Mol Cancer. 2018 Nov 23;17(1):167
pubmed: 30470227
Front Oncol. 2020 Aug 19;10:1119
pubmed: 32974125
Cancer Lett. 2018 Feb 28;415:11-19
pubmed: 29174803
Hepatology. 2018 Jun;67(6):2254-2270
pubmed: 29171881
Cancer Res. 2016 Nov 15;76(22):6439-6442
pubmed: 28148676
Nat Commun. 2019 May 6;10(1):2065
pubmed: 31061416
Cancer Cell. 2009 May 5;15(5):402-15
pubmed: 19411069
Cancer Sci. 2019 Jan;110(1):166-179
pubmed: 30426615
Cancer Control. 2022 Jan-Dec;29:10732748221129451
pubmed: 36283420
Front Mol Biosci. 2020 Dec 10;7:604766
pubmed: 33363211
Med Sci Monit. 2021 Oct 25;27:e930994
pubmed: 34690344
Semin Cancer Biol. 2020 Oct;65:1-12
pubmed: 31265893
Eur J Public Health. 2020 Oct 1;30(5):1026-1027
pubmed: 31764976
Semin Cancer Biol. 2021 Oct;75:97-115
pubmed: 33220459
Mol Cancer. 2019 Dec 4;18(1):176
pubmed: 31801551
Immunity. 2013 Oct 17;39(4):782-95
pubmed: 24138885
J Cell Physiol. 2018 Sep;233(9):7055-7066
pubmed: 29384212
Am J Transl Res. 2020 Mar 15;12(3):912-922
pubmed: 32269723
Cancer Res. 2018 Jan 15;78(2):410-421
pubmed: 29180470
Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2014 Jan;46:138-47
pubmed: 24291763
Nat Commun. 2021 Nov 2;12(1):6314
pubmed: 34728628
Sci Rep. 2021 Jun 7;11(1):11926
pubmed: 34099740
Front Oncol. 2019 May 03;9:332
pubmed: 31131257
Neoplasia. 2022 Mar;25:18-27
pubmed: 35078134
Cell Rep. 2017 Mar 14;18(11):2622-2634
pubmed: 28297667
DNA Cell Biol. 2020 Oct;39(10):1767-1778
pubmed: 32833542
Front Genet. 2021 Jul 09;12:680369
pubmed: 34306023