Construction of a microenvironment immune gene model for predicting the prognosis of endometrial cancer

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-355638/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Construction of a microenvironment immune gene model for predicting the prognosis of endometrial cancer

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-355638/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 11 Nov, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Cancer →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background: Infiltrating immune and stromal cells are important components of the endometrial cancer (EC) microenvironment, which has a significant effect on the biological behavior of EC, suggesting that unique immune-related genes may be associated with the prognosis of EC. However, the association of immune-related genes with the prognosis of EC has not been elucidated. We attempted to identify immune-related genes with potentially prognostic value in EC using The Cancer Genome Atlas database and the relationship between immune microenvironment and EC.

Methods: We analyzed 578 EC samples from TCGA database and used weighted gene co-expression network analysis to screen out immune-related genes. We constructed a protein–protein interaction network and analyzed it using STRING and Cytoscape.

Results: Using conjoint Cox regression and random forest algorithm, we found that TRBC2, TRAC, LPXN, and ARHGAP30 were associated with the prognosis of EC and constructed four gene risk models for overall survival and a consistent nomogram. The time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the area under the curve for 1-, 3-, and 5-y overall survival was 0.687, 0.699, and 0.76, respectively. These results were validated using a validation cohort. Immune-related pathways were mostly enriched in the low-risk group, which had higher levels of immune infiltration and immune status.

Conclusion: Our study provides new insights for novel biomarkers and immunotherapy targets in EC.

Cancer Biology

Oncology

endometrial cancer

immune microenvironment

prognosis

nomogram

immune status

Endometrial cancer (EC) is a common gynecological malignant tumor. In recent years, the incidence of EC has increased, with a trend of occurrence in younger generations[1].

The main causes of EC include obesity and endocrine disorders[2, 3]. The immune microenvironment has been reported to significantly affect the biological behavior and prognosis of EC[4]. Therefore, the expression of inflammatory genes might be associated with the prognosis of EC. However, prognostic models associated with the expression of immune genes in EC have not yet been established [5]. The establishment of new genome-sequencing technologies and genomic databases has enabled the discovery of tumor biomarkers. Several studies have attempted to evaluate the prognostic value of infiltrating immune and stromal cells in malignancies (hepatocellular carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, and osteosarcoma)[6–8]. Thus, we attempted to identify immune-related genes with potentially prognostic value in EC using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database and the relationship between immune microenvironment and EC. This may provide strategies for the development of new immunotherapy modalities for patients with EC.

Data sources and preprocessing

TCGA-UCEC-standardized FPKM data (https://bioinformatics.mdanderson.org/), survival data, and clinical information were downloaded from the UCSC Xena official website (https://xena.ucsc.edu/). The TME was assessed in 543 EC samples using the ESTIMATE package in R (version 4.0.2; https://www.r-project.org)[9]. Gene expression datasets were prepared using standard annotation files and uploaded to the CIBERSORT web portal (http://cibersort.stanford.edu/), with the algorithm based on the default signature matrix at 1000 permutations. After converting the gene expression matrix into the immune cell matrix and applying filtering criteria for gene transcription (P < 0.05) in CIBERSORT (Perm = 1000), 283 samples (6 normal and 277 tumor tissues) were selected to visualize the matrix of 22 immune cell fractions.

Visual display of immune cell types

The matrices of 22 immune cell subsets, their correlations, and gene expression profiles were visualized as barplots, boxplots, heat maps, and t-SNE using the ggpubr, corrplot, and Rtsne R packages[10].

Evaluation of EC-infiltrating immune cells and the TME

ESTIMATE is a tool used for predicting tumor purity and the presence of infiltrating stromal/immune cells in the TME based on gene expression data. The ESTIMATE algorithm is based on single-sample gene set enrichment analysis (ssGSEA), generating three scores, namely, stromal cell scores, immune cell scores, and ESTIMATE scores (which have been shown to exhibit a higher correlation with tumor purity than stromal-only and immune-only scores).

Screening representative genes in the EC immune microenvironment by weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA)

We employed the WGCNA to screen for genes with a median absolute deviation of the top 75% and genes with MAD > 0.01 to analyze the immune score-related modules. We then used the WGCNA R package to construct a gene co-expression network, using genetic methods to generate a dynamic shear module, and performed cluster analysis of the module[11]. Genes with similar expression levels were assigned to the same module, with the important parameters being minModuleSize = 30 and mergeCutHeight = 0.25. Our results showed that genes in the four modules (salmon, red, royal blue, and purple) had a high correlation with the immune score (P < 0.05). All genes with GS correlation > 0.2 and MM correlation > 0.8 were extracted in the four modules.

Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) and Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analyses

Data analysis was performed using clusterProfiler packages in R[12]. A false discovery rate (FDR ) < 0.05 was set as the cut-off criterion indicating significant enrichment of functional GO terms and KEGG pathways.

Protein–protein interaction (PPI) network and hub gene selection

The cytoHubba (version 0.1) plug-in of Cytoscape (version 3.7.2) was used to screen out hub genes based on degree. ClueGO is a plug-in of Cytoscape to visualize nonredundant biological terms for large clusters of genes in a functionally grouped network. We also performed the GO analysis of key genes and visualized the biological processes using ClueGO (version 2.5.4). In addition, we constructed a hierarchical cluster of key genes.

Selection and verification of prognosis-related genes

We used the expression data transformed by log₂(FPKM + 1) and the corresponding clinical information to screen out the prognosis-related genes using univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis in the training cohort (Hazard Ratio [HR] ≠ 1, P < 0.05). Finally, 58 prognosis-related genes were used in the subsequent analysis. We applied the random forest algorithm to construct a multigene signature for predicting prognosis in EC using the "randomForest" package of R software[13]. The top four genes with high IncNodePurity value were selected for the downstream analysis. Subsequently, multivariate Cox regression was employed to construct the prognosis-related gene model.

Establishment and validation of multigene prognostic signature

The validation (n = 134) and entire (N = 529) cohorts were used to validate the predictive capability and applicability of the multigene prognostic signature in EC. In the validation cohort, the risk score of each patient was calculated using the coefficients of TRBC2, TRAC, LPXN, and ARHGAP30. Patients were then stratified into high- and low-risk groups by 1 (risk score). We used the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis with log-rank test and tROC analysis to validate the multigene prognostic signature.

Construction and validation of gene prognostic nomogram

A composite nomogram was constructed based on all independent prognostic parameters screened using the above multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis to predict the probability of 1-, 3-, and 5-y OS. Then assessed the predictive accuracy of nomogram by employing the timeROC package of R software. We used a bootstrap method with 1000 resamples to generate a calibration curve to visualize the performance of the nomogram with the observed rates of the entire cohort at the corresponding time points.

Evaluation of immune status

The immune status of each sample was quantified using the single-sample gene-set enrichment analysis (ssGSEA) with 29 immune-related gene signatures (Supplementary Table 1). ssGSEA was conducted using R package “GSVA.”[14] We then analyzed the expression of a pool of key immune checkpoint molecules (CD274, PDCD1, CTLA4, LAG3, HAVCR2, TIGIT, CD27, CD40, CD70, TNFRSF14, CD276, VTCN1, IDO1, PDCD1LG2, CD86, and ICOS) between the low- and high-risk groups.

Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA)

As for the ultimate prognosis-related genes used, we performed the GSEA to identify potential biological pathways. The entire cohort of 529 EC samples was divided into two groups based on the risk group analysis. Using the DESeq2 R package[15], we compared the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the low- and high-risk groups, and obtained an expression matrix of 8320 genes (FDR < 0.05), sorted by fold change. GSEA (v4.1, http://software.broadinstitute.org/gsea/) was then performed using the JAVA 8.0 platform. The c5.bp.v7.1.symbols.gmt-annotated gene set obtained from the MSigDB was chosen as the reference set to calculate the enrichment score (ES), which estimated whether genes from the previously defined gene sets were enriched in the high-/low-risk groups. The number of permutations was set to 1000. Gene sets with less than 15 genes or more than 500 genes were excluded. A gene set was considered as an enriched group when the normalized P value was < 0.05 and FDR was < 0.25.

Gene set variation analysis (GSVA)

Pathway analyses were performed on the 50 hallmark pathways described in h.all.v7.2.symbols_hallmarks.gmt of the molecular signature database (MSigDB); they were exported using the R package “GSEA”. Next, to assign pathway activity estimates to samples, we performed the GSVA using standard settings with R package “GSVA”[14]. Then, we compared the differences activity of pathway between the two groups. A pathway was considered as significant pathway when the normalized adjust P value was < 0.05 and absolute t value was > 3.27.

Stemness analysis

The stemness signature was exported from the R package “scCancer.” We then defined the stemness score as the Spearman correlation coefficient between stemness signature and sample expression.

Mutation analysis

The WES data of TNBC patients were obtained from TCGA. The mutation data of low- and high-risk groups were analyzed using the R package “maftools”[16]. Somatic mutation sites were filtered under the following conditions: (i) allele frequency > 5%; (ii) sequencing depth > 9; (iii) reads supporting the alternate allele > 2.

Statistical analysis

Tumor samples were randomly stratified into two groups using the “sample” function of R software. The heatmap of prognostic genes was plotted using the “pheatmap” R package with zero-mean normalization. Two groups of boxplots were analyzed using Wilcoxon test. Accordingly, Kaplan–Meier curves, P-values, and HRs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were generated using log-rank tests and univariate Cox proportional hazards regression. All analytical methods above were performed using R software version 4.0.2. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results with P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Analysis of immune cell subsets of EC using ESTIMATE and CIBERSORT

The analysis of cellular characteristics showed that tumor-related macrophages were the most abundant TME-infiltrating cells, followed by CD8⁺ T-cells. We noted that the numbers of M0 and M1 macrophages were low in normal tissues, but high in cancer tissues (Fig. 1a, 1c). We also observed that the levels of activated macrophages M0 and CD8⁺ T-cells decreased with EC stage, whereas M1 and M2 macrophages increased with EC stage (Supplementary Fig. 1). The correlation heatmap revealed that CD4⁺ T-cells and M0 macrophages were negatively correlated with resting memory CD8⁺ T-cells, activated mast cells and M0 macrophages were negatively correlated with resting mast cells, and CD8⁺ T-cells were positively correlated with CD4⁺ T-cells (Fig. 1b). Similarly, the obtained boxplot showed an increase in follicular helper T-cells, T-regulatory cells (Tregs), and M0 and M1 macrophages in cancer tissues compared with those in normal tissues. In contrast, we found that naive B-cells, CD4 memory resting T-cells, gamma delta T-cells, activated NK cells, and mast cells showed high abundance in normal tissues, but low abundance in tumor tissues (Fig. 1c). The tSNE plot of 22 immune signatures showed an increased number of M0 macrophages in tumor tissues compared with that in normal tissues (Fig. 1d).

Construction of weighted co-expression network and identification of gene modules

We chose a threshold value of 7 for the WGCNA, which had the lowest power of the scale-free topological fit index of 0.85 (Fig. 2a). After merging similar clusters, we identified 21 modules that contained groups of genes with similar patterns of connection strengths with other genes (Fig. 2b, 2c). Finally, we determined the correlation between these modules and traits (Fig. 2d). A significant association was found between the salmon, red, royal blue, and purple modules and stromal cell, immune cell, and ESTIMATE scores. Evaluating the correlation between GS and MM is key in measuring the quality of the construction of gene modules. After correlating the modules with the ImmuneScore, the correlation between GS and MM in the four modules was observed to reach 0.39, 0.99, 0.9, and 0.22 (Fig. 2e). Thus, we set more stringent screening conditions, namely GS correlation > 0.2 and MM correlation > 0.8, and finally selected 107 key genes for the downstream analyses.

GO and KEGG functional enrichment analyses

Using the “clusterProfiler” R package, 434 GO terms and 37 KEGG pathway were indicated in 107 key genes. The KEGG pathway analysis showed that the top 15 significantly enriched pathways were related to hematopoietic cell lineage, phagosome pathways, and the human T-cell leukemia virus 1 infection pathway (Supplementary Fig. 2a). The top five GO terms of each subclass were found to be mainly related to immune activation, such as T-cell activation and proliferation (Supplementary Fig. 2b).

PPI network of key genes

To better understand the interplay among the key genes, we constructed a PPI network using STRING, which revealed that all key genes were densely interconnected. The PPI network of the top 20 key genes sorted by degree using Cytoscape software revealed several gene interactions (Supplementary Fig. 3a). The biological process analysis of the key genes is shown in Supplementary Fig. 3b.

Establishment of a prognostic risk model of the four immune-related genes

The entire cohort (N = 529) was divided into the training (n = 395) and validation (n = 134) groups based on stratified sampling according to AJCC staging. The univariate Cox regression analysis of the training group showed that 58 immune-related genes were found to be associated with the OS of patients (P < 0.05; Fig. 3a). To verify the reliability of the model, we selected four immune-related genes using the random forest algorithm (Fig. 3b), with its coefficient in multivariate Cox regression as follows: four immune-related genes with risk scores − 0.08485*Exp(LPXN), -0.18955*Exp(TRBC2), -0.14632*Exp(TRAC), and 0.13717*Exp(ARHGAP30). We noted significant differences between the high- and low-risk groups. Additionally, up on optimization of the expression median for analysis of the four immune-related genes based on the selected cut-off, we found that the low expression of TRBC2, LPXN, TRAC, and ARHGAP30 was associated a with poor prognosis (Fig. 3c). We then calculated the risk score for each patient, with 1 as the cut-off point, and divided the patients into the high-risk (n = 255) and low-risk (n = 274) groups (Fig. 3d); the expression heatmap of these four genes in the two groups is shown in Fig. 3e.

Prognostic analysis of the four immune-related genes classifier and construction of the nomogram prognostic model

The Kaplan–Meier analysis of the OS showed that the high-risk group in the training cohort was associated with poor OS (P = 0.0026), whereas the OS rate of high-risk patients in the validation and entire cohorts was significantly lower than that of low-risk patients (P = 0.038, P < 0.0001) (Fig. 4a). As shown in Fig. 4b, time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that the area under the curve (AUC) for 1-, 3-, and 5-y OS in the training cohort was 0.687, 0.699, and 0.76, respectively. The predictive value of the four immune-related gene classifiers was confirmed in the validation cohort, which showed that the AUCs for 1-, 3-, and 5-y OS in the validation cohort were 0.445, 0.606, and 0.679, respectively, whereas those of the entire cohort were 0.637, 0.671, and 0.74, respectively. To establish a more reliable predictive method for clinical practice, we combined the two cohorts (n = 453) and constructed a compound nomogram. We performed univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses on the relationship between clinical characteristic variables and OS (Supplementary Table 2). Meanwhile, by drawing the ROC curve, we found that risk score has a better predictive ability than other clinical factors for 5-y OS. The AUC of ROC increased after combining the risk score with other clinical factors (Fig. 4c), which suggested that the risk score may be an independent risk factor for patients. As shown in Fig. 4d, we employed these variables to analyze the survival probability of patients at 1, 3, and 5 y. To verify the predictive value of the nomogram, we used C-statistics to analyze the generated nomogram model. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.818 (95% CI, 0.865–0.77). In addition, the calibration plot generated for patients with a 1-, 3-, and 5-y OS prediction demonstrated that the predicted outcome of the nomogram showed a good agreement with the actual outcome (Fig. 4e). Finally, we used the online website GEPIA2 to analyze the overall prognosis of four immune-related genes in endemic cancer (Fig. 5).

Tumor microenvironment and immune status

To understand the immunological evaluation value of the model, we performed immunological analysis between the high- and low- risk groups. The ssGSEA analysis of the immune status of patients showed that type I IFN response was not significantly different between the groups. However, the scores of other immune cells, immune function, and immune pathway gene set were significantly higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group, indicating that the immune status of the low-risk group was higher than that of the high-risk group (Fig. 6a, Supplementary Fig. 4a). In addition, we compare the immune infiltration results of CIBERSORT analysis between the groups (Fig. 6b). The results show that the infiltration of T cells CD8, T cells follicular helper, T cells regulatory (Tregs), T cells gamma delta, and macrophages M1 in the low-risk group was significantly higher than that in the high-risk group (Supplementary Fig. 4b). The results of the ESTIMATE analysis showed that the immune score, stromal score, and ESTIMATE score of the low-risk group were significantly higher than those of the high-risk group. Furthermore, the tumor purity was significantly lower than that of the high-risk group, indicating that the degree of immune infiltration in the low-risk group was higher than that in the high-risk group (Fig. 6c). The checkpoint score based on the ssGSEA showed that the low-risk group was more suitable for immunotherapy than the high-risk group. We analyzed the clinical common immune checkpoint expression, tumor mutation burden (TMB), and mutant-allele tumor heterogeneity (MATH) of patients in the two groups, respectively, as references for the evaluation of clinical immunotherapy. The expression of immune checkpoints except CD276 (no significant) and TMB were higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group, and MATH was significantly lower in the low-risk group (Fig. 6d, 6e, and 6f). These results indicated that the gene model has a good ability for immune evaluation, and the low-risk group has higher immune infiltration and immune status, which may result in better efficacy of immunotherapy.

Enrichment analysis, stemness analysis, and mutation profile

We further stratified the transcript levels of patients according to risk score into the high- and low-risk subgroups. We performed the GSEA to identify potential biological processes in the four immune-related prognostic gene model. Our results revealed that the pathways of T-cell activation, T-cell proliferation, activation of immune response, and alpha beta T-cell activation were enriched in low-risk patients. The details are shown in Fig. 7a. We also generated a heatmap of the transcriptional expression profiles of the 100 DEGs (Supplementary Fig. 5). In addition, Supplementary Table 3 shows the enrichment score and statistical significance of each pathway. The hallmark pathway enrichment results showed that the top six hallmark pathways in the low-risk group were all immune-related (Fig. 7b).

Stemness is one of the factors that determine the malignancy of a tumor. In the analysis of stemness, we found that the low-risk group had lower stemness than the high-risk group (Fig. 7c). This might be one of the reasons for the better prognosis in the low-risk group. For further research of potential mechanism of EC in the different risk groups, we analyzed the somatic mutation data of the two groups of patients and showed the mutation profile (Fig. 7d). There were some differences in the top 20 genes between the groups. The top 10 genes of mutation frequency in the high-risk group were PTEN (46%), PIK3CA (45%), TP53 (45%), ARID1A (35%), PIK3R1 (27%), KMT2D (23%), CTNNB1 (21%), ZFHX3 (19%), CHD4 (18%) and FBXW7 (18%). And the top 10 genes of mutation frequency in the low-risk group were PTEN (67%), PIK3CA (51%), ARID1A (50%), PIK3R1 (32%), CTCF (31%), KMT2D (30%), ZFHX3 (28%), FAT4 (28%), FAT1 (27%), TP53 (27%), CTNNB1 (26%) and LRP1B (25%). These results indicate that our gene model has good performance and could be considered as a candidate factor for clinical indicators.

The incidence of EC has been increasing annually, ranking it the first among gynecological malignancies in developed nations[17, 18]. The treatment options for EC include surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, hormone therapy, and targeted therapy[19, 20]. However, treatment efficacy has been reported to be reduced in patients with recurrent or specific pathological types of EC[21]. Abundant infiltrating immune cells and cytokines, which can stimulate endogenous antitumor immune responses, have been typically observed in EC tissues, indicating that the immune microenvironment can influence the prognostic survival of patients with EC[22].

In this study, we performed TCGA data mining to reveal correlations between the infiltration pattern of immune cells into the TME and the clinical characteristics of patients with EC. Our results showed that a large number of immune cells infiltrated the interstitium of EC, among which M0 macrophages, followed by CD8⁺ T-cells, were found to be the most common immune cells. These cells are known to be important regulators of the TME, playing an important role in the occurrence, progression, and prognosis of EC. Interestingly, the proportion of M0 macrophages in tumor and normal tissues was significantly different (P < 0.001). However, as the tumor progressed, the proportion of M0 macrophages gradually decreased, whereas that of M2 macrophages gradually increased, indicating that TME signals emitted by tumor or mesenchymal cells can polarize undifferentiated macrophages into M2 macrophages (tumor-associated macrophages, TAMs)[23, 24]. In particular, TAMs are known to pass through multiple signals and promote the occurrence and development of tumors, which is an important factor implicated in the poor prognosis of EC[25].

The PPI analysis revealed that the top 20 hub genes in the EC microenvironment were related to integrin, immune signaling adapter, and leukocyte surface antigen pathways. We found that 16 of the 20 hub genes were associated with patient survival (P < 0.05). TYROBP (transmembrane immune signaling adapter TYROBP), which was the second highest interconnected node in the PPI network revealed to be negatively associated with OS, was found to be upregulated in EC tumor tissues. TYROBP is known to be tyrosine-phosphorylated in the ITAM domain following ligand binding by the associated receptors, leading to the activation of additional tyrosine kinases and subsequent cell activation[26, 27]. The intersected genes screened out among key genes and prognosis-related genes in the training cohort using univariate Cox regression methods were used for random forest algorithm to identify the four genes (TRAC, TRBC2, LPXN, and ARHGAP30) significantly associated with the OS of patients with EC. Both TRAC and TRBC2 have been reported to express the alpha and beta chains of the T-cell receptor[28–31]. The alpha and beta T-cell receptors are specific antigen receptors that are essential for the immune response and are present on the surface of T-lymphocytes for the recognition of peptide-major histocompatibility complexes (MHCs) displayed by antigen-presenting cells (APCs). After identifying these four prognostic genes, we developed a four-gene prognostic signature and investigated its prognostic value in patients with EC. Patients in the high-risk group showed a significantly worse prognosis than those in the low-risk group. The AUC value of the prognostic model (AUC = 0.774) was greater than that of stage (AUC = 0.731), grade (AUC = 0.659), tumor invasion percent (AUC = 0.627) and age (AUC = 0.593). This indicates that the prognostic model is more accurate than the commonly used clinical prognostic indicators. We then built a nomogram incorporating the risk score, tumor invasion percentage, age, AJCC stage, and grade to visualize the prognosis of patients with EC. This can be used to predict the individual 1-, 3-, and 5-y OS probability specifically according to the risk score and other conventional clinical prognostic parameters; therefore, our prognostic model may help clinicians decide on better EC treatments.

TME plays an important role in tumor development[32, 33]. Therefore, the study of the molecular composition and function of tumor microenvironment is of great importance for the assessment of the progression and immune response of EC. Immune score and stromal score were obtained through the ESTIMATE analysis, and the ESTIMATE score and tumor purity were predicted based on these two scores. The results showed that immune cell infiltration was higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group. The results of the CIBERSORT analysis indicate that the infiltration of T cells CD8, T cells follicular helper, T cells regulatory (Tregs), T cells gamma delta, and macrophages M1 in the low-risk group was significantly higher than that in the high-risk group. Through the ssGSEA, we analyzed the enrichment of genes of immune cells, immune function, and immune pathway activity in each sample. The results of the ssGSEA revealed that the immune activity of the low-risk groups was higher than that of the high-risk group. Moreover, the GSEA and hallmark pathway analysis showed that immune-related pathways, including the activation of the immune response and molecular signals induced by it were enriched in the low-risk group. These results indicate that the immune ability of patients was stronger in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group, indicating a better prognosis. Hence, by exploring the response of the immune checkpoint inhibitors, we found that the expression of 15 immune checkpoints and TMB were significantly higher in the low-risk group than in the high-risk group, and the MATH of the low-risk group was lower than that of the high-risk group. According to these findings, we speculate that EC patients with a low-risk score might have a better response to these checkpoint inhibitors.

Nevertheless, there were some limitations associated with our study. First, the present study was completely based on data obtained from TCGA database. Thus, the results should be validated using external databases and additional clinical-based experiments. Second, the predictive value of the immune-related prognostic model should be experimentally tested using a large number of EC samples. Third, our study only focused on large-scale mRNA sequencing data from TCGA platform. However, other types of data, such as copy number variations, and DNA methylation, are also provided in the public dataset. If possible, these four novel biomarkers should be further analyzed to determine whether their expression levels are associated with the mutation types mentioned above.

In our current study, by integrating transcriptome and clinical data, we identified a novel prognostic model in EC. Combined with immunological and genomic analysis, we demonstrate that this novel immune gene model could potentially be used in clinical practice for assessing the individual risk and potentially guide treatment strategies.

EC: endometrial cancer; TME: tumor microenvironment; OS: overall survival; ESTIMATE: Estimation of STromal and Immune cells in MAlignant Tumors using Expression data; GO: Gene Ontology; TCGA: The Cancer Genome Atlas; WGCNA: weighted gene co-expression network analysis. ROC: receiver operating characteristic; KM: Kaplan–Meier; TRAC: T-cell receptor alpha constant; TRBC2: T-cell receptor beta constant 2; LPXN: leupaxin, paxillin protein family; ARHGAP30: Rho GTPase activating protein 30; WES: whole exome sequencing; TMB: tumor mutation burden; MATH: mutant-allele tumor heterogeneity

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent for publication

We have obtained oral consent to publish this paper from all participants in this study.

Availability of data and materials

The TCGA-UCEC-standardized FPKM data used during the current study are available in the https://bioinformatics.mdanderson.org/. WES data obtained from TCGA database is available at: https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov/projects. Survival data and clinical information are available in the UCSC Xena official website (https://xena.ucsc.edu/).

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

This research work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81872655 to ZGL, NO. 81602200 to DKL).

Authors' contributions

Study concept and design: YCW, QL, DKL, ZGL. Administrative support: QL, DKL, ZGL. Data acquisition: YCW, JKZ. Data analysis and interpretation: YCW, JKZ. Manuscript writing: All authors. Critical revision: All authors. Final approval of manuscript: All authors.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank members of their laboratory and their collaborators for their assistance with this study.

Aşıcıoğlu O, Gungorduk K, Ozdemir A, Güngördük Ö, Gokçü M, Yaşar L, Sancı M: A novel preoperative scoring system based on 18-FDG PET-CT for predicting lymph node metastases in patients with high-risk endometrial cancer. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology : the journal of the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2019, 39(1):105-109.
Schmandt R, Iglesias D, Co N, Lu K: Understanding obesity and endometrial cancer risk: opportunities for prevention. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2011, 205(6):518-525.
Monsivais D, Peng J, Kang Y, Matzuk M: Activin-like kinase 5 (ALK5) inactivation in the mouse uterus results in metastatic endometrial carcinoma. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2019, 116(9):3883-3892.
Dossus L, Lukanova A, Rinaldi S, Allen N, Cust A, Becker S, Tjonneland A, Hansen L, Overvad K, Chabbert-Buffet N et al: Hormonal, metabolic, and inflammatory profiles and endometrial cancer risk within the EPIC cohort--a factor analysis. American journal of epidemiology 2013, 177(8):787-799.
Li N, Yu K, Lin Z, Zeng D: Development and Validation of a Five-immune Gene Pair Signature in Endometrial Carcinoma. Combinatorial chemistry & high throughput screening 2021, 24(2):233-245.
Wang Z, Zhu J, Liu Y, Liu C, Ma L: Development and validation of a novel immune-related prognostic model in hepatocellular carcinoma. Journal of Translational Medicine 2020, 18(1).
Zeng Q, Zhang W, Li X, Lai J, Li Z: Bioinformatic identification of renal cell carcinoma microenvironment-associated biomarkers with therapeutic and prognostic value. Life Sciences 2020, 243:117273.
Zhang C, Zheng JH, Lin ZH, Lv HY, Zhang XY: Profiles of immune cell infiltration and immune-related genes in the tumor microenvironment of osteosarcoma. Aging 2020, 12(4).
Yoshihara K, Shahmoradgoli M, Martínez E, Vegesna R, Kim H, Torres-Garcia W, Trevi?O V, Shen H, Laird PW, Levine DA: Inferring tumour purity and stromal and immune cell admixture from expression data. Nature Communications 2013, 4.
Kobak D, Berens P: The art of using t-SNE for single-cell transcriptomics. Nature Communications 2019, 10(1).
Langfelder P, Horvath S: WGCNA: an R package for weighted correlation network analysis. Bmc Bioinformatics 2008, 9(1):559.
Yu G, Wang LG, Han Y, He QY: clusterProfiler: an R package for comparing biological themes among gene clusters. Omics-a Journal of Integrative Biology 2012, 16(5):284-287.
Ya-Han, Hu, Chun-Tien, Tai, Chih-Fong, Tsai, Min-Wei, Huang: Improvement of Adequate Digoxin Dosage: An Application of Machine Learning Approach. Journal of Healthcare Engineering 2018.
Hnzelmann S, Castelo R, Guinney J: GSVA: gene set variation analysis for microarray and RNA-Seq data. Bmc Bioinformatics 2013, 14(1):7-7.
Love MI, Huber W, Anders S: Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biology 2014, 15(12):550.
Anand, Mayakonda, De-Chen, Lin, Yassen, Assenov, Christoph, Plass, Phillip: Maftools: efficient and comprehensive analysis of somatic variants in cancer. Genome Research 2018.
Lee YC, Lheureux S, Oza AM: Treatment strategies for endometrial cancer: current practice and perspective. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2017, 29(1):47-58.
Mcalpine JN, Temkin SM, Mbchb H, MD, MRCP: Endometrial cancer: Not your grandmother's cancer. Cancer 2016.
Slomovitz BM, Lu KH, Johnston T, Coleman RL, Munsell M, Broaddus RR, Walker C, Ramondetta LM, Burke TW, Gershenson DM: A phase 2 study of the oral mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, everolimus, in patients with recurrent endometrial carcinoma. Cancer 2010, 116(23):5415-5419.
Philippe, Morice, Alexandra, Leary, Carien, Creutzberg, Nadeem, Abu-Rustum, Emile, Darai: Endometrial cancer. Lancet 2016.
Holman L, Pal N, Iglesias D, Soliman P, Balakrishnan N, Klopp A, Broaddus R, Fleming N, Munsell M, Lu K et al: Factors prognostic of survival in advanced-stage uterine serous carcinoma. Gynecologic oncology 2017, 146(1):27-33.
Crumley S, Kurnit K, Hudgens C, Fellman B, Tetzlaff MT, Broaddus R: Identification of a Subset of Microsatellite-Stable Endometrial Carcinoma with High PD-L1 and CD8+ Lymphocytes. Modern Pathology 2018.
Gordon S, Taylor PR: Monocyte and macrophage heterogeneity. Nature Reviews Immunology.
Clear AJ, Lee AM, Calaminici M, Ramsay AG, Morris KJ, Hallam S, Kelly G, Macdougall F, Lister TA, Gribben JG: Increased angiogenic sprouting in poor prognosis FL is associated with elevated numbers of CD163+ macrophages within the immediate sprouting microenvironment. Blood 2010, 115(24):5053-5056.
Chanmee T, Ontong P, Konno K, Itano N: Tumor-Associated Macrophages as Major Players in the Tumor Microenvironment. Cancers 2014, 6(3):1670-1690.
Lanier LL, Corliss BC, Wu J, ., Leong C, ., Phillips JH: Immunoreceptor DAP12 bearing a tyrosine-based activation motif is involved in activating NK cells. Nature 2013, 1998年391卷6668期(6668):703-707页.
Paloneva J, Kestilä M, Wu J, Salminen A, Peltonen L: Loss-of-function mutations in TYROBP (DAP12) result in a presenile dementia with bone cysts. Nature Genetics 2000, 25(3):357-361.
Koop BF, Rowen L, Kai W, Kuo CL, Seto D, Lenstra JA, Howard S, Wei S, Deshpan De P, Hood L: The human T-cell receptor TCRAC/TCRDC (C alpha/C delta) region: organization, sequence, and evolution of 97.6 kb of DNA. Genomics 1994, 19(3):478.
Williams SC, Tomlinson I, Lefranc M, Frippiat JP: Sequence and evolution of the human germline V lambda repertoire. Journal of Molecular Biology 1996, 264(2):220-232.
Pal N: Factors prognostic of survival in advanced-stage uterine serous carcinoma. Gynecologic Oncology 2017, 146(1).
Tunnacliffe, Kefford, Milstein, Forster, H T, Rabbitts: Sequence and evolution of the human T-cell antigen receptor beta-chain genes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 1985.
Yang X, Jie Z, Huang K: Mining the tissue-tissue gene co-expression network for tumor microenvironment study and biomarker prediction. BMC Genomics 2013, 14(5):S4.
Xu Y: Lysophospholipid Signaling in the Epithelial Ovarian Cancer Tumor Microenvironment. Cancers 2018, 10(7):227-.

No competing interests reported.

SupplementaryFigure1.pdf
Supplementary Figure 1: Proportion of 22 immune cell types in different tumor stages.
SupplementaryFigure2.pdf
Supplementary Figure 2: Functional enrichment analysis of 107 key genes.
SupplementaryFigure3.pdf
Supplementary Figure 3: Interaction network and analysis of 107 key genes.
SupplementaryFigure4.pdf
Supplementary Figure 4: Box plot of (a) immune signature gene sets and (b) immune cell types.
SupplementaryFigure5.pdf
Supplementary Figure 5: Transcriptional expression profiles of the 100 significant genes were analyzed using a heatmap.
SupplementaryTable1.pdf
Supplementary Table 1: Gene sets of 29 immune-related gene signatures.
SupplementaryTable2.pdf
Supplementary Table 2: Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses in each group with the OS of patients with EC.
SupplementaryTable3.pdf
Supplementary Table 3: Gene sets enriched in the low-risk group of the EC cohort.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 11 Nov, 2021

Read the published version in BMC Cancer →

Editorial decision: Major revision
15 Jun, 2021
Reviews received at journal
23 May, 2021
Reviews received at journal
23 May, 2021
Reviewers agreed at journal
03 May, 2021
Reviewers agreed at journal
01 May, 2021
Reviewers invited by journal
15 Apr, 2021
Editor assigned by journal
15 Apr, 2021
Editor invited by journal
15 Apr, 2021
Submission checks completed at journal
15 Apr, 2021
First submitted to journal
23 Mar, 2021

You are reading this latest preprint version

Construction of a microenvironment immune gene model for predicting the prognosis of endometrial cancer

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

List Of Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Supplementary Files

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1