Workflow
A multi-step approach was used to identify and analyse the autophagy-dependent ferroptosis-related key gene in LUAD. The transcriptome and clinical information were downloaded from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project and Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) data. Autophagy-dependent ferroptosis-related genes were screened by the published articles. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) related to autophagy-dependent ferroptosis were identified. Univariate and multivariate Cox analyses were applied to screen out the independent prognosis genes related to overall survival (OS). The key gene was identified by the intersection of the DEGs and the prognostic genes. The LUAD patients were classified into the high-risk and low-risk groups based on the key gene expression level. Kaplan-Meier (K-M) analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were conducted to analyze the survival prognosis of patients in TCGA and GEO cohort. Chemotherapy sensitivity was predicted between different risk group. Gene ontology (GO) and Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes (KEGG) were conducted to investigate the potential bio-function of the key gene. ImmuneScore was calculated using the Tumor Immune Estimation Resource (TIMER) algorithm and the TMB was counted as the total number of mutations per megabyte of tumor tissue.
LUAD patients dataset processing
All the RNA-Seq data was normalized as fragments per kilobase of transcript per million mapped reads. mRNAs ensemble gene identities were derived from the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC) database. The corresponding clinical information include age, gender, tumor grade, lymph node metastasis, AJCC TNM stages and survival outcomes. Patients with insufficient clinical data were excluded. OS was estimated as the primary endpoint.
Construction and validation of an autophagy-dependent ferroptosis-related gene signature
Autophagy-dependent ferroptosis-related genes were retrieved from the literatures published before January 2021. The gene expression file was obtained after combining the related mRNA expression and the clinical data. The DEGs between tumor and normal tissues were identified with a false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.05 in the TCGA cohort. Univariate and multivariate Cox analysis of OS were performed to screen the genes with prognostic values. The key gene was identified by the intersection of the DEGs and the prognostic genes in the TCGA cohort. Patients were stratified into high-risk and low-risk groups based on the median value of the key gene expression. And the prognostic value was validated by a GEO cohort (GSE116959). The clinical correlation analysis of the key gene was conducted between high- and low-risk groups.The time-dependent ROC curve analyses were conduct to evaluate the predictive power of the key gene. The mRNA expression level of the key gene in various types of cancers were identified in the Oncomine database [16]. The mRNA and protein expression of the key gene in LUAD were determined using the Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA) and The Human Protein Atlas (HPA) database [17] [18].
Chemotherapeutic response prediction
The commonly used chemotherapy for lung adenocarcinoma, including pemetrexed, cisplatin, gemcitabine, paclitaxel, vinorelbine, docetaxel, doxorubicin, etoposide, erlotinib and gefitinib, were all analyzed in our study [19]. The chemotherapeutic response was estimated by using the R package “pRRophetic” [20]. The half maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50) of each patients of different risk group were compared.
Functional enrichment analysis
The biological functions and pathways of the key gene were elucidated through the DEGs between the high-risk and low-risk groups. GO enrichment and KEGG pathway analyses were then were assessed in DAVID database.
Correlation between the key gene and tumor immune cell infiltration
The enrichment levels of immune cells was quantified by the Tumor Purity, Estimate Score, Immune Score and Stromal Score in each sample. The tumor immune cell infiltration was calculated by Single Sample Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (ssGSEA). Then we analyzed the correlation between the key gene expression and the abundance of infiltrating immune cells (B cells, CD8+ T cells, CD4+ T cells, macrophages, neutrophils and dendritic cells) via The Tumor IMmune Estimation Resource (TIMER) database [21].
Analyses of somatic mutations and TMB estimation
The somatic mutation profiles of LUAD patients were downloaded from TCGA database. The mutation frequency with number of variants/the length of exons (38 million) were calculated for each sample. The OncoPlot of the top 10 mutated genes were plotted. The detailed mutational information, including the variant classification, the number of variant type and the single-nucleotide variant (SNV) class were displayed. Then we assessed the corelation between the key gene expression and the TMB levels.
Quantitative real-time PCR and immunohistochemistry
The mRNA and protein expression of the key gene in LUAD were determined using quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) and immunohistochemistry. The clinical tissue samples of LUAD were obtained from patients who received surgery in Thoracic Oncology Department of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, which was approved by the Institutional Review Committee of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center. The detail procedure was performed according to strict adherence to the manufacturers’ instructions.
For qRT-PCR, 24 paired LUAD and normal tissues were resected and stored in RNAlater immediately. Total RNA was extracted using TRIzol reagent. cDNA was synthesized from total RNA using cDNA reverse transcription kit (Termo Fisher Scientifc). qRT-PCR was performed using SYBR Green PCR kit (Termo Fisher Scientifc). The housekeeping gene GAPDH was used as an endogenous control. Primer information: FANCD2: 5′- AAAACGGGAGAGAGTCAGAATCA-3' (forward) and 5'- ACGCTCACAAGACAAAAGGCA-3' (reverse); GAPDH: 5′- GGAGCGAGATCCCTCCAAAAT-3' (forward) and 5'- GGCTGTTGTCATACTTCTCATGG-3' (reverse). The cycle threshold (Ct) of each gene in samples were record. Relative quantification was calculated as 2-ΔCt (ΔCt values = target gene mean Ct value - control gene mean Ct value).
Twenty LUAD immunohistochemistry samples were fixed using 10% formalin and were embedded in paraffin. Immunohistochemistry was carried out using the processed 5µm continuous sections. Samples were dewaxed with decreasing concentrations 100%, 95%, 75% and 50% of ethanol and were washed in deionized water. The sections were heated in a microwave with TE buffer pH 9.0 to retrieve antigens. Endogenous peroxidase was inhibited by incubation in goat serum. Then they were incubated in rabbit anti-FANCD2 (Proteintech, 204006-1-AP, 1:1,200) overnight at 4℃. Next, the sections were incubation with horseradish peroxidase-coupled goat anti-rabbit secondary antibody and stained using DAB Detection Kit (Polymer). The following process is cell nucleus staining, dehydration, xylene infusion, and mounting [22].