4.8 Article

Combined analysis of bulk and single-cell RNA sequencing reveals novel natural killer cell-related prognostic biomarkers for predicting immunotherapeutic response in hepatocellular carcinoma

Journal

FRONTIERS IN IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 14, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1142126

Keywords

NK; biomarker; HCC; immunotherapy; TUBA1B

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study created a unique prognostic profile based on NK cell marker genes that can accurately predict the efficacy of immunotherapy for HCC patients.
IntroductionNatural killer (NK) cells play an irreplaceable and important role as a subtype of innate immune cells in the contemporary setting of antitumor immunity. MethodsWe chose a total of 1,196 samples for this analysis from the public dataset's six separate cohorts. To identify 42 NK cell marker genes, we first carried out a thorough study of single-cell RNA sequencing data from the GSE149614 cohort of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). ResultsUsing the NK cell marker genes in the TCGA cohort, we next created a seven-gene prognostic signature, separating the patients into two categories with distinct survival patterns. This signature's prognostic prediction ability was well verified across several validation cohorts. Patients with high scores had higher TIDE scores but lower immune cell infiltration percentages. Importantly, low-scoring patients had superior immunotherapy response and prognosis than high-scoring patients in an independent immunotherapy cohort (IMvigor210). Finally, we used CD56 and TUBA1B antibodies for immunohistochemical labeling of HCC tissue sections, and we discovered a lower number of CD56+ cells in the HCC tissue sections with high TUBA1B expression. DiscussionIn summary, our research created a unique prognostic profile based on NK cell marker genes that may accurately predict how well immunotherapy would work for HCC patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available