4.5 Article

Immune classification of osteosarcoma

Journal

MATHEMATICAL BIOSCIENCES AND ENGINEERING
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages 1879-1897

Publisher

AMER INST MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES-AIMS
DOI: 10.3934/mbe.2021098

Keywords

osteosarcoma; immune pattern; gene expression analysis

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health [R21CA242933]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study identified different immune patterns in osteosarcoma patients using CIBERSORTx, revealing that high abundance of CD8 T cells, NK cells, and M1 Macrophages were positively associated with prognosis, while high abundance of gamma delta T cells, Mast cells, M0 Macrophages, and Dendritic cells were negatively associated with prognosis. Grouping patients based on similar immune patterns can help suggest specific treatments tailored to the tumor microenvironment.
Tumor immune microenvironment has been shown to be important in predicting the tumor progression and the outcome of treatments. This work aims to identify different immune patterns in osteosarcoma and their clinical characteristics. We use the latest and best performing deconvolution method, CIBERSORTx, to obtain the relative abundance of 22 immune cells. Then we cluster patients based on their estimated immune abundance and study the characteristics of these clusters, along with the relationship between immune infiltration and outcome of patients. We find that abundance of CD8 T cells, NK cells and M1 Macrophages have a positive association with prognosis, while abundance of gamma delta T cells, Mast cells, M0 Macrophages and Dendritic cells have a negative association with prognosis. Accordingly, the cluster with the lowest proportion of CD8 T cells, M1 Macrophages and highest proportion of M0 Macrophages has the worst outcome among clusters. By grouping patients with similar immune patterns, we are also able to suggest treatments that are specific to the tumor microenvironment.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available