4.6 Article

A 4-gene prognostic signature predicting survival in hepatocellular carcinoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 120, 期 6, 页码 9117-9124

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcb.28187

关键词

4-gene-based signature; hepatocellular carcinoma; prognostic significance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveTo develop an independent prognostic signature for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). MethodsHCC gene expression profile the cancer genome atlas-liver hepatocellular carcinoma and GSE14520 were used as discovery and test set, respectively. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified between HCC tissues and adjacent normal liver tissues. Univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was performed to identify DEGs correlated with survival of HCC patients. A 4-gene-based signature was constructed based on a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox penalized regression model. The predictive value of the signature was analyzed and validated. ResultsTwo hundred sixty-three DEGs were identified between HCC and adjacent liver tissues. After univariate survival analysis, 90 DEGs were found to be significantly correlated with the overall survival (OS) of HCC patients, of which 4 genes (KPNA2, CDC20, SPP1, and TOP2A) with non-zero coefficient were used to construct a prognostic signature. The 4-gene signature was significantly associated with the age (P=0.046), grade (P=0.022), and T stage (P=0.023) of HCC patients in the discovery set and it also significantly associated with TNM stage (P=0.033), and serum alpha-fetoprotein lever (P=0.034). Patients in the 4-gene low-risk group were associated with better OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) than those in the high-risk group in the discovery and test set. Meanwhile, the 4-gene signature is an independent prognostic factor regarding OS and RFS in the discovery and test set. ConclusionWe developed a 4-gene-based signature, which could be a candidate prognostic factor for patients with HCC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据