4.6 Article

Prognostic, Clinicopathological, and Function of Key Cuproptosis Regulator FDX1 in Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

期刊

GENES
卷 13, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/genes13101725

关键词

clear cell renal cell carcinoma; FDX1; cuproptosis; biomarker; prognosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The expression of FDX1 is significantly downregulated in ccRCC, and patients with higher FDX1 expression have better prognosis. FDX1 could serve as a potential novel prognostic biomarker for ccRCC patients with good predictive power.
Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the most common histological subtype of renal cancer. Cuproptosis is suggested to be a novel therapy target for cancer treatment. However, the function of cuproptosis and its key regulator FDX1 in ccRCC remains unclear. In this study, we adequately explored the prognostic factors, clinicopathological characteristics, and function of FDX1 in ccRCC. We found that the expression of FDX1 was significantly downregulated in ccRCC samples. Patients with a higher FDX1 expression had a significantly better prognosis, including overall survival (OS) (Hazard ratio (HR): 2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.82-3.53, p < 0.001), disease-specific survival (DSS) (HR: 3.04, 95% CI: 2.04-4.54, p < 0.001), and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR: 2.54, 95% CI: 1.82-3.53, p < 0.001). FDX1 was a clinical predictor to stratify patients into the high or low risk of poor survival, independent of conventional clinical features, with the area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.658, 0.677, and 0.656 for predicting the 5-year OS, DSS, and PFS. The nomogram model based on FDX1 had greater predictive power than other individual prognostic parameters. FDX1 mainly participated in the oxidative-related process and mitochondrial respiration-related processes but was not associated with immune infiltration levels. In conclusion, the cuproptosis key regulator FDX1 could serve as a potential novel prognostic biomarker for ccRCC patients.

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