4.7 Article

Development and validation of a gene expression-based signature to predict distant metastasis in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a retrospective, multicentre, cohort study

期刊

LANCET ONCOLOGY
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 382-393

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30080-9

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81230056, 81402516]
  2. National Science & Technology Pillar Program during the Twelfth Five-year Plan Period [2014BAI09B10]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Guang Dong Province [2017A030312003]
  4. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFC0902000]
  5. Innovation Team Development Plan of the Ministry of Education [IRT_17R110]
  6. Health & Medical Collaborative Innovation Project of Guangzhou City, China [201400000001]
  7. Program of Introducing Talents of Discipline to Universities [B14035]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Gene expression patterns can be used as prognostic biomarkers in various types of cancers. We aimed to identify a gene expression pattern for individual distant metastatic risk assessment in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Methods In this multicentre, retrospective, cohort analysis, we included 937 patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma from three Chinese hospitals: the Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (Guangzhou, China), the Affiliated Hospital of Guilin Medical University (Guilin, China), and the First People's Hospital of Foshan (Foshan, China). Using microarray analysis, we profiled mRNA gene expression between 24 paired locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma tumours from patients at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center with or without distant metastasis after radical treatment. Differentially expressed genes were examined using digital expression profiling in a training cohort (Guangzhou training cohort; n=410) to build a gene classifier using a penalised regression model. We validated the prognostic accuracy of this gene classifier in an internal validation cohort (Guangzhou internal validation cohort, n=204) and two external independent cohorts (Guilin cohort, n=165; Foshan cohort, n=158). The primary endpoint was distant metastasis-free survival. Secondary endpoints were disease-free survival and overall survival. Findings We identified 137 differentially expressed genes between metastatic and non-metastatic locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma tissues. A distant metastasis gene signature for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (DMGN) that consisted of 13 genes was generated to classify patients into high-risk and low-risk groups in the training cohort. Patients with high-risk scores in the training cohort had shorter distant metastasis-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 4.93, 95% CI 2.99-8.16; p<0.0001), disease-free survival (HR 3.51, 2.43-5.07; p<0.0001), and overall survival (HR 3.22, 2.18-4.76; p<0.0001) than patients with low-risk scores. The prognostic accuracy of DMGN was validated in the internal and external cohorts. Furthermore, among patients with low-risk scores in the combined training and internal cohorts, concurrent chemotherapy improved distant metastasisfree survival compared with those patients who did not receive concurrent chemotherapy (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.19-0.83; p=0.011), whereas patients with high-risk scores did not benefit from concurrent chemotherapy (HR 1.03, 0.71-1.50; p=0.876). This was also validated in the two external cohorts combined. We developed a nomogram based on the DMGN and other variables that predicted an individual's risk of distant metastasis, which was strengthened by adding Epstein-Barr virus DNA status. Interpretation The DMGN is a reliable prognostic tool for distant metastasis in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma and might be able to predict which patients benefit from concurrent chemotherapy. It has the potential to guide treatment decisions for patients at different risk of distant metastasis.

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

4.7
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