ArticleHeliyon2024
Identification of costimulatory molecule signatures for evaluating prognostic risk in non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Despite advances in treatment, prognosis remains poor, necessitating the identification of reliable prognostic biomarkers. Costimulatory molecules (CMs) have shown to enhance antitumor immune responses. We aimed to explore their prognostic signals in NSCLC. Methods: This study is a combination of bioinformatics analysis and laboratory validation. Gene expression profiles from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA), GSE120622, and GSE131907 datasets were collected. NSCLC samples in TCGA were clustered based on CMs using consensus clustering. We used LASSO regression to identify CMs-related signatures and constructed nomogram and risk models. Differences in immune cells and checkpoint expressions between risk models were evaluated. Enrichment analysis was performed for differentially expressed CMs between NSCLC and controls. Key results were validated using qRT-PCR and flow cytometry. Results: NSCLC samples in TCGA were divided into two clusters based on CMs, with cluster 1 showing poor overall survival. Ten CMs-related signatures were identified using LASSO regression. NSCLC samples in TCGA were stratified into high- and low-risk groups based on the median risk score of these signatures, revealing differences in survival probability, drug sensitivity, immune cell infiltration and checkpoints expression. The area under the ROC curve values (AUC) for EDA, ICOS, PDCD1LG2, and VTCN1 exceeded 0.7 in both datasets and considered as hub genes. Expression of these hub genes was significance in GSE131907 and validated by qRT-PCR. Macrophage M1 and T cell follicular helper showed high correlation with hub genes and were lower in NSCLC than controls detected by flow cytometry. Conclusion: The identified hub genes can serve as prognostic biomarkers for NSCLC, aiding in treatment decisions and highlighting potential targets for immunotherapy. This study provides new insights into the role of CMs in NSCLC prognosis and suggests future directions for clinical research and therapeutic strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.