scholarly journals Comparison of the Gene Expression Profiles Between Smokers With and Without Lung Cancer Using RNA-Seq

2012 ◽  
Vol 13 (8) ◽  
pp. 3605-3609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Cheng ◽  
You Cheng ◽  
Yan Li ◽  
Zhenguo Zhao ◽  
Hui Gao ◽  
...  
Lung Cancer ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 80 ◽  
pp. S12-S13
Author(s):  
S. Han ◽  
H. Lee ◽  
S. Lee ◽  
W.J. Kim ◽  
Y. Oh ◽  
...  

Lung Cancer ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 126
Author(s):  
Dimitra Vageli ◽  
Zoe Daniil ◽  
Jubrail Dahabreh ◽  
Eleni Karagianni ◽  
Dimitra N. Vamvakopoulou ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (Suppl 3) ◽  
pp. A954-A955
Author(s):  
Jacob Kaufman ◽  
Doug Cress ◽  
Theresa Boyle ◽  
David Carbone ◽  
Neal Ready ◽  
...  

BackgroundLKB1 (STK11) is a commonly disrupted tumor suppressor in NSCLC. Its loss promotes an immune exclusion phenotype with evidence of low expression of interferon stimulated genes (ISG) and decreased microenvironment immune infiltration.1 2 Clinically, LKB1 loss induces primary immunotherapy resistance.3 LKB1 is a master regulator of a complex downstream kinase network and has pleiotropic effects on cell biology. Understanding the heterogeneous phenotypes associated with LKB1 loss and their influence on tumor-immune biology will help define and overcome mechanisms of immunotherapy resistance within this subset of lung cancer.MethodsWe applied multi-omic analyses across multiple lung adenocarcinoma datasets2 4–6 (>1000 tumors) to define transcriptional and genetic features enriched in LKB1-deficient lung cancer. Top scoring phenotypes exhibited heterogeneity across LKB1-loss tumors, and were further interrogated to determine association with increased or decreased markers of immune activity. Further, immune cell-types were estimated by Cibersort to identify effects of LKB1 loss on the immune microenvironment. Key conclusions were confirmed by blinded pathology review.ResultsWe show that LKB1 loss significantly affects differentiation patterns, with enrichment of ASCL1-expressing tumors with putative neuroendocrine differentiation. LKB1-deficient neuroendocrine tumors had lower expression of Interferon Stimulated Genes (ISG), MHC1 and MHC2 components, and immune infiltration compared to LKB1-WT and non-neuroendocrine LKB1-deficient tumors (figure 1).The abundances of 22 immune cell types assessed by Cibersort were compared between LKB1-deficient and LKB1-WT tumors. We observe skewing of immune microenvironmental composition by LKB1 loss, with lower abundance of dendritic cells, monocytes, and macrophages, and increased levels of neutrophils and plasma cells (table 1). These trends were most pronounced among tumors with neuroendocrine differentiation, and were concordant across three independent datasets. In a confirmatory subset of 20 tumors, plasma cell abundance was assessed by a blinded pathologist. Pathologist assessment was 100% concordant with Cibersort prediction, and association with LKB1 loss was confirmed (P=0.001).Abstract 909 Figure 1Immune-associated Gene Expression Profiles Affected by Neuroendocrine Differentiation within LKB1-Deficient Lung Adenocarcinomas. Gene expression profiles corresponding to five immune-associated phenotypes are shown with bars indicating average GEP scores for tumors grouped according to LKB1 and neuroendocrine status as indicated. P-values represent results from Student’s T-test between groups as indicated.Abstract 909 Table 1LKB1 Loss Affects Composition of Immune Microenvironment. Values indicate log10 P-values comparing LKB1-loss to LKB1-WT tumors. Positive (red) indicates increased abundance in LKB1 loss. Negative (blue) indicates decreased abundance.ConclusionsWe conclude that tumor differentiation patterns strongly influence the immune microenvironment and immune exclusion characteristics of LKB1-deficient tumors. Neuroendocrine differentiation is associated with the strongest immune exclusion characteristics and should be evaluated clinically for evidence of immunotherapy resistance. A novel observation of increased plasma cell abundance is observed across multiple datasets and confirmed by pathology. Causal mechanisms linking differentiation status to immune activity is not well understood, and the functional role of plasma cells in the immune biology of LKB1-deficient tumors is undefined. These questions warrant further study to inform precision immuno-oncology treatments for these patients.AcknowledgementsThis work was funded by SITC AZ Immunotherapy in Lung Cancer grant (SPS256666) and DOD Lung Cancer Research Program Concept Award (LC180633).ReferencesSkoulidis F, Byers LA, Diao L, et al. Co-occurring genomic alterations define major subsets of KRAS-mutant lung adenocarcinoma with distinct biology, immune profiles, and therapeutic vulnerabilities. Cancer Discov 2015;5:860–77.Schabath MB, Welsh EA, Fulp WJ, et al. Differential association of STK11 and TP53 with KRAS mutation-associated gene expression, proliferation and immune surveillance in lung adenocarcinoma. Oncogene 2016;35:3209–16.Skoulidis F, Goldberg ME, Greenawalt DM, et al. STK11/LKB1 mutations and PD-1 inhibitor resistance in KRAS-mutant lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer Discovery 2018;8:822-835.Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Comprehensive molecular profiling of lung adenocarcinoma. Nature 2014;511:543–50.Chitale D, Gong Y, Taylor BS, et al. An integrated genomic analysis of lung cancer reveals loss of DUSP4 in EGFR-mutant tumors. Oncogene 2009;28:2773–83.Shedden K, Taylor JM, Enkemann SA, et al. Gene expression-based survival prediction in lung adenocarcinoma: a multi-site, blinded validation study. Nat Med 2008;14:822–7.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taguchi Y-h. ◽  
Turki Turki

Abstract The integrated analysis of multiple gene expression profiles measured in distinct studies is always problematic. Especially, missing sample matching and missing common labeling between distinct studies prevent the integration of multiple studies in fully data-driven and unsupervised manner. In this study, we propose a strategy enabling the integration of multiple gene expression profiles among multiple independent studies without either labeling or sample matching, using tensor decomposition-based unsupervised feature extraction. As an example, we applied this strategy to Alzheimer’s disease (AD)-related gene expression profiles that lack exact correspondence among samples as well as AD single-cell RNA-seq (scRNA-seq) data. We found that we could select biologically reasonable genes with integrated analysis. Overall, integrated gene expression profiles can function analogously to prior learning and/or transfer learning strategies in other machine learning applications. For scRNA-seq, the proposed approach was able to drastically reduce the required computational memory.


2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. A. Babichev ◽  
A. I. Kornelyuk ◽  
V. I. Lytvynenko ◽  
V. V. Osypenko

Author(s):  
Haowei Zhang ◽  
Yujin Ding ◽  
Qin Zeng ◽  
Dandan Wang ◽  
Ganglei Liu ◽  
...  

Background: Mesenteric adipose tissue (MAT) plays a critical role in the intestinal physiological ecosystems. Small and large intestines have evidently intrinsic and distinct characteristics. However, whether there exist any mesenteric differences adjacent to the small and large intestines (SMAT and LMAT) has not been properly characterized. We studied the important facets of these differences, such as morphology, gene expression, cell components and immune regulation of MATs, to characterize the mesenteric differences. Methods: The SMAT and LMAT of mice were utilized for comparison of tissue morphology. Paired mesenteric samples were analyzed by RNA-seq to clarify gene expression profiles. MAT partial excision models were constructed to illustrate the immune regulation roles of MATs, and 16S-seq was applied to detect the subsequent effect on microbiota. Results: Our data show that different segments of mesenteries have different morphological structures. SMAT not only has smaller adipocytes but also contains more fat-associated lymphoid clusters than LMAT. The gene expression profile is also discrepant between these two MATs in mice. B-cell markers were abundantly expressed in SMAT, while development-related genes were highly expressed in LMAT. Adipose-derived stem cells of LMAT exhibited higher adipogenic potential and lower proliferation rates than those of SMAT. In addition, SMAT and LMAT play different roles in immune regulation and subsequently affect microbiota components. Finally, our data clarified the described differences between SMAT and LMAT in humans. Conclusions: There were significant differences in cell morphology, gene expression profiles, cell components, biological characteristics, and immune and microbiota regulation roles between regional MATs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document