A comprehensive pan-cancer analysis of necroptosis molecules in four gynecologic cancers.

BACKGROUND

In recent years, it has been proved that necroptosis plays an important role in the occurrence, development, invasion, metastasis and drug resistance of malignant tumors. Hence, further evaluation and targeting of necroptosis may be of clinical benefit for gynecologic cancers (GCs).

METHODS

To compare consistency and difference, we explored the expression pattern and prognostic value of necroptosis-related genes (NRGs) in pan-GC analysis through Linear regression and Empirical Bayesian, Univariate Cox analysis, and public databases from TCGA and Genotype-Tissue Expression (GTEx), including CESC, OV, UCEC, and UCS. We explored the copy number variation (CNV), methylation level and enrichment pathways of NRGs in the four GCs. Based on LASSO Cox regression analysis or principal component analysis, we established the prognostic NRG-signature or necroptosis-score for the four GCs. In addition, we predicted and compared functional pathways, tumor mutational burden (TMB), somatic mutation features, immunity status, immunotherapy, chemotherapeutic drug sensitivity of the NRG-signature based on NRGs. We also examined the expression level of several NRGs in OV samples that we collected using Quantitative Real-time PCR.

RESULTS

We confirmed the presence of NRGs in expression, prognosis, CNV, and methylation for four GCs, thus comparing the consistency and difference among the four GCs. The prognosis and independent prognostic value of the risk signatures based on NRGs were determined. Through the results of subclass mapping, we found that GC patients with lower risk score may be more sensitive to PDL1 response and more sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade therapy. Drug susceptibility analysis showed that, 51, 45, 64, and 29 drugs with differences between risk groups were yielded in CESC, OV, UCEC, and UCS respectively. For OV, the expression differences of several NRGs in the tissues we collected were similar to that in TCGA.

CONCLUSION

Our comprehensive analysis of NRGs and NRG-signature demonstrated their similarity and difference, as well as their potential roles in prognosis and could guide therapeutic strategies, thus improving the outcome of GC patients.