A new CCCH-type zinc finger-related lncRNA signature predicts the prognosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients

Background: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the main component of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and advanced ccRCC frequently indicates a poor prognosis. The significance of the CCCH-type zinc finger (CTZF) gene in cancer has been increasingly demonstrated during the past few years. According to studies, targeted radical therapy for cancer treatment may be a revolutionary therapeutic approach. Both lncRNAs and CCCH-type zinc finger genes are essential in ccRCC. However, the predictive role of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) associated with the CCCH-type zinc finger gene in ccRCC needs further elucidation. This study aims to predict patient prognosis and investigate the immunological profile of ccRCC patients using CCCH-type zinc finger-associated lncRNAs (CTZFLs). 

Methods: From the Cancer Genome Atlas database, RNA-seq and corresponding clinical and prognostic data of ccRCC patients were downloaded. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to acquire CTZFLs for constructing prediction models. The risk model was verified using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the overall survival (OS) of high-risk and low-risk groups. Multivariate Cox and stratified analyses were used to assess the prognostic value of the predictive feature in the entire cohort and different subgroups. In addition, the relationship between risk scores, immunological status, and treatment response was studied. 

Results: We constructed a signature consisting of eight CTZFLs (LINC02100, AC002451.1, DBH-AS1, AC105105.3, AL357140.2, LINC00460, DLGAP1-AS2, AL162377.1). The results demonstrated that the prognosis of ccRCC patients was independently predicted by CTZFLs signature and that the prognosis of high-risk groups was poorer than that of the lower group. CTZFLs markers had the highest diagnostic adequacy compared to single clinicopathologic factors, and their AUC (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve) was 0.806. The overall survival of high-risk groups was shorter than that of low-risk groups when patients were divided into groups based on several clinicopathologic factors. There were substantial differences in immunological function, immune cell score, and immune checkpoint expression between high- and low-risk groups. Additionally, Four agents, including ABT737, WIKI4, afuresertib, and GNE 317, were more sensitive in the high-risk group. 

Conclusion: The Eight-CTZFLs prognostic signature may be a helpful prognostic indicator and may help with medication selection for clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

 

Comments:

The study you mentioned aimed to investigate the predictive role of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) associated with the CCCH-type zinc finger gene in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). The researchers utilized data from the Cancer Genome Atlas database, including RNA-seq data, clinical information, and prognostic data of ccRCC patients.

The researchers performed univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses to identify CCCH-type zinc finger-associated lncRNAs (CTZFLs) that could be used to construct a prediction model. They identified eight CTZFLs that were included in the prognostic signature: LINC02100, AC002451.1, DBH-AS1, AC105105.3, AL357140.2, LINC00460, DLGAP1-AS2, and AL162377.1.

The constructed signature consisting of these eight CTZFLs demonstrated independent predictive value for patient prognosis in ccRCC. The high-risk group, identified based on the signature, had a poorer prognosis compared to the low-risk group. The signature also showed higher diagnostic adequacy compared to single clinicopathologic factors, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.806.

The study further analyzed the overall survival (OS) of high-risk and low-risk groups based on different clinicopathologic factors, and consistently found that the high-risk group had shorter overall survival compared to the low-risk group.

Additionally, the researchers explored the relationship between the risk scores derived from the CTZFLs signature, immunological status, and treatment response. They observed significant differences in immunological function, immune cell score, and immune checkpoint expression between the high-risk and low-risk groups. Furthermore, four agents (ABT737, WIKI4, afuresertib, and GNE 317) were found to be more sensitive in the high-risk group, suggesting potential implications for medication selection.

In conclusion, the Eight-CTZFLs prognostic signature developed in this study appears to be a promising prognostic indicator for ccRCC patients. It may provide valuable information for predicting patient outcomes and assist in selecting appropriate medications for the treatment of ccRCC.