Page 24 - GPD-2-3

Gene & Protein in Disease Signatures construction strategies for TC

References Qin et al., 2021 [25] Xue et al., 2020 [26] Lin et al., 2019 [24] Hu et al., 2020 [22] Lin et al., 2018 [23] (Cont’d...)

Multivariate Cox analysis P‑value HR (95% CI) P = 0.001 1.042 (1.016 – 1.067) P = 0.016 1.187 (1.032 – 1.366) P < 0.001 2.425 (1.492 – 3.943)

Univariate Cox analysis P‑value HR (95% CI) P < 0.001 1.046 (1.027 – 1.065) P = 0.011 1.018 (1.004 – 1.033) P < 0.001 2.711 (2.046 – 3.592)

AUC of the ROC curve AUCs for 1-, 3-, and 5-year PFI: 0.802, 0.729, and 0.703 0.888 0.792 AUCs of the signature predicting the 5- and 10-year OS rates: 0.839 and 0.886

Signature outcome Unfavorable Unfavorable Unfavorable Unfavorable Unfavorable

Risk score = (−0.876 * ULBP2) + (0.301 * S100A5) + (−0.582 * LTF) + (−1.003 * PLXNA4) + (−0.975 * FAM3B) + (1.901 * GIPR) + (1.606 * RORB) + (−0.907 * Risk score = (0.6846 * expression value of CXCL5) + (1.1556 * expression value of AZU1) + (−0.3156 * expression value of NOD1) + (0.0542 * expression value of TNFRSF11B) + (0.0952 * expression value of VGF) Risk score = [Expression level of AGTR1 * (−0.1212)] + [Expression lev

Table 2. The prognostic signatures of TC are summarized in strategy 2
Risk score TGFBR3) CDKN2A) expression

Survival curve P‑value P = 0.0000026 P = 0.001524 P < 0.001 P = 0.00042 P = 0.0023

Survival event PFI OS PFI OS OS

Signature ULBP2, S100A5, LTF, PLXNA4, FAM3B, GIPR, RORB, and TGFBR3 CXCL5, AZU1, NOD1, TNFRSF11B, and VGF AGTR1, CTGF, FAM3B, IL11, IL17C, PTH2R, and SPAG11A ITPR1, CCL2, and CDKN2A ATG9B, BID, and DNAJB1

Signature type IRGs IRGs IRGs ARGs ARGs

Authors Rujia Qin, et al., 2021 Yuanbo Xue, et al., 2020 Peng Lin, et al., 2019 Gang Hu, et al., 2020 Peng Lin, et al., 2018

Volume 2 Issue 3 (2023) 8 https://doi.org/10.36922/gpd.1138