Identification of the immune cell infiltration landscape in pancreatic cancer to assist immunotherapy

ncRNA-mediated upregulation of FAM83A is associated with poor prognosis and immune infiltration in pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Malignant pancreatic cancer has poor long-term survival. Increasing evidence shows that FAM83A (family with sequence similarity 83 member A) plays a vital role in tumorigenesis and malignant progression in some human cancer types. The present study explored the potential mechanism of FAM83A in improving the prognosis of pancreatic cancer patients.

METHODS

Transcriptomic and clinical data from patients were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas while FAM83A expression was measured in tumorous pancreatic tissue compared with normal controls by quantitative real-time PCR and immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

FAM83A is a vital prognostic indicator and potential oncogene in pancreatic cancer via pan-cancer analysis. In silico analysis revealed that AL049555.1/hsa-miR-129-5p axis was the pivotal upstream ncRNA- mediated pathway of FAM83A in pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, FAM83A expression was related to immune cell infiltration through vital immune-related genes including programmed cell death 1 (PDCD1), and tumorigenesis through common mutation genes including KRAS protooncogene GTPase (KRAS), and SMAD family member 4 (SMAD4). In summary, ncRNA-mediated upregulation of FAM83A is associated with poor long-term survival and immune cell infiltration in pancreatic cancer.

DISCUSSION

FAM83A may be used as a novel survival-related and immune-related biomarker. This information suggests that FAM83A may be a novel therapeutic target for combined or individual treatment for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Single Cell RNA-Seq Identifies Immune-Related Prognostic Model and Key Signature-SPP1 in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

There are no reliable biomarkers for early diagnosis or prognosis evaluation in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Multiple scRNA-seq datasets for PDAC were retrieved from online databases and combined with scRNA-seq results from our previous study. The malignant ductal cells were identified through calculating copy number variation (CNV) scores. The robust markers of malignant ductal cells in PDAC were found. Five immune-related signatures, including SPP1, LINC00683, SNHG10, LINC00237, and CASC19, were used to develop a risk score formula to predict the overall survival of PDAC patients. We also constructed an easy-to-use nomogram, combining risk score, N stage, and margin status. The expression level of SPP1 was related to the prognosis and immune regulators. We found that SPP1 was mainly expressed in ductal cells and macrophages in PDAC. In conclusion, we constructed a promising prognostic model based on immune-related signatures for PDAC using scRNA-seq and TCGA_PAAD datasets.

Multimodal data analysis reveals that pancreatobiliary-type ampullary adenocarcinoma resembles pancreatic adenocarcinoma and differs from cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC) arises from the ampulla of Vater where the pancreatic duct and bile duct join and empty into the duodenum. It can be classified into intestinal and pancreatobiliary types based on histopathology or immunohistochemistry. However, there are no biomarkers for further classification of pancreatobiliary-type AAC which has important implications for its treatment. We aimed to identify the tumor origin of pancreatobiliary-type AAC by systematically analyzing whole-slide images (WSIs), survival data, and genome sequencing data collected from multiple centers.

METHODS

This study involved three experiments. First, we extracted quantitative and highly interpretable features from the tumor region in WSIs and constructed a histologic classifier to differentiate between pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) and cholangiocarcinoma. The histologic classifier was then applied to patients with pancreatobiliary-type AAC to infer the tumor origin. Secondly, we compared the overall survival of patients with pancreatobiliary-type AAC stratified by the adjuvant chemotherapy regimens designed for PAC or cholangiocarcinoma. Finally, we compared the mutation landscape of pancreatobiliary-type AAC with those of PAC and cholangiocarcinoma.

RESULTS

The histologic classifier accurately classified PAC and cholangiocarcinoma in both the internal and external validation sets (AUC > 0.99). All pancreatobiliary-type AACs (n = 45) were classified as PAC. The patients with pancreatobiliary-type AAC receiving regimens designed for PAC showed more favorable overall survival than those receiving regimens designed for cholangiocarcinoma in a multivariable Cox regression (hazard ratio = 7.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.28-40.78, P = 0.025). The results of mutation analysis showed that the mutation landscape of AAC was very similar to that of PAC but distinct from that of cholangiocarcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

This multi-center study provides compelling evidence that pancreatobiliary-type AAC resembles PAC instead of cholangiocarcinoma in different aspects, which can guide the treatment selection and clinical trials planning for pancreatobiliary-type AAC.