AUTHOR=Liu Yu , Liu Nana , Zhou Xue , Zhao Lingqiong , Wei Wei , Hu Jie , Luo Zhibin TITLE=Constructing a prognostic model for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma based on glucose metabolism related genes JOURNAL=Frontiers in Endocrinology VOLUME=14 YEAR=2023 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/endocrinology/articles/10.3389/fendo.2023.1245629 DOI=10.3389/fendo.2023.1245629 ISSN=1664-2392 ABSTRACT=Background

Glucose metabolism (GM) plays a crucial role in cancer cell proliferation, tumor growth, and survival. However, the identification of glucose metabolism-related genes (GMRGs) for effective prediction of prognosis in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSC) is still lacking.

Methods

We conducted differential analysis between HNSC and Normal groups to identify differentially expressed genes (DEGs). Key module genes were obtained using weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA). Intersection analysis of DEGs, GMRGs, and key module genes identified GMRG-DEGs. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to screen prognostic-associated genes. Independent prognostic analysis of clinical traits and risk scores was implemented using Cox regression. Gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) was used to explore functional pathways and genes between high- and low-risk groups. Immune infiltration analysis compared immune cells between the two groups in HNSC samples. Drug prediction was performed using the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) database. Quantitative real-time fluorescence PCR (qRT-PCR) validated the expression levels of prognosis-related genes in HNSC patients.

Results

We identified 4973 DEGs between HNSC and Normal samples. Key gene modules, represented by black and brown module genes, were identified. Intersection analysis revealed 76 GMRG-DEGs. Five prognosis-related genes (MTHFD2, CDKN2A, TPM2, MPZ, and DNMT1) were identified. A nomogram incorporating age, lymph node status (N), and risk score was constructed for survival prediction in HNSC patients. Immune infiltration analysis showed significant differences in five immune cell types (Macrophages M0, memory B cells, Monocytes, Macrophages M2, and Dendritic resting cells) between the high- and low-risk groups. GDSC database analysis identified 53 drugs with remarkable differences between the groups, including A.443654 and AG.014699. DNMT1 and MTHFD2 were up-regulated, while MPZ was down-regulated in HNSC.

Conclusion

Our study highlights the significant association of five prognosis-related genes (MTHFD2, CDKN2A, TPM2, MPZ, and DNMT1) with HNSC. These findings provide further evidence of the crucial role of GMRGs in HNSC.