Research Paper Volume 14, Issue 8 pp 3705—3719
Integrative analysis of expression, prognostic significance and immune infiltration of RFC family genes in human sarcoma
- 1 Department of Orthopedics, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha 410011, Hunan, China
- 2 Clinical Medicine Eight-Year Program, Central South University, Changsha 410013, Hunan Province, China
- 3 Department of Internal Medicine III, University Hospital, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich 81377, Germany
- 4 Department of Orthopedics, Chenzhou No.1 People's Hospital, Chenzhou 423000, Hunan, China
- 5 Department of Cardiology, The Fourth Hospital of Changsha, Changsha 410006, Hunan, China
- 6 Department of Orthopedics, The First People's Hospital of Changde City, Changde 415003, Hunan, China
- 7 Department of Emergency, The First Hospital of Changsha, Changsha 410005, Hunan, China
Received: February 8, 2022 Accepted: April 13, 2022 Published: April 29, 2022https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.204039
How to Cite
Copyright: © 2022 Wu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Objective: To reveal the expression and prognostic value of replication factor C family genes (RFCs) in patients with sarcoma.
Results: The results showed that the mRNA expression levels of RFC2, RFC3, RFC4, and RFC5 were increased in sarcoma tissues. In addition, Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE) dataset analysis indicated that RFC1, RFC2, RFC3, RFC4, and RFC5 were elevated expressed in sarcoma cell lines. Moreover, Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis (GEPIA) and Kaplan-Meier Plotter showed that highly expressed RFC2-5 were associated with poor overall survival (OS) or relapse-free survival (RFS) in sarcoma patients. The results of the Tumor Immune Estimation Resource (TIMER) database indicated that the expression of RFCs was negatively correlated with the infiltration of CD4+ T cells and macrophages.
Conclusions: There were significant differences in the expression of RFCs between normal tissue and sarcoma tissue, and RFC2, RFC3, RFC4, and RFC5 might be promising prognostic biomarkers for sarcoma.
Methods: The expression of RFCs was analyzed using the ONCOMINE dataset and GEPIA dataset. CCLE dataset was used to assess the expression of RFCs in the cancer cell line. The prognostic value of RFCs was evaluated by GEPIA and Kaplan-Meier analysis. Furthermore, the association between RFCs and their co-expressed genes were explored via ONCOMINE and GEPIA datasets. We used the TIMER dataset to analyze the immune cell infiltration of RFCs in sarcoma.