Abstract
A fundamental goal in cancer-associated genome sequencing is to identify the key genes. Protein–protein interactions (PPIs) play a crucially important role in this goal. Here, human reference interactome (HuRI) map was generated and 64,006 PPIs involving 9094 proteins were identified. Here, we developed a physical link and co-expression combinatory network construction (PLACE) method for genes of interest, which provides a rapid way to analyze genome sequencing datasets. Next, Kaplan‒Meier survival analysis, CCK8 assays, scratch wound assays and Transwell assays were applied to confirm the results. In this study, we selected single-cell sequencing data from patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in GSE149614. The PLACE method constructs a protein connection network for genes of interest, and a large fraction (80%) of the genes (screened by the PLACE method) were associated with survival. Then, PLACE discovered that transmembrane protein 14B (TMEM14B) was the most significant prognostic key gene, and target genes of TMEM14B were predicted. The TMEM14B-target gene regulatory network was constructed by PLACE. We also detected that TMEM14B-knockdown inhibited proliferation and migration. The results demonstrate that we proposed a new effective method for identifying key genes. The PLACE method can be used widely and make outstanding contributions to the tumor research field.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Since the 1970s, increasingly efficient cancer prognosis detection methods and therapeutic approaches have been developed1,2,3, and the list of cancer genes has been growing steadily4. There are a large number of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between cancer tissues and paired adjacent noncancerous tissues, and the key cancer genes often arise from the DEGs, but it is unrealistic to conduct a study on each DEG5,6,7,8. Fortunately, technological and computational advances in genomics and interactomics have made it possible to screen key genes within human cancer cells9.
There are many genome sequencing analysis methods to screen key cancer genes. These methods have the same problem: (1) the accuracy of key gene screening methods needs to be improved10,11. (2) Objective regulatory networks for key genes are lacking. There is an urgent need for new key gene screening approaches. The protein–protein interactions (PPIs) are defined as physical links between proteins12,13,14. It is well known that PPIs provide an objective basis, and PPIs could be utilized to screen genes that are consistently associated with survival15,16,17,18. PPIs have been studied for many years and have been utilized in diverse fields of medicine, such as diagnostics, with a wide range of applications. The revolution brought about by the advent of PPIs has changed the face of human molecular and disease research19,20,21, and it has brought great convenience to human cancer research22. PPI networks have vital relationships with gene regulation and function and provide a new way to characterize genes23, and many diagnostic markers and therapeutic targets have been identified by PPIs, such as CDK1, SET, and cyclin K24,25,26.
A wide variety of methods have been used to enhance the coverage of PPI identification. Some PPIs are directly obtained by computer simulations, for example, the method of three-dimensional reconstructions of large cellular machinery27,28, but there is a deviation between the computer simulation results and real PPIs, resulting in inaccurate PPIs29. Some interactions are acknowledged through indirect evidence, such as genetic observations or statistical predictions30,31. Genetic observations or statistical predictions provide direction for PPI research, but many genes have the same expression pattern and do not interact with each other32, resulting in a waste of research resources.
PPIs are defined based on physical links, and such interactions can only be confirmed if they occur in reality33, so comprehensive experimentally validated PPIs may be more trustworthy. Some researchers have experimentally verified the effectiveness of PPIs, but only a small percentage of PPIs have been confirmed by experiments. An incomplete PPI dataset means that the gene interaction network is also incomplete, which leads to significant misinterpretation of gene function. Therefore, we need a comprehensive and accurate PPI dataset. Fortunately, Katja Luck et al. presented a human “all-by-all” reference interactome map (HuRI, the Human Reference Interactome) of human binary protein interactions34. Approximately 53,000 PPIs were identified using yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) assays. Other PPIs were reported in the literature by experiments. Finally, the dataset versioned HuRI-union contains 64,006 verified PPIs involving 9094 proteins.
Genome sequencing analysis methods and PPI methods have undeniable deficiencies35,36. Genome sequencing analysis methods lack sensitivity and specificity35 and cannot be used to build objective regulatory networks37,38. PPI methods cannot identify all regulatory relationships between genes36. The combination of methods might compensate for the deficiencies. Therefore, in the present study, we combined PPI and genome sequencing analysis to find a better method for screening key genes.
In this study, our aim was to identify key tumor-associated genes that are correlated with the corresponding clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis. We developed a physical link and co-expression combinatory network construction (PLACE) method for the gene of interest, which considered not only the physical links but also the co-expression. The PLACE method allows us to screen the key genes and design a network for the genes of interest. This means that PLACE could be of potential interest to more researchers and will bring more innovative ideas.
Results
Hepatocytes and HCC cells were identified based on gene expression patterns and cell markers from tumors
The study scheme is shown in Fig. 1. HCC cells (T) and hepatocytes (N) were selected from GSE149614 (samples of liver cancer patients) of the GEO database. The data were processed with the Seurat package39. We calculated the number of gene types (nFeature39) presented in the sample, total gene expression (nCount39) and the percentage of reads in the mitochondrial genome (percent.mt39), and distinct differences in gene expression levels between T and N were found (Fig. 2A). We next calculated a subset of features that exhibited high cell-to-cell intercellular variation in the dataset (the top 2000 variable genes) (Fig. 2B). Among the 2000 variable genes, we identified 15 principal components, which allowed easy exploration of the primary sources of heterogeneity in a dataset (Fig. 2C). Then, we created an expression matrix of cell-by-gene and conducted dimensionality reduction by T-distributed stochastic neighbor embedding (tSNE) to visualize and explore these datasets (Fig. 2D). We used SingleR to predict and annotate cell type40, and then the cell type was confirmed using canonical markers (hepatocyte and HCC cell-ALB, endothelial cell-CD34, stem cell-EPCAM, stromal cell-NGFR, B cell-MS4A1, T cell-GNLY, CD3E and CD8A, NK cell-KLRD1, monocyte-CD14 and FCGR3A, macrophage-CD68) (Table S1) (Fig. 2E). Finally, all cell types were identified and annotated: NK cells, hepatocytes and HCC cells, monocytes, macrophages, stem cells, endothelial cells, stromal cells, T cells, and B cells (Fig. 2F). We retained hepatocytes and HCC cells (Fig. 2G) and calculated nFeature, nCount and percent.mt presented separately in hepatocytes and HCC cells and each sample of hepatocytes and HCC cells for further analysis. (Fig. 2H,I).
DEGs between HCC cells and hepatocytes
Hepatocytes and HCC cells were divided into two groups: HCC cells (T) and hepatocytes (N) (Fig. 3A). Besides we calculated nFeature, nCount and percent.mt separately in N and T (Fig. 3B). We then identified 1618 DEGs by comparing cells from HCC with those from hepatocyte (Table S2). We next analyzed DEGs by enrichment in Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways and hallmarks. Hallmark analysis showed that DNA repair, peroxisomes, MYC targets V1, and oxidative phosphorylation were activated (Fig. 3C), and the KEGG results indicated that the DEGs activated in group T were mainly enriched in the oxidative phosphorylation pathway (Fig. 3D). Therefore, follow-up work was performed to help us identify the key genes among the candidate genes.
Screening candidate genes from DEGs using the PLACE method
The ultimate gene regulatory network requires both physical links and co-expression, as we mentioned earlier. Thus, we analyzed and counted the proportion of DEGs that were significantly correlated (physical links and co-expression) with the target gene in all DEGs. We recalculated the level 1, level 2 and level 3 counts of each DEG of interest using the PLACE method, which has been described in the Methods section. The genes were arranged in descending order by the number of level 1, level 2 and level 3 genes (Table S3). We screened the top10 candidate genes that had the greatest number of PPIs. The expression levels of 10 genes between N and T had significant difference. TMEM14B, ERGIC3, JAGN1, EBP, UBE2I, GJB1, IER3IP1, TIMMDC1, YIF1A and AIG1 were highly expressed in HCC cells (Table 1, Fig. 3E). Finally as an example, PLACE constructed a new network of TMEM14B containing PPIs and co-expression (Fig. 3F), and we verified the relationship of TMEM14B-TMEM14C and TMEM14B-NUFDAB1 by the STRING protein interaction database with the TCGA database (Fig. 3G,H).
Validation of candidate genes on survival benefit
To further verify whether the previously candidate genes can regulate tumor development and thus affect survival, we calculated p values for different survival data of each gene by The Cancer Genome Atlas-Liver hepatocellular carcinoma (TCGA-LIHC). Among them, TMEM14B, ERGIC3, JAGN1, BE2I, IER3IP1, TIMMDC1, YIF1A and AIG1 were negatively associated with the overall survival (Fig. 4A), TMEM14B, ERGIC3, UBE2I, IER3IP1 and TIMMDC1 were associated with the disease-specific survival. TMEM14B, ERGIC3, JAGN1 and TIMMDC1 were associated with the disease-free interval. TMEM14B, ERGIC3, UBE2I, IER3IP1 and TIMMDC1 were associated with the progression-free interval (Fig. 4B). A large fraction (80%) of the genes (screened by PLACE method) were associated with survival.
Construction and validation of the TMEM14B regulatory network
In the above results, we identified and verified the DEG TMEM14B, which was closely related to the survival of tumor patients. Here, TMEM14B-related genes (Table S4) were screened from the 1618 DEGs by the PLACE method. We next analyzed these TMEM14B-related genes by Hallmark. We then found that DNA repair genes, MYC target V1 genes and oxidative phosphorylation genes were enriched in the TMEM14B-related genes (Fig. 5A). Meanwhile, PLACE was used to construct the TMEM14B regulatory network (Fig. 5B–D). To further verify whether TMEM14B could regulate DNA repair genes, MYC targets V1 genes and oxidative phosphorylation genes, the interrelationships among the genes (TMEM14B-DNA repair genes, TMEM14B-MYC targets V1 and TMEM14B-oxidative phosphorylation) were validated by TCGA-LIHC. We discovered that 8 of the 11 TMEM14B-DNA repair gene interactions were detected by our method and confirmed by the Pearson test in the TCGA-LIHC cohort, 34 of the 46 TMEM14B-MYC target V1 gene interactions were detected by our method and confirmed by the Pearson test in the TCGA-LIHC cohort, and 11 of the 15 TMEM14B-oxidative phosphorylation gene interactions were detected by our method and confirmed by the Pearson test in the TCGA-LIHC cohort (Fig. 5E–G, Tables S5–S7). To confirm the carcinogenic role of TMEM14B, we knocked down TMEM14B in HepG2 and MHCC-LM3 cells using siRNA. Cell proliferation was evaluated using a CCK-8 assay at 24 h, 48 h and 72 h. The results showed that TMEM14B knockdown inhibited the proliferation of HepG2 and LM3 cells (Fig. 6A–D). Cell migration was evaluated using Transwell and scratch assays. TMEM14B knockdown inhibited the migration of HepG2 and LM3 cells (Fig. 6E–L). This result emphasized another advantage of the PLACE method: we can construct a PPI and co-expression network for each protein that is useful for studying genes of interest.
Discussion
In the present study, we proposed a new method, PLACE. In the PLACE method, the input of PPI interactions, expression matrix and potential gene list were needed, and then the co-expression and physical link (level 1, level 2, level 3) network of each potential gene was accordingly constructed. After sorting by PLACE, potential genes that ranked in the top 5, 10, 20, 30, 40 or 50 of the list were selected as key genes.
PPI interactions stem from computational prediction, from knowledge about intricate connections and information transfer between molecules within organisms, and from interactions aggregated from other primary databases41,42. There are several published databases of PPIs, such as The Search Tool for the Retrieval of Interacting Genes/Proteins (STRING) database and BioGRID database16,43. For these databases, while comprehensive, no uniform standard definitions were used for the PPIs. Therefore, these databases were not used in our study, but the Human Reference Interactome database (HuRI) was used. Benefiting from the Center for Cancer Systems Biology at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, a human “all-by-all” reference interactome map of human binary protein interactions was successfully constructed. Currently, 64,006 PPIs involving 9094 proteins have been identified using the Y2H assay22. The Y2H assay is the least laborious, low-cost, high-precision direct PPI screening method available to date44. PLACE can further dissect key genes based on HuRI PPI interaction data.
The expression matrix and potential gene list from a total of 13,736 cells (10,672 cancer tissue-derived cells and 3064 paired adjacent noncancerous tissue-derived cells) were picked from the scRNA-seq, and we annotated hepatocytes and HCC cells using canonical markers, such as ALB45. The exclusion of other cell types by design implied that our results have no bearing for immune cells, stromal cells, etc., so we only focused on the hepatocytes and HCC cells themselves. Then, we identified a number of genes that were differentially expressed between cancer tissues and paired adjacent noncancerous tissues.
In this article, the PPI interactions, expression matrix and potential gene list were processed using PLACE. Next, TMEM14B was identified as the most significant prognostic key gene. Survival is the key to prognosis for tumors; thus, we thought that differentially expressed key genes strongly correlated with survival determine the different prognoses of cancer patients46,47, so we analyzed the correlation between gene expression level and survival to evaluate the importance of a gene.
In the present study, TMEM14B regulatory hallmarks, such as DNA repair, MYC targets V1 and oxidative phosphorylation, were found by analyzing the GSE149614 dataset in PLACE, and the results were proven by TCGA. For TMEM14B, biological experiments were conducted, indicating its critical role in the pathogenesis of multiple carcinomas. In conclusion, we have found a new method for discovering critical genes. The role of TMEM14B in tumors is not clear, and this study revealed its prognostic role and regulatory network in HCC for the first time. The results proved that PLACE makes it possible to accurately connect key genes to the regulatory pathway.
Materials and methods
PLACE method
The PPI network was constructed using the HuRI-Union dataset. The PPIs in HuRI were identified by yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) assay or curated literature. For ease of use, we redefined 3 relationships (between any two proteins A and B). Level 1: Proteins A and B in direct contact and interaction—protein A-protein B; level 2: Proteins A and B in indirect contact with an interval of protein X—protein A-protein X-protein B; level 3: Proteins A and B in indirect contact with an interval of two proteins X1 and X2—protein A-protein X1-protein X2-protein B. We calculated the level 1 counts, level 2 counts and level 3 counts for each DEG. Apart from this, we then examined the relationship between each DEG, and Pearson’s coefficient was calculated for all genes. We retained the level 1 counts, level 2 counts and level 3 counts based on correlation values r > 0.5 and p < 0.05, and the network was visualized with Cytoscape software. The genes were arranged in descending order by the number of level 1, level 2 and level 3 genes.
Data processing
We downloaded GSE149614 scRNA-seq submitted by Yiming Lu et al. from the Gene Expression Omnibus database48. A total of 13,736 cells (10,672 cancer tissue-derived cells and 3064 paired adjacent noncancerous tissue-derived cells) were selected from the scRNA-seq.
We downloaded TCGA-LIHC-FPKM data from The Cancer Genome Atlas Program. We subsequently converted FPKM values to TPM (transcripts per million) using TPM = [FPKM/FPKMsum] * 106. We also downloaded survival data from The Cancer Genome Atlas Program (https://xena.ucsc.edu/public/).
We downloaded the HuRI-union dataset submitted by Luck et al. (64,006 PPIs involving 9094 proteins were identified)34.
Single-cell RNA sequencing data analysis: dimensionality reduction and clustering
After preliminary screening of 13,736 cells (10,672 cancer tissue-derived cells and 3064 paired adjacent noncancerous tissue-derived cells), the cutoff criteria iare that the percentage of mitochondria is less than 20%, and the expression matrix of cells was processed using R software (Seurat package). Following data normalization (NormalizeData Function) and scaling (ScaleData Function), principal component analysis (PCA) was conducted using genes with highly variable expression. Seurat graph-based clustering was then applied to visualize the identified clusters in tSNE plots (RunTSNE Function).
Single-cell RNA sequencing data analysis: cell type annotation
The cell types were annotated according to a sample reference dataset (HumanPrimaryCellAtlasData) with known labels given via the SingleR package, which assigns these labels to cells from GSE149614 based on the similarity of their expression profiles and confirmed according to the list of marker genes (Table S1). We visualized the marker genes in clustering plots by the FeaturePlot function.
Single-cell RNA sequencing data analysis: biomarker genes that showed differential expression between cancer cell-derived hepatocytes and HCC cells
Hepatocytes and HCC cells were selected from the pool of single cells (subset Function). We performed differential gene expression analyses on cancer tissue-derived cells and paired adjacent noncancerous tissue-derived cells. Differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were then identified by differential gene expression analysis. The Wilcoxon test (adjusted P value < 0.05) and a loge (FC) greater than 0.25 were used to test for significance39.
Gene enrichment analysis
With the help of the clusterProfiler package and GSEA dataset, hallmark enrichment and KEGG pathway enrichment were performed using the hallmark gene set (http://www.gsea-msigdb.org/gsea/msigdb/index.jsp) and KEGG database (https://www.genome.jp/kegg/).
Validation using TCGA RNA-seq data
To determine the value of the prognostic gene signature in prognosis at the RNA level, TCGA-LIHC TPM data and survival data were used for validation. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier survival analysis. Overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) of HCC patients with the gene of interest were assessed and compared between the long-survival and short-survival groups.
Validation in human HCC cell lines
To determine the functions of TMEM14B, we knocked down TMEM14B expression using siRNA in human HCC cell lines (LM3 and HepG2).
-
siTMEM14B#1: sense5′-3′ GUGCUUACCAGCUGUAUCATT,
-
siTMEM14B#2 sense5′-3 GCCUGUAGGUUUAAUUGCATT.
Cell counting kit 8 (CCK8) assay
For the Cell Counting Kit-8 (CCK-8) assay, LM3 and HepG2 cells in DMEM containing 10% FBS were seeded into 96-well plates at a concentration of 1 × 104 cells per well and incubated for 24 h, 48 h and 72 h. CCK-8 solution (10 μl/well) was added to the 96-well plates and incubated for 1 h to detect the viability of LM3 and HepG2 cells. The light absorbance values at 450 nm were measured in a microplate reader (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, United States), and cell viability was determined.
Wound-healing assay
A culture insert (Ibidi, Munich, Germany) was used to generate a wound of 500 μm. The insert was placed on 24-well plates; then, 3 × 105 cells were seeded in each culture insert and incubated for 24 h. After removing the culture insert, the cells were allowed to grow in medium without FBS for 24 h. The original area and migration area were measured using ImageJ software, and the wound closure rates are shown according to the ratio of the migration area to the original area. Each treatment was performed in triplicate wells, and three independent experiments were repeated.
Transwell assay
Transwell migration assays were performed using a 6.5-mm transwell insert with an 8.0-μm pore polycarbonate membrane (Merck Millipore, Burlington, MA, United States). A total of 300 μl of cell suspension containing 3 × 105 cells without FBS was added to the upper chamber, and 800 μl of medium containing 10% FBS was added to the lower chamber. After incubation for 24 h, cells in the lower chamber were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde for 15 min and stained with crystal violet for 15 min. Images of each chamber were captured randomly for cell counting. Three independent experiments were repeated.
Data availability
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within Gene Expression Omnibus database (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/query/acc.cgi?acc=GSE149614) and The Cancer Genome Atlas Program (https://xena.ucsc.edu/public/).
References
Bykov, V. J. N., Eriksson, S. E., Bianchi, J. & Wiman, K. G. Targeting mutant p53 for efficient cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 18, 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc.2017.109 (2018).
Garnis, C., Buys, T. P. & Lam, W. L. Genetic alteration and gene expression modulation during cancer progression. Mol. Cancer 3, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-4598-3-9 (2004).
Wassermann, S. et al. p16INK4a is a beta-catenin target gene and indicates low survival in human colorectal tumors. Gastroenterology 136, 196-205.e192. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2008.09.019 (2009).
Martínez-Jiménez, F. et al. A compendium of mutational cancer driver genes. Nat. Rev. Cancer 20, 555–572. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-020-0290-x (2020).
Shang, S. et al. Identification of osteopontin as a novel marker for early hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) 55, 483–490. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.24703 (2012).
Lin, X. et al. miR-195-5p/NOTCH2-mediated EMT modulates IL-4 secretion in colorectal cancer to affect M2-like TAM polarization. J. Hematol. Oncol. 12, 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13045-019-0708-7 (2019).
Jordan, N. V. et al. HER2 expression identifies dynamic functional states within circulating breast cancer cells. Nature 537, 102–106. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19328 (2016).
Yang, Z. et al. Identification of AUNIP as a candidate diagnostic and prognostic biomarker for oral squamous cell carcinoma. EBioMedicine 47, 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.08.013 (2019).
Cheng, F. et al. Comprehensive characterization of protein–protein interactions perturbed by disease mutations. Nat. Genet. 53, 342–353. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-020-00774-y (2021).
Tian, Z. et al. Identification of important modules and biomarkers in breast cancer based on WGCNA. OncoTargets Ther. 13, 6805–6817. https://doi.org/10.2147/ott.s258439 (2020).
Xiong, Y., Ling, Q. H., Han, F. & Liu, Q. H. An efficient gene selection method for microarray data based on LASSO and BPSO. BMC Bioinform. 20, 715. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-019-3228-0 (2019).
Koh, G. C., Porras, P., Aranda, B., Hermjakob, H. & Orchard, S. E. Analyzing protein–protein interaction networks. J. Proteome Res. 11, 2014–2031. https://doi.org/10.1021/pr201211w (2012).
Gonzalez, M. W. & Kann, M. G. Chapter 4: Protein interactions and disease. PLoS Comput. Biol. 8, e1002819. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002819 (2012).
Mabonga, L. & Kappo, A. P. Protein–protein interaction modulators: Advances, successes and remaining challenges. Biophys. Rev. 11, 559–581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12551-019-00570-x (2019).
Ke, Z. B. et al. Identification of key genes and pathways in benign prostatic hyperplasia. J. Cell. Physiol. 234, 19942–19950. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcp.28592 (2019).
Szklarczyk, D. et al. STRING v11: Protein–protein association networks with increased coverage, supporting functional discovery in genome-wide experimental datasets. Nucleic Acids Res. 47, D607-d613. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gky1131 (2019).
Zhao, X., Sun, S., Zeng, X. & Cui, L. Expression profiles analysis identifies a novel three-mRNA signature to predict overall survival in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Am. J. Cancer Res. 8, 450–461 (2018).
Cheng, S. S., Yang, G. J., Wang, W., Leung, C. H. & Ma, D. L. The design and development of covalent protein–protein interaction inhibitors for cancer treatment. J. Hematol. Oncol. 13, 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13045-020-00850-0 (2020).
Kocyła, A., Tran, J. B. & Krężel, A. Galvanization of protein–protein interactions in a dynamic zinc interactome. Trends Biochem. Sci. 46, 64–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2020.08.011 (2021).
Gartel, A. L. FOXM1 in cancer: Interactions and vulnerabilities. Can. Res. 77, 3135–3139. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.can-16-3566 (2017).
Yadav, L. et al. Systematic analysis of human protein phosphatase interactions and dynamics. Cell Syst. 4, 430-444.e435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2017.02.011 (2017).
Wu, G., Feng, X. & Stein, L. A human functional protein interaction network and its application to cancer data analysis. Genome Biol. 11, R53. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2010-11-5-r53 (2010).
McWhite, C. D. et al. A pan-plant protein complex map reveals deep conservation and novel assemblies. Cell 181, 460-474.e414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.049 (2020).
Ravindran Menon, D. et al. CDK1 interacts with Sox2 and promotes tumor initiation in human melanoma. Cancer Res. 78, 6561–6574. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.can-18-0330 (2018).
Dacol, E. C., Wang, S., Chen, Y. & Lepique, A. P. The interaction of SET and protein phosphatase 2A as target for cancer therapy. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Rev. Cancer 1876, 188578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbcan.2021.188578 (2021).
Yao, G. et al. Cyclin K interacts with β-catenin to induce Cyclin D1 expression and facilitates tumorigenesis and radioresistance in lung cancer. Theranostics 10, 11144–11158. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.42578 (2020).
Ban, N., Nissen, P., Hansen, J., Moore, P. B. & Steitz, T. A. The complete atomic structure of the large ribosomal subunit at 2.4 A resolution. Science (New York, N.Y.) 289, 905–920. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5481.905 (2000).
Schuller, J. M., Falk, S., Fromm, L., Hurt, E. & Conti, E. Structure of the nuclear exosome captured on a maturing preribosome. Science (New York, N.Y.) 360, 219–222. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar5428 (2018).
Kannan, S. & Zacharias, M. Folding of Trp-cage mini protein using temperature and biasing potential replica-exchange molecular dynamics simulations. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 10, 1121–1137. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms10031121 (2009).
Li, G., Tian, Y., Gao, Z., Ma, X. & Ren, C. Identification of immune-related markers in hepatocellular carcinoma based on gene co-expression network. Biochem. Genet. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10528-022-10235-2 (2022).
Chen, D. L., Cai, J. H. & Wang, C. C. N. Identification of key prognostic genes of triple negative breast cancer by LASSO-based machine learning and bioinformatics analysis. Genes https://doi.org/10.3390/genes13050902 (2022).
Herrera-Solorio, A. M. et al. LncRNA SOX2-OT regulates AKT/ERK and SOX2/GLI-1 expression, hinders therapy, and worsens clinical prognosis in malignant lung diseases. Mol. Oncol. 15, 1110–1129. https://doi.org/10.1002/1878-0261.12875 (2021).
Johnson, K. L. et al. Revealing protein–protein interactions at the transcriptome scale by sequencing. Mol. Cell 81, 4091-4103.e4099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2021.07.006 (2021).
Luck, K. et al. A reference map of the human binary protein interactome. Nature 580, 402–408. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2188-x (2020).
Wan, Q., Tang, J., Han, Y. & Wang, D. Co-expression modules construction by WGCNA and identify potential prognostic markers of uveal melanoma. Exp. Eye Res. 166, 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exer.2017.10.007 (2018).
Szklarczyk, D. et al. The STRING database in 2017: Quality-controlled protein–protein association networks, made broadly accessible. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D362-d368. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw937 (2017).
Cai, W. Y. et al. Identification of a tumor microenvironment-relevant gene set-based prognostic signature and related therapy targets in gastric cancer. Theranostics 10, 8633–8647. https://doi.org/10.7150/thno.47938 (2020).
Tian, M., Yang, J., Han, J., He, J. & Liao, W. A novel immune checkpoint-related seven-gene signature for predicting prognosis and immunotherapy response in melanoma. Int. Immunopharmacol. 87, 106821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intimp.2020.106821 (2020).
Butler, A., Hoffman, P., Smibert, P., Papalexi, E. & Satija, R. Integrating single-cell transcriptomic data across different conditions, technologies, and species. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 411–420. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.4096 (2018).
Aran, D. et al. Reference-based analysis of lung single-cell sequencing reveals a transitional profibrotic macrophage. Nat. Immunol. 20, 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-018-0276-y (2019).
Rabbani, G., Baig, M. H., Ahmad, K. & Choi, I. Protein–protein Interactions and their role in various diseases and their prediction techniques. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 19, 948–957. https://doi.org/10.2174/1389203718666170828122927 (2018).
Du, Y. et al. To explore the molecular mechanism of acupuncture alleviating inflammation and treating obesity based on text mining. Biomed. Res. Int. 2022, 3133096. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3133096 (2022).
Oughtred, R. et al. The BioGRID database: A comprehensive biomedical resource of curated protein, genetic, and chemical interactions. Protein Sci. A Publ. Protein Soc. 30, 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.3978 (2021).
Weimann, M. et al. A Y2H-seq approach defines the human protein methyltransferase interactome. Nat. Methods 10, 339–342. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2397 (2013).
Wang, H. et al. Characterization of ferroptosis in murine models of hemochromatosis. Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) 66, 449–465. https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.29117 (2017).
Kruiswijk, F., Labuschagne, C. F. & Vousden, K. H. p53 in survival, death and metabolic health: A lifeguard with a licence to kill. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 16, 393–405. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm4007 (2015).
Lev, S. Targeted therapy and drug resistance in triple-negative breast cancer: The EGFR axis. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 48, 657–665. https://doi.org/10.1042/bst20191055 (2020).
Li, C. et al. 6-Phosphogluconolactonase promotes hepatocellular carcinogenesis by activating pentose phosphate pathway. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 9, 753196. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2021.753196 (2021).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81972888, 82272819); the Research Project of Jinan Microecological Biomedicine Shandong Laboratory (JNL202219B, JNL202204A, JNL-2023017D); the Primary Research and Development Plan of Jiangsu Province (BE2018701, BE2022840); the Shandong Provincial Laboratory Project (SYS202202) and the Open Project of Chinese Materia Medica First-Class Discipline of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine (2020YLXK007).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
D.M.: Conceptualization; Methodology; Formal analysis; Investigation; Resources; Data Curation; Writing—Original Draft; Visualization. S.L.: Investigation; Resources; Data Curation. Q.H.: Investigation; Resources; Data Curation. L.K.: Investigation; Resources; Data Curation. K.L.: Investigation. L.X.: Investigation. Q.X.: Investigation. Y.B.: Investigation. J.W.: Conceptualization; Validation; Writing—Review and Editing; Supervision; Project administration; Funding acquisition. C.J.: Conceptualization; Writing—Review and Editing; Supervision; Project administration; Funding acquisition.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Ma, D., Liu, S., He, Q. et al. A novel approach for the analysis of single-cell RNA sequencing identifies TMEM14B as a novel poor prognostic marker in hepatocellular carcinoma. Sci Rep 13, 10508 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36650-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-36650-y
- Springer Nature Limited