Investigator

Haizhou Ji

Union Hospital

HJHaizhou Ji
Papers(2)
Prognostic Difference…Prognostic and Immuno…
Collaborators(2)
Qin XuYang Sun
Institutions(3)
Union HospitalFujian Provincial Can…Fuda Cancer Hospital

Papers

Prognostic Differences and Survival Predictive Models for Mucinous Versus Usual‐Type Adenocarcinoma of the Uterine Cervix

ABSTRACT Background There is significant histological heterogeneity between the endocervical adenocarcinoma (EA) subtypes. Usual‐type carcinoma (adenocarcinoma) and mucinous carcinoma (mucinous adenocarcinoma, MA) are the most common types of EA. Methods Demographic and clinical variables were collected from the SEER database for selected patients between 2004 and 2021. The effect of confounding variables was reduced by propensity score matching (PSM). Survival data were analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox regression models. A risk prediction model nomogram for MA was developed and validated. Results The median age for MA patients was 46 years compared to 45 years for adenocarcinoma ( p  = 0.021). The 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year overall survival (OS) rates for MA were 88.2%, 74.5%, and 68.4%, respectively, significantly lower than those for adenocarcinoma (89.0%, 79.0%, and 74.9%, p  < 0.0001). Cancer‐specific survival (CSS) showed a similar trend ( p  < 0.0001). Seven variables, including age, primary site, T, N, combined stage, surgery, and chemotherapy, were selected to create the nomograms for predicting OS, while age, primary site, tumor size, T, N, combined stage, and surgery were selected for CSS. The validations of all predictive models were satisfactory. Conclusion This study revealed MA's poorer prognosis compared to adenocarcinoma using the SEER database. It developed predictive models for OS and CSS of MA, offering a more accurate prognosis assessment tool for clinical practice.

Prognostic and Immunological Significance of CXCR2 in Ovarian Cancer: A Promising Target for Survival Outcome and Immunotherapeutic Response Assessment

Objective. Uncovering genetic and immunologic tumor features is critical to gain insights into the mechanisms of immunotherapeutic response. Herein, this study observed the functions of CXCR2 in prognosis and immunology of ovarian cancer. Methods. Expression, prognostic significance, and genetic mutations of CXCR2 were analyzed in diverse cancer types based on TCGA and GTEx datasets. Associations of CXCR2 expression with immune checkpoints, neoantigens, tumor mutational burden (TMB), and microsatellite instability (MSI) were evaluated across pancancer. CXCR2-relevant genes were identified, and their biological functions were investigated in ovarian cancer. Through three algorithms (TIMER, quanTIseq, and xCell), we assessed the relationships of CXCR2 with immune cell infiltration in ovarian cancer. GSEA was adopted for inferring KEGG and hallmark pathways involved in CXCR2. Results. CXCR2 presented abnormal expression in tumors than paired normal tissues across pancancer. Higher expression of CXCR2 was found in ovarian cancer. Moreover, its expression was in relation to overall survival and progression including ovarian cancer. Prominent associations of CXCR2 with immune checkpoints, neoantigens, TMB, and MSI were observed in human cancers. Somatic mutations of CXCR2 frequently occurred across pancancer. Amplification was the main mutational type of CXCR2 in ovarian cancer. CXCR2-relevant genes were markedly enriched in immunity activation and carcinogenic pathways in ovarian cancer. Moreover, it participated in modulating immune cell infiltration in the tumor microenvironment of ovarian cancer such as macrophage and immune response was prominently modulated by CXCR2. Conclusion. Collectively, CXCR2 acts as a promising prognostic and immunological biomarker as well as a novel immunotherapeutic target of ovarian cancer.

2Papers
2Collaborators