PeerJ (Dec 2021)

Prognostic values of the core components of the mammalian circadian clock in prostate cancer

  • Wenchang Yue,
  • Xiao Du,
  • Xuhong Wang,
  • Niu Gui,
  • Weijie Zhang,
  • Jiale Sun,
  • Jiawei You,
  • Dong He,
  • Xinyu Geng,
  • Yuhua Huang,
  • Jianquan Hou

DOI
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12539
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9
p. e12539

Abstract

Read online Read online

Background Prostate cancer (PC) is one of the most common malignancies in males. Extensive and complex connections between circadian rhythm and cancer were found. Nonetheless, in PC, the potential role of the core components of the mammalian circadian clock (CCMCCs) in prognosis prediction has not been fully clarified. Methods We firstly collected 605 patients with PC from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) databases. Survival analysis was carried out for each CCMCC. Then, we investigated the prognostic ability of CCMCCs by Cox regression analysis. Independent prognostic signatures were extracted for the establishment of the circadian clock-based risk score model. We explored the predictive performance of the risk score model in the TCGA training cohort and the independent GEO dataset. Finally, the relationships between risk score and clinicopathological parameters, biological processes, and signaling pathways were evaluated. Results The expression levels of CCMCCs were widely correlated with age, tumor status, lymph node status, disease-free survival (DFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Nine circadian clock genes, including CSNK1D, BTRC, CLOCK, CSNK1E, FBXL3, PRKAA2, DBP, NR1D2, and RORB, were identified as vital prognostic factors in PC and were used to construct the circadian clock-based risk score model. For DFS, the area under the 3-year or 5-year receiver operating characteristic curves ranged from 0.728 to 0.821, suggesting better predictive performance. When compared with T3-4N1 stage, PC patients at T2N0 stage might be benefited more from the circadian clock-based risk score model. Furthermore, a high circadian clock-based risk score indicated shorter DFS (p < 0.0001), early progression (p < 0.0001), and higher 5-year death rate (p = 0.007) in PC. The risk score was related to tumor status (p < 0.001), lymph node status (p < 0.001), and ribosome-related biogenesis and pathways. Conclusions The vital roles of circadian clock genes in clinical outcomes were fully depicted. The circadian clock-based risk score model could reflect and predict the prognosis of patients with PC.

Keywords