Abstract
Backgrounds
The overall survival of patients with lower-grade gliomas and glioblastoma varies greatly. No reliable or existing procedures can accurately forecast survival and prognostic biomarkers for early diagnosis in glioma and glioblastoma. However, investigations are progressing in immunotherapy, tumor purity, and tumor microenvironment which may be therapeutic targets for glioma and glioblastoma.
Results
This study indicated the possible prognostic signatures that can be used to identify immune-related prognostic biomarkers in the prediction of the survival of low-grade glioma (LGG) patients which may be a possible therapeutic target. In addition, the Kaplan–Meier plot, ESTIMATE algorithm, and TIMER 2.0 analysis indicated that Krüppel-like factor 15 (KLF15) p = 0.030, Aquaporin 7 (AQP7) p = 0.001, and Human 1-acylglycerol-3-phosphate O-acyltransferase 9 (AGPAT9) p = 0.005 are significantly associated in glioma. Hence, they may be possible prognostic biomarkers in glioma. Meanwhile, in the glioblastoma, only KLF15 has a significant association with glioblastoma (p = 0.025). Stromal and immune scores of gliomas were determined from transcriptomic profiles of LGG cohort from TCGA (The Cancer Genome Atlas) using the ESTIMATE (Estimation of Stromal and Immune cells in Malignant Tumours using Expression data algorithm). The immune infiltration of the KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9 for low-grade glioma and glioblastoma was determined using TIMER immune 2.0 which indicates correlation with tumor purity for KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9, but only KLF15 and AGPAT9 are significantly associated in both glioma and glioblastoma, respectively.
Conclusions
These results highlight the significance of microenvironment monitoring, analysis of glioma and glioblastoma prognosis, and targeted immunotherapy. To our knowledge, this is the first time to investigate an analysis that revealed that KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9 may be important prognostic biomarkers for patients with glioma and KLF15 for patients with glioblastoma. Meanwhile, KLF15 and AGPAT9 are significantly associated in both glioma and glioblastoma, respectively, for tumor purity.
Similar content being viewed by others
Backgrounds
Glioma is the most prevalent primary malignant brain tumor and can be divided into distinct categories. According to the WHO grading system, it can be categorized into astrocytomas, diffuse low-grade, intermediate-grade, oligodendrogliomas, and mixed oligoastrocytomas [1,2,3]. The most frequent treatment for glioma is surgical resection in combination with chemoradiotherapy. Due to its highly invasive nature, surgical resection may be difficult to treat, and residual tumor could lead to malignant progressions and even reoccurrence in the long run [4]. Although the classification of low-grade glioma (LGG) is recognized worldwide, it may not adequately predict its survival rate; however, clinicians tend to depend on genetic classifications to guide its treatment [5,6,7]. The survival outcomes of LGG vary widely among different patients [8]. However, some LGGs stay stable for a long period while some progress into glioblastoma [9,10,11]. Notwithstanding more investigations are required to elucidate whether gliomas progress to glioblastoma. Gliomas account for approximately 75% of primary cancerous brain tumors [12]. In the USA, about 13,000 people die and 18,000 new cases of CNS tumors and malignant brain tumors arise each year due to glioma prognosis and occurrence [13, 14], hence a need for therapeutics and early diagnosis of the diseases [15].
Glioma is a cancerous tumor of the central nervous system that begins in the glial cells that surround and nourish the brain's neurons [16]. In the treatment of gliomas, great progress has been made in genomic, transcriptomic, and epigenetic profiling [17,18,19,20,21]. Astrocytoma, ependymoma, glioblastoma, and oligodendroglioma are some of the different kinds of glioma [22]. Glioblastoma (GBM), the most common and aggressive primary kind of malignant brain tumor, is assumed to have started in glial cells [23,24,25]. Scientific evidence, on the other hand, reveals that GBM could have developed from a variety of cells with neural stem cell characteristics [26, 27]. GBM is slightly more common in men than in women, as well as in Caucasians and other white races and ethnicities [28, 29]. GBM is usually found in the supratentorial region of the brain such as hypothalamus, pituitary gland, pineal, and the four lobes: temporal, parietal, frontal, and occipital lobes, with cerebellum being a rare exception [30, 31]. Sixty-one percent of all primary gliomas are found in the brain's four lobes: 20% in the temporal lobe, 25% in the frontal lobe, 3% in the occipital lobe, and 13% in the parietal lobe [32]. Glioblastomas are divided into primary and secondary subtypes that originate along different genetic routes and affect individuals of various ages [33, 34]. Quite recently, glioblastoma with oligodendroglioma component is an uncommon subtype of glioblastoma that features certain parts that resemble anaplastic oligodendroglioma, according to the WHO [35, 36].
In clinical practices, mutated genes such as isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDHI), IDH2, tumor protein 53 (TP53), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), and alpha-thalassemia/mental retardation, X-linked (ATRX) are factors for the prognosis of patients with LGG [37,38,39]. Some other biomarkers, including 1p/19q codeletion and methylguanine methyltransferase (MGMT) promoter methylation, are also well-recognized and essential prognostic factors for LGGs [40,41,42]. Sometimes, these genetic factors fail to indicate accurate survival outcomes [43, 44]. Hence, further investigations are required to elucidate the functions and the mechanisms of the prognostic signatures.
Several studies have shown that cancer recurrence and progression are caused not only by the tumor's underlying genetic changes but also by tumor microenvironment (TME) [45,46,47]. The TME is basically composed of numerous cytokines, extracellular matrix molecules, immune cells, chemokines, fluids, and stromal cells [23, 48, 49]. The cells found in the TME reflect the evolutionary nature of cancer and together, promotes the tumor immune escape, tumor growth, and metastasis [50, 51]. Cancer researchers are not vividly aware of the impact of the TME on immune response or tumor progressions although multiple genetic mutations increase the prevalence of cancer [52]. TME can induce metabolic stress on immune cell infiltration thereby causing local immunosuppression and limited reinvigoration of antitumor immunity [53, 54]. However, having an in-depth understanding of the epigenetic, molecular composition, and function of the TME is essential to manage and treat cancer progressions, recurrence, and immune response [55,56,57]. Integrating multiple gene biomarkers instead of a single model would improve the accuracy of the prediction significantly [58,59,60,61].
The survival of glioma patients has received so much research and discovery in the aspect of neurosurgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy. However, a lot of challenges of glioma are yet to be solved. Currently, immunotherapy has unveiled possible therapy for cancer [54, 62, 63]. Investigations are currently going on in the area of immunotherapy, but there is still need for efficient molecular biomarkers to differentiate patients with possible sensitivity to immunotherapy [64, 65]. Therefore, it is very crucial to identify immune-related prognostic biomarkers which may be a possible therapeutic target and may be utilized for immunotherapy in patients.
Taken together, differential expressed genes (DEGs) using an immune stromal score in glioma and glioblastoma, transcriptional microarray of glioma cases from multiple TCGA cohorts were investigated to predict the survival of LGG and GBM patients. The following prognostic signatures, such as KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9, were used in this investigation to determine whether they have a significant association with glioma and glioblastoma using TCGA and the immune infiltration was unveiled for precise immunotherapy. To our knowledge, this is the first time to use these signatures for glioma and glioblastoma, hence unveiling prognostic biomarker and immune infiltration.
Methods
In this investigation, utilization of the Kaplan–Meier plots using Xena bower (http://xena.ucsc.edu/), ESTIMATE algorithm (Estimation of Stromal and Immune cells in Malignant Tumours using Expression), Timer 2.0 (http://timer.comp-genomics.org/timer/), and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database were used to unveil the prognostic signature and immune infiltration of glioma and glioblastoma analysis.
Bioinformatics approaches were applied to integrate copy number variations and differential expressed genes of low-grade glioma. The immune cell proportion of the prognostic signatures, such as KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9, were determined using TIMER immune 2.0. In TIMER, the Gene module was used to identify the relationship between tumor gene expression and immune infiltration in low-grade glioma and glioblastoma. Stromal and immune scores of gliomas were estimated in transcriptomic profiles of LGG cohort from TCGA using the ESTIMATE. One hundred entries of TCGA cohort were entered and used to plot the graph showing the presence of stromal scores in tumor tissues, immune scores for the infiltration of immune cells in tumor tissues, and the ESTIMATE scores that infers tumor purity. Herein, we analyzed the immune infiltration landscape in LGGs, by applying single-sample gene set enrichment analysis (ssGSEA) to evaluate the relative abundance of each immune cell subpopulation using RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq V2) data of 100 LGGs from TCGA. The survival analysis of significant DEGs in glioma using TCGA database was determined. Kaplan–Meier curves were used to produce graphs showing the survival probability of prognostic signature genes of glioma and glioblastoma and their statistical significance. For example, p values of less than 0.05 in all tests were significantly linked to low-grade glioma and glioblastoma. The gene expression profiles of the prognostic signatures (KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9) were determined using TIMER immune 2.0.
Results
Kaplan–Meier curve showing the expression of KLF 15, AQP7, and AGPAT9 gene in glioma
Herein, we unveiled the survival analysis for glioma patients using the TCGA database and Kaplan–Meier plots and discovered that the KLF 15 is significantly associated (p = 0.03) with the overall survival of the patient which indicates that it may be a very possible prognostic biomarker useful for glioma patients Fig. 1a. In our investigations, the Kaplan–Meier plot showed that AQP7 is significantly associated (p = 0.001) with overall survival of the glioma patients using the TCGA database Fig. 1b. Hence, it showed that it may be a prognostic biomarker which may be useful for the glioma patient. The Kaplan–Meier plot showed that AGPAT9 is significantly associated (p = 0.005) with overall survival of the glioma patients using the TCGA database (Fig. 1c).
Kaplan–Meier curve showing the expression of KLF 15, AQP7, and AGPAT9 gene in glioblastoma
This is a visual representation of expression level of prognostic signature KLF15, which indicates that the p value is 0.025 that means it has a significant association with glioblastoma and thus can be used as a prognostic signature in the early detection of glioblastoma (Fig. 2a). Meanwhile, the expression level of prognostic signature AQP7 has p value of 0.59 that means it has no significant association with glioblastoma and thus cannot be used as a prognostic signature in the early detection for glioblastoma patients (Fig. 2b). Also, AGPAT9 has a p value of 0.10 that means it has no significant association with glioblastoma and thus cannot be used as a prognostic signature in the early detection of glioblastoma. Thus, AQP7 and AGPAT9 have no significant association and so they are predictive biomarkers and may not be potential prognostic signatures for glioblastoma patients. However, KLF15 showed a significant association with glioblastoma and so can be a prognostic biomarker in glioblastoma patients.
The stromal, immune, and estimate scores of low-grade glioma
To analyze the immune infiltration landscape in LGGs, single-sample gene set enrichment analysis (ssGSEA) was applied to evaluate the relative abundance of each immune cell subpopulation using RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq V2) data of 100 LGGs patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). By performing single-sample gene set enrichment analysis (ssGSEA), we calculated stromal and immune scores to predict the level of infiltrating stromal and immune cells and these form the basis for the ESTIMATE score to infer tumor purity in tumor tissue Fig. 3.
The expression levels of KLF15 in LGG using different immune infiltrate variables
KLF15 has a correlation with low-grade glioma. Correlation value of 0.124 and the genes are highly expressed in the tumor cells which show a positive correlation with tumor purity and significantly association (p = 0.000005) Fig. 4. B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells are the immune infiltrates which show that the expression level of KLF15 has a partial correlation, and it is significantly associated with immune infiltration in all the cells except that of the macrophages where the P value is 0.07.
The expression levels of AQP7 in LGG using different immune infiltrate variables
Based on investigations, it shows that the tumor purity of AQP7 has a negative correlation with low-grade glioma; correlation value = − 0.007 (Fig. 5). Also, purity and B cells do not show a significant association with glioma; p values = 0.8, 0.4, respectively. CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells show that the expression level of AQP7 has a partial correlation with the infiltration level and significantly associated. CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells also show a significant association with glioma with p values of 0.006, 0.05, 0.003, 0.003, and 0.01, respectively.
The expression levels of AGPAT9 IN LGG using different immune infiltrate variables
Based on the investigation, it also shows that tumor purity of AGPAT9 has a negative correlation with low-grade glioma; correlation value = − 0.238, and it shows a significant association with the tumor purity with p value (p = 0.000000014) (Fig. 6). All the immune cells have positive correlation and show significant association with glioma except macrophages.
The expression levels of KLF15 in GBM using different immune infiltrate variables
The dendritic cells, CD4 T cell, neutrophil, and CD8+ T cell immune infiltrate are significantly associated with glioblastoma. Meanwhile, B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells immune infiltrates indicated that KLF15 expression level is partially correlated with immune infiltration level in GBM, and purity immune infiltrate is correlated. Herein, during the analysis of the KLF15, we realized that the immune infiltrates are significantly association except that of the B cells (p = 0.1) and the macrophages (p = 0.3). The correlation value was 0.254 and the genes are highly expressed in the tumor cells. In the tumor purity, it shows positive correlation and significantly associated (p = 0.00000013) (Fig. 7) in glioblastoma.
The expression levels of AQP7 in GBM using different immune infiltrate variables
Here, no significant association (p = 0.26). It was also indicated that the tumor purity of AQP7 has a negative correlation with its immune infiltration level; Correlation value = − 0.055 (Fig. 8). However, neutrophil and CD4 T cells have partial correlation and significantly associated in glioblastoma patients with p value of 0.0000195 and 0.0000177, respectively.
The expression levels of AGPAT9 in GBM using different immune infiltrate variables
B cells and macrophages show no significant association with glioblastoma multiforme. The purity, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, neutrophil, and dendritic cells show a significant association with glioblastoma multiforme. Based on the analysis, the tumor purity of AGPAT9 has a negative correlation with low-grade glioma; correlation value = − 0.363. It also shows a significant association p = 0.000012 (Fig. 9).
Discussions
Krüppel-like factor 15 (KLF15) is a signature that is yet to be fully elucidated in the glioma patient, but previous investigations have been done in the area of clear cell renal cell carcinoma [66] adenocarcinoma lung cancer [67]. Krüppel-like factor 15 (KLF15) is useful in a lot of biological processes which include cell proliferation, cell cycle, adipogenesis, etc. [68,69,70]. KLF15 has an important role in RNA polymerase II-specific DNA-binding transcription factor activity [71, 72]. Hence, it is known to have significant functions in different types of cancer. KLF15 is responsible for the suppression and activation of genes in carcinogenesis. Previous investigation has shown that KLF15 is a positive regulator of carcinogenesis [73,74,75,76]. Therefore, KLF15 may be useful immune-related prognostic signature in glioma and glioblastoma patients.
Investigations have been conducted on the Aquaporin 7 (AQP7) association with lymphatic metastasis, breast cancer, liver cancer, and clear renal cancer [77,78,79,80,81]. It is otherwise known as water channels which have been known to be related to the invasion, proliferation, and migration of human breast tumors [77, 82,83,84]. However, investigations are yet to discover the potential roles of AQP7 in glioma and glioblastoma patients as a possible therapeutic target and prognostic biomarker. Aquaporin (AQP) family members were first investigated in 1992 [85,86,87]. Various investigations have shown that it can be expressed in epithelial and non-epithelial cells [88]. AQP7 is also important in fatty acid metabolism and enhances the migration of water and glycerol [78]. Human 1-acylglycerol-3-phosphate O-acyltransferase 9 (AGPAT9, also known as GPAT3 or LPCAT1) is correlated with tumor progression and tumor microenvironment [89]. It is related to fatty acid metabolisms and involved in a lot of biological processes. It catalyzes de novo synthesis of triacylglycerol [89]. Hence, AQP7 and AGPAT9 indicate usefulness as prognostic biomarker which may be advantageous for the glioma patient.
Stromal and immune scores were estimated from transcriptomic profiles of LGG cohort from TCGA using the ESTIMATE. One hundred entries of TCGA cohort were entered and used for the investigation. Hence, the presence of stromal scores in tumor tissues, immune scores for the infiltration of immune cells in tumor tissues and the ESTIMATE scores that infers tumor purity is observed [90,91,92].
Immune infiltration of malignancies correlates strongly with clinical outcomes. In terms of chemotherapy and immunotherapy, the makeup of tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs) can serve as biomarkers for predicting treatment response and survival in distinct patient subgroups [93]. Hence, the immune cell proportion of the three-signature for LGG were determined using Timer immune 2.0. The Gene module allows a user to identify the relationship between tumor gene expression and immune infiltration in a fast, comprehensive, and unbiased way [94]. Therefore, the signatures may be a potential prognostic signature for glioma and useful for screening immunotherapy for glioma patients. Hence, this is in consistent with previous investigations [95, 96]. Therefore, B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, Neutrophil, and dendritic cells immune infiltrates indicated that AQP7 expression level is partially correlated with immune infiltration level in LGG [97], while purity infiltrate is correlated. Hence, it may be a potential prognostic signature for glioma and useful for screening immunotherapy for glioma patients [98].
B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells show that the expression level of AGPAT9 has a partial correlation with the infiltration level. Purity, B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, neutrophil, and dendritic cells show a significant association with glioma [99], while macrophages do not have any significant association with glioma. Therefore, B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells immune infiltrates indicated that AGPAT9 expression level is partially correlated with immune infiltration level in low-grade glioma, while purity immune infiltrate is correlated [100].
Determination of immune cell proportion of the KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9 signatures on the glioblastoma multiforme prognostic using Timer immune 2.0 indicated that the tumor purity of KLF15 has a positive correlation with glioma and glioblastoma [101]. Hence, KLF 15 may be a potential prognostic biomarker and useful for screening immunotherapy for glioma and glioblastoma patients. B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells show that the expression level of KLF15 has a partial correlation with the infiltration level. Therefore, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, neutrophil, and dendritic cells immune infiltrates indicated that KLF15 expression level is significantly associated with the GBM patients. Thus, KLF15 may be a useful signature for monitoring immunotherapy in GBM [102].
B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells show that the expression level of AGPAT9 has a partial correlation with the infiltration level. CD4+ T cell, macrophages, and neutrophil cells do not show a significant association with glioblastoma multiforme. The tumor purity, dendritic cells, and CD8+ T cell immune infiltrate have a significant association with glioblastoma using the AGPAT9 gene [66]. Therefore, B cell, CD8+ T cell, CD4+ T cell, macrophages, neutrophil, and dendritic cells immune infiltrates indicated that AGPAT9 expression level is partially correlated with immune infiltration level in GBM [89], while purity immune infiltrate is correlated. Dendritic cells are known for their ability of promoting tumor immunosuppression [103]. Dendritic cells are divided into two forms, myeloid DC and plasmacytoid DC, which can produce large amount of Interferon gamma [104]. It can also induce T cell immunity or tolerance [105, 106]. Hence, AGPT9 may be useful for monitoring immunotherapy in glioblastoma patients. Concerning the association of CD8 T cells, it shows that CD8+ T lymphocytes are crucial components of the tumor-specific adaptive immunity that attacks tumor cells [107]. Clinical outcomes are highly connected to the immune infiltration of malignancies [108]. The composition of tumor-infiltrating immune cells (TIICs) may serve as biomarkers for predicting treatment response and survival in various patients subgroups in terms of chemotherapy and immunotherapy [109, 110].
Conclusions
The analysis revealed that KLF15, AQP7, and AGPAT9 may be prognostic biomarker genes that may be useful for prognosis of patients with glioma. Utilization of bioinformatics tools such as TIMER, ESTIMATE, Kaplan–Meier plot, TCGA database; the immune proportion, stromal and immune scores, various expression levels of the prognostic signatures, infiltrating levels, and tumor purity of glioma and glioblastoma multiforme were determined. Further investigations will be required using X-tile software, Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery (DAVID), string, cytoscape, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGGs) databases to unveil the molecular mechanisms of glioma and glioblastoma. Use of single cell sequencing will be of great usefulness in the treatment of glioma and glioblastoma. Investigations into hormone-based therapy will be fascinating. It would be enormously fascinating to validate maybe the biomarker predicts both precision immunotherapy and prognosis. The determination of real-time quantitative PCR analysis is also important.
Availability of data and materials
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, upon reasonable request http://xena.ucsc.edu/, TCGA database.
Abbreviations
- TCGA:
-
The Cancer Genome Atlas
- KLF15:
-
Krüppel-like factor 15
- AQP7:
-
Aquaporin 7
- AGPAT9:
-
Human 1-acylglycerol-3-phosphate O-acyltransferase 9
- LGG:
-
Low-grade glioma
- GBM:
-
Glioblastoma
- ESTIMATE:
-
Estimation of Stromal and Immune cells in Malignant Tumors using Expression data algorithm
- TIICs:
-
Tumor-infiltrating immune cells
- ssGSEA:
-
Single-sample gene set enrichment analysis.
- DEG:
-
Differentially Expressed Genes
- DAVID:
-
Database for Annotation, Visualization, and Integrated Discovery
- KEGGs:
-
Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes
- TME:
-
Tumor microenvironment
- TIMER:
-
Tumor IMmune Estimation Resource
References
Aoki K, Nakamura H, Suzuki H, Matsuo K, Kataoka K, Shimamura T et al (2018) Prognostic relevance of genetic alterations in diffuse lower-grade gliomas. Neuro-Oncol 20(1):66–77. https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/nox132
Salari N, Ghasemi H, Fatahian R, Mansouri K, Dokaneheifard S, Shiri MH et al (2023) The global prevalence of primary central nervous system tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Med Res 28(1):39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-023-01011-y
Kessler T, Ito J, Wick W, Wick A (2023) Conventional and emerging treatments of astrocytomas and oligodendrogliomas. J Neurooncol 162(3):471–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-022-04216-z
Song L-R, Weng J-C, Li C-B, Huo X-L, Li H, Hao S-Y et al (2020) Prognostic and predictive value of an immune infiltration signature in diffuse lower-grade gliomas. JCI insight 5(8):e133811. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.133811
Liang X, Wang Z, Dai Z, Zhang H, Cheng Q, Liu Z (2021) Promoting prognostic model application: a review based on gliomas. J Oncol 2021:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/7840007
Luo J, Pan M, Mo K, Mao Y, Zou D (2023) Emerging role of artificial intelligence in diagnosis, classification, and clinical management of glioma. Sem Cancer Bio 91:110–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcancer.2023.03.006
Aiman W, Gasalberti DP, Rayi A. Low-Grade Gliomas (2023). StatPearls [Internet] 1–10
Hu Y, Yang Q, Cai S, Wang W, Fu S (2023) The integrative analysis based on super-enhancer related genes for predicting different subtypes and prognosis of patient with lower-grade glioma. Front Gent 14:1085584. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2023.1085584
Jiang H, Zhu Q, Wang X, Li M, Shen S, Yang C et al (2023) Characterization and clinical implications of different malignant transformation patterns in diffuse low-grade gliomas. Cancer Sci 114(9):3708–3718. https://doi.org/10.1111/cas.15889
Nakasu S, Nakasu Y, Tsuji A, Fukami T, Nitta N, Kawano H et al (2023) Incidental diffuse low-grade gliomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis of treatment results with correction of lead-time and lengthy-time biases. Neurooncol Pract 10(2):113–125. https://doi.org/10.1093/nop/npac073
van den Bent M (2023) Thirty years of progress in the management of low-grade gliomas. Revue Neurologique 5:425–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurol.2023.03.001
Melnyk T, Masiá E, Zagorodko O, Conejos-Sánchez I, Vicent MJ (2023) Rational design of poly-L-glutamic acid-palbociclib conjugates for pediatric glioma treatment. J Control Release 355:385–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2023.01.079
Kupfer SS, Ellis NA (2017) Hereditary colorectal cancer. In: The molecular basis of human cancer, pp 381–400. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.scrs.2010.12.002
Chen H-L, Hsu F-T, Kao Y-CJ, Liu H-S, Huang W-Z, Lu C-F et al (2017) Identification of epidermal growth factor receptor-positive glioblastoma using lipid-encapsulated targeted superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles in vitro. J Nanobiotechnol 15(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12951-017-0313-2
Pickering L, Main KM, Feldt-Rasmussen U, Sehested A, Mathiasen R, Klose M et al (2023) Survival and long-term socioeconomic consequences of childhood and adolescent onset of brain tumors. Dev Med Child Neurol 65(7):942–952. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.15467
Ji J, Huh Y, Ji R-R (2023) Immune and glial cells in pain and their interactions with nociceptive neurons. In: Neuroimmune interact pain: mech and therap. Springer, Berlin, pp 121–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29231-6-5
Shi DD, Anand S, Abdullah KG, McBrayer SK (2023) DNA damage in IDH-mutant gliomas: mechanisms and clinical implications. J Neuro-Oncol 162(3):515–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11060-022-04172-8
Navickas SM, Giles KA, Brettingham-Moore KH, Taberlay PC (2023) The role of chromatin remodeler SMARCA4/BRG1 in brain cancers: a potential therapeutic target. Oncogene. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41388-023-02773-9
Ajuyah P, Mayoh C, Lau LM, Barahona P, Wong M, Chambers H et al (2023) Histone H3-wild type diffuse midline gliomas with H3K27me3 loss are a distinct entity with exclusive EGFR or ACVR1 mutation and differential methylation of homeobox genes. Sci Rep 3(1):3775. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-30395-4
O’Donohue T, Farouk Sait S, Glade Bender J (2023) Progress in precision therapy in pediatric oncology. Curr Opin Ped 35(1):41–47. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0000000000001198
Sun Y, Liu Z, Fu Y, Yang Y, Lu J, Pan M et al (2023) Single-cell multi-omics sequencing and its application in tumor heterogeneity. Brief Func Gen 22(4):313–328. https://doi.org/10.1093/bfgp/elad009
Broggi G, Salvatorelli L, Barbagallo D, Certo F, Altieri R, Tirrò E et al (2021) Diagnostic utility of the immunohistochemical expression of serine and arginine rich splicing factor 1 (SRSF1) in the differential diagnosis of adult gliomas. Cancers 3(9):2086. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13092086
Sisakht AK, Malekan M, Ghobadinezhad F, Firouzabadi SNM, Jafari A, Mirazimi SMA et al (2023) Cellular conversations in glioblastoma progression, diagnosis, and treatment. Cell Mol Neurobio 43(2):585–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10571-022-01212-9
Elshaer SS, Abulsoud AI, Fathi D, Abdelmaksoud NM, Zaki MB, El-Mahdy HA et al (2023) miRNAs role in glioblastoma pathogenesis and targeted therapy: Signaling pathways interplay. Pathol Res Pract. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prp.2023.154511
Sharma A, Guerrero-Cázares H, Maciaczyk J (2023) Editorial to special issue “glioblastoma: recapitulating the key breakthroughs and future perspective”. MDPI, p 2548. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-023-01605-x
Loras A, Gonzalez-Bonet LG, Gutierrez-Arroyo JL, Martinez-Cadenas C, Marques-Torrejon MA (2023) Neural stem cells as potential glioblastoma cells of origin. Life 13(4):905. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13040905
Ah-Pine F, Khettab M, Bedoui Y, Slama Y, Daniel M, Doray B, Gasque P (2023) On the origin and development of glioblastoma: multifaceted role of perivascular mesenchymal stromal cells. Acta Neuropathol Commun 11(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-023-01605-x
Colopi A, Fuda S, Santi S, Onorato A, Cesarini V, Salvati M et al (2023) Impact of age and gender on glioblastoma onset, progression, and management. Mech Ageing Dev 211:111801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2023.111801
Shobeiri P, Seyedmirzaei H, Kalantari A, Mohammadi E, Rezaei N, Hanaei S (2023) The epidemiology of brain and spinal cord tumors. In: Human brain and spinal cord tumors: from bench to bedside volume 1: neuroimmunology and neurogenetics. Springer, Berlin, pp 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14732-6-2
Sahrizan NSA, Manan HA, Abdul Hamid H, Abdullah JM, Yahya N (2023) Functional alteration in the brain due to tumour invasion in paediatric patients: a systematic review. Cancers 15(7):2168. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15072168
Arnold LM, DeWitt JC, Thomas AA (2023) Tumors of the nervous system. In: Neurobiology of brain disorders. Elsevier, New York, pp 203–228
Datta S, Jones LD, Pingle S (2023) Brain tumors: focus on glioblastoma. Dis Rev 1–22
Bao H, Ren P, Yi L, Lv Z, Ding W, Li C et al (2023) New insights into glioma frequency maps: from genetic and transcriptomic correlate to survival prediction. Int J Cancer 152(5):998. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.34336
Goodenberger ML, Jenkins RB (2012) Genetics of adult glioma. Cancer Genet 205(12):613–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cancergen.2012.10.009
Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, Von Deimling A, Figarella-Branger D, Cavenee WK et al (2016) The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: a summary. Acta Neuropathol 131:803–820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1
Esparragosa Vazquez I, Ndiaye M, Di Stefano AL, Younan N, Larrieu-Ciron D, Seyve A et al (2023) FLAIR pseudoprogression in patients with anaplastic oligodendrogliomas treated with PCV chemotherapy alone. Euro J Neurol. https://doi.org/10.1111/ene.15873
Bernabéu-Sanz Á, Fuentes-Baile M, Alenda C (2021) Main genetic differences in high-grade gliomas may present different MR imaging and MR spectroscopy correlates. Eur Radiol 31:749–763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-07138-4
Balana C, Castañer S, Carrato C, Moran T, Lopez-Paradís A, Domenech M et al (2022) Preoperative diagnosis and molecular characterization of gliomas with liquid biopsy and radiogenomics. Front Neurol 13:865171. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2022.865171
Zhang J, Peng H, Wang Y-L, Xiao H-F, Cui Y-Y, Bian X-B et al (2021) Predictive role of the apparent diffusion coefficient and MRI morphologic features on IDH status in patients with diffuse glioma: a retrospective cross-sectional study. Front Oncol 11:640738. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.640738
Li M, Wang J, Chen X, Dong G, Zhang W, Shen S et al (2023) The sinuous, wave-like intratumoral-wall sign is a sensitive and specific radiological biomarker for oligodendrogliomas. Euro Radiol 33(6):4440–4452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-022-09314-0
Fisher BJ, Hu C, Macdonald DR, Lesser GJ, Coons SW, Brachman DG et al (2015) Phase 2 study of temozolomide-based chemoradiation therapy for high-risk low-grade gliomas: preliminary results of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0424. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 91(3):497–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.11.012
Wang Y, Wahafu A, Wu W, Xiang J, Huo L, Ma X et al (2021) FABP5 enhances malignancies of lower-grade gliomas via canonical activation of NF-κB signaling. J Cell Mol Med 9:4487–4500. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcmm.16536
Kumari S, Gupta R, Ambasta RK, Kumar P (2023) Multiple therapeutic approaches of glioblastoma multiforme: from terminal to therapy. Biochim Biophys Acta Rev Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbcan.2023.188913
Steyaert S, Qiu YL, Zheng Y, Mukherjee P, Vogel H, Gevaert O (2023) Multimodal deep learning to predict prognosis in adult and pediatric brain tumors. Commun Med Lond 3(1):44. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43856-023-00276-y
Cui X, Wang Y, Zhou J, Wang Q, Kang C (2023) Expert opinion on translational research for advanced glioblastoma treatment. Cancer Biol Med 20(5):344. https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2023.0012
Dhungel L, Harris C, Romine L, Sarkaria J, Raucher D (2023) Targeted c-Myc inhibition and systemic temozolomide therapy extend survival in glioblastoma xenografts. Bioenginering 10(6):718. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10060718
Hu Y, Li Z, Zhang Y, Wu Y, Liu Z, Zeng J et al (2023) The evolution of tumor microenvironment evolution in gliomas and its implication for target therapy. Int J Biol Sci 19(13):4311–4326. https://doi.org/10.7150/ijbs.83531
Siminzar P, Tohidkia MR, Eppard E, Vahidfar N, Tarighatnia A, Aghanejad A (2023) Recent trends in diagnostic biomarkers of tumor microenvironment. Mol Imaging Biol 25(3):464–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-022-01795-11
Neophytou CM, Panagi M, Stylianopoulos T, Papageorgis P (2021) The role of tumor microenvironment in cancer metastasis: Molecular mechanisms and therapeutic opportunities. Cancers 13(9):2053. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13092053
Francescangeli F, De Angelis ML, Rossi R, Cuccu A, Giuliani A, De Maria R, Zeuner A (2023) Dormancy, stemness, and therapy resistance: interconnected players in cancer evolution. Cancer Metastasis Rev 42(1):197–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10555-023-10092-4
van Weverwijk A, de Visser KE (2023) Mechanisms driving the immunoregulatory function of cancer cells. Nat Rev Cancer 23(4):193–215. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-022-00544-4
Margetis AT (2023) Metabolic targeting of malignant tumors: a need for systemic approach. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 149(5):2115–2138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-022-04212-w
Wang S, Yan W, Kong L, Zuo S, Wu J, Zhu C et al (2023) Oncolytic viruses engineered to enforce cholesterol efflux restore tumor-associated macrophage phagocytosis and anti-tumor immunity in glioblastoma. Nat Commun 14(1):4367. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-39683-z
Wu B, Shi X, Jiang M, Liu H (2023) Crosstalk between cancer stem cells and immune cells: potential therapeutic targets in the tumor immune microenvironment. Mol Cancer 22(1):1–22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-023-01748-4
Kumari S, Kumar S, Muthuswamy S (2023) RNA N6-methyladenosine modification in regulating cancer stem cells and tumor immune microenvironment and its implication for cancer therapy. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 149(4):1621–1633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-022-04158-z
Luo H, Zhang H, Mao J, Cao H, Tao Y, Zhao G et al (2023) Exosome-based nanoimmunotherapy targeting TAMs, a promising strategy for glioma. Cell Death Dis 14(4):235. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-023-05753-9
Yang J, Xu J, Wang W, Zhang B, Yu X, Shi S (2023) Epigenetic regulation in the tumor microenvironment: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic targets. Signal Transduct Target Ther 8(1):210. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-023-01480-x
Li Z-S, Wang B, Liang H, Li Y, Zhang Z-Y, Han L (2023) A three-stage eccDNA-based molecular profiling significantly improves the identification, prognosis assessment and recurrence prediction accuracy in patients with glioma. Cancer Lett. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2023.216369
Karabacak M, Ozkara BB, Senparlak K, Bisdas S (2023) Deep learning-based radiomics for prognostic stratification of low-grade gliomas using a multiple-gene signature. Appl Sci 13(6):3873. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13063873
Lee M (2023) Deep learning techniques with genomic data in cancer prognosis: a comprehensive review of the 2021–2023 literature. Biology 12(7):893. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12070893
Choi SR, Lee M (2023) Transformer architecture and attention mechanisms in genome data analysis: a comprehensive review. Biology 12(7):1033. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12071033
Li S, Wang C, Chen J, Lan Y, Zhang W, Kang Z et al (2023) Signaling pathways in brain tumors and therapeutic interventions. Signal Transduct Target Ther 8(1):8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41392-022-01260-z
Zhou X, Jin G, Zhang J, Liu F (2023) Recruitment mechanisms and therapeutic implications of tumor-associated macrophages in the glioma microenvironment. Front Immunol 14:1067641. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1067641
Arrieta VA, Dmello C, McGrail DJ, Brat DJ, Lee-Chang C, Heimberger AB et al (2023) Immune checkpoint blockade in glioblastoma: from tumor heterogeneity to personalized treatment. J Clin Invest 133(2):e163447. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI163447
Cruz N, Herculano-Carvalho M, Roque D, Faria CC, Cascão R, Ferreira HA et al (2023) Highlighted advances in therapies for difficult-to-treat brain tumours such as glioblastoma. Pharmaceutics 15(3):928. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics15030928
Xu W-H, Xu Y, Wang J, Wan F-N, Wang H-K, Cao D-L et al (2019) Prognostic value and immune infiltration of novel signatures in clear cell renal cell carcinoma microenvironment. Aging (Albany NY) 11(17):6999–7020. https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.102233
Zhu Z, Yu Z, Wang J, Zhou L, Zhang J, Yao B et al (2018) Krüppel-like factor 4 inhibits pancreatic cancer epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and metastasis by down-regulating caveolin 1 expression. Cell Physiol Biochem 46(1):23852. https://doi.org/10.1159/000488426
Chang K, Xue R, Zhao M, Zhao Y, Yu W, Zhao Z, Liu X (2021) EP300/CBP is crucial for cAMP-PKA pathway to alleviate podocyte dedifferentiation via targeting Notch3 signaling. Exp Cell Res 407(2):112825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yexcr.2021.112825
Mallipattu SK, Liu R, Zheng F, Narla G, Ma’ayan A, Dikman S et al (2012) Krüppel-like factor 15 (KLF15) is a key regulator of podocyte differentiation. J Biol Chem 287(23):19122–19135. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M112.345983
Khatibi SMH, Ardalan M, Abediazar S, Vahed SZ (2020) The impact of steroids on the injured podocytes in nephrotic syndrome. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 196:105490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2019.105490
Zhang Y, Yao C, Ju Z, Jiao D, Hu D, Qi L et al (2023) Krüppel-like factors in tumors: Key regulators and therapeutic avenues. Front Oncol 13:1080720. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1080720
Liu Y, Zhao X, Wang B, Liu Z, Zhang M, Wang J et al (2021) miR-376a provokes rectum adenocarcinoma via CTC1 depletion-induced telomere dysfunction. Front Cell Dev Biol 9:649328. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2021.649328
Wang J, Wang W, Zhu F, Duan Q (2022) The role of branched-chain amino acids metabolic disorders in tumorigenesis and progression. Biomed Pharmacother 153:113390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2022.113390
He Z, Wang C, Xue H, Zhao R, Li G (2020) Identification of a metabolism-related risk signature associated with clinical prognosis in glioblastoma using integrated bioinformatic analysis. Front Oncol 10:1631. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.01631
Ray SK (2016) The transcription regulator Kruppel-like factor 4 and its dual roles of oncogene in glioblastoma and tumor suppressor in neuroblastoma. For Immunopathol Dis Therap 7(2):127–139. https://doi.org/10.1615/ForumImmunDisTher.2016017227
Li J, Shen J, Zhao Y, Du F, Li M, Wu X et al (2023) Role of miR-181a-5p in cancer. Int J Oncol 63(4):1–18. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2023.5556
Zhu L, Ma N, Wang B, Wang L, Zhou C, Yan Y et al (2019) Significant prognostic values of aquaporin mRNA expression in breast cancer. Cancer Manag Res 11:1503–1515. https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S193396
Abulizi A, Dawuti A, Yang B (2023) Aquaporins in tumor. Aquaporins Adv Exp Med Biol 1398:303–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-7415-1_21
Charlestin V, Fulkerson D, Arias Matus CE, Walker ZT, Carthy K, Littlepage LE (2022) Aquaporins: new players in breast cancer progression and treatment response. Front Oncol 12:988119. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.988119
Chow PH, Bowen J, Yool AJ (2020) Combined systematic review and transcriptomic analyses of mammalian aquaporin classes 1 to 10 as biomarkers and prognostic indicators in diverse cancers. Cancers 2(7):1911. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12071911
Kushwaha PP, Verma S, Gupta S (2023) Aquaporins as prognostic biomarker in prostate cancer. Cancers 15(2):331. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15020331
Jang SJ, Moon C (2023) Aquaporin 5 (AQP5) expression in breast cancer and its clinicopathological characteristics. PLoS ONE 18(1):e0270752. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0270752
Edamana S, Login FH, Riishede A, Dam VS, Tramm T, Nejsum LN (2023) The cell polarity protein Scribble is downregulated by the water channel aquaporin-5 in breast cancer cells. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 324(2):C307–C319. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpcell.00311.2022
Bystrup M, Login FH, Edamana S, Borgquist S, Tramm T, Kwon TH, Nejsum LN (2022) Aquaporin-5 in breast cancer. APMIS 130(5):253–260. https://doi.org/10.1111/apm.13212
Zhou Y, Huang H, Zhou D, Li Q, Pan R, Yuan C, Cui Y (2023) Cloning and bioinformatics analysis of aquaporin proteins in the European house dust mite, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus. Euro Zool J 90(1):344–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750263.2023.2205866
Ahmed B, Alam M, Aktar N, Hossain MS, Ullah MW, Bashar KK et al (2023) Genome-wide investigation of aquaporin genes in Corchorus spp and their role in organ development and abiotic stress tolerance. Plant Gene 34:100410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plgene.2023.100410
Zhou C, Lin Z-s, Shi Y, Feng J, Hu Z, Yang M-j et al (2023) Genome-wide identification, structural and evolutionary characteristics, and expression analysis of aquaporin gene family members in Mercenaria mercenaria. Front Marine Sci 10:1138074. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2023.1138074
Mutchler SM, Shi S, Whelan SCM, Kleyman TR (2023) Validation of commercially available antibodies directed against subunits of the epithelial Na+ channel. Physiol Rep 11(1):e15554. https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.15554
Korbecki J, Bosiacki M, Gutowska I, Chlubek D, Baranowska-Bosiacka I (2023) Biosynthesis and significance of fatty acids, glycerophospholipids, and triacylglycerol in the processes of glioblastoma tumorigenesis. Cancers 15(7):2183. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15072183
Li J, Zhang S, Chen S, Yuan Y, Zuo M, Li T et al (2023) Lipid metabolism-related gene signature predicts prognosis and depicts tumor microenvironment immune landscape in gliomas. Front Immunol 14:1021678. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1021678
Xiong Y, Xiong Z, Cao H, Li C, Wanggou S, Li X (2020) Multi-dimensional omics characterization in glioblastoma identifies the purity-associated pattern and prognostic gene signatures. Cancer Cell Int 20(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12935-020-1116-3
Zhang S-H, Zeng N, Sun J-X, Liu C-Q, Xu J-Z, Xu M-Y et al (2023) Pan-cancer analysis reveals the prognostic and immunologic roles of cereblon and its significance for PROTAC design. Heliyon 29(6):e16644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16644
Xu H, Zhu Q, Tang L, Jiang J, Yuan H, Zhang A, Lou M (2021) Prognostic and predictive value of FCER1G in glioma outcomes and response to immunotherapy. Cancer Cell Int 21:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12935-021-01804-3
Huang X, Tian T, Zhang Y, Zhou S, Hu P, Zhang J (2021) Age-associated changes in adverse events arising from anti-PD-(L) 1 therapy. Front Oncol 11:619385. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.619385
Malta TM, Sokolov A, Gentles AJ, Burzykowski T, Poisson L, Weinstein JN et al (2018) Machine learning identifies stemness features associated with oncogenic dedifferentiation. Cell 173(2):338–54.e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.034.
Liang Y, Li Z, Yuan H, Wang L (2021) Gao L-H (2021) Poly (p-phenylenevinylene) nanoparticles modified with antiEGFRvIII for specific glioblastoma therapy. Sci Rep 11(1):4449. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-83931-5
Zhou Z, Zhan J, Cai Q, Xu F, Chai R, Lam K et al (2022) The water transport system in astrocytes-aquaporins. Cells 11(16):2564. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells11162564
da Silva IV, Garra S, Calamita G, Soveral G (2022) The multifaceted role of aquaporin-9 in health and its potential as a clinical biomarker. Biomolecules 12(7):897. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom12070897
Roma-Rodrigues C, Mendes R, Baptista PV, Fernandes AR (2019) Targeting tumor microenvironment for cancer therapy. Int J Mol Sci 20(4):840. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms20040840
Mahajan S, Schmidt MH, Schumann U (2023) The glioma immune landscape: a double-edged sword for treatment regimens. Cancers 15(7):2024. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15072024
Simmen FA, Alhallak I, Simmen RC (2023) Krüppel-like factor-9 and Krüppel-like factor-13: highly related, multi-functional, transcriptional repressors and activators of oncogenesis. Cancers 15(23):5667. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15235667
Shu L, Tang J, Liu S, Tao Y (2023) Plasma cell signatures predict prognosis and treatment efficacy for lung adenocarcinoma. Cell Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13402-023-00883-w
Shbeer AM (2023) Current state of knowledge and challenges for harnessing the power of dendritic cells in cancer immunotherapy. Pathol-Res Pract. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prp.2023.155025
Hornero RA, Idoyaga J (2023) Plasmacytoid dendritic cells: a dendritic cell in disguise. Mol Immunol 159:38–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molimm.2023.05.007
Dey M, Chang AL, Miska J, Wainwright DA, Ahmed AU, Balyasnikova IV et al (2015) Dendritic cell–based vaccines that utilize myeloid rather than plasmacytoid cells offer a superior survival advantage in malignant glioma. J Immunol 195(1):367–376. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1401607
Zhang Y (ed) (2024) Dendritic cell vaccine in cancer immunotherapy. In: Third international conference on biological engineering and medical science (ICBioMed2023) SPIE. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11684-011-0172-4
Hwang HS, Shin H, Han J, Na K (2018) Combination of photodynamic therapy (PDT) and anti-tumor immunity in cancer therapy. J Pharma Invest 48:143–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40005-017-0377-x
Cascão R, Faria CC (2023) Optimizing the role of immunotherapy for the treatment of glioblastoma. In: New insights glioblastoma. Elsevier, New York, pp 553–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-99873-4.00012-8
Zhang S-C, Hu Z-Q, Long J-H, Zhu G-M, Wang Y, Jia Y et al (2019) Clinical implications of tumor-infiltrating immune cells in breast cancer. J Cancer 10(24):6175. https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.35901
Kwon Y (2022) Potential pro-tumorigenic effect of bisphenol A in breast cancer via altering the tumor microenvironment. Cancers 14(12):3021. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14123021
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
There is no funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
AMO wrote the manuscript. AMO and OSW performed the experiments, collected, and analyzed data. AKO, RMH, AJ, AA, AMA, and AIA revised the manuscript. AMO conceived and designed the study and revised the manuscript for improved intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they do not have 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
Olajuyin, A.M., Nwachukwu, O.S., Olajuyin, A.K. et al. Prognostic values and immune infiltration of KLF15, AQP7, AGPAT9 in glioma and glioblastoma. Futur J Pharm Sci 10, 32 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43094-024-00608-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43094-024-00608-2