Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 15, 2026
Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT
Published on: January 22, 2018
An antigen processing and presentation signature for prognostic evaluation and immunotherapy selection in advanced
Ke-Wei Wang1, Mei-Dan Wang1, Zi-Xi Li1
1Institute of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China.
Objective:
The aim of the study was to propose a signature based on genes associated with antigen processing and presentation (APscore) to predict prognosis and response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in advanced gastric cancer (aGC).
Background:
How antigen presentation-related genes affected the immunotherapy response and whether they could predict the clinical outcomes of the immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) in aGC remain largely unknown.
Methods:
In this study, an aGC cohort (Kim cohort, RNAseq, N=45) treated by ICIs, and 467 aGC patients from seven cohorts were conducted to investigate the value of the APscore predicting the prognosis and response to ICIs. Subsequently, the associations of the APscore with the tumor microenvironment (TME), molecular characteristics, clinical features, and somatic mutation variants in aGC were assessed. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of the APscore was analyzed to estimate response to ICIs. Cox regression or Log-rank test was used to estimate the prognosis of aGC patients.
Results:
The APscore constructed by principal component analysis algorithms was an effective predictive biomarker of the response to ICIs in the Kim cohort and 467 aGC patients (Kim: AUC =0.85, 95% CI: 0.69-1.00; 467 aGC: AUC =0.69, 95% CI: 0.63-0.74). The APscore also was a prognostic biomarker in 467 aGC patients (HR=1.73, 95% CI: 1.21-2.46). Inhibitory immunity, decreased TMB and low stromal scores were observed in the high APscore group, while activation of immunity, increased TMB, and high stromal scores were observed in the low APscore group. Next, we evaluated the value of several central genes in predicting the prognosis and response to ICIs in aGC patients, and verified them using immunogenic, transcriptomic, genomic, and multi-omics methods. Lastly, a predictive model built successfully discriminated patients with vs. without immunotherapy response and predicted the survival of aGC patients.
Conclusions:
The APscore was a new biomarker for identifying high-risk aGC patients and patients with responses to ICIs. Exploration of the APscore and hub genes in multi-omics GC data may guide treatment decisions.
