Cited by 514Lung Cancer Research StudiesBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Development and Validation of an Individualized Immune Prognostic Signature in Early-Stage Nonsquamous Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

Open access
Li, Bailiang, Cui, Yi, Diehn, Maximilian, Li, Ruijiang·2017·JAMA Oncology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: The prevalence of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is expected to increase with recent implementation of annual screening programs. Reliable prognostic biomarkers are needed to identify patients at a high risk for recurrence to guide adjuvant therapy. OBJECTIVE: To develop a robust, individualized immune signature that can estimate prognosis in patients with early-stage nonsquamous NSCLC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective study analyzed the gene expression profiles of frozen tumor tissue samples from 19 public NSCLC cohorts, including 18 microarray data sets and 1 RNA-Seq data set for The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) lung adenocarcinoma cohort. Only patients with nonsquamous NSCLC with clinical annotation were included. Samples were from 2414 patients with nonsquamous NSCLC, divided into a meta-training cohort (729 patients), meta-testing cohort (716 patients), and 3 independent validation cohorts (439, 323, and 207 patients). All patients underwent surgery with a negative surgical margin, received no adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy, and had publicly available gene expression data and survival information. Data were collected from July 22 through September 8, 2016. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Overall survival. RESULTS: Of 2414 patients (1205 men [50%], 1111 women [46%], and 98 of unknown sex [4%]; median age [range], 64 [15-90] years), a prognostic immune signature of 25 gene pairs consisting of 40 unique genes was constructed using the meta-training data set. In the meta-testing and validation cohorts, the immune signature significantly stratified patients into high- vs low-risk groups in terms of overall survival across and within subpopulations with stage I, IA, IB, or II disease and remained as an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analyses (hazard ratio range, 1.72 [95% CI, 1.26-2.33; P < .001] to 2.36 [95% CI, 1.47-3.79; P < .001]) after adjusting for clinical and pathologic factors. Several biological processes, including chemotaxis, were enriched among genes in the immune signature. The percentage of neutrophil infiltration (5.6% vs 1.8%) and necrosis (4.6% vs 1.5%) was significantly higher in the high-risk immune group compared with the low-risk groups in TCGA data set (P < .003). The immune signature achieved a higher accuracy (mean concordance index [C-index], 0.64) than 2 commercialized multigene signatures (mean C-index, 0.53 and 0.61) for estimation of survival in comparable validation cohorts. When integrated with clinical characteristics such as age and stage, the composite clinical and immune signature showed improved prognostic accuracy in all validation data sets relative to molecular signatures alone (mean C-index, 0.70 vs 0.63) and another commercialized clinical-molecular signature (mean C-index, 0.68 vs 0.65). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The proposed clinical-immune signature is a promising biomarker for estimating overall survival in nonsquamous NSCLC, including early-stage disease. Prospective studies are needed to test the clinical utility of the biomarker in individualized management of nonsquamous NSCLC.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.1609

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 78 · Cited by 514

Authors
Li, B., Cui, Y., Diehn, M., & Li, R.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Hokkaido University (JP)
Corresponding author
Li, Ruijiang
Venue
JAMA Oncology
Published
2017-11-01
Volume
3
Issue
11
Pages
1529
ISSN
2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2733991343
Cited by
514
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 89 · 2021: 139 · 2020: 136 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 3
FWCI
23.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Lung Cancer Research Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer, gene expression signatures, overall survival, recurrence risk, adjuvant therapy decision, lung adenocarcinoma, chemotaxis, tumor immune microenvironment, early-stage lung cancer, prognostic factors, risk stratification, TIDE score, tumor-infiltrating immune cells, immune checkpoint genes, tumor suppressor
MeSH terms
Adenocarcinoma of Lung, Adenocarcinoma, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung, Female, Humans, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Phenotype, Pneumonectomy, Predictive Value of Tests, Retrospective Studies, Risk Factors, Biomarkers, Tumor, Reproducibility of Results, Proportional Hazards Models, Treatment Outcome, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Oligonucleotide Array Sequence Analysis, Gene Expression Profiling, Databases, Genetic, Young Adult, Tumor Microenvironment, Transcriptome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review