A cuproptosis-related prognostic signature for guiding clinical diagnosis and treatment in uveal melanoma patients

Ying Yang; Qixuan Li; Jia Chen; Yangchen Guo; Yu Cai; Wenmin Zhao; Shu Su; Aimin Sang

doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36324

A cuproptosis-related prognostic signature for guiding clinical diagnosis and treatment in uveal melanoma patients

Heliyon. 2024 Aug 14;10(16):e36324. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36324. eCollection 2024 Aug 30.

Authors

Ying Yang^{1

2}, Qixuan Li^{3

2}, Jia Chen¹, Yangchen Guo², Yu Cai^{1

2}, Wenmin Zhao^{2

4}, Shu Su¹, Aimin Sang¹

Affiliations

¹ Eye Institute, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, Jiangsu, China.
² Medical School of Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, China.
³ Department of Thoracic Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, Jiangsu, China.
⁴ Department of Dermatology, Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University, Nantong, 226001, Jiangsu, China.

Abstract

Background: Cuproptosis, one of the most recently discovered forms of cell death, is induced by the disruption of copper binding to the mitochondrial respiratory acylation components. However, the mechanism underlying cuproptosis in uveal melanoma (UM) has not yet been adequately studied.

Methods: RNA and clinical data were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. Differentially expressed cuproptosis-related genes were identified by R software. A prognostic signature was constructed by applying LASSO regression and Cox regression models. The associations between the signature and the immune microenvironment, overall survival, and drug sensitivity were studied. In addition, qPCR and Western blotting were performed on UM cells and RPE cell lines to verify the expression levels of the genes encoding dihydrolipoamide dehydrogenase (DLD) and dihydrolipoamide S-succinyltransferase (DLST) in UM cases.

Results: Using a cuproptosis-related prognostic signature, UM samples were classified into high- and low-risk groups. A significant difference in overall survival between the two risk groups was evident. Receiver operating characteristic curves demonstrated that the signature is a reliable predictor of prognosis. Immune cell infiltration, drug sensitivity, and immune checkpoint expression were analysed. Significant immune difference between the two high-risk groups was found, and the high expression of immune checkpoints in high-risk groups suggests significant immunotherapy potential. In addition, drug sensitivity analysis experiments suggest that erlotinib may be a potential treatment for high-risk patients. The results of in vitro experiments confirmed that DLD and DLST had higher expression levels in UM cell lines.

Conclusions: The prognostic signature developed in this study is a reliable biomarker for predicting the prognosis of UM and may serve as a tool for personalised treatment of patients with UM.

Keywords: Cuproptosis; DLD; DLST; Immune microenvironment; Prognostic signature; Uveal melanoma (UM).