Back to all available

CD161, a promising prognostic biomarker in hepatocellular carcinoma, correlates with immune infiltration

bioinformatics
cell-biology
gastroenterology-and-hepatology
immunology
oncology

Abstract

Background.CD161, encoded by the killer cell lectin-like receptor B1 (KLRB1) gene, exhibits a distinct role among different tumors. This study aims to explore the potential value of CD161 as a prognostic biomarker for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and its association with the immune cell infiltration.

Methods. A total of 109 HCC patients who underwent surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Immunohistochemistry, bioinformatic analyses, and statistical measurements were used to investigate the associations between CD161 expression, immune cell infiltration, and clinical outcomes in multiple public and in-house cohorts.

Results. CD 161 was highly expressed in adjacent normal tissues compared to those in tumor tissues of HCC patients at both protein and mRNA level. Meanwhile, CD161 was enriched in HCC cases characterized by smaller tumor sizes (≤5cm), earlier TNM stages, and the absence of portal vein tumor thrombus. Individuals with high CD161 expression showed extended overall survival (OS) and relapse free survival (RFS) compared to those with lower levels. Notably, CD161 was identified as an independent prognostic indicator for both OS and RFS. In addition, the enrichment analysis indicated a close correlation between CD161 and the immune response, as well as the signaling pathways of cytokines and chemokines, implying its role in immune regulation during cancer development. To be more specific, CD161 was positively related to the immunemodulators and the tumor-infiltrating immune cells, especially CD8+T cells, CD4+T cells, and dendritic cells. Importantly, the patients with high CD161 expression were more likely to derive benefits from immunotherapy in multiple public databases.

Conclusion. CD161 emerges as a promising prognostic biomarker for HCC. Additionally, CD161 is closely linked to high infiltration of immune cells, participates in the regulation of the tumor immune microenvironment, and holds promise as a potential biomarker for predicting the efficacy of immunotherapy.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at peer.review@peerj.com.