Back to all available

Comprehensive analysis of FAM111B as an emerging prospective biomarker in glioma

bioinformatics
genetics
neurology

Abstract

Background ： The FAM111B has a significant part to perform in the pathogenesis of certain tumors, but its relationship with glioblastoma remains unclear. This research aims to probe the expression of FAM111B in glioblastoma and to analyze the relationship between FAM111B expression and the prognosis of patients. Methods ： Using the TCGA and the GTEx, the gene levels of FAM111B in glioma tissue and control tissue were investigated. Additionally, the expression of FAM111B in glioma was further verified through IHC of the Human Protein Atlas. The associations from FAM111B to glioma prognosis were interrogated by using Kaplan-Meier analysis and COX regression analysis. With help from nomograms, we anticipate the survival of glioma patients. The effect of FAM111B on the proliferation of glioma cells was investigated in the LN229 cell line. The gene associated with FAM111B was instrumented with functional enrichment analysis by utilizing GO and KEGG functional analysis. The correlation between FAM111B and m6A modification in glioma was analyzed. Immune infiltration analysis was carried out basing on single-sample GSEA. Results ： In TCGA, the presence of FAM111B is notable in many types of cancer. Comparative analysis reveals a meaningful upregulation of FAM111B in glioma relative to normal counterparts. The upregulation of FAM111B is associated with poorer clinical pathological features of glioma. By interfering with the expression of FAM111B, the proliferation ability of LN229 cells significantly decreased. It has been determined that the enrichment of FAM111B-related genes is principally concerned with biological processes. FAM111B is affiliated with most m6A-related genes. The infiltration of immune cells in glioma is linked to FAM111B, which is also related to the expression of Th2. Conclusion ： Elevated expression of FAM111B is accompanied by an adverse prognosis in patients with glioma, and it has been posited that its function may be implicated in m6A methylation. FAM111B inhibits the proliferative capacity of glioma cells. FAM111B is engaged in the process of immune infiltration of glioma.
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 [email protected].