Prognosis-related lncRNA
The co-expression analysis confirmed that 1616 lncRNAs had a co-expression relationship with m6A-related genes (Fig. 1A). Survival analysis results showed that ATP2B1-AS1, NSMCE1-DT, AC003101.2, LINC02657, AL161729.4, ZKSCAN2-DT, AP006621.2, AC156455.1, NIFK-AS1, AC008760.1, and AC245041.1 were significantly related to the survival of patients with COAD (Fig. 1B). The results of expression analysis showed that the expression of these 13 lncRNAs significantly related to survival had significant differences between patients with COAD and normal samples (Fig. 1C).
Construction and verification of the prognostic risk model
LASSO regression analysis further confirmed that AC003101.2, LINC02657, L161729.4, AP006621.2, AC156455.1, ZKSCAN2-DT, and AC245041.1 were key lncRNAs, which could be used to construct a prognostic risk model (Fig. 2A and 2B). The formula for calculating the risk score of patients with COAD was as follows:
Risk score = (0.7734 × Exp AC003101.2) + (0.5589 × Exp LINC02657) + (0.0020 × ExpAL161729.4) + (0.0678 × ExpAP006621.2) + (0.0914 × Exp AC156455.1) + (0.4037 × Exp ZKSCAN2-DT) + (0.1692 × Exp AC245041.1) (Fig. 2C).
A significant difference in survival was found between the high-risk and the low-risk groups in the training group; the survival rate in the low-risk group was significantly higher than that in the high-risk group (Fig. 2D). The AUC value of the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival curves was 0.766, 0.785, and 0.726, respectively, which showed that the survival curve was credible (Fig. 2E). The calibration curve of the survival curve further verified its credibility (Fig. 2F). The trend in the test group was the same as that in the train group (Fig. 2G-2I). The survival status results showed that the higher the risk score of patients, the greater the number of deaths (Fig. 2M and 2N). The results of correlation analysis showed that the overall survival rate of patients was negatively correlated with the risk score, although the statistical difference was not significant (Fig. 2O and 2P). Single-factor independent prognostic analysis and multivariate independent prognostic analysis showed that whether in the train group or in the test group, the risk score could be used as a key factor to predict the prognostic survival rate of COAD (Fig. 2Q-2T).
Nomogram
By integrating factors such as age, sex, cancer stage, and risk score of patients, we constructed a nomogram that could predict the 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates of patients (Fig. 3A). For each patient, the overall score could be calculated according to the scores of the four factors of age, sex, cancer stage, and risk score. Finally, the survival rate could be obtained according to the score and the horizontal axis of the survival rate. The AUC values of the ROC curve of 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years were all greater than 0.8, indicating that the constructed nomogram had good prediction accuracy. The calibration curve of the ROC curve also illustrated this point.
Functional analysis of the prognostic risk model lncRNA
The analysis between the risk score and the expression of lncRNA showed a positive correlation between AC003101.2, LINC02657, AL161729.4, AP006621.2, AC156455.1, ZKSCAN2-DT, AC245041.1, and the risk score. The higher the level of expression, the higher the risk score. This implied that these lncRNAs might be involved in the occurrence and development of COAD (Fig. 4A-4G). The results of survival analysis showed that L161729.4, AP006621.2, and AC156455.1 were significantly related to the survival of patients, and the higher the expression of lncRNA, the lower the survival rate of COAD (Fig. 4H-4N). The full length of AL161729.4 was only 476 bp with only one transcript; therefore, we determined it as the target of follow-up research. The results of subcellular localization showed that AL161729.4 mainly existed in the cytoplasm in GM12878, MCF7, and other cells (Fig. 4O). The subcellular localization results of the prediction model showed that about 40% of lncRNA AL161729.4 was located in the cytoplasm (Fig. 4P). The results of subcellular localization showed that the knockdown vector designed and constructed for lncRNA could decrease the content of AL161729.4 in vivo. Then, the function of lncRNA AL161729.4 was examined.
Construction of ceRNA network
ENCORI online database results showed that the target miRNA of lncRNA AL161729.4 included miR-498-5p, miR-4291, miR-4762-3p, miR-6759-5p, miR-181b-3p, miR-181b-2-3p, miR-4306, miR-711, miR-555, miR-6776-5p, miR-100-3p, miR-3684, miR-6507-5p, miR-4420, miR-182-5p, miR-4644, miR-185-5p, miR-631, miR-3661, miR-3123, miR-760, miR-299-3p, miR-10524-5p, miR-6529-5p, miR-1909-3p, miR-451b, miR-8065, miR-5196-5p, miR-4747-5p, miR-12131, miR-4441, miR-6873-5p, miR-6722-3p, and miR-609. The results of miRNA difference analysis showed that 180 highly expressed miRNAs existed in normal samples, including miR-760, compared with patients with COAD (Fig. 5A). The survival analysis of miR-760 showed that the higher the expression of miR-760, the higher the survival rate of patients. This indicated that miR-760 might play a positive regulatory role in the development of COAD (Fig. 5B).
The miRNA target gene prediction results showed 24 miR-760 target genes predicted by the three databases miRDB, miRTarBase, and TargetScan: HM13, ORAI2, AKAP12, GOLGA7, HIST1H2AE, HIST2H2BE, HYOU1, KHNYN, MAGED1, SRRM1, PUM1, GDE1, RIC8A, KIAA1191, PPIP5K1, NFATC2IP, ANP32B, ANKFY1, STEAP3, HMGA2, TRAPPC10, PDXK, FOXJ2, and TOMM40L (Fig. 5C). The gene expression differential analysis showed that STEAP3, PDXK, HYOU1, and HM13 were highly expressed in patients, while HMGA2, AKAP12, and ANKFY1 were highly expressed in normal samples (Fig. 5D-5J). The ceRNA network of AL161729.4-miR-760-HYOU1 was constructed based on the principle of base complementary pairing (Fig. 5K).
Verification of ceRNA network
When miR-760 mimics were transfected into HT29 and SW620 cells, the fluorescence luminescence of wild-type expression vectors of HYOU1 and AL161729.4 reduced (Fig. 6A-6D). When miR-760 inhibitors were transfected into HT29 and SW620 cells, the fluorescence of wild-type expression vectors of HYOU1 and AL161729.4 increased (Fig. 6E-6H). The overexpression and inhibition results of miR-760 indicated that miR-760 could indeed target binding to AL161729.4 and HYOU1, and the AL161729.4-miR-760-HYOU1 ceRNA network existed.
AL161729.4-miR-760-HYOU1 was involved in regulating the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway
In the detection of the knockdown efficiency of the knockdown vector, it was found that the knockdown effect of AL161729.4 siRNA 1# was significantly better than that of siRNA 2# (Fig. 7A), and the knockdown effect of HYOU1 siRNA 2# was better than that of siRNA 1# (Fig. 7B). In subsequent studies, the knockdown vectors with better effects were used for experiments. MiR-760 mimics could significantly reduce the mRNA levels of AL161729.4, HYOU1, PI3K, and Akt (Fig. 7C), and miR-760 inhibitors could increase their mRNA levels (Fig. 7D).
AL161729.4-miR-760-HYOU1 was involved in cancer cell proliferation
The overexpression of AL161729.4 could promote the proliferation of SW620 (Fig. 8A), while the knockdown of AL161729.4 could inhibit the proliferation of SW620 (Fig. 8B). MiR-760 mimics could inhibit the proliferation of SW620 (Fig. 8C), while miR-760 inhibitors could promote the proliferation of SW620 (Fig. 8D). The overexpression of HYOU1 could promote the proliferation of SW620 (Fig. 8E), while the knockdown of HYOU1 could inhibit the proliferation of SW620 (Fig. 8F). These findings proved that AL161729.4-miR-760-HYOU1 directly participated in the regulation of SW620 cell proliferation.