Skip to main content
Aging (Albany NY) logoLink to Aging (Albany NY)
. 2021 Dec 15;13(24):25799–25845. doi: 10.18632/aging.203762

DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 is negatively associated with ARHGAP30 expression in lung adenocarcinoma, which reduces tumor immunity and is detrimental to patient survival

Sheng Hu 1, Wenxiong Zhang 1, Jiayue Ye 1, Yang Zhang 1, Deyuan Zhang 1, Jinhua Peng 1, Dongliang Yu 1, Jianjun Xu 1,, Yiping Wei 1,
PMCID: PMC8751594  PMID: 34910688

Abstract

Rho-GTPase activating protein 30 (ARHGAP30) can enhance the intrinsic hydrolysis of GTP and regulates Rho-GTPase negatively. The relationship between ARHGAP30 expression and lung adenocarcinoma is unclear. Therefore, the present study aimed to assess the differences in expression of ARHGAP30 between lung adenocarcinoma tissues and normal tissues and the relationship between DNA methylation and ARHGAP30 expression in lung adenocarcinoma. To determine the role of ARHGAP30 expression in the prognosis and survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma, gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 was performed, comprising analyses of Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathways, Panther pathways, Reactome pathways, Wikipathways, Gene Ontology, Kinase Target Network, Transcription Factor Network, and a protein-protein interaction network. The association of ARHGAP30 expression with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, immunostimulators, major histocompatibility complex molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors in lung adenocarcinoma tissues was also analyzed. DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 correlated negatively with ARHGAP30 expression. Patients with lung adenocarcinoma with high DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 had poor prognosis. The prognosis of patients with lung adenocarcinoma with low ARHGAP30 expression was also poor. ARHGAP30 expression in lung adenocarcinoma correlated positively, whereas methylation of ARHGAP30 correlated negatively, with levels of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. Gene set enrichment analysis revealed that many pathways associated with ARHGAP30 should be studied to improve the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of lung adenocarcinoma. We speculated that DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 suppresses ARHGAP30 expression, which reduces tumor immunity, leading to poor prognosis for patients with lung adenocarcinoma.

Keywords: ARHGAP30, lung adenocarcinoma, DNA methylation, gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA), tumor immunity

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, lung cancer cases and deaths are increasing. In 2018, GLOBOCAN [1] estimated that there were 2.09 million new cases (11.6% of the total number of cancer cases) and 1.76 million deaths (18.4% of the total number of cancer deaths), which is higher than the rate reported in 2012 (1.8 million new cases and 1.6 million deaths), making it the most common cause of cancer and cancer deaths in both men and women [2]. Lung cancer includes multiple subtypes, and the proportion of lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) has increased in recent years. Despite significant advances in chemotherapy and molecular targeted therapy, the survival rate of LUAD remains unsatisfactory. Tumor recurrence and metastasis are major challenges in the clinical treatment of LUAD [3]. To improve the prognosis of patients with LUAD, more targeted molecules should be identified to diagnose, treat, and determine the prognosis of patients. We suggest that ARHGAP30 might have potential as a new targeting molecule.

The Rho protein family belongs to the small GTP-binding proteins of the Ras superfamily (including the Ras, Rho, Rab, Ran, and Rrf families), which have a molecular weight between 20 and 30 kDa and control numerous signal transduction pathways as molecular switches in eukaryotic cells [4]. Rho proteins act as signal converters in the signal transduction pathway of cells, acting on the cytoskeleton or target proteins, and produce a variety of biological effects [5]. Rho GTPase activating protein 30 (ARHGAP30), a Rho-specific Rho GAP, has been reported to enhance the intrinsic hydrolysis of GTP and might regulate Rho GTPase negatively [6].

Recent studies have demonstrated a close relationship between Rho-GTPases and the development and metastasis of various human tumors [7]. In some studies on the relationship between ARHGAP30 and cancer, upregulation of ARHGAP30 attenuated pancreatic cancer progression by inactivating the β-catenin pathway [8]. In addition, ARHGAP30 promotes p53 acetylation and function in colorectal cancer [9]. However, whether there is a difference in the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD, a relationship between the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD and DNA methylation, and whether these affect patient’s prognosis, survival, and tumor immune infiltration, are unclear and require further study.

This present study aimed to investigate the differential expression of ARHGAP30 between LUAD tissues and normal tissues and the relationship between ARHGAP30 expression and DNA methylation in LUAD. The role of ARHGAP30 expression in the prognosis and survival of patients with LUAD was studied. In addition, gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) of ARHGAP30 was performed using various bioinformatic analyses, including Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathways, Panther pathways, Reactome pathways, Wikipathways, Gene ontology (GO; biological process, cellular component, and molecular function), Kinase Target Network, Transcription Factor Network, and a protein-protein interaction (PPI) network in the Biological General Repository for Interaction Datasets (BI-OGRID). The association of ARHGAP30 expression with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), immunostimulators, major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors in LUAD tissues were also analyzed. We believe that ARHGAP30 can be developed as a new biomarker for LUAD. The study of ARHGAP30-associated immune infiltration will provide a new direction for immunotherapy of lung adenocarcinoma.

RESULTS

Differential expression of the ARHGAP30 mRNA and protein in LUAD tissues and normal tissues

Figure 1A shows a summary view of the different transcriptional levels of ARHGAP30 in various cancers in the Oncomine [10] database. The red line in the figure shows that the expression level of ARHGAP30 in lung cancer tissue was significantly lower than that in normal tissue. Figure 1B11B6 show that the mRNA expression levels of ARHGAP30 were considerably higher in LUAD than in normal tissue. Figure 1B11B3 show the fold change, associated p-values, and overexpression Gene Rank, based on Oncomine 4.5 analysis [10], including box plots of ARHGAP30 mRNA levels in the Hou Lung, Selamat Lung, and Okayama Lung datasets. Figure 1B4, 1B5 show the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD based on SurvExpress [11] analysis. Figure 1 (B6) shows the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD based on GEPIA [12]. P values as described in the figure are statistically significant. According to analysis at the Warner [13] database, the abundance of the different exons of the ARHGAP30 gene show an uneven balance between normal and tumor tissues in patients with LUAD (Figure 2A). Figure 2A1 shows the expression of ARHGAP30 in normal tissues (n = 58) and Figure 2A2 shows the expression of ARHGAP30 in tumor tissues (n = 488). The data shown in Figure 2A4, 2A5 indicates that ARHGAP30 expression correlated negatively with the level of DNA methylation.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Comparison of mRNA and protein expression of ARHGAP30 in lung cancer tissues and normal tissues. (A) Summary view of ARHGAP30. The transcription level of ARHGAP30 in different types of cancer. P-value < 0.05, Note: The Z-score standardizes the color to describe the relative value in the row. Among them, red indicates overexpression or copy acquisition of genes in the analysis; blue indicates low expression or copy loss of genes in these analyses. Datasets comprised samples represented as microarray data measuring mRNA expression in primary tumors, cell lines, or xenografts. (B) Transcription of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma (from Oncomine, SurvExpress, and GEPIA databases). mRNA expression levels of ARHGAP30 were significantly higher in lung adenocarcinoma than in normal tissue. (B1B3) The fold change, associated p-values, and overexpression Gene Rank, based on Oncomine 4.5 analysis. Box plots show ARHGAP30 mRNA levels in the Hou Lung, Selamat Lung, and Okayama Lung datasets. (B4, B5) The expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD based on SurvExpress analysis; (B6) The expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD based on GEPIA analysis; P values as described in the figure are statistically significant. (C) ARHGAP30 transcription in subgroups of patients with lung adenocarcinoma, stratified based on sex, age, and other criteria (UALCAN). (C1) Sample types. (C2) Individual cancer stages. (C3) Ethnicity. (C4) Sex. (C5) Age. (C6) Smoking habits. (C7) Nodal metastasis status. (C8) TP53 mutation status. ☆, P < 0.05; ☆☆, P < 0.01; ☆☆☆, P < 0.001. (D) Differential abundance of the ARHGAP30 protein in patients with lung adenocarcinoma, stratified by sex, age, and other criteria. (D1) Sample types. (D2) Individual cancer stages. (D3) Ethnicity. (D4) Sex. (D5) Age. (D6) Weight. (D7) Tumor grade. (D8) Tumor histology. ☆, P < 0.05; ☆☆, P < 0.01; ☆☆☆, P < 0.001.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

DNA methylation and the differential expression of ARHGAP30 between lung adenocarcinoma and normal tissues. (A) The abundance of the different exons of the ARHGAP30 gene shows an uneven balance in normal and tumor tissues in patients with lung adenocarcinoma according to the Wanderer database. (A1) Expression of ARHGAP30 in normal tissues (n = 58); (A2) Expression of ARHGAP30 in tumor tissues (n = 488); (A3) Comparison of the mean expression of ARHGAP30 between normal tissue and lung adenocarcinoma tissue. (A4, A5) The expression of ARHGAP30 correlated negatively with the level of DNA methylation. (B) Highly mutated genes and the expression of ARHGAP30 in the TCGAportal database. The value adjacent to the highly mutated gene is the permutation test p-value of gene expression between the driver mutated (red) and not-mutated (gray) samples. (C1, C2) Box plots of the mRNA expression of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma before and after mutation of highly mutated genes (KEAP1, STK11) in the Linkedomics database. (D) Heat map of ARHGAP30 methylation in lung adenocarcinoma. (E1, E2) Kaplan–Meier plots of the survival of patients with lung adenocarcinoma with different ARHGAP30 DNA methylation levels (Different methylation probes cg07837534 and cg00045607 in the MethSurv database). (F) Gene expression and methylation of ARHGAP30 in samples of primary tumors and solid tissues analyzed at the TCGAportal database. Spearman T: Spearman correlation between expression and methylation in primary tumor samples. Spearman N: Spearman correlation between expression and methylation in solid tissue standard samples. Mean T: Mean value of the methylation beta-value in primary tumor samples. Mean N: Mean value of methylation in normal solid tissue samples.

Differential expression of ARHGAP30 mRNA in LUAD tissues and normal tissues

Figure 1C shows mRNA expression levels of ARHGAP30 in subgroups of patients with LUAD, stratified based on sample type, individual cancer stage, ethnicity, sex, age, smoking habit, nodal metastasis status, and TP53 mutation status (UALCAN [14]). The P-value of the comparison between each is shown in Supplementary Table 1. Figure 1C1 shows a significant difference between normal tissue and lung adenocarcinoma tissue (P < 0.001). Figure 1C21C8 show that in addition to the differential expression between tumor tissues and normal tissues, there were statistically significant differences between Stage 1 and Stage 3, Stage 1 and Stage 4, Stage 2 and Stage 3, male and female, and N0 and N2.

Differential abundance of the ARHGAP30 protein in LUAD tissues and normal tissues

Figure 1D shows the protein levels of ARHGAP30 in subgroups of patients with LUAD, stratified based on sample type, individual cancer stage, ethnicity, sex, age, weight, tumor grade, and tumor histology (assessed using UALCAN [14] and CPTAC [15]). The P-value of the comparison between each is shown in Supplementary Table 2. Figure 1D1 shows a significant difference between normal tissue and LUAD tissue (P < 0.001). Figure 1D11D8 show that in addition to the differential abundance between tumor tissues and normal tissues, there were statistically significant differences between age 41–60 years and 61–80 years; and Grade 2 and Grade 3.

Effect of mutations in common hypermutated genes and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 on the expression of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma versus normal tissues

The location of ARHGAP30 methylation in the lung adenocarcinoma cases was on chromosome 1, 161015000 to 161,069905. Figure 2B shows that ARHGAP30 expression was affected by some highly mutated genes in the analysis using the TCGAportal [16] database. Among them, KRAS (encoding KRAS proto-oncogene, GTPase), KEAP1 (encoding kelch like ECH associated protein 1), STK11 (encoding serine/threonine kinase 11), and NF1 (encoding neurofibromin 1) genes had statistically significant P values. Figure 2C1, 2C2 show that ARHGAP30 mRNA expression in LUAD was significantly lower than that in normal tissues after mutation of highly mutated genes (KEAP1 and STK11) in the Linkedomics [17] database. These results indicate that mutations in KEAP1 and STK11 significantly reduce ARHGAP30 gene expression and affect LUAD development.

Figure 2D shows a heatmap of ARHGAP30 DNA methylation (using four probes: cg07837534, cg12081303, cg00045607, cg03089651) in LUAD based on analysis at the Methsurv [18] database, which showed that ARHGAP30 DNA methylation levels were markedly increased in LUAD. A Kaplan–Meier map for patients with LUAD with different levels of ARHGAP30 DNA methylation showed that patients with hypomethylation had a statistically significant better survival prognosis (Figure 2E1, 2E2) [18]. The Spearman correlation between expression and methylation in primary tumor samples was significantly higher than the Spearman correlation between expression and methylation in normal samples of solid tissues (Figure 2F) [16].

Prediction of the prognosis of patients with LUAD according to ARHGAP30 mRNA levels

We found that the prognosis of patients with LUAD with high ARHGAP30 mRNA expression levels was significantly better than that of patients with low ARHGAP30 mRNA expression levels, as demonstrated by the 12 overall survival curves shown in Figure 3 (all P < 0.01). Figure 3A1, 3A2 represent the two overall survival curves from the GEPIA [12] database; Figure 3C3J represent the eight overall survival curves from the Oncolnc [19], Ualcan [14], UCSC [20], TCGA portal [16], TISIDB [21], KMplot [22], TIMER [23], and Linkedomics [17] databases. The two survival curves in Figure 3K1, 3K2 represent the overall survival curves from the PrognoScan [24] database. Figure 3B1, 3B2 show two disease-free survival curves from the GEPIA database, which indicate that the prognosis of patients with LUAD with high expression of ARHGAP30 mRNA was significantly higher than that of patients with low expression of ARHGAP30 mRNA (P < 0.01). The two survival curves in Figure 3L1, 3L2 represent recurrence-free survival curves from the PrognoScan [24] database), which show that the prognosis of patients with LUAD with high expression of ARHGAP30 mRNA were significantly higher than that of patients with low expression of ARHGAP30 mRNA (P < 0.05).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Overall survival curves, recurrence-free survival curves, and disease-free survival curves of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma. The blue curves represent patients with lung adenocarcinoma with low ARHGAP30 expression, and the red curves represent patients with lung adenocarcinoma with high ARHGAP30 expression. (A1, A2) Two overall survival curves (in months and days, respectively) from the GEPIA database; (B1, B2) Two disease-free survival (DFS) curves for ARHGAP30 in the GEPIA database (in months and days, respectively). (CJ) Eight overall survival curves from the databases of Oncolnc, Ualcan, UCSC, TCGAportal, TISIDB, KMplot, TIMER, and Linkedomics, respectively. (K1, K2) Two survival curves representing the overall survival curves from the PrognoScan database. (L1, L2) Two survival curves representing recurrence-free survival curves from the PrognoScan database.

Genes, miRNAs, and lncRNAs correlated highly with ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma

We analyzed the genes and microRNAs (miRNAs) that correlated with ARHGAP30 based on the Linkedomics [17] database. Figure 4A shows a volcano plot of genes that correlated highly with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. Figure 4B shows a heatmap of genes that correlated highly and positively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. Figure 4C shows a heatmap of genes that correlated highly and negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. Figure 4D14D18 show scatter plots of the top 18 genes that correlated positively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD: ITGAL, DOCK2, MYO1F, SNX20, IL10RA, SASH3, IKZF1, NCKAP1L, SPN, CSF2RB, FAM78A, WAS, ARHGAP25, PIK3R5, CD37, FGD2, PTPRC, and CYTH4. Figure 4E14E18 show scatter plots of the top 18 genes that correlated negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD: SNRPE, HSPE1, DPY30, PSMB5, TMEM223, MRPS18A, PFDN6, C15orf63, YWHAE, APOA1BP, ACP1, TMEM9, TMEM183A, ILF2, SRP9, FBXO22OS, SF3B14, and CCT3.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Genes that correlated highly with ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). (A) Volcano map of ARHGAP30-correlated genes in LUAD, the red dots on the right represent the positively related genes, and the green dots on the left represent the negatively related genes. (B, C) Heat maps showing the genes that correlated positively and negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD (top 50). Red indicates positively correlated genes; green indicates negatively correlated genes. (D1D18) Scatter plots of the first 18 genes that correlated positively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. (E1E18) Scatter plots of the first 18 genes that correlated negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD.

Figure 5A shows a volcano plot of miRNAs that correlated highly with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. Figure 5B shows a heatmap of miRNAs that correlated highly and positively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. Figure 5C shows a heatmap of miRNAs that correlated highly and negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. Figure 5D15D18 show scatter plots of the top 18 miRNAs that correlated positively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD: hsa-mir-150, hsa-mir-155, hsa-mir-146a, hsa-mir-511-1, hsa-mir-140, hsa-mir-142, hsa-mir-342, hsa-mir-511-2, hsa-mir-146b, hsa-mir-598, hsa-mir-378, hsa-mir-101-2, hsa-mir-133a-1, hsa-mir-1976, hsa-mir-218-2, hsa-mir-29c, hsa-mir-139, and hsa-mir-223. Figure 5E15E18 show scatter plots of the top 18 mRNAs that corelated negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD: hsa-mir-183, hsa-mir-182, hsa-mir-877, hsa-mir-1276, hsa-mir-3691, hsa-mir-151, hsa-mir-96, hsa-mir-760, hsa-mir-18b, hsa-mir-130b, hsa-mir-1254, hsa-mir-556, hsa-mir-200c, hsa-mir-421, hsa-mir-301b, hsa-mir-106b, hsa-mir-1266 and hsa-mir-561.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

MiRNAs correlated highly with ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). (A) Volcano map of ARHGAP30-correlated miRNAs in LUAD, the red dots on the right represent the positively associated miRNAs, and the green dots on the left represent the negatively associated miRNAs. (B, C) Heat maps showing the miRNAs that correlated positively and negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD (top 50). Red indicates positively correlated miRNAs; green indicates negatively correlated miRNAs. (D1D18) Scatter plots of the first 18 miRNAs that correlated positively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. (E1E18) Scatter plots of the first 18 miRNAs that correlated negatively with ARHGAP30 in LUAD.

We analyzed the long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) that correlated with ARHGAP30 based on the TANRIC [25] database. Figure 6A16A20 show scatter plots of lncRNAs that are highly and positively correlated with ARHGAP30 in LUAD: ENSG00000257824.1, ENSG00000268802.1, ENSG00000261644.1, ENSG00000255197.1, ENSG00000267074.1, ENSG00000233038.1, ENSG00000245164.2, ENSG00000229645.4, ENSG00000272908.1, ENSG00000265148.1, ENSG00000247774.2, ENSG00000238121.1, ENSG00000270107.1, ENSG00000242258.1, ENSG00000237484.5, ENSG00000239636.1, ENSG00000225331.1, ENSG00000228427.1, ENSG00000258810.1, ENSG00000224875.2. Figure 6B16B10 show survival curves with a better prognosis for those lncRNAs with low expression associated with ARHGAP30: ENSG00000182057.4, ENSG00000235570.1, ENSG00000250838.1, ENSG00000251059.1, ENSG00000229656.2, ENSG00000232527.3, ENSG00000261521.1, ENSG00000233903.2, ENSG00000186615.6, and ENSG00000215394.4 (all P < 0.05). Figure 6C16C10 show survival curves with a better prognosis for highly expressed lncRNAs associated with ARHGAP30: ENSG00000256691.1, ENSG00000266312.1, ENSG00000270182.1, ENSG00000231335.1, ENSG00000249717.1, ENSG00000267259.1, ENSG00000256984.1, ENSG00000178977.3, ENSG00000264469.1, and ENSG00000258670.1 (all P < 0.05).

Figure 6.

Figure 6

LncRNAs correlated highly with ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). (A1A20) Scatter plots of lncRNAs that are positively associated with ARHGAP30 in LUAD. (B1B10) ARHGAP30 correlated lncRNAs, in which low expression has a better prognosis according to the survival curve of the lncRNAs. (C1C10) ARHGAP30 correlated lncRNAs, in which high expression has a better prognosis according to the survival curve of lncRNAs.

Gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma

We performed gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) [26] of ARHGAP30 using the Linkedomics [17] database for KEGG Pathway [27], Panther Pathway [28], Reactome Pathway [29], Wikipathway [30], Gene ontology Biological Process [31, 32], Gene ontology Cellular Component [31, 32], Gene ontology Molecular Function [31, 32], Kinase Target Network, Transcription Factor Network, and PPI BIOGRID Network [33]. We identified many genes related to tumor immunity in the enrichment results.

The results of KEGG pathway enrichment analysis are shown in Figure 7A. Significantly enriched pathways were identified using false discovery rate (FDR) less than 0.05 and the absolute value of the normalized enrichment score greater than 1. Figure 7B1, 7B2 show the enrichment profiles of some statistically significant gene sets in the KEGG analysis. Supplementary Figures 19 show the bar charts and enrichment profiles for ARHGAP30 GSEA of the Panther Pathway, Reactome Pathway, Wikipathway, Gene ontology Biological Process, Gene ontology Cellular Component, Gene ontology Molecular Function, Kinase Target Network, Transcription Factor Network, and PPI BIOGRID Network. Tables 110 detail the results of ARHGAP30 GSEA for the Panther Pathway, Reactome Pathway, Wikipathway, Gene ontology Biological Process, Gene ontology Cellular Component, Gene ontology Molecular Function, Kinase Target Network, Transcription Factor Network, and PPI BIOGRID Network, respectively, which were statistically significant (absolute normalized enrichment score (NES values greater than 1, FDR and P values less than 0.05).

Figure 7.

Figure 7

KEGG pathway-based GSEA of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). (A) Bar chart of KEGG pathway-based GSEA of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (FDR < 0.05). (B1B16) GSEA enrichment analysis Plots of 16 tumor immune-related KEGG gene sets (FDR < 0.05).

Table 1. KEGG pathway based gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Description Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
hsa05310 Asthma 28 18 0.92455 1.6939 0 0
hsa05340 Primary immunodeficiency 36 24 0.89598 1.6822 0 0
hsa05320 Autoimmune thyroid disease 48 27 0.88334 1.6799 0 0
hsa05140 Leishmaniasis 71 41 0.88206 1.6794 0 0
hsa04672 Intestinal immune network for IgA production 45 34 0.88949 1.676 0 0
hsa05330 Allograft rejection 35 31 0.89287 1.6643 0 0
hsa04640 Hematopoietic cell lineage 93 58 0.86219 1.6628 0 0
hsa05150 Staphylococcus aureus infection 52 36 0.87392 1.6576 0 0
hsa05321 Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) 63 41 0.85768 1.6417 0 0
hsa04658 Th1 and Th2 cell differentiation 90 46 0.85202 1.6391 0 0
hsa05416 Viral myocarditis 56 32 0.8628 1.6368 0 0
hsa05332 Graft-versus-host disease 37 27 0.86783 1.6327 0 0
hsa04940 Type I diabetes mellitus 41 30 0.86296 1.6313 0 0
hsa04514 Cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) 137 54 0.8432 1.6295 0 0
hsa05012 Parkinson disease 115 66 -0.59262 -2.2319 0 0
hsa03020 RNA polymerase 31 21 -0.74745 -2.237 0 0
hsa00970 Aminoacyl-tRNA biosynthesis 43 30 -0.67799 -2.2413 0 0
hsa03430 Mismatch repair 23 11 -0.80357 -2.2495 0 0
hsa00020 Citrate cycle (TCA cycle) 30 19 -0.7776 -2.3534 0 0
hsa03060 Protein export 22 17 -0.79558 -2.3539 0 0
hsa03030 DNA replication 36 19 -0.76463 -2.4152 0 0
hsa03010 Ribosome 131 100 -0.83153 -3.4961 0 0
hsa04062 Chemokine signaling pathway 185 73 0.82904 1.6039 0 9.82E-05
hsa05323 Rheumatoid arthritis 85 42 0.83117 1.6084 0 0.000104
hsa05144 Malaria 46 27 0.84172 1.6104 0 0.000111
hsa04660 T cell receptor signaling pathway 98 35 0.83662 1.6002 0 0.000176
hsa04659 Th17 cell differentiation 105 54 0.83277 1.6019 0 0.000185
hsa04380 Osteoclast differentiation 126 57 0.83591 1.5957 0 0.00025
hsa04064 NF-kappa B signaling pathway 90 42 0.81436 1.5757 0 0.00091
hsa04666 Fc gamma R-mediated phagocytosis 86 17 0.81881 1.5724 0 0.001016
hsa03008 Ribosome biogenesis in eukaryotes 70 37 -0.65008 -2.1763 0 0.001061
hsa05152 Tuberculosis 174 65 0.80199 1.5575 0 0.001535
hsa00900 Terpenoid backbone biosynthesis 22 17 -0.74335 -1.9428 0 0.002387
hsa03420 Nucleotide excision repair 45 16 -0.59231 -1.9806 0 0.002387
hsa00563 Glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchor biosynthesis 25 10 -0.71989 -1.9597 0 0.002546
hsa01230 Biosynthesis of amino acids 69 27 -0.59257 -2.0052 0 0.002604
hsa05010 Alzheimer disease 152 67 -0.49713 -1.9717 0 0.002728
hsa01200 Carbon metabolism 110 38 -0.47465 -1.9118 0 0.002808
hsa03050 Proteasome 44 34 -0.60203 -2.0108 0 0.002865
hsa03022 Basal transcription factors 44 18 -0.63104 -1.9781 0 0.002938
hsa03018 RNA degradation 73 27 -0.50119 -1.9041 0 0.003183
hsa03410 Base excision repair 33 13 -0.68657 -1.8682 0 0.004523
hsa04932 Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) 143 55 -0.46729 -1.8446 0 0.005729
hsa00240 Pyrimidine metabolism 96 42 -0.4934 -1.836 0 0.005911
hsa00130 Ubiquinone and other terpenoid-quinone biosynthesis 11 5 -0.76111 -1.6567 0 0.027882

Table 10. PPI BIOGRID network gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
PPI_BIOGRID_M856 27 20 -0.80351 -2.2385 0 0
PPI_BIOGRID_M299 43 23 -0.77865 -2.3323 0 0
PPI_BIOGRID_M422 41 25 -0.78055 -2.38 0 0
PPI_BIOGRID_M298 50 37 -0.8034 -2.6225 0 0
PPI_BIOGRID_M300 49 42 -0.88664 -3.0801 0 0
PPI_BIOGRID_M272 85 44 -0.53652 -2.1103 0 0.000404
PPI_BIOGRID_M428 43 23 -0.62913 -2.1148 0 0.000471
PPI_BIOGRID_M441 36 15 -0.63714 -2.0772 0 0.000706
PPI_BIOGRID_M734 30 11 -0.69304 -2.0258 0 0.00113
PPI_BIOGRID_M848 22 11 -0.67958 -1.9924 0 0.001177
PPI_BIOGRID_M857 14 13 -0.83146 -2.0371 0 0.001256
PPI_BIOGRID_M581 56 23 -0.63221 -2.0062 0 0.001284
PPI_BIOGRID_M172 31 14 -0.63806 -1.9488 0 0.001507
PPI_BIOGRID_M544 20 12 -0.7468 -1.9646 0 0.001521
PPI_BIOGRID_M438 16 6 -0.74768 -1.9459 0 0.001589
PPI_BIOGRID_M597 13 6 -0.85103 -1.9511 0 0.001614
PPI_BIOGRID_M309 238 89 0.83885 1.6286 0 0.003523
PPI_BIOGRID_M185 32 21 -0.63805 -1.8991 0 0.003822
PPI_BIOGRID_M702 15 8 -0.76267 -1.8672 0 0.006592
PPI_BIOGRID_M722 46 24 -0.58535 -1.8575 0 0.007286
PPI_BIOGRID_M189 11 7 -0.86049 -1.8475 0 0.008616
PPI_BIOGRID_M717 23 12 -0.67161 -1.8398 0 0.008732
PPI_BIOGRID_M583 69 27 -0.54002 -1.8412 0 0.008744
PPI_BIOGRID_M951 10 5 -0.81538 -1.8293 0.008929 0.010809
PPI_BIOGRID_M190 11 7 -0.79575 -1.8176 0.016949 0.012359
PPI_BIOGRID_M819 10 8 -0.80619 -1.8117 0 0.012656

Table 8. Kinase target network gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Description Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
Kinase_LYN LYN proto-oncogene, Src family tyrosine kinase 50 23 0.88163 1.69 0 0
Kinase_SYK spleen associated tyrosine kinase 35 20 0.88807 1.6638 0 0
Kinase_LCK LCK proto-oncogene, Src family tyrosine kinase 43 25 0.87754 1.6409 0 0
Kinase_HCK HCK proto-oncogene, Src family tyrosine kinase 23 14 0.90568 1.6236 0 0.000453
Kinase_BTK Bruton tyrosine kinase 9 4 0.96245 1.5569 0 0.014843
Kinase_FGR FGR proto-oncogene, Src family tyrosine kinase 12 7 0.90291 1.5354 0.004819 0.023015
Kinase_FYN FYN proto-oncogene, Src family tyrosine kinase 66 21 0.79674 1.5309 0 0.023306
Kinase_PRKCQ protein kinase C theta 28 10 0.83313 1.5386 0.002179 0.023834
Kinase_ITK IL2 inducible T-cell kinase 8 6 0.95805 1.5163 0 0.030592
Kinase_JAK3 Janus kinase 3 12 8 0.8914 1.5164 0.005051 0.033991

Table 9. Transcription factor network gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
V$PU1_Q6 211 48 0.7456 1.4539 0 0.027156
V$PEA3_Q6 242 73 0.74837 1.4483 0 0.027497
RACCACAR_V$AML_Q6 241 66 0.74025 1.4434 0 0.028904
RGAGGAARY_V$PU1_Q6 460 107 0.7462 1.4553 0 0.030226
STTTCRNTTT_V$IRF_Q6 175 68 0.75524 1.4614 0 0.030856
V$PAX5_02 15 7 0.85689 1.4665 0.009346 0.035138
V$ISRE_01 234 77 0.75508 1.4722 0 0.038255
V$IRF_Q6 229 78 0.76436 1.482 0 0.039042
V$ELF1_Q6 220 69 0.77176 1.5138 0 0.039672
V$ETS_Q4 238 55 0.72616 1.4108 0 0.043159
TGTYNNNNNRGCARM_UNKNOWN 81 26 0.73366 1.4113 0 0.046284
V$ICSBP_Q6 230 75 0.71252 1.3885 0 0.047526
V$ETS1_B 237 76 0.71314 1.3914 0 0.047543
V$STAT6_02 241 60 0.71256 1.3852 0 0.0477
V$AML_Q6 239 75 0.72796 1.4135 0 0.047915
GGGNNTTTCC_V$NFKB_Q6_01 130 51 0.76183 1.4879 0 0.048173
YNTTTNNNANGCARM_UNKNOWN 66 16 0.73294 1.3927 0.00202 0.048562

From the results of KEGG pathway GSEA (Table 1), Primary immunodeficiency, Th1 and Th2 cell differentiation, Chemokine signaling pathway, T cell receptor signaling pathway, Th17 cell differentiation, and Fc gamma R-mediated phagocytosis were associated with immunity. From the results of Panther Pathway GSEA (Table 2), T cell activation, B cell activation, Inflammation mediated by chemokine and cytokine signaling pathway, Interleukin signaling pathway, and Toll receptor signaling pathway were associated with immunity. From the results of Reactome Pathway GSEA (Table 3), Defensins, Translocation of ZAP-70 to Immunological synapse, Generation of second messenger molecules, Costimulation by the CD28 family, PD-1 signaling, Interleukin-2 family signaling, Interleukin-10 signaling, Interleukin-3, Interleukin-5 and GM-CSF signaling, DAP12 interactions, Immunoregulatory interactions between a Lymphoid and a non-Lymphoid cell, Phosphorylation of CD3 and TCR zeta chains, DAP12 signaling, Interleukin receptor SHC signaling, Antigen activates B Cell Receptor (BCR) leading to generation of second messengers, RHO GTPases Activate NADPH Oxidases, Chemokine receptors bind chemokines, Interferon-gamma signaling, and Regulation of actin dynamics for phagocytic cup formation were associated with immunity. From the results of Wikipathway GSEA analysis (Table 4), T-Cell antigen Receptor (TCR) Signaling Pathway, T-Cell antigen Receptor (TCR) pathway during Staphylococcus aureus infection, Allograft Rejection, IL-3 Signaling Pathway, Type II interferon signaling (IFNG), Interactions between immune cells and microRNAs in the tumor microenvironment, Cancer immunotherapy by PD-1 blockade, IL-2 Signaling Pathway, IL-9 Signaling Pathway, IL-7 Signaling Pathway, Macrophage markers, Chemokine signaling pathway, Selective expression of chemokine receptors during T-cell polarization, Cancer immunotherapy by CTLA4 blockade, T-Cell Receptor and Co-stimulatory Signaling, B Cell Receptor Signaling Pathway, Inflammatory Response Pathway, and IL-5 Signaling Pathway were associated with immunity. From the results of Gene ontology Biological Process GSEA (Table 5), the GO terms cellular defense response, interleukin-2 production, interferon-gamma production, leukocyte proliferation, lymphocyte activation involved in immune response, leukocyte cell-cell adhesion, myeloid dendritic cell activation, adaptive immune response, T cell activation, interleukin-4 production, cytokine metabolic process, tumor necrosis factor superfamily cytokine production, response to chemokine, natural killer cell activation, regulation of leukocyte activation, B cell activation, immune response-regulating signaling pathway, and interleukin-10 production were associated with immunity. From the results of the Gene ontology Cellular Component GSEA (Table 6), the GO terms MHC protein complex, immunological synapse, and mast cell granule were associated with immunity. From the results of Gene ontology Molecular Function GSEA (Table 710) the GO terms MHC protein binding, cytokine receptor activity, immunoglobulin binding, antigen binding, and cytokine binding were associated with immunity.

Table 2. Panther pathway gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Description Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
P00053 T cell activation 75 30 0.87572 1.6754 0 0
P02738 De novo purine biosynthesis 26 16 -0.79062 -2.2412 0 0
P00017 DNA replication 19 10 -0.79041 -2.2625 0 0
P00023 General transcription regulation 28 14 -0.72986 -2.101 0 0.001287
P00010 B cell activation 58 19 0.84216 1.5819 0 0.004295
P00055 Transcription regulation by bZIP transcription factor 45 14 -0.58101 -1.8961 0 0.005792
P00038 JAK/STAT signaling pathway 15 9 0.9035 1.5543 0.002381 0.006872
P02746 Heme biosynthesis 12 6 -0.73501 -1.7337 0.011364 0.013998
P02740 De novo pyrimidine ribonucleotides biosynthesis 10 7 -0.79533 -1.7549 0.009901 0.014894
P00031 Inflammation mediated by chemokine and cytokine signaling pathway 196 72 0.78311 1.524 0 0.015463
P00051 TCA cycle 10 5 -0.83656 -1.7588 0 0.017377
P02739 De novo pyrimidine deoxyribonucleotide biosynthesis 13 8 -0.74772 -1.7772 0 0.019307
P00009 Axon guidance mediated by netrin 30 12 0.81439 1.4941 0.008511 0.035736
P00014 Cholesterol biosynthesis 12 8 -0.76183 -1.6443 0.010101 0.039902

Table 3. Wikipathway gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Description Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
R-HSA-110373 Resolution of AP sites via the multiple-nucleotide patch replacement pathway 26 15 -0.80592 -2.1643 0 0
R-HSA-114604 GPVI-mediated activation cascade 34 14 0.86846 1.613 0 0.003124
R-HSA-1268020 Mitochondrial protein import 52 35 -0.82458 -2.784 0 0
R-HSA-1461973 Defensins 21 5 0.92843 1.7135 0 0
R-HSA-162599 Late Phase of HIV Life Cycle 121 59 -0.61857 -2.4395 0 0
R-HSA-191859 snRNP Assembly 49 19 -0.78096 -2.5186 0 0
R-HSA-194441 Metabolism of non-coding RNA 49 19 -0.78096 -2.5186 0 0
R-HSA-198933 Immunoregulatory interactions between a Lymphoid and a non-Lymphoid cell 122 79 0.86427 1.6654 0 0.000368
R-HSA-202427 Phosphorylation of CD3 and TCR zeta chains 20 20 0.93356 1.6673 0.002353 0.00042
R-HSA-202430 Translocation of ZAP-70 to Immunological synapse 17 16 0.94274 1.6844 0 0
R-HSA-202433 Generation of second messenger molecules 30 22 0.94177 1.7411 0 0
R-HSA-2029482 Regulation of actin dynamics for phagocytic cup formation 60 14 0.83348 1.5954 0 0.005648
R-HSA-2172127 DAP12 interactions 38 21 0.87591 1.6582 0 0.000327
R-HSA-2299718 Condensation of Prophase Chromosomes 69 47 -0.66539 -2.1895 0 0
R-HSA-2424491 DAP12 signaling 29 15 0.88744 1.6332 0 0.00084
R-HSA-379724 tRNA Aminoacylation 42 32 -0.71306 -2.3694 0 0
R-HSA-380108 Chemokine receptors bind chemokines 45 26 0.84855 1.5991 0 0.004982
R-HSA-388841 Costimulation by the CD28 family 67 34 0.88459 1.7064 0 0
R-HSA-389948 PD-1 signaling 21 20 0.93832 1.7049 0 0
R-HSA-451927 Interleukin-2 family signaling 44 28 0.89201 1.6924 0 0
R-HSA-512988 Interleukin-3, Interleukin-5 and GM-CSF signaling 47 24 0.86993 1.6512 0 0.000294
R-HSA-5621480 Dectin-2 family 24 10 0.90122 1.6503 0 0.000245
R-HSA-5668599 RHO GTPases Activate NADPH Oxidases 13 5 0.94977 1.6075 0 0.003718
R-HSA-5696399 Global Genome Nucleotide Excision Repair (GG-NER) 84 31 -0.63145 -2.2073 0 0
R-HSA-606279 Deposition of new CENPA-containing nucleosomes at the centromere 63 36 -0.70907 -2.5507 0 0
R-HSA-6781827 Transcription-Coupled Nucleotide Excision Repair (TC-NER) 77 34 -0.6929 -2.399 0 0
R-HSA-6782135 Dual incision in TC-NER 64 27 -0.72714 -2.3136 0 0
R-HSA-6783783 Interleukin-10 signaling 45 28 0.86974 1.6503 0 0.000267
R-HSA-6790901 rRNA modification in the nucleus and cytosol 52 35 -0.80009 -2.6392 0 0
R-HSA-69202 Cyclin E associated events during G1/S transition 82 50 -0.61312 -2.2508 0 0
R-HSA-69206 G1/S Transition 124 75 -0.64433 -2.4821 0 0
R-HSA-69618 Mitotic Spindle Checkpoint 101 56 -0.67804 -2.3397 0 0
R-HSA-69656 Cyclin A:Cdk2-associated events at S phase entry 84 50 -0.60739 -2.4501 0 0
R-HSA-72165 mRNA Splicing - Minor Pathway 46 20 -0.74059 -2.3252 0 0
R-HSA-73863 RNA Polymerase I Transcription Termination 30 12 -0.81293 -2.5196 0 0
R-HSA-73864 RNA Polymerase I Transcription 106 43 -0.61126 -2.3211 0 0
R-HSA-73884 Base Excision Repair 39 17 -0.77946 -2.3177 0 0
R-HSA-73933 Resolution of Abasic Sites (AP sites) 39 17 -0.77946 -2.3177 0 0
R-HSA-774815 Nucleosome assembly 63 36 -0.70907 -2.5507 0 0
R-HSA-877300 Interferon gamma signaling 90 53 0.82409 1.5933 0 0.00553
R-HSA-912526 Interleukin receptor SHC signaling 27 15 0.88441 1.6345 0 0.000905
R-HSA-983695 Antigen activates B Cell Receptor (BCR) leading to generation of second messengers 32 18 0.86 1.6179 0 0.002744

Table 4. Reactome pathway gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Description Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
WP3937 Microglia Pathogen Phagocytosis Pathway 40 25 0.93221 1.7523 0 0
WP69 T-Cell antigen Receptor (TCR) Signaling Pathway 89 39 0.86566 1.6825 0 0
WP3863 T-Cell antigen Receptor (TCR) pathway during Staphylococcus aureus infection 61 26 0.86662 1.6615 0 0
WP3945 TYROBP Causal Network 59 40 0.88146 1.6593 0 0
WP2328 Allograft Rejection 87 55 0.86119 1.6499 0 0
WP286 IL-3 Signaling Pathway 48 22 0.87343 1.6334 0 0
WP78 TCA Cycle (aka Krebs or citric acid cycle) 18 13 -0.79775 -2.1053 0 0
WP4752 Base Excision Repair 31 13 -0.76263 -2.224 0 0
WP4521 Glycosylation and related congenital defects 25 13 -0.78449 -2.2261 0 0
WP466 DNA Replication 36 19 -0.75101 -2.3665 0 0
WP623 Oxidative phosphorylation 37 27 -0.81707 -2.3904 0 0
WP405 Eukaryotic Transcription Initiation 42 24 -0.77435 -2.4676 0 0
WP477 Cytoplasmic Ribosomal Proteins 88 72 -0.77946 -2.4707 0 0
WP107 Translation Factors 50 28 -0.76662 -2.4884 0 0
WP4324 Mitochondrial complex I assembly model OXPHOS system 44 39 -0.84395 -2.6711 0 0
WP111 Electron Transport Chain (OXPHOS system in mitochondria) 73 61 -0.83256 -2.9456 0 0
WP4595 Urea cycle and associated pathways 21 9 -0.73691 -2.0795 0 0.000281
WP531 DNA Mismatch Repair 22 10 -0.77183 -2.0484 0 0.000515
WP619 Type II interferon signaling (IFNG) 37 22 0.87609 1.625 0 0.000533
WP4753 Nucleotide Excision Repair 44 16 -0.59965 -2.0373 0 0.000713
WP2446 Retinoblastoma Gene in Cancer 86 45 -0.55877 -1.9707 0 0.001443
WP4022 Pyrimidine metabolism 83 39 -0.49658 -1.9718 0 0.001546
WP4559 Interactions between immune cells and microRNAs in tumor microenvironment 28 20 0.86424 1.6013 0 0.001864
WP4585 Cancer immunotherapy by PD-1 blockade 23 15 0.88715 1.6016 0 0.00205
WP49 IL-2 Signaling Pathway 42 17 0.84445 1.6036 0 0.002278
WP22 IL-9 Signaling Pathway 17 9 0.92271 1.6042 0 0.00233
WP205 IL-7 Signaling Pathway 25 12 0.89998 1.5928 0 0.003417
WP4146 Macrophage markers 9 8 0.97473 1.5863 0 0.003594
WP3929 Chemokine signaling pathway 163 62 0.82524 1.5876 0 0.003728
WP4494 Selective expression of chemokine receptors during T-cell polarization 29 20 0.86987 1.5752 0 0.003837
WP581 EPO Receptor Signaling 26 8 0.87123 1.5768 0 0.003844
WP2849 Hematopoietic Stem Cell Differentiation 55 18 0.84073 1.5807 0 0.003852
WP4582 Cancer immunotherapy by CTLA4 blockade 14 7 0.91643 1.5725 0 0.004038
WP2583 T-Cell Receptor and Co-stimulatory Signaling 29 13 0.86168 1.5679 0 0.004807
WP23 B Cell Receptor Signaling Pathway 96 39 0.81089 1.5636 0 0.005498
WP453 Inflammatory Response Pathway 30 15 0.84311 1.5595 0 0.005676
WP24 Peptide GPCRs 73 19 0.81715 1.5604 0 0.005858
WP2453 TCA Cycle and Deficiency of Pyruvate Dehydrogenase complex 16 11 -0.77333 -1.9018 0 0.006183
WP127 IL-5 Signaling Pathway 40 13 0.82934 1.5565 0 0.006321
WP4553 FBXL10 enhancement of MAP/ERK signaling in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma 32 10 -0.59305 -1.8368 0 0.011093
WP1946 Cori Cycle 17 8 -0.72333 -1.8214 0 0.012022
WP4629 Computational Model of Aerobic Glycolysis 11 7 -0.77655 -1.8124 0 0.013017
WP197 Cholesterol Biosynthesis Pathway 13 9 -0.76865 -1.7715 0.009901 0.019786
WP4240 Regulation of sister chromatid separation at the metaphase-anaphase transition 15 9 -0.68148 -1.7149 0 0.035479
WP438 Non-homologous end joining 10 2 -0.78427 -1.6835 0.024194 0.040727
WP4320 The effect of progerin on the involved genes in Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndrome 36 14 -0.57494 -1.6836 0 0.042578

Table 5. Gene ontology biological process based gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Description Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
GO:0006968 cellular defense response 53 26 0.85607 1.6667 0 0
GO:0000959 mitochondrial RNA metabolic process 33 22 -0.67592 -2.0538 0 0
GO:0002181 cytoplasmic translation 84 50 -0.58607 -2.0597 0 0
GO:0098781 ncRNA transcription 93 46 -0.54515 -2.0641 0 0
GO:0071806 protein transmembrane transport 59 27 -0.70316 -2.1031 0 0
GO:0034502 protein localization to chromosome 68 39 -0.61386 -2.1257 0 0
GO:0042769 DNA damage response, detection of DNA damage 38 15 -0.70411 -2.1428 0 0
GO:0006490 oligosaccharide-lipid intermediate biosynthetic process 20 9 -0.8074 -2.1678 0 0
GO:0006354 DNA-templated transcription, elongation 84 27 -0.54275 -2.1898 0 0
GO:0045454 cell redox homeostasis 59 24 -0.65482 -2.1915 0 0
GO:0061641 CENP-A containing chromatin organization 24 16 -0.77476 -2.2312 0 0
GO:0036260 RNA capping 30 13 -0.79033 -2.3135 0 0
GO:0006353 DNA-templated transcription, termination 69 26 -0.69744 -2.3511 0 0
GO:0072350 tricarboxylic acid metabolic process 38 21 -0.73574 -2.4276 0 0
GO:0033108 mitochondrial respiratory chain complex assembly 68 53 -0.82238 -2.4489 0 0
GO:0010257 NADH dehydrogenase complex assembly 49 41 -0.83836 -2.4807 0 0
GO:0006289 nucleotide-excision repair 106 39 -0.64825 -2.4996 0 0
GO:0006414 translational elongation 123 82 -0.83503 -3.2155 0 0
GO:0032623 interleukin-2 production 63 31 0.83578 1.6105 0 0.000291
GO:0032609 interferon-gamma production 102 56 0.84241 1.6107 0 0.000317
GO:0070661 leukocyte proliferation 272 122 0.84138 1.6349 0 0.000349
GO:0002285 lymphocyte activation involved in immune response 165 68 0.83527 1.6137 0 0.000349
GO:0007159 leukocyte cell-cell adhesion 310 135 0.83054 1.6142 0 0.000388
GO:0001773 myeloid dendritic cell activation 27 15 0.86561 1.6095 0 0.000403
GO:0050690 regulation of defense response to virus by virus 29 12 0.85941 1.639 0 0.000437
GO:0002250 adaptive immune response 366 175 0.835 1.6177 0 0.000437
GO:0042110 T cell activation 437 184 0.83599 1.6255 0 0.000499
GO:0050867 positive regulation of cell activation 298 126 0.82659 1.608 0 0.000499
GO:0032633 interleukin-4 production 34 21 0.88557 1.6508 0 0.000582
GO:0045730 respiratory burst 27 10 0.90536 1.6256 0 0.000582
GO:0031123 RNA 3'-end processing 111 48 -0.62236 -1.9837 0 0.000584
GO:0016073 snRNA metabolic process 82 42 -0.56867 -1.9865 0 0.000611
GO:0051131 chaperone-mediated protein complex assembly 19 6 -0.74976 -2.0021 0 0.00064
GO:0042107 cytokine metabolic process 106 43 0.83001 1.6024 0 0.000698
GO:0071706 tumor necrosis factor superfamily cytokine production 133 54 0.82167 1.6013 0 0.000764
GO:1990868 response to chemokine 86 44 0.84852 1.6524 0 0.000873
GO:0030101 natural killer cell activation 79 30 0.83376 1.5967 0 0.000873
GO:0002694 regulation of leukocyte activation 461 199 0.82149 1.5987 0 0.000924
GO:0042113 B cell activation 221 86 0.82221 1.5887 0 0.000998
GO:0050866 negative regulation of cell activation 172 78 0.82699 1.5914 0 0.001011
GO:0002764 immune response-regulating signaling pathway 452 159 0.80813 1.5818 0 0.001215
GO:0032613 interleukin-10 production 46 24 0.83341 1.5734 0 0.001293

Table 6. Gene ontology cellular component based gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Description Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR
GO:0042611 MHC protein complex 19 16 0.91235 1.6397 0 0
GO:0036452 ESCRT complex 23 12 -0.7271 -1.9814 0 0
GO:0101031 chaperone complex 21 13 -0.7488 -2.089 0 0
GO:0005732 small nucleolar ribonucleoprotein complex 20 14 -0.84007 -2.2357 0 0
GO:0005844 polysome 70 44 -0.64071 -2.2843 0 0
GO:0009295 nucleoid 36 27 -0.76327 -2.3211 0 0
GO:1905368 peptidase complex 85 54 -0.68339 -2.4793 0 0
GO:0005681 spliceosomal complex 155 64 -0.60446 -2.5676 0 0
GO:0030964 NADH dehydrogenase complex 43 39 -0.82377 -2.6221 0 0
GO:0070069 cytochrome complex 29 22 -0.87423 -2.6756 0 0
GO:0070469 respiratory chain 84 62 -0.82349 -2.6858 0 0
GO:0120114 Sm-like protein family complex 69 28 -0.78085 -2.7326 0 0
GO:0030684 preribosome 66 39 -0.73361 -2.7355 0 0
GO:0001772 immunological synapse 32 17 0.85713 1.5928 0 0.000759
GO:1905348 endonuclease complex 23 10 -0.7109 -1.8954 0 0.003019
GO:0098552 side of membrane 459 171 0.80484 1.5734 0 0.00354
GO:0098636 protein complex involved in cell adhesion 35 14 0.83327 1.5509 0 0.00531
GO:0042629 mast cell granule 21 9 0.85342 1.5417 0 0.006069
GO:0001891 phagocytic cup 21 12 0.85394 1.536 0 0.006575
GO:0042581 specific granule 152 44 0.77662 1.5083 0 0.010431
GO:0070820 tertiary granule 155 43 0.77958 1.5136 0 0.010837
GO:0005657 replication fork 62 21 -0.52303 -1.7674 0 0.012616
GO:1990204 oxidoreductase complex 95 61 -0.47317 -1.7327 0 0.017008
GO:0031970 organelle envelope lumen 73 28 -0.44485 -1.7196 0 0.017172
GO:0030667 secretory granule membrane 279 76 0.75106 1.4744 0 0.023264
GO:0005697 telomerase holoenzyme complex 20 10 -0.62191 -1.6713 0.017241 0.032323
GO:0043235 receptor complex 391 143 0.73726 1.437 0 0.047337
GO:0036019 endolysosome 19 9 0.82188 1.4317 0.004587 0.047999

Table 7. Gene ontology molecular function-based gene set enrichment analysis of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma.

Gene set Size Leading edge number ES NES P Value FDR Description
GO:0042287 MHC protein binding 24 16 0.90783 1.6451 0 0
GO:0008135 translation factor activity, RNA binding 81 34 -0.59488 -2.1067 0 0
GO:0043021 ribonucleoprotein complex binding 117 44 -0.55984 -2.1205 0 0
GO:0000049 tRNA binding 50 32 -0.61345 -2.1332 0 0
GO:0015002 heme-copper terminal oxidase activity 24 16 -0.84644 -2.3002 0 0
GO:0030515 snoRNA binding 28 19 -0.80939 -2.3053 0 0
GO:0016675 oxidoreductase activity, acting on a heme group of donors 25 16 -0.84613 -2.3757 0 0
GO:0019843 rRNA binding 60 42 -0.74059 -2.4081 0 0
GO:0051082 unfolded protein binding 108 52 -0.69233 -2.6499 0 0
GO:0003735 structural constituent of ribosome 154 119 -0.83969 -3.289 0 0
GO:0016502 nucleotide receptor activity 22 14 0.87811 1.6115 0 0.00054724
GO:0035586 purinergic receptor activity 26 16 0.86825 1.6126 0 0.00082086
GO:0004896 cytokine receptor activity 88 49 0.84639 1.6087 0 0.0016417
GO:0017069 snRNA binding 34 10 -0.67977 -1.9375 0 0.0022837
GO:0003684 damaged DNA binding 67 26 -0.49758 -1.9239 0 0.0028547
GO:0016779 nucleotidyltransferase activity 114 44 -0.47695 -1.9243 0 0.0031142
GO:0035004 phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase activity 81 25 0.82041 1.5905 0 0.0032834
GO:0019865 immunoglobulin binding 22 12 0.86362 1.5831 0.0022272 0.003518
GO:0038187 pattern recognition receptor activity 20 11 0.87926 1.5833 0 0.0041043
GO:0052813 phosphatidylinositol bisphosphate kinase activity 73 24 0.81306 1.5743 0 0.0045147
GO:0043548 phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase binding 30 11 0.84191 1.546 0 0.0073877
GO:0003823 antigen binding 52 25 0.83357 1.5482 0.0020367 0.0080262
GO:0019239 deaminase activity 27 9 0.84449 1.5368 0 0.010149
GO:0042169 SH2 domain binding 33 9 0.83581 1.5289 0 0.010229
GO:0015026 coreceptor activity 39 20 0.83108 1.5324 0 0.010261
GO:0019955 cytokine binding 119 53 0.7923 1.5183 0 0.012547
GO:1990782 protein tyrosine kinase binding 76 18 0.79568 1.5158 0 0.012587
GO:0031491 nucleosome binding 66 20 -0.49926 -1.7891 0 0.016689
GO:0017056 structural constituent of nuclear pore 22 3 -0.61094 -1.758 0 0.023653
GO:0016790 thiolester hydrolase activity 31 13 -0.5909 -1.7292 0 0.028166
GO:0038024 cargo receptor activity 77 26 0.76716 1.4694 0 0.03776
GO:0104005 hijacked molecular function 70 14 0.77566 1.4646 0 0.039884
GO:0004713 protein tyrosine kinase activity 174 56 0.75063 1.4588 0 0.042685
GO:0003697 single-stranded DNA binding 93 41 -0.46853 -1.6551 0 0.044247
GO:0051087 chaperone binding 96 27 -0.46803 -1.6357 0 0.045003
GO:0030506 ankyrin binding 20 2 0.81515 1.4498 0.0090703 0.04856
GO:0051540 metal cluster binding 59 26 -0.53488 -1.6196 0 0.048846

The relationship between TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors and the expression and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma

The relationship between ARHGAP30 expression and TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors in LUAD

Figures 8A, 9A, 10A, 11A, 12A, respectively, show heat maps of the relationship between the abundance of TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors and the expression of ARHGAP30. These heatmaps were mostly red, indicating that most of the TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors correlated positively with the expression of ARHGAP30. Also, dark red areas indicated that some of them had a strong positive correlation with the expression of ARHGAP30.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

The correlation between the abundance of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and expression of ARHGAP30. (A) Heat map of the relationship between the abundance of TILs and ARHGAP30 expression. (B1B28) Scatter plots showing the positive correlation between ARHGAP30 expression and TILs in the treatment of lung adenocarcinoma. Act_CD8, Activated CD8 T cell; Tcm_CD8, Central memory CD8 T cell; Tem_CD8, Effector memory CD8 T cell; Act_CD4, Activated CD4 T cell; Tcm_CD4, Central memory CD4 T cell; Tem_CD4, Effector memory CD4 T cell; Tgd, Gamma delta T cell; Tfh, T follicular helper cell; Th1, Type 1 T helper cell; Th17, Type 17 T helper cell; Th2, Type 2 T helper cell; Treg, Regulatory T cell; MDSC, Myeloid derived suppressor cell; Act_B, Activated B cell; Imm_B, Immature B cell; Mem_B, Memory B cell; NK, Natural killer cell; CD56brigh, CD56bright natural killer cell; CD56dim, CD56dim natural killer cell; NKT, Natural killer T cell; Act_DC, Activated dendritic cell; iDC, Immature dendritic cell; pDC, Plasmacytoid dendritic cell; Mast, Mast cell.

Figure 9.

Figure 9

The correlation between the abundance of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) and the methylation of ARHGAP30. (A) Heat map of the relationship between the abundance of TILs abundance and ARHGAP30 DNA methylation. (B1B39) Scatter plots showing the negative correlation between ARHGAP30 DNA methylation and TILs in the treatment of lung adenocarcinoma. Act_CD8, Activated CD8 T cell; Tcm_CD8, Central memory CD8 T cell; Tem_CD8, Effector memory CD8 T cell; Act_CD4, Activated CD4 T cell; Tcm_CD4, Central memory CD4 T cell; Tem_CD4, Effector memory CD4 T cell; Tgd, Gamma delta T cell; Tfh, T follicular helper cell; Th1, Type 1 T helper cell; Th17, Type 17 T helper cell; Th2, Type 2 T helper cell; Treg, Regulatory T cell; MDSC, Myeloid derived suppressor cell; Act_B, Activated B cell; Imm_B, Immature B cell; Mem_B, Memory B cell; NK, Natural killer cell; CD56brigh, CD56bright natural killer cell; CD56dim, CD56dim natural killer cell; NKT, Natural killer T cell; Act_DC, Activated dendritic cell; iDC, Immature dendritic cell; pDC, Plasmacytoid dendritic cell; Mast, Mast cell.

Figure 10.

Figure 10

The correlation between the expression of ARHGAP30 and immune inhibitors. (A) Heat map of Spearman correlations between ARHGAP30 expression and immune inhibitors across human cancers. (B1B21) Scatter plots showing the positive correlation between ARHGAP30 expression and immune inhibitors in the treatment of lung adenocarcinoma.

Figure 11.

Figure 11

The correlation between the DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and immune inhibitors. (A) Heat map of Spearman correlations between DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and immune inhibitors across human cancers. (B1B30) Scatter plots showing the negative correlation between DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and immune inhibitors in the treatment of lung adenocarcinoma.

Figure 12.

Figure 12

The correlation between the expression of ARHGAP30 and immunostimulators. (A) Heat map of Spearman correlations between ARHGAP30 expression and immunostimulators across human cancers. (B1B15) Scatter plots showing the positive correlation between ARHGAP30 expression and immunostimulators in the treatment of lung adenocarcinoma.

Figure 8B18B28 show scatter plots of the relations the abundance of TILs and ARHGAP30 expression. The results showed that effector memory CD8 T cells, T follicular helper cells, type 1 T helper cells, regulatory T cells, myeloid derived suppressor cells, activated B cells, immature B cells, natural killer cells, natural killer T cells, macrophages, eosinophils, and mast cells showed a strong positive correlation with the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r > 0.6; p value < 0.01). Figure 9B19B39 shows scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of immunostimulators and ARHGAP30 expression. The results showed that C10orf54, CD28, CD40LG, CD48, CD80, CD86, ICOS, KLRK1, LTA, and TNFRSF8 showed a strong positive correlation with the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r > 0.6; p value < 0.01). Figure 10B110B21 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of MHC molecules and ARHGAP30 expression. The results showed that HLA-DMB, HLA-DOA, HLA-DPA1, HLA-DPB1, HLA-DQA1, and HLA-DRA showed a strong positive correlation with the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r > 0.6; p value < 0.01). Figure 11B111B30 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of chemokines and ARHGAP30 expression. The results showed that CCL19 showed a strong positive correlation with the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r > 0.6; p value < 0.01). Figure 12B112B15 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of chemokine receptors and ARHGAP30 expression. The results showed that CCR1, CCR2, CCR4, CCR5, CCR6, CCR7, CCR8, CXCR3, CXCR5, and CXCR6 showed a strong positive correlation with the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r > 0.6; p value < 0.01).

The relationship between DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors in LUAD

Figures 13A and Supplementary Figures 10A, 11A, 12A, 13A, respectively, show heat maps of the relationship between TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30. The results showed that in LUAD, most of them were blue, indicating that most of the TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors correlated negatively with DNA methylation of ARHGAP30. Also, some of them were very dark blue, indicating that they had a strong negative correlation with DNA methylation of ARHGAP30.

Figure 13.

Figure 13

The correlation between the DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and Immunostimulators. (A) Heat map of Spearman correlations between DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and immunostimulators across human cancers. (B1B28) Scatter plots showing the negative correlation between DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and immunostimulators in the treatment of lung adenocarcinoma.

Figure 13B113B28 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of TILs and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30. The results showed that activated B cell, immature B cell, myeloid derived suppressor cell, natural killer T cell, effector memory CD8 T cell, type 1 T helper cell, and regulatory T cell had a strong negative correlation with the DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r < - 0.6; p value < 0.01). Supplementary Figure 10B110B39 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of immunostimulators and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30. The results showed that CD28, CD48, LTA, and TNFRSF8 had a strong negative correlation with the DNA methylation of AGHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r < - 0.6; p value < 0.01). Supplementary Figure 11B111B21 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of MHC molecules and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30. Supplementary Figure 12B112B30 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of chemokines and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30. Supplementary Figure 13B113B15 show scatter plots of the relationship between the abundance of chemokine receptors and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30. The results showed that CCR5 and CCR6 had a strong negative correlation with the DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Spearman correlation coefficient, r < - 0.6; p value < 0.01).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we showed that the expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD tissues was significantly lower than that in normal tissues. There were differences in ARHGAP30 mRNA expression levels in patients with LUAD with different sexes, cancer stages, and nodal metastatic status (Figure 1). The expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD tissues was significantly lower in the presence of KEAP1 and STK11 mutations. The correlation between DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and its mRNA expression levels was considerably higher in LUAD tissues than in normal tissues (Figure 2). There are some studies on the differential expression of ARHGAP30 in cancer [8, 34, 35]. The high DNA methylation level of ARHGAP30 might also be one of the reasons for the decreased ARHGAP30 expression in LUAD tissues. Genetic mutations in KEAP1 and STK11 might also be another reason for decreased expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD tissues. These were not reported in previous studies.

Patients with LUAD with low ARHGAP30 expression had a significantly better prognosis than those with high ARHGAP30 expression (Figure 3). A study by Mao and Tong [35] also supports this point. Although some prognostic molecular markers have been found in patients with LUAD [3643], ARHGAP30 might be developed as a molecular marker to evaluate the prognosis of patients with LUAD after surgery or in patients with advanced disease. We identified genes, miRNAs, and lncRNAs that were highly associated with ARHGAP30 in LUAD (Figures 46), which could provide new ideas and targets for epigenetic studies of ARHGAP30 in LUAD.

We identified many pathways related to tumor immunity from the enrichment results of KEGG Pathway, Panther Pathway, Reactome Pathway, and Wikipathway (Figures 7, 14 and Supplementary Figures 13). Recent studies have demonstrated a close relationship between Rho GTPases and the development and metastasis of a variety of human tumors [7]. KEGG pathways included Primary immunodeficiency, Th1 and Th2 cell differentiation, Chemokine signaling pathway, T cell receptor signaling pathway, Th17 cell differentiation, and Fc gamma R-mediated phagocytosis. Panther pathways included T cell activation, B cell activation, Inflammation mediated by chemokine and cytokine signaling pathway, Interleukin signaling pathway and Toll receptor signaling pathway. Reactome Pathways Defensins, Translocation of ZAP-70 to Immunological synapse, Generation of second messenger molecules, Costimulation by the CD28 family, PD-1 signaling, Interleukin-2 family signaling, Interleukin-10 signaling, Interleukin-3, Interleukin-5 and GM-CSF signaling, DAP12 inter-actions, Immunoregulatory interactions between a Lymphoid and a non-Lymphoid cell, Phosphorylation of CD3 and TCR zeta chains, DAP12 signaling, Interleukin receptor SHC signaling, Antigen activates B Cell Receptor (BCR) leading to generation of second messengers, RHO GTPases Activate NADPH Oxidases, Chemokine receptors bind chemokines, Interferon gamma signaling and Regulation of actin dynamics for phagocytic cup formation. Wikipathways included T-Cell antigen Receptor (TCR) Signaling Pathway, T-Cell antigen Receptor (TCR) pathway during Staphylococcus aureus infection, Allograft Rejection, IL-3 Signaling Pathway, Type II interferon signaling (IFNG), Interactions between immune cells and microRNAs in tumor microenvironment, Cancer immunotherapy by PD-1 blockade, IL-2 Signaling Pathway, IL-9 Signaling Pathway, IL-7 Signaling Pathway, Macrophage markers, Chemokine signaling pathway, Selective expression of chemokine receptors during T-cell polarization, Cancer immunotherapy by CTLA4 blockade, T-Cell Receptor and Co-stimulatory Signaling, B Cell Receptor Signaling Pathway, Inflammatory Response Pathway, and IL-5 Signaling Pathway.

Figure 14.

Figure 14

Immune-related statistically significant KEGG pathway annotations. (A) Chemokine signaling pathway (hsa04062). (B) Th1 and Th2 cell differentiation (hsa04658). (C) Th17 cell differentiation (hsa04659). (D) T cell receptor signaling pathway (hsa04660). (E) Fc gamma R-mediated phagocytosis (hsa04666). (F) Primary immunodeficiency (hsa05340). Red denotes leading-edge genes; green denotes the remaining genes.

We further observed that the levels of TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, chemokine receptors and ARHGAP30 expression correlated positively in LUAD (Figures 813); however, these factors correlated negatively with the DNA methylation level of ARHGAP30 (Supplementary Figures 1013). Anti-tumor immunotherapy is promising treatment modality in the fight against tumors; however, previous application found that its efficacy was not as good as expected. Through in-depth studies, it has been found that immune tolerance in the tumor microenvironment might be the most important reason leading to the unsatisfactory effects of immunotherapy [44, 45]. Defects in the development or function of CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs), CD4+ Th1 helper T cells, or natural killer (NK) cells all lead to more frequent tumorigenesis and/or more rapid growth [46]. Immunostimulators could accumulate in tumors and significantly inhibit tumor growth [47]. A tumor can escape T cell reactions by losing major histocompatibility complex (MHC) molecules [48]. Chemokines and chemokine receptors mediate the host response to cancer by directing leukocytes into the tumor microenvironment [49, 50]. Our results supported the above points. ARHGAP30 expression correlated positively with TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors in LUAD (Figures 812), which might be related to the significantly reduced ARHGAP30 expression in LUAD. Levels of TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors were decreased in LUAD. Reduced or functional defects in tumor immune function result in more frequent occurrence and more rapid proliferation and growth of LUAD.

Therefore, we proposed that DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 and mutations in KEAP1 and STK11 genes inhibit ARHGAP30 expression in LUAD. Decreased ARHGAP30 expression might inhibit TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors in lung adenocarcinoma through pathways identified in the enrichment analysis, which in turn inhibits tumor immunity and ultimately promotes the formation and growth of LUAD.

Our study is the first to perform prognostic analysis and evaluation of ARHGAP30 in patients with LUAD, to carry out GSEA of ARHGAP30, and to investigate the relationship between ARHGAP30 and TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, and chemokine receptors in LUAD. These findings have important implications for the diagnosis, prognostic evaluation, and cancer immunotherapy of patients with LUAD Our study was limited by a lack of further experimental validation. We could also assess the relationship of ARHGAP30 with other types of lung cancer to determine the specific role of ARHGAP30 expression in the diagnosis and treatment of different types of lung cancer.

Overall, our results suggest that DNA methylation of ARHGAP30, as well as mutations in KEAP1 and STK11, inhibit ARHGAP30 expression in LUAD, which in turn promotes LUAD formation and growth through multiple pathways that suppress tumor infiltrating immunity, thus contributing to poor prognosis of patients with LUAD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the Oncomine 4.5 [10] database to analyze the differential expression of ARHGAP30 in various cancers and in the Hou lung, Selamat lung, and Okayama lung adenocarcinoma datasets. We used the SurvExpress [11] database to analyze the differential expression of ARHGAP30 in two lung adenocarcinoma datasets. We used the GEPIA [12] database to analyze the differential expression of ARHGAP30 in lung adenocarcinoma. We used the Warner [13] database to explore the abundance of different exons of the ARHGAP30 gene in normal and tumor tissues of patients with LUAD. We used the Ualcan [14] database to analyze the differences of ARHGAP30 mRNA expression in subgroups of patients with lung adenocarcinoma patients according to sample type, individual cancer stage, ethnicity, sex, age, smoking habit, nodal metastasis status, and TP53 mutation status. We used the Ualcan [14] and CPTAC [15] databases to analyze the differential expression of ARHGAP30 protein in patients with LUAD stratified by sample type, individual cancer stage, ethnicity, sex, age, weight, tumor grade, and tumor histology.

We used the TCGA portal [16] database to analyze the differential expression of ARHGAP30 after highly mutated gene mutation. We also used the TCGA portal database to analyze the correlation between ARHGAP30 gene expression and DNA methylation in primary tumors and normal tissue samples. We analyzed the mRNA expression of ARHGAP30 in LUAD before and after mutation of highly mutated genes (KEAP1, STK11) using the Linkedomics [17] database. We analyzed the heatmap of ARHGAP30 methylation in lung adenocarcinoma using the MethSurv [18] database. The Kaplan–Meier plots of patients with LUAD assessed using different ARHGAP30 methylation probes (cg07837534 and cg00045607) were analyzed.

We used GEPIA [12], Oncolnc [19], Ualcan [14], UCSC [20], TCGAportal [16], TISIDB [21], KMplot [22], TIMER [23], Linkedomics [17], and PrognoScan [24] databases to analyze the overall survival (OS) curves for patients with LUAD. We used the GEPIA [12] database to analyze the disease-free survival (DFS) curves for patients with LUAD (in months and days, respectively). We used the PrognoScan database to analyze the recurrence-free survival (RFS) curves in patients with LUAD.

We analyzed the genes and mRNAs that were highly associated with ARHGAP30 in LUAD using the Linkedomics [17] database and obtained the corresponding volcano plots, heat plots, and scatter plots. We analyzed the lncRNAs that were highly associated with ARHGAP30 in LUAD using the TANRIC [25] database and obtained the corresponding scatter plots and survival curves.

We used the TISIDB [21] database to analyze the relationship between TILs, immunostimulators, MHC molecules, chemokines, chemokine receptors and the expression and DNA methylation of ARHGAP30 in LUAD.

Statistical methods

We used a t-test to analyze the differential expression levels of ARHGAP30 in normal and tumor samples. We analyzed the DNA methylation expression levels of ARHGAP30 in normal and tumor samples using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. We used Pearson correlation [5154] to analyze ARHGAP30-associated genes, miRNAs, and lncRNAs. We performed survival analysis and plotted Kaplan–Meier curves for ARHGAP30. We performed gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) [26] of ARHGAP30 for KEGG Pathway [27], Panther Pathway [28], Reactome Pathway [29], Wikipathway [30], Gene ontology Biological Process [31, 32], Gene ontology Cellular Component [31, 32], Gene ontology Molecular Function [31, 32], Kinase Target Network, Transcription Factor Network, and PPI BIOGRID Network [33].

Ethics approval and declaration

This study was approved by the academic ethics review board of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. Human participants and research animals were not involved in this study. All software applications are freely and publicly available without custom code. All data in this article were obtained from publicly available databases, and all the data and pictures in this article are authorized.

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Figures
Supplementary Tables
aging-13-203762-s002.pdf (596.7KB, pdf)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to the staff from the Department of Thoracic Surgery of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, China for their support during the preparation of this manuscript.

Abbreviations

ARHGAP30

Rho-GTPase activating protein 30

LUAD

lung adenocarcinoma

GSEA

gene set enrichment analysis

KEGG

Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes

PPI

protein-protein interaction

MHC

major histocompatibility complex

TILs

Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes

Footnotes

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS: Conceptualization, S.H. and YP.W.; methodology, S.H., JY. Y, WB. Z, WX. Z, Y.Z, DY. Z, JJ.X, DL.Y, YP. W, J.P; software, S.H.; validation, X.X., Y.Y. and Z.Z.; formal analysis, S.H.; investigation, S.H.; resources, S.H.; data curation, S.H.; writing—original draft preparation, S.H., JY. Y, WB. Z, WX. Z, Y.Z, DY. Z, JJ.X, DL.Y, YP. W, J.P; writing—review and editing, S.H., YP. W., JH. P; visualization, S.H.; supervision, S.H., YP. W., JH. P.; project administration, S.H., YP. W., JH. P.; funding acquisition, YP.W.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

FUNDING: This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 81860379], the Preeminence Youth Fund of Jiangxi Province [grant number 20162BCB23058], and the Natural Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province, China [grant number 20171BAB 205075].

REFERENCES

  • 1.Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018; 68:394–424. 10.3322/caac.21492 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Bade BC, Dela Cruz CS. Lung Cancer 2020: Epidemiology, Etiology, and Prevention. Clin Chest Med. 2020; 41:1–24. 10.1016/j.ccm.2019.10.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Govindan R, Page N, Morgensztern D, Read W, Tierney R, Vlahiotis A, Spitznagel EL, Piccirillo J. Changing epidemiology of small-cell lung cancer in the United States over the last 30 years: analysis of the surveillance, epidemiologic, and end results database. J Clin Oncol. 2006; 24:4539–44. 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.4859 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Etienne-Manneville S, Hall A. Rho GTPases in cell biology. Nature. 2002; 420:629–35. 10.1038/nature01148 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sah VP, Seasholtz TM, Sagi SA, Brown JH. The role of Rho in G protein-coupled receptor signal transduction. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2000; 40:459–89. 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.40.1.459 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Naji L, Pacholsky D, Aspenström P. ARHGAP30 is a Wrch-1-interacting protein involved in actin dynamics and cell adhesion. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2011; 409:96–102. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2011.04.116 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Heasman SJ, Ridley AJ. Mammalian Rho GTPases: new insights into their functions from in vivo studies. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2008; 9:690–701. 10.1038/nrm2476 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Zhou Y, Hua Z, Zhu Y, Wang L, Chen F, Shan T, Zhou Y, Dai T. Upregulation of ARHGAP30 attenuates pancreatic cancer progression by inactivating the β-catenin pathway. Cancer Cell Int. 2020; 20:225. 10.1186/s12935-020-01288-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
  • 9.Wang J, Qian J, Hu Y, Kong X, Chen H, Shi Q, Jiang L, Wu C, Zou W, Chen Y, Xu J, Fang JY. ArhGAP30 promotes p53 acetylation and function in colorectal cancer. Nat Commun. 2014; 5:4735. 10.1038/ncomms5735 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Rhodes DR, Kalyana-Sundaram S, Mahavisno V, Varambally R, Yu J, Briggs BB, Barrette TR, Anstet MJ, Kincead-Beal C, Kulkarni P, Varambally S, Ghosh D, Chinnaiyan AM. Oncomine 3.0: genes, pathways, and networks in a collection of 18,000 cancer gene expression profiles. Neoplasia. 2007; 9:166–80. 10.1593/neo.07112 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Aguirre-Gamboa R, Gomez-Rueda H, Martínez-Ledesma E, Martínez-Torteya A, Chacolla-Huaringa R, Rodriguez-Barrientos A, Tamez-Peña JG, Treviño V. SurvExpress: an online biomarker validation tool and database for cancer gene expression data using survival analysis. PLoS One. 2013; 8:e74250. 10.1371/journal.pone.0074250 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Tang Z, Li C, Kang B, Gao G, Li C, Zhang Z. GEPIA: a web server for cancer and normal gene expression profiling and interactive analyses. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017; 45:W98–102. 10.1093/nar/gkx247 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Díez-Villanueva A, Mallona I, Peinado MA. Wanderer, an interactive viewer to explore DNA methylation and gene expression data in human cancer. Epigenetics Chromatin. 2015; 8:22. 10.1186/s13072-015-0014-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Chandrashekar DS, Bashel B, Balasubramanya SA, Creighton CJ, Ponce-Rodriguez I, Chakravarthi BV, Varambally S. UALCAN: A Portal for Facilitating Tumor Subgroup Gene Expression and Survival Analyses. Neoplasia. 2017; 19:649–58. 10.1016/j.neo.2017.05.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Chen F, Chandrashekar DS, Varambally S, Creighton CJ. Pan-cancer molecular subtypes revealed by mass-spectrometry-based proteomic characterization of more than 500 human cancers. Nat Commun. 2019; 10:5679. 10.1038/s41467-019-13528-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Xu S, Feng Y, Zhao S. Proteins with Evolutionarily Hypervariable Domains are Associated with Immune Response and Better Survival of Basal-like Breast Cancer Patients. Comput Struct Biotechnol J. 2019; 17:430–40. 10.1016/j.csbj.2019.03.008 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Vasaikar SV, Straub P, Wang J, Zhang B. LinkedOmics: analyzing multi-omics data within and across 32 cancer types. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018; 46:D956–63. 10.1093/nar/gkx1090 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Modhukur V, Iljasenko T, Metsalu T, Lokk K, Laisk-Podar T, Vilo J. MethSurv: a web tool to perform multivariable survival analysis using DNA methylation data. Epigenomics. 2018; 10:277–88. 10.2217/epi-2017-0118 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Jordan A. Guide to using OncoLnc, a new TCGA data portal. 2016.
  • 20.Goldman MJ, Craft B, Hastie M, Repečka K, McDade F, Kamath A, Banerjee A, Luo Y, Rogers D, Brooks AN, Zhu J, Haussler D. Visualizing and interpreting cancer genomics data via the Xena platform. Nat Biotechnol. 2020; 38:675–78. 10.1038/s41587-020-0546-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Ru B, Wong CN, Tong Y, Zhong JY, Zhong SS, Wu WC, Chu KC, Wong CY, Lau CY, Chen I, Chan NW, Zhang J. TISIDB: an integrated repository portal for tumor-immune system interactions. Bioinformatics. 2019; 35:4200–202. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btz210 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Nagy Á, Munkácsy G, Győrffy B. Pancancer survival analysis of cancer hallmark genes. Sci Rep. 2021; 11:6047. 10.1038/s41598-021-84787-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Li T, Fan J, Wang B, Traugh N, Chen Q, Liu JS, Li B, Liu XS. TIMER: A Web Server for Comprehensive Analysis of Tumor-Infiltrating Immune Cells. Cancer Res. 2017; 77:e108–10. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-17-0307 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Mizuno H, Kitada K, Nakai K, Sarai A. PrognoScan: a new database for meta-analysis of the prognostic value of genes. BMC Med Genomics. 2009; 2:18. 10.1186/1755-8794-2-18 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Li J, Han L, Roebuck P, Diao L, Liu L, Yuan Y, Weinstein JN, Liang H. TANRIC: An Interactive Open Platform to Explore the Function of lncRNAs in Cancer. Cancer Res. 2015; 75:3728–37. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-0273 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Subramanian A, Tamayo P, Mootha VK, Mukherjee S, Ebert BL, Gillette MA, Paulovich A, Pomeroy SL, Golub TR, Lander ES, Mesirov JP. Gene set enrichment analysis: a knowledge-based approach for interpreting genome-wide expression profiles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005; 102:15545–50. 10.1073/pnas.0506580102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Kanehisa M, Sato Y. KEGG Mapper for inferring cellular functions from protein sequences. Protein Sci. 2020; 29:28–35. 10.1002/pro.3711 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Mi H, Thomas P. PANTHER pathway: an ontology-based pathway database coupled with data analysis tools. Methods Mol Biol. 2009; 563:123–40. 10.1007/978-1-60761-175-2_7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Jassal B, Matthews L, Viteri G, Gong C, Lorente P, Fabregat A, Sidiropoulos K, Cook J, Gillespie M, Haw R, Loney F, May B, Milacic M, et al. The reactome pathway knowledgebase. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020; 48:D498–503. 10.1093/nar/gkz1031 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Martens M, Ammar A, Riutta A, Waagmeester A, Slenter DN, Hanspers K, Miller RA, Digles D, Lopes EN, Ehrhart F, Dupuis LJ, Winckers LA, Coort SL, et al. WikiPathways: connecting communities. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021; 49:D613–21. 10.1093/nar/gkaa1024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Gene Ontology Consortium. The Gene Ontology resource: enriching a GOld mine. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021; 49:D325–34. 10.1093/nar/gkaa1113 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Ashburner M, Ball CA, Blake JA, Botstein D, Butler H, Cherry JM, Davis AP, Dolinski K, Dwight SS, Eppig JT, Harris MA, Hill DP, Issel-Tarver L, et al. Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nat Genet. 2000; 25:25–29. 10.1038/75556 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Stark C, Breitkreutz BJ, Reguly T, Boucher L, Breitkreutz A, Tyers M. BioGRID: a general repository for interaction datasets. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006; 34:D535–39. 10.1093/nar/gkj109 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Wang JL, Guo CR, Sun TT, Su WY, Hu Q, Guo FF, Liang LX, Xu J, Xiong H, Fang JY. SRSF3 functions as an oncogene in colorectal cancer by regulating the expression of ArhGAP30. Cancer Cell Int. 2020; 20:120. 10.1186/s12935-020-01201-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Mao X, Tong J. ARHGAP30 suppressed lung cancer cell proliferation, migration, and invasion through inhibition of the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway. Onco Targets Ther. 2018; 11:7447–57. 10.2147/OTT.S175255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Hu S, Zeng W, Zhang W, Xu J, Yu D, Peng J, Wei Y. KIAA0101 as a new diagnostic and prognostic marker, and its correlation with gene regulatory networks and immune infiltrates in lung adenocarcinoma. Aging (Albany NY). 2020; 13:301–39. 10.18632/aging.104144 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Timsah Z, Berrout J, Suraokar M, Behrens C, Song J, Lee JJ, Ivan C, Gagea M, Shires M, Hu X, Vallien C, Kingsley CV, Wistuba I, Ladbury JE. Expression pattern of FGFR2, Grb2 and Plcγ1 acts as a novel prognostic marker of recurrence recurrence-free survival in lung adenocarcinoma. Am J Cancer Res. 2015; 5:3135–48. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Wang L, Meng Y, Zhang QY. LAPTM4B is a novel diagnostic and prognostic marker for lung adenocarcinoma and associated with mutant EGFR. BMC Cancer. 2019; 19:293. 10.1186/s12885-019-5506-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Wang D, Jia Y, Zheng W, Li C, Cui W. Overexpression of eIF3D in Lung Adenocarcinoma Is a New Independent Prognostic Marker of Poor Survival. Dis Markers. 2019; 2019:6019637. 10.1155/2019/6019637 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Zhao J, Cheng M, Gai J, Zhang R, Du T, Li Q. SPOCK2 Serves as a Potential Prognostic Marker and Correlates With Immune Infiltration in Lung Adenocarcinoma. Front Genet. 2020; 11:588499. 10.3389/fgene.2020.588499 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Zhao S, Gao X, Zang S, Li Y, Feng X, Yuan X. MicroRNA-383-5p acts as a prognostic marker and inhibitor of cell proliferation in lung adenocarcinoma by cancerous inhibitor of protein phosphatase 2A. Oncol Lett. 2017; 14:3573–79. 10.3892/ol.2017.6603 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Gao L, Qiu H, Liu J, Ma Y, Feng J, Qian L, Zhang J, Liu Y, Bian T. KLF15 promotes the proliferation and metastasis of lung adenocarcinoma cells and has potential as a cancer prognostic marker. Oncotarget. 2017; 8:109952–61. 10.18632/oncotarget.21972 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Liu HY, Zhao H, Li WX. Integrated Analysis of Transcriptome and Prognosis Data Identifies FGF22 as a Prognostic Marker of Lung Adenocarcinoma. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2019; 18:1533033819827317. 10.1177/1533033819827317 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Poggi A, Zocchi MR. Mechanisms of tumor escape: role of tumor microenvironment in inducing apoptosis of cytolytic effector cells. Arch Immunol Ther Exp (Warsz). 2006; 54:323–33. 10.1007/s00005-006-0038-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Liotta LA, Kohn EC. The microenvironment of the tumour-host interface. Nature. 2001; 411:375–79. 10.1038/35077241 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011; 144:646–74. 10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Wu T, Qiao Q, Qin X, Zhang D, Zhang Z. Immunostimulatory cytokine and doxorubicin co-loaded nanovesicles for cancer immunochemotherapy. Nanomedicine. 2019; 18:66–77. 10.1016/j.nano.2019.02.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Garrido F, Aptsiauri N. Cancer immune escape: MHC expression in primary tumours versus metastases. Immunology. 2019; 158:255–66. 10.1111/imm.13114 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Chow MT, Luster AD. Chemokines in cancer. Cancer Immunol Res. 2014; 2:1125–31. 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-14-0160 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Mollica Poeta V, Massara M, Capucetti A, Bonecchi R. Chemokines and Chemokine Receptors: New Targets for Cancer Immunotherapy. Front Immunol. 2019; 10:379. 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00379 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Győrffy B, Bottai G, Fleischer T, Munkácsy G, Budczies J, Paladini L, Børresen-Dale AL, Kristensen VN, Santarpia L. Aberrant DNA methylation impacts gene expression and prognosis in breast cancer subtypes. Int J Cancer. 2016; 138:87–97. 10.1002/ijc.29684 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Deng Y, Xu Y, Xu S, Zhang Y, Han B, Liu Z, Liu X, Zhu Z. Secondary data mining of GEO database for long non-coding RNA and Competing endogenous RNA network in keloid-prone individuals. Aging (Albany NY). 2020; 12:25076–89. 10.18632/aging.104054 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kraft P, Schadt E, Aten J, Horvath S. A family-based test for correlation between gene expression and trait values. Am J Hum Genet. 2003; 72:1323–30. 10.1086/375167 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Jia D, Lin W, Tang H, Cheng Y, Xu K, He Y, Geng W, Dai Q. Integrative analysis of DNA methylation and gene expression to identify key epigenetic genes in glioblastoma. Aging (Albany NY). 2019; 11:5579–92. 10.18632/aging.102139 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplementary Figures
Supplementary Tables
aging-13-203762-s002.pdf (596.7KB, pdf)

Articles from Aging (Albany NY) are provided here courtesy of Impact Journals, LLC

RESOURCES