Integration of bioinformatics and machine learning strategies identifies APM-related gene signatures to predict clinical outcomes and therapeutic responses for breast cancer patients

Background: Tumor antigenicity and efficiency of antigen presentation jointly influence tumor immunogenicity, which largely determines the effectiveness of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB). However, the role of altered antigen processing and presentation machinery (APM) in breast cancer (BRCA) has not been fully elucidated.

Methods: A series of bioinformatic analyses and machine learning strategies were performed to construct APM-related gene signatures to guide personalized treatment for BRCA patients. A single-sample gene set enrichment analysis (ssGSEA) algorithm and weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) were combined to screen for BRCA-specific APM-related genes. The non-negative matrix factorization (NMF) algorithm was used to divide the cohort into different clusters and the fgsea algorithm was applied to investigate the altered signaling pathways. Random survival forest (RSF) and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso) Cox regression analysis were combined to construct an APM-related risk score (APMrs) signature to predict overall survival. Furthermore, a nomogram and decision tree were generated to improve predictive accuracy and risk stratification for individual patients. Based on Tumor Immune Dysfunction and Exclusion (TIDE) method, random forest (RF) and Lasso logistic regression model were combined to establish an APM-related immunotherapeutic response score (APMis). Finally, immune infiltration, immunomodulators, mutational patterns, and potentially applicable drugs were comprehensively analyzed in different APM-related risk groups. IHC staining was used to assess the expression of APM-related genes in clinical samples.

Results: In this study, APMrs and APMis showed favorable performances in risk stratification and therapeutic prediction for BRCA patients. APMrs exhibited more powerful prognostic capacity and accurate survival prediction compared to conventional clinicopathological features. APMrs was closely associated with distinct mutational patterns, immune cell infiltration and immunomodulators expression. Furthermore, the two APM-related gene signatures were independently validated in external cohorts with prognosis or immunotherapeutic responses. Potential applicable drugs and targets were mined in the APMrs-high group. APM-related genes were further validated in our in-house samples.

Conclusion: The APM-related gene signatures established in our study could improve the personalized assessment of survival risk and guide ICB decision-making for BRCA patients.