A signature of 13 autophagy‑related gene pairs predicts prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma

Figures & data

Table 1. 127 autophagy-related genes

127 autophagy-related genes
APOL1	ARNT	ARSA	ARSB	ATF4	ATF6
ATG4B	ATG4D	ATIC	BAG1	BAG3	BAK1
BAX	BCL2L1	BECN1	BID	BIRC5	BIRC6
BNIP3	BNIP3L	CANX	CAPN1	CAPN2	CAPNS1
CASP1	CASP3	CASP4	CASP8	CCL2	CD46
CDKN1A	CDKN1B	CDKN2A	CHMP2B	CHMP4B	CLN3
CTSB	CTSD	CX3CL1	CXCR4	DAPK1	DDIT3
DLC1	DNAJB1	DNAJB9	DRAM1	EDEM1	EEF2
EEF2K	EGFR	EIF2AK2	EIF4EBP1	ERBB2	ERN1
FAS	FKBP1A	FKBP1B	FOS	FOXO1	FOXO3
GAA	GABARAPL1	GAPDH	GOPC	HDAC1	HDAC6
HGS	HIF1A	HSP90AB1	HSPA5	HSPA8	HSPB8
IKBKE	ITGA3	ITGA6	ITGB1	ITGB4	KIF5B
KLHL24	LAMP1	LAMP2	MAP1LC3A	MAP1LC3B	MAPK1
MAPK3	MAPK8IP1	MTOR	MYC	NAMPT	NBR1
NCKAP1	NFE2L2	NFKB1	NPC1	P4HB	PARP1
PEA15	PELP1	PEX14	PEX3	PIK3R4	PINK1
PPP1R15A	PRKAR1A	PRKCD	PTK6	RAB24	RAB33B
RB1	RB1CC1	RGS19	SERPINA1	SESN2	SIRT1
SPHK1	SQSTM1	TMEM74	TNFSF10	TP53	TP53INP2
TSC2	TUSC1	ULK1	ULK2	VAMP3	VEGFA
WIPI1

Figure 1. LASSO cox-regression analysis to filter the autophagy-related gene pairs for prognosis. (a)The most representative autophagy-related gene pairs were obtained by LASSO analysis; (b) LASSO coefficient of the 13 autophagy-related gene pairs

Figure 2. Survival analysis of HCC in the two cohort. (a)Risk scores distribution of patients in the training cohort; (b) Survival time and survival state of patients in the training cohort; (c) Kaplan-Meier survival curve of patients with HCC in the training cohort; (d) Risk scores distribution of patients with HCC in the validation cohort; (e) Survival time and survival state of patients with HCC in the validation cohort; (f) Kaplan-Meier analysis of patients in the validation cohort

Figure 3. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed independently prognostic factors for OS of HCC in the two cohorts. (a) Univariate analyses in the training cohort; (b) Multivariate analyses in the training cohort; (c) Univariate analyses in the validation cohort; (d) Multivariate analyses in the validation cohort

Figure 4. GO and KEGG enrichment analyses of the signature gene. (a) GO enrichment analyses; (b) KEGG enrichment analyses

Figure 5. Immune infiltration levels in the two groups. (a)The radar plot displayed 22 different immune cell levels for different groups; (b) The violin plot displayed 22 different immune cell levels for different groups

Data availability statement

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in TCGA (https://portal.gdc.cancer.gov) and ICGC (https://icgc.org/).