Development and Validation of a DNA Damage Repair-related Gene-based Prediction Model for the Prognosis of Lung Adenocarcinoma

Background: Lung cancer is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among all cancer types, with lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) being the most prevalent subtype. DNA damage repair (DDR)-related genes are closely associated with cancer progression and treatment, with emerging evidence highlighting their correlation with tumor development. However, the relationship between LUAD prognosis and DDR-related genes remains unclear.

Methods: RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) data and clinical information were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. The GSE31210 dataset, utilized for external validation, was retrieved from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. Differentially expressed DDR genes were identified, and a DDR-related prognostic model was established and validated using Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival analysis, time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA), tumor mutational burden (TMB) analysis, and immune cell infiltration. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: A total of 514 patients with LUAD from TCGA database were divided into distinct subtypes to characterize the diversity within the DDR pathway. DDR-activated and DDR-suppressed subgroups showed distinct clinical characteristics, molecular characteristics, and immune profiles. Nine genes were identified as hub DDR-related genes, including , and . By using the expression levels of these selected genes, the corresponding risk scores for each sample was predicted. In the training group, KM survival analysis revealed that the high-risk group exhibited significantly diminished overall survival (OS) [hazard ratio (HR) =3.341, P=1.38e-08]. The corresponding area under the curve (AUC) values for the 1-year follow-up periods was 0.767, respectively. Upon validation in the external cohort, patients with higher risk scores manifested significantly reduced OS (HR =2.372, P=1.87e-03). The AUC values of the ROC curves for the 1-year OS in the validation cohort was 0.87, respectively. Moreover, advanced DDR risk score was correlated with increased TMB scores, a heightened frequency of mutations, an increased abundance of cancer-testicular antigens (CTAs), and a lower tumor immune dysfunction and exclusion (TIDE) score in patients with LUAD (P<0.05).

Conclusions: A nine-gene risk signature associated with DDR in LUAD was effectively developed, demonstrating its potential as a robust and reliable classification tool for clinical practice. This model exhibited the capability to accurately predict the prognosis and survival outcomes of LUAD patients.