Identifies a prognostic model in kidney renal clear cell carcinoma, suggesting improved patient outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The Bone Morphogenetic Protein (BMP) family acts as a critical modulator of cellular plasticity and lineage commitment in oncogenesis. However, the systematic contribution of BMP-related mRNAs (BRMs) to the progression and immunophenotypic landscape of kidney renal clear cell carcinoma (KIRC) remains poorly defined. METHODS: Integrating transcriptomic and clinical data, we established a BRM-based risk signature to refine KIRC prognosis. The model's robustness was validated using the E-MTAB-1980 cohort and a comprehensive nomogram. We employed advanced computational frameworks-including tumor mutation burden (TMB), tumor microenvironment (TME) deconvolution, and drug sensitivity profiling-to dissect biological heterogeneity between risk subgroups. RESULTS: A nine-BRM signature (comprising L1CAM, MPP7, CLIC5, TUBB2B, PLG, CA8, ITGAX, PADI3, and PRR15L) was identified as an independent prognostic factor. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated significantly inferior survival in the high-risk group (HRG) compared to the low-risk group (LRG) (P < 0.001). The BRM-integrated nomogram exhibited superior predictive accuracy (AUC = 0.747) and strong calibration. Functional enrichment revealed that while the LRG was associated with physiological renal tubular secretion, the HRG was predominantly characterized by immunoglobulin production and B cell-mediated immune dysregulation. Furthermore, the HRG exhibited a significantly higher TMB and distinct sensitivity to Dactolisib and Podophyllotoxin, whereas the LRG favored Docetaxel. RT-qPCR successfully validated the differential expression of core BRMs in clinical samples. CONCLUSIONS: This nine-BRM prognostic model serves as a potential prognostic stratification tool that may complement existing clinical parameters in evaluating the outcomes of KIRC patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: