ArticleFEBS open bio2024
SMARCA4 mutations and expression in lung adenocarcinoma: prognostic significance and impact on the immunotherapy response.
Article in FEBS open bio, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinicopathological characteristics and therapeutic outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer harboringAnnals of medicine · 2026Article
- Histone Methylation and Chromatin Remodeling in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Mechanisms of Oncogenesis and Emerging Therapeutic Strategies.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Targeting TROP-2 in treatment-resistant non-small cell lung cancer harboring theOncology letters · 2026Article
- Review
- SMARCA4 deficiency in small cell lung cancer: A case report and narrative review of the literature.Biomolecules & biomedicine · 2025Review
- Lung Adenocarcinoma With Bone Metastases: Clinicogenomic Profiling and Insights Into Prognostic Factors.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
- Retrospective Insights into the Clinicopathological Features and Treatment Outcomes of Thoracic SMARCA4-Deficient Tumors.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The switch/sucrose non-fermenting (SWI/SNF) complex family includes important chromatin-remodeling factors that are frequently mutated in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). However, the role of one family member, SMARCA4, in LUAD prognosis and immunotherapy sensitivity remains unclear. In the present study, 6745 LUAD samples from the cBioPortal database were used to analyze the relationships between SMARCA4 mutations and patient prognoses and clinical characteristics. Additionally, we examined the correlation between SMARCA4 mutations and prognosis in patients treated with immunotherapy using two immune-related datasets. SMARCA4 mutations and low expression were associated with shorter survival, and mutations were associated with a high tumor mutational burden and high microsatellite instability. SMARCA4 mutations were accompanied by KRAS, KEAP1, TP53 and STK11 mutations. No significant difference was observed in the immunotherapy response between patients with and without SMARCA4 mutations. When KRAS or STK11 mutations were present, immunotherapy effectiveness was poorer; however, when both SMARCA4 and TP53 mutations were present, immunotherapy was more effective. Furthermore, low SMARCA4 expression predicted a higher immunophenoscore, and SMARCA4 expression was correlated with certain immune microenvironment features. Taken together, our results suggest that SMARCA4 mutations and low expression might be associated with poor LUAD prognosis. Additionally, immunotherapy efficacy in patients with SMARCA4 mutations depended on the co-mutant genes. Thus, SMARCA4 could be an important factor to be considered for LUAD diagnosis and treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.