ArticleTranslational cancer research2026
Identifying and validating of prognostic genes associated with myeloid cell differentiation in cervical cancer: development of a risk model based on single-cell RNA sequencing combined with bulk RNA sequencing data.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prognosis of cervical cancer (CESC) is closely associated with the differentiation of myeloid cells within the tumor microenvironment (TME), including myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) and tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). These myeloid cells modulate CESC progression and treatment response by regulating immunosuppressive and activating pathways. The current study aimed to identify prognostic gene signatures and elucidate the biological pathways involved in myeloid cell differentiation (MCD) in CESC. Methods: CESC-related datasets and an MCD-related gene set were utilized in this study. Prognostic genes were identified using an integrated approach combined with differential expression analysis, Venn diagram intersection, univariate Cox regression, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) for feature selection. A risk model was constructed and validated. Additionally, functional enrichment analysis, immune microenvironment profiling, drug sensitivity assessment, and single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) were employed to explore the molecular mechanisms underlying the prognostic genes and risk model in CESC development. Reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) was used to validate the expression levels of the prognostic genes. Results: The risk score, derived from four prognostic genes (TNF, PTPN6, FASN, and TFRC), effectively classified CESC samples into high-risk group (HRG) and low-risk group (LRG). The risk model and nomogram accurately predicted the prognosis of patients with CESC. Synapse organization-related pathways were significantly enriched in the HRG compared to the LRG. Notably, 11 immune cell populations, including immature B cells and macrophages, were significantly different between HRG and LRG. Moreover, the half-maximum inhibitory concentration (IC50) values for 85 drugs, such as roscovitine and embelin, were markedly distinct between the two risk groups. Pseudotime analysis identified dynamic expression changes in TNF, PTPN6, and FASN during macrophage differentiation. RT-qPCR results confirmed that TNF, PTPN6, FASN, and TFRC were upregulated in CESC, consistent with the Wilcoxon test findings. Conclusions: This study established an MCD-associated prognostic model for CESC, highlighting its link to the TME and its potential to enhance prognostic predictions.
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.