Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) poses substantial treatment challenges, especially in advanced stages where the efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy varies significantly. Elevated expression of the oncogene TUBA1C has been correlated with poor prognosis in various cancers, however, its role in ccRCC is unclear, especially concerning ICB resistance. METHODS: Single-cell analysis was used to examine gene expression variations in malignant cells post-ICB therapy. This included investigating TUBA1C expression across different ICB response groups and its relationship with CD274. A general module of action was identified through pan-cancer and pan-tissue analysis. TUBA1C expression and its association with clinical characteristics and prognosis was further validated. Multiple algorithms were employed to explore immune cell infiltration levels, and the DepMap database was utilized to assess gene dependency and mutation status in kidney cancer cell lines. The in silico knockout of TUBA1C was performed using deep learning model, complemented by immunohistochemical assays, clinical cohort and functional assays validations. RESULTS: TUBA1C expression is elevated in malignant cells following ICB therapy and is correlated with ICB resistance in ccRCC. High TUBA1C expression activates PI3K/AKT pathway and is associated with increased infiltration of regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells, which contributes to an immunosuppressive microenvironment in ccRCC. Patients with high TUBA1C expression exhibit a greater tumor mutation burden and increased genetic variation, which causes a worse prognosis. Additionally, TUBA1C dependency and its effects were evident in kidney cancer cell lines, where mutations conferred resistance to anti-PD-L1 therapy. In silico knockout analyses indicated that treatment targeting TUBA1C shifted malignant cells to a state responsive to ICB therapy. Immunohistochemistry, RT-qPCR and clinical cohort validation further confirmed that TUBA1C expression was upregulated and contributed to poorer outcome in ccRCC. Finaly, wound healing and CCK-8 assays demonstrated the potent oncogenic function of TUBA1C. CONCLUSIONS: TUBA1C is a pivotal regulator in ccRCC, affecting both disease progression and the effectiveness of ICB therapy by fostering an immunosuppressive microenvironment mediated by the PI3K/AKT pathway. Additionally, TUBA1C holds promise, both as a prognostic biomarker and a therapeutic target, for enhancing responsiveness to ICB.