# Metabolic‐immune interactions in gastric cancer T cells: A single‐cell atlas for prognostic biomarker identification

**Authors:** Junjun Liu, Rui Zhao, Guodong Yao, Zhao Liu, Runze Shi, Jingshu Geng, Guanying Liang, Kexin Chen

PMC · DOI: 10.1002/qub2.70027 · Quantitative Biology · 2026-01-01

## TL;DR

This study explores how metabolism and immunity interact in gastric cancer, identifying new biomarkers for predicting patient outcomes.

## Contribution

A novel risk score model based on T cell differentiation signatures improves prognosis prediction in gastric cancer.

## Key findings

- Distinct metabolic phenotypes in malignant epithelial cells drive intratumoral diversity and T cell differentiation.
- A machine learning-derived risk score model outperforms traditional clinicopathological factors in predicting survival.
- Key regulatory proteins like RGS1, CXCR4, and CTLA4 show prognostic value confirmed by immunohistochemistry.

## Abstract

Metabolic alterations and immune dysfunction within the gastric tumor microenvironment critically drive gastric cancer (GC) progression and therapeutic resistance. Although single‐cell RNA sequencing (scRNA‐seq) has unveiled cellular heterogeneity in GC, the metabolic landscapes of tumor cells and their interplay with immune components remain underexplored. By integrating scRNA‐seq data from 35,633 cells across 23 GC tissues (GSE150290), bulk RNA‐seq data from UCSC Xena, and two independent microarray cohorts (GSE26899, GSE62254), we systematically characterized metabolic heterogeneity and identified immune‐related prognostic biomarkers. Reclustering of malignant epithelial cells revealed distinct metabolic phenotypes, with the citrate cycle and oxidative phosphorylation pathways emerging as key drivers of intratumoral diversity and T cell differentiation. Through machine learning and survival analyses, we discovered a novel risk score model composed of 6 T cell differentiation signatures, which stratified patients into high‐ and low‐risk groups with significant differences in overall survival. Notably, this model outperformed traditional clinicopathological factors in predicting prognosis, validated in both bulk RNA‐seq and microarray datasets. Immunohistochemistry further confirmed the prognostic value of key regulatory proteins (RGS1, CXCR4, CTLA4, ARPP19, ZNRF1, and ZNF207). Our findings highlight the metabolic immune crosstalk in GC and provide a promising biomarker panel for precision risk stratification and potential immunotherapeutic targets.

## Linked entities

- **Genes:** RGS1 (regulator of G protein signaling 1) [NCBI Gene 5996], CXCR4 (C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 4) [NCBI Gene 7852], CTLA4 (cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4) [NCBI Gene 1493], ARPP19 (cAMP regulated phosphoprotein 19) [NCBI Gene 10776], ZNRF1 (zinc and ring finger 1) [NCBI Gene 84937], ZNF207 (zinc finger protein 207) [NCBI Gene 7756]
- **Proteins:** RGS1 (regulator of G protein signaling 1), CXCR4 (C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 4), CTLA4 (cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4), ARPP19 (cAMP regulated phosphoprotein 19), ZNRF1 (zinc and ring finger 1), ZNF207 (zinc finger protein 207)
- **Diseases:** gastric cancer (MONDO:0001056)

## Full-text entities

- **Genes:** CXCR4 (C-X-C motif chemokine receptor 4) [NCBI Gene 7852] {aka CD184, D2S201E, FB22, HM89, HSY3RR, LCR1}, ARPP19 (cAMP regulated phosphoprotein 19) [NCBI Gene 10776] {aka ARPP-16, ARPP-19, ARPP16, ENSAL}, CTLA4 (cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4) [NCBI Gene 1493] {aka ALPS5, CD, CD152, CELIAC3, CTLA-4, GRD4}, ZNRF1 (zinc and ring finger 1) [NCBI Gene 84937] {aka NIN283}, RGS1 (regulator of G protein signaling 1) [NCBI Gene 5996] {aka 1R20, BL34, HEL-S-87, IER1, IR20}, ZNF207 (zinc finger protein 207) [NCBI Gene 7756] {aka BuGZ, hBuGZ}
- **Diseases:** tumor (MESH:D009369), GC (MESH:D013274)
- **Chemicals:** citrate (MESH:D019343)
- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12806102/full.md

## Figures

8 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12806102/full.md

## References

44 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12806102/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12806102