Construction of the CRLs prognostic signature
RS
The 304 CC patients were randomly assigned into two cohorts: the training group (n = 152) and the test group (n = 152). Among clinicopathologic variables, age, grade, and TNM categorization did not differ significantly between the two groups. (Table Clinicopathological features of CC patients in test and train group.Construction of prognostic signature. (To validate the predictive power of a prognostic model consisting of these 8 CRLs to predict CC survival, the following formula was used to determine the RS for each sample: RS = (− 0.495 × AL441992.1 expression) + (− 0.355 × SOX21-AS1 expression) + (− 0.853 × AC011468.3 expression) + (0.556 × AC012306.2 expression) + (0.511 × FZD4-DT expression) + (0.592 × AP001922.5 expression) + (0.468 × RUSC1-AS1 expression) + (0.708 × AP001453.2 expression). The CC patients were classified into different risk subgroups by the median RS. Consistent findings were observed among all subgroups (Fig. Predictive value of prognostic model in the training, test, entire group. (Then, we performed stratified analysis of clinicopathological factors for CC patient prognosis. According to Fig. Kaplan Meier survival curves of risk subgroups in patients stratified by different clinicopathological factors. (