Fig. 7: Expression of LHPP in tumors is associated with stemness characteristics, the anti-tumor immune microenvironment, and prognosis.

A Representative images of gastric cancer in the Mist-CreERT;Apc^fl/fl;p53^fl/fl;Rosa26^Tdtomato conditional knockout gene mouse model. Multiplex immunofluorescence staining was used to assess the expression of LHPP, CD44, CD8, and DAPI in the model. The upper right corner displays HE-stained images of the gastric cancer region in the mouse model. B The experimental strategy for genetic recombination in the Mist-CreERT;Apc^fl/fl;p53^fl/fl;Rosa26^Tdtomato mouse model. C Statistical analysis of CD8+ T cell counts in fields of Lhpp low-expression and Lhpp high-expression regions. A total of 20 regions from four mouse gastric cancer models were analyzed (five randomly selected regions per mouse), including 10 Lhpp low-expression regions and 10 Lhpp high-expression regions. The distinction between Lhpp high and low expression was determined based on the median H-score of Lhpp. Statistical differences between the two groups were compared using Student’s t test. D Statistical analysis of the number of CD44+ gastric epithelial cells in fields of Lhpp low-expression and Lhpp high-expression regions. E Overall survival curves for gastric cancer patients with low and high LHPP expression. F Overall survival curves for gastric cancer patients with low and high CD44 expression. G Kaplan–Meier survival curves depicting overall survival probabilities for gastric cancer patients based on combined LHPP and CD44 expression levels. Patients are classified into four groups: LHPP^high CD44^high, LHPP^high CD44^low, LHPP^low CD44^high, and LHPP^low CD44^low. H Representative IHC images showing CD8 expression in the tumor center and invasive margin across three immune phenotypes: Desert, Excluded, and Inflamed. Magnified areas highlight differences in CD8 staining among the phenotypes. Scale bar = 200 μm. I Box plot illustrating LHPP expression levels across Desert, Excluded, and Inflamed immune phenotypes. Student’s t test was used to compare the statistical difference between the two groups. Statistical significance was determined using the Kruskal–Wallis test. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.