4.6 Article

LncRNA CTC-497E21.4 promotes the progression of gastric cancer via modulating miR-22/NET1 axis through RhoA signaling pathway

期刊

GASTRIC CANCER
卷 23, 期 2, 页码 228-240

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10120-019-00998-w

关键词

lncRNA CTC-497E21.4; Gastric cancer; miR-22; ceRNA; NET1; RhoA

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation [81201349, 81000775]
  2. Young medical key talents in Jiangsu province [QNRC 2016686, 2016687]
  3. Frontier and key technical innovation projects of Nantong [MS22015049]
  4. Nantong Science and Technology Plan Project [MS12017008-3, MS12018031]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) have emerged as important roles in gastric cancer (GC). However, the role of the dysregulated lncRNAs in GC remained large unknown. We investigated the clinical significance, biological function and mechanism of CTC-497E21.4 in GC. Methods Firstly, RTFQ-PCR was used to detect the expression of CTC-497E21.4 in GC. Furthermore, knockdown of CTC-497E21.4 was conducted to assess the effect of CTC-497E21.4 in vitro and vivo. Subcellular localization of CTC-497E21.4 was determined by nuclear plasmolysis PCR and FISH. We also predicted CTC-497E21.4 binding miRNAs and downstream target genes and evaluated its regulation of miR-22 by acting as a ceRNA. Result CTC-497E21.4 was upregulated in GC tissues and GC cell lines (P < 0.05), and the expression was associated with depth of invasion, lymph node metastasis, and neurological invasion. Besides, knockdown of CTC-497E21.4 inhibited cell proliferation, invasion and promoted cell cycle arrest in vitro and inhibited tumorigenesis in vivo. Mechanistic investigations indicated that CTC-497E21.4 acted as a ceRNA for miR-22 and regulated NET1 expression. CTC-497E21.4/miR-22-3p/ NET1 participated in the RhoA signaling pathway in the GC progression. Conclusion CTC-497E21.4 competed with miR-22 to regulate the expression of NET1 and regulated the malignant progression of GC through RhoA signaling pathway.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据