3.9 Article

Long Noncoding RNA Sponges miR-454 to Promote Osteogenic Differentiation in Maxillary Sinus Membrane Stem Cells

期刊

IMPLANT DENTISTRY
卷 26, 期 2, 页码 178-186

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000569

关键词

mesenchymal stem cells; osteogenesis; long noncoding RNA; microRNA; competing endogenous RNA

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81371111]
  2. Guangdong Province Science and Technology Commission [2013B010406006]
  3. Guangdong Province Nature Science Foundation [2014A030313059]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective:Although increasing evidence has shown that long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) play an important regulatory role in pluripotency and differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells, little is known about the role of lncRNA in maxillary sinus membrane stem cells (MSMSCs). The goal of this study was to investigate the expression profile and function of lncRNAs on osteogenic differentiation of MSMSCs.Materials and Methods:By using lncRNA microarray, we identify a novel osteogenesis differentiation-related lncRNA of MSMSCs (lncRNA-MODR). The functional role of lncRNA-MODR in regulating osteogenesis was evaluated by quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction, western blot, and alizarin red staining. Bioinformatic analyses of the predicted target genes (gene ontology, pathway, and network analysis) were applied for further study of lncRNA-MODR.Results:We show that lncRNA-MODR is gradually upregulated during osteogenic differentiation. lncRNA-MODR overexpression upregulated, whereas lncRNA-MODR silencing decreased the expression of the osteogenic key marker, runt-related transcription factor 2 (RUNX2). In-depth analyses showed that lncRNA-MODR acts as a molecular sponge for microRNA-454 (miR-454) and that prevents RUNX2 from mi-454-mediated suppression.Conclusion:The lncRNAs act as a competing endogenous RNA to sequester microRNA-454 (miR-454), leading to heightened RUNX2 expression and thus promotes osteogenesis of MSMSCs.

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

3.9
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