4.7 Article

MicroRNA-664 suppresses the growth of cervical cancer cells via targeting c-Kit

期刊

DRUG DESIGN DEVELOPMENT AND THERAPY
卷 13, 期 -, 页码 2371-2379

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/DDDT.S203399

关键词

microRNA-664; c-Kit; cervical cancer; apoptosis

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81571395, 81671408, 81771531, 81871129]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Cervical cancer is the second most common malignant cancer in women worldwide. Evidence indicated that miR-664 was significantly downregulated in cervical cancer. However, the mechanisms by which miR-664 regulates the tumorigenesis of cervical cancer remain unclear. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the role of miR-664 in cervical cancer. Methods: Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction was used to detect the level of miR-664 in tumor tissues and cell line. The dual luciferase reporter system assay and Western blotting were used to explore the interaction of miR-664 and c-Kit in cervical cancer. Results: The expression of miR-664 in patients with cervical cancer was dramatically decreased compared with that in adjacent tissues. MiR-664 mimics significantly inhibited proliferation in SiHa cells via inducing apoptosis. In addition, miR-664 mimics induced apoptosis in SiHa cells via increasing the expressions of Box and active caspase 3 and decreasing the level of Bcl-2. Moreover, dual-luciferase assay showed that c-Kit was the directly binding target of miR-664 in SiHa cells; overexpression of miR-664 downregulated the expression of c-Kit. Meanwhile, upregulation of miR-664 significantly decreased the levels of c-Myc and Cyclin D in cells. Furthermore, miR-664 markedly inhibited tumor growth of cervical cancer in xenograft. Conclusion: Our data indicated that miR-664 exerted antitumor effects on SiHa cells by directly targeting c-Kit in vitro and in vivo. Therefore, miR-664 might be a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of patients with cervical cancer.

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

4.7
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