4.4 Article

MiR-4652-5p Targets RND1 to Regulate Cell Adhesion and Promote Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma Progression

期刊

APPLIED BIOCHEMISTRY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 194, 期 7, 页码 3031-3043

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12010-022-03897-6

关键词

Lung squamous cell carcinoma; RND1; miR-4652-5p; Migration; Invasion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study identified the regulatory role of miR-4652-5p and RND1 in lung squamous cell carcinoma. miR-4652-5p promoted the proliferation, migration, and invasion of LUSC cells by downregulating RND1 expression, and may also affect cell adhesion.
Lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) is one subtype of non-small-cell lung cancer, whose pathogenesis has not been fully understood. Exploring molecular mechanisms of LUSC helps a lot with the development of LUSC novel therapy. Hence, our study aims to investigate novel molecular mechanisms. Differentially expressed miRNAs and mRNAs were acquired from The Cancer Genome Atlas database. A series of assays were applied to test cell functions, including qRT-PCR to analyze RND1 and miR-4652-5p expression, dual-luciferase reporter gene assay to verify the targeting relationship between these two genes, cell counting kit-8 and colony formation assays to evaluate the ability of LUSC cells to proliferate, transwell to examine the migratory and invasive abilities, and western blot to test expression of RND1 and cell adhesion-related proteins. RND1 was lowly expressed while miR-4652-5p was highly expressed in LUSC cells. The correlation between these two genes was significantly negative and miR-4652-5p could downregulate RND1 expression. Additionally, cellular function assays validated that RND1 suppressed LUSC cells to proliferate, migrate, and invade. Besides, this gene might also affect cell adhesion. Furthermore, rescue assay suggested that miR-4652-5p downregulated RND1 expression to promote the progression of LUSC cells. Together, miR-4652-5p targeted RND1 to modulate cell adhesion and the progression of LUSC cells.

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

4.4
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