Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article has been retracted, and the online PDF replaced with this retraction notice.

Keywords

lncRNAs numb GHET1 biological activities vitro study vivo study

1. Introduction

Glioma is the most common primary brain tumor in adults, with high malignancy and poor prognosis, accounting for more than 45% of the central nervous system tumors. Like other malignant tumors, the occurrence and development of glioma is a pathological process in which the two major mechanisms of genetics and epigenetics interact together, multiple genes participate, and multiple stages change and accumulate. In the past 20 years, the treatment of glioma has been studied from molecular mechanisms, genetic aspects and pathways, but the mechanism of glioma development is still unclear [1]. At present, surgical resection, radiotherapy and chemotherapy have achieved some progress, but the prognosis of the patients is still not well.

Non coding RNA includes short RNA and long chain noncoding RNA represented by miRNA, siRNA, and piRNA. Long stranded noncoding RNA (lncRNA) is a class of transcripts with a length of more than 200nt RNA, which does not encode proteins per se. Compared with short chain non coding RNA, many functions are still unknown [2]. However, with the development of genome technology, more and more evidences show that non coding long chain RNA has many influences on cell function by regulating the expression of target genes or by modifying the transcription products [3]. Compared with normal tissues, non coding long stranded RNA, which is expressed abnormally in tumor tissues, may affect the function of oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes, thus promoting or inhibiting the formation of tumors [4]. In the past, abnormal expression of molecular markers could be used to determine tumor development or tumor malignancy [5]. Abnormal expression of noncoding long chain RNA is also likely as a new molecular marker to suggest the stage of tumor development. However, in the central nervous system, there are more and more evidence that the expression of long chain non RNA encoding and neural development, neural degeneration and nerve immune disease, is closely related to primary brain tumors, and mental disease, nerve tumor [6]. Abnormal expression of long chain RNA may serve as a cue for glioma types in different types of gliomas [7]. It has also been reported that long chain RNA (anti-NOS2A), an anti NOS2 receptor, plays an important role in the differentiation of glioma, and can affect the effect of chemotherapy in glioma patients [8]. Some previous studies found that lncRNA GHET1 knockdown had effects to suppress cell biological activities in colorectal cancer, gastric cancer and bladder cancer [9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16]. However, there is no study that the correlation between GHET1 and glioma. This study was firstly showed that the GHET1 knockdown had anti-tumor effects to glioma biological activities, GHET1 might be a potential therapeutic target for glioma cells.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Clinical sample

The glioma tissues were collected from 30 cases of glioma patients who were treated in our hospital, and the no-tumor tissues were taken from traumatic brain injury patients who were treated in our hospital. The tissues were fixed in the 4% paraformaldehyde until the next experiment.

2.2 In situ hybridization (ISH)

Routine dehydration, soaking wax, embedding; sliced with fresh diluted pepsin dilution by 3% citric acid, digestion for 20 min at 37 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C, washing by PBS (5 min $\times$ 3 times), washing by distilled water once; fixed by PBS contained 1/1000 DEPC for 10 min at room temperature, washing by distilled water for 3 times; adding pre-hybridization liquid, incubated in incubation box at 40 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C for 3 h. Absorb excess liquid, not wash; The protective film in situ hybridization special glass opened after the cover in the section, the incubator incubated overnight at 40 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C; Washing; Dripping sealing solution; adding biotinylated mouse anti digoxin; adding Streptavidin biotin complex (SABC), cultured for 20 min at 37 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C; Washing by PBS (5 min $\times$ 4 times); Double amino benizidine (DAB) to color, Counterstain, fully washing, ethanol dehydration, xylene transparent, mounting.

2.3 Immunohistochemistry (IHC)

Tissue samples were taken, paraffin embedded, sliced, and routinely replaced with citric acid solution (pH6. 0), After being heated to boiling, interval 5 min, repeated 1 times, cooled, washed with PBS solution, added goat serum sealing liquid, incubated at room temperature for 20 min, added anti-body working fluid, 4 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C overnight, washing by PBS. Immunohistochemistry routine operation, room temperature color, controls reaction time under the microscope, distilled water rinse. Hematoxylin staining. Dehydrated, transparent, mounting. Through the micro camera system, the image is collected by image analysis software.

2.4 Cell culture and grouping

The LN229 and U87 cells were purchased from ATCC (USA). The LN229 and U87 cells were respectively divided into 3 groups: NC group, BL group and GHET1-shRNA group. The LN229 and U87 cells were cultured by DMEM medium which contained with 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) in Incubator (37 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C, 5% CO ${}_{2}$ ), changing the medium for 2 or 3 d. The cells were passage when the cell grows to 70% $\sim$ 80% fusion. Digestion was carried out with 0.25% trypsin digestion solution and observed under inverted microscope.

2.5 Cell transfection

According to the manual operation of liposome 2000, the liposome 2000 and GHET1 shRNA (GHET1-shRNA) and blank control (BL) were respectively mixed. After placing 20 min at room temperature, 48 h and U87 cell culture dishes were dropped into LN229 culture dish respectively. After completion, proceed to the next experiment.

Figure 1.

The clinical data. A. The pathology of No-tumor and cancer tissues by HE staining ( $\times$ 200). B. The lncRNA GHET1 expression of No-tumor and cancer tissues by ISH ( $\times$ 200) ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. No-tumor tissues. C. The Numb protein expression of No-tumor and cancer tissues by IHC ( $\times$ 200) ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. No-tumor tissues.

Figure 2.

The cell proliferation rate of difference groups by MTT assay. A. The cell proliferation rate of difference groups in LN229 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group. B. The cell proliferation rate of difference groups in U87 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group.

Figure 3.

The cell apoptosis rate of difference groups by flow cytometry. A. The cell apoptosis rate of difference groups in LN229 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group. B. The cell apoptosis rate of difference groups in U87 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group.

Figure 4.

The cell cycle of difference groups by flow cytometry. A. The cell cycle of difference groups in LN229 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group. B. The cell cycle of difference groups in U87 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group.

Figure 5.

The invasion cell number of difference groups by transwell assay. A. The LN229 invasion cell number of difference groups ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group. B. The U87 invasion cell number of difference groups ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group.

Figure 6.

The wound healing rate of difference groups by wound healing. A. The wound healing rate of difference groups in LN229 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group. B. The wound healing rate of difference groups in U87 ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group.

Figure 7.

The relative proteins expressions of difference groups by WB assay. A. The relative proteins expressions of difference groups in LN229 by WB assay ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group. B. The relative proteins expressions of difference groups in U87 by WB assay ${}^{***}P<$ 0.001 vs. NC group.

Figure 8.

The nude mice of difference groups. A. The tumor of difference groups in vivo. B. The tumor of difference groups in vitro. C. The tumor volume of difference groups (cm ${}^{3}$ ) ${}^{*}$ : $P<$ 0.05 vs. NC group. D. The tumor weight of difference groups (g) ${}^{*}$ : $P<$ 0.05 vs. NC group.

Figure 9.

The positive apoptosis cell of difference groups by TUNEL assay ${}^{*}$ : $P<$ 0.05 vs. NC group.

Figure 10.

The Numb protein expression of difference groups by IHC ( $\times$ 200) $*$ : $P<$ 0.05 vs. NC group.

Figure 11.

The P53 protein expression of difference groups by IHC ( $\times$ 200) ${}^{*}$ : $P<$ 0.05 vs. NC group.

Figure 12.

The MMP-2 protein expression of difference groups by IHC ( $\times$ 200) ${}^{*}$ : $P<$ 0.05 vs. NC group.

Figure 13.

The MMP-9 protein expression of difference groups by IHC ( $\times$ 200) ${}^{*}$ : $P<$ 0.05 vs. NC group.

2.6 Cell proliferation by MTT

The LN229 and U87 cells proliferation rate of difference groups were measured by MTT method, The LN229 or U87 cells of difference groups were inoculated in 96-hole plate as 5 $\times$ 10 ${}^{3}$ cell/hole, the cells were cultured by free-serum DMEM for 24 h when cells grow into 50% $\sim$ 60% fusion. Discard the culture medium, add fresh culture medium 180 $\mu$ l per hole, balance 30 min in cell culture box, add 0.5% MTT solution 20 $\mu$ l to every hole, continue to culture for 4 h, and then terminate culture. Then, the culture medium is poured out, and each hole is added with 150 $\mu$ l DMSO for 15 min at 37 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C, 570 nm wavelength is chosen on the microplate reader, and the optical density of each hole is measured. Each treatment group was equipped with 6 double holes, and the experiment was repeated 3 times.

2.7 Cell apoptosis by flow cytometry

The LN229 and U87 cells of difference groups were inoculated in the 6-hole plate as 4 $\times$ 10 ${}^{5}$ cell/hole, after 24 h, the cells were collected by free-EDTA digestion, centrifugal as 1000 r/min for 5 min, giving up supernatant, washing by pre-cool PBS for 2 times, adding 3 $\mu$ l Annexin V-FIC and 3 $\mu$ l 7-AAD to mix, and adding 300 $\mu$ l binding buffer, The cell apoptosis was measured by flow cytometry at 15 min at room temperature, and the percentage of apoptosis was expressed by percentage.

2.8 Cell cycle by flow cytometry

The cells of difference groups were treated by difference methods for 48 h, the collected cells were washed with PBS and fixed overnight with 75% of the pre cooled ethanol. 50 $\mu$ l RNAse solutions was added to the bath, 30 water baths at 37 min, 450 $\mu$ l PI staining solution, and then tested after exposure to light.

2.9 The cell invasion by transwell assay

One night before inoculation, the cells were diluted with a serum free volume of 1:4 at a volume ratio of Matrigel, and Transwell cells were packed at 50 $\mu$ l per hole. After LN229 and U87 cells transfection for 48 h, Adjust cell density as 2.0 $\times$ 10 ${}^{5}$ cell/ml, the 200 $\mu$ l of difference groups were added into bedroom, Cell implantation in 24 pore plate, in complete medium adding 500 $\mu$ l lower chamber containing 10%FBS in the incubator after incubation for 24 h, remove the Transwell chamber, with sterile cotton swab wipe on the chamber surface cells and Matrigel, formalin fixed, crystal violet staining, The number of cells passing through the membrane in 5 high-power mirrors was counted under microscope, and the average number of penetrating cells in each field was calculated as an index to evaluate their invasiveness. The experiment was repeated 3 times.

2.10 Wound healing test

The cells of difference groups were inoculated in 6-hole plate as 2 $\times$ 10 ${}^{6}$ cells/hole, the cells were placed in incubators until the cells adhered and formed a homogeneous monolayer, which was scratched; PBS washed the cells 3 times and removed the free cells. They were cultured in serum-free medium and photographed under inverted microscope; After training for 48 h, take pictures again. Each shot was measured with Image J software. The width of the scratch was measured 3 times in each experiment.

2.11 The relative protein expressions in vitro

The total protein was extracted by RIPA reagent 48 hours after transfection, and the protein concentration was determined by BCA kit. Adding the protein sample as 50 $\mu$ g in every lane, Electrophoresis was performed at constant pressure of 110 V. After electrophoresis, the protein is transferred to the PVDF membrane by 200 mA. The slices were blocked with 5% skimmed milk powder and incubated by primary anti-body as 1:1000 dilution for 4 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C overnight. After washing, adding 1:1000 dilution of the corresponding species to the enzyme labeled second anti-body, cultured at room temperature for 1 h, after that, adding ECL to color. GAPDH was as reference in this study.

2.12 Nude mice model

The LN229 cell which were in logarithmic phase were collected, centrifugal as 1000 for 5 min, washing by PBS for once. The cell concentration was adjusted to 10 ${}^{7}$ cell/ml by PBS, Each mouse was inoculated with 0.2 mL cell suspension intraperitoneally. After 7 $\sim$ 10 d mice to develop ascites in the clean bench in sterile ascites using cell counting plate counting cell concentration of 3 $\times$ 10 ${}^{7}$ /mL, the ascites was inoculated in 30 mice inoculated with 0.2 mL left armpit, each mouse, 9 to 10 weeks old, weighing 18 $\sim$ 21 g, the other 8 only L inoculated with 0.2 m PBS as control. After 5D, 27 mice inoculated with ascites all grew tumors subcutaneously, and the mice were randomly divided into 3 groups, 9 mice in each group. NC group were treated with PBS, BL group were injected the empty vector from caudal vein every day and GHET1-shRNA group were injected the GHET1-shRNA with vector from caudal vein every day. The nude mice of difference groups were treated and feed for 30 d. After that, the nude mice of difference groups were neck removal and taken the tumor tissues out. The tumor volume and weight were evaluated in the difference groups.

2.13 TUNEL assay

The fresh tumor tissue was fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde, dehydrated, wrapped, sliced, lost to water, washing by PBS, digestion by protease K for 10 min, washing by PBS, inhibition H ${}_{2}$ O ${}_{2}$ for 10 min at room temperature, adding TUNEL reaction mixture, cultured at 37 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C for 1 h, washing by PBS, adding POD conversion agent, cultured at 37 ${{}^{\circ}}$ C for 30 min. Washing by PBS, DAB color, HE almost dyes, dehydrated, transparent, and sealed with neutral gum. The gray ImageProPlus6 image analysis software to detect the view of value.

2.14 Statistical analysis

All of data were analysis by SPSS 19.0 soft ware in our present study. The relative data were explained as mean $\pm$ standard deviation (SD). The data of difference groups were analysis by one-way ANOVA with LSD methods. $P<$ 0.05 explained that the difference was statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1 Clinical data

Depending on the HE staining, we found that the cell infiltration surrounding normal tissues of cancer tissues was more serious than that of normal tissues (Fig. 1A). By the ISH assay, the GHET1 expression of cancer tissues was significantly up-regulation compared with normal tissues ( $P<$ 0.05, Fig. 1B). However, The Numb protein expression of cancer tissues was significantly down-regulation compared with normal tissues by IHC assay ( $P<$ 0.05, Fig. 1C). Depending on those results, we inferred that lncRNA GHET1 may be negatively correlation with Numb protein expression in glioma cancer tissues by clinical data.

3.2 GHET1 knock-down suppress cell proliferation in vitro

Compared with NC group, the LN229 and U87 cells proliferation rates of BL groups were no significantly differences ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively). These results were shown that vector transfection had no effects to cell proliferation in LN-229 and U87 cells. However, the LN-229 and U87 cells proliferation rates of GHET1-shRNA groups were significantly inhibited compared with NC group ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively). The relative data was shown in Fig. 2A and B.

3.3 GHET1 down-regulation improve cell apoptosis in vitro

There were no significantly difference between NC and BL groups in LN-229 and U87 cells apoptosis ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively). These results were prompted that the vector transfection had no damage effects in our preset study. However, the cells apoptosis of GHET1-shRNA groups were significantly enhanced compared with those of NC groups in LN229 and U87 cells ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively). The relative data were shown in Fig. 3A and B.

3.4 GHET1 knock-down have effects to cell cycle in vitro

Compared with NC group which were treated with normal treatment, the cell cycle rates (G1, S and G2 phases) of BL groups which were transfected with empty vector were similar as those of GHET1-shRNA groups in LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively). The G1 phase rates of GHET1-shRNA groups were significantly increased compared with those of NC groups in LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively). However, the S and G2 phase rates of GHET1-shRNA groups were significantly decreased compared with those of NC groups in LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively). The relative data were shown in Fig. 4A and B.

3.5 GHET1 down-regulation inhibit cell invasion in vitro

There were no significantly differences between NC and BL groups in invasion cell number of LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively). However, the invasion cell numbers of GHET1-shRNA groups were significantly suppressed compared with NC groups in LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively). The relative data were shown in Fig. 5A and B.

3.6 GHET1 knock-down inhibit cell migration in vitro

Compared with NC group, the wound healing rate of GHET1-shRNA groups were significantly suppressed compared with NC groups in LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively). However, there were no significantly differences between NC and BL groups in LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively). The relative data were shown in Fig. 6A and B.

3.7 GHET1 down-regulation has effects to relative proteins

Compared with NC group, the Numb and P53 proteins expressions of GHET1 groups were significantly increased ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively) and the MMP-2 and MMP-9 proteins expressions of GHET1 groups were significantly decreased ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively) in LN-229 and U87 cells. However, there were no significantly differences between NC and BL groups in Numb, P53, MMP-2 and MMP-9 proteins expressions of LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively). The relative data were shown in Fig. 7A and B.

3.8 GHET1 down-regulation inhibit tumor growth in vivo

The tumor volume of difference groups in vivo and vitro were shown in Fig. 8A and B. Compared with NC group, the tumor volume and weight of GHET1-shRNA group were significantly suppressed ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively). However, there were no significantly differences between NC and BL groups in tumor volume and weight ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively, Fig. 8A and B). The relative data were shown in Fig. 8.

3.9 GHET1 knock-down improve cell apoptosis in vivo

The positive apoptosis cell number of GHET1-shRNA group was significantly increase compared with that of NC group ( $P<$ 0.05). However, there were no significantly differences between NC and BL groups in positive apoptosis cell number ( $P>$ 0.05). The data were shown in Fig. 9.

3.10 GHET1 down-regulation have effects to relative proteins expression in vivo

Compared with NC group, the Numb and P53 proteins expressions of GHET1 groups were significantly increased ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively, Figs 10 and 11) and the MMP-2 and MMP-9 proteins expressions of GHET1 groups were significantly decreased ( $P<$ 0.05, respectively, Figs 12 and 13) in LN-229 and U87 cells. However, there were no significantly differences between NC and BL groups in Numb, P53, MMP-2 and MMP-9 proteins expressions of LN-229 and U87 cells ( $P>$ 0.05, respectively, Figs 11–13).

4. Discussion

Glioma is the most common primary brain tumor in adults, with high malignancy and poor prognosis, accounting for more than 45% of the central nervous system tumors. Surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are still the main ways to treat glioma, but the prognosis of patients receiving chemotherapy is still not optimistic [17]. Although progress has been made in the pathogenesis and progression of glioma, the mechanisms underlying the progression of glioma remain unclear because of the complex regulatory network between genes [18]. The past is considered to be the long chain of genome transcription “noise” encoding RNA (long non-coding RNA, lncRNA), but in recent years more and more research found that their participation in the various cell biological functions, including participation in the regulation of tumor occurrence and development mechanism [19]. lncRNA is a class of transcripts with a length of more than 200nt RNA, which itself does not encode proteins. Studies have shown that lncRNA plays an important role in transcriptional level, including transcriptional activation, post transcriptional regulation [20]. In glioma, the study of lcnRNA is still in the exploratory stage, but has made some progress. For example, in gliomas, high expression of lncRNA HOTAIR also increases with tumor grade, and high expression of HOTAIR in glioma patients suggests poor prognosis [21]. The study found that HOTAIR acts on its target gene, PCR2, and ultimately promotes tumor growth [22]. The previous studies found that lncRNA GHET1 expression was significantly up-regulation in the cancer tissues [12, 13, 14, 15, 16]. However, it has been unclear that lncRNA GHET1 expression in the glioma tissues. Our present study was found that the lncRNA GHET1 was high expression in the glioma tissues by ISH. Meanwhile, we also found that the Numb which was an important suppressor gene was significantly down-regulation in the glioma cancer tissues. Depending on these results, we inferred that stimulating lncRNA GHET1 expression may have effects to inhibit Numb to occurrence and development of tumor. In the following studies, we found that GHET1 knock-down might have effects to cell proliferation, invasion and migration in vitro and vivo studies.

In recent years, more and more attentions have been paid to the discovery of Numb protein in tumor formation, invasion and metastasis. Numb has been shown to regulate cellular recognition of differentiation signals. It plays an important role in regulating cell growth, differentiation, tissue regeneration and stabilizing intracellular environment [23, 24, 25]. In our present study, The Numb protein expressions were up-regulation with lncRNA GHET1 knock-down in glioma cancer in vivo and vitro studies. That might the results that the GHET1 knock-down inhibited tumor biological activities (cell apoptosis, cell cycle, cell invasion and migration) in vitro and vivo.

P53 was an important role of Numb down-steam genes [26, 27, 28]. The human p53 gene is an important tumor suppressor gene [29], in cells received external pressure signals, the half-life of p53 can be extended by the accumulation of p53 protein in the cell, at the same time, p53 can play a conformation change, transcription factor function, a series of target genes in regulation leads to cell cycle arrest in G1 phase. P53 can induce cell cycle arrest by transcriptional regulation of p21 and Cyclin B1 genes [30]; P53 also can increase Bax and Puma and apoptosis promoting gene, leading to apoptosis [31]. In our present study, we found that P53 expression was up-regulation with GHET1 down-regulation in vivo and vitro study, that might the results induced cell cycle stayed in the G1 phase induced cell apoptosis enhancing.

Matrix metalloproteinases are a large family, because they require Ca2+, Zn2+ and other metal ions as cofactor. MMPs can degrade almost all kinds of protein components in extracellular matrix, and destroy the barrier of tumor cell invasion, and play a key role in tumor invasion and metastasis [32, 33]. In many MMPs proteins, MMP-2 and MMP-9 are involved in angiogenesis and are directly related to the degradation of basement membranes and are involved in tumor metastasis and prognosis [34, 35]. Meanwhile, MMP-2 and MMP-9 are important roles of Numb downstream genes [36, 37]. In our present study, we found that GHET1 knock-down inhibited the cell invasion and migration via regulation Numb/MMP-2/9 in vitro and vivo study.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by Yunnan Provincial Science and Technology Department – Kunming Medical University Joint Fund (No. 2015FB068).

References

Stewart

L.A.

, Chemotherapy in adult high-grade glioma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from 12 randomised trials [J], Lancet 359 (2002), 1011.

Ponting

C.P.

and Belgard

T.G.

, Transcribed dark matter: Meaning or myth [J], Human Molecular Genetics 19 (2010), R162.

Farazi

T.A.

Spitzer

J.I.

Morozov

et al., Mirnas in human cancer [J], The Journal of Pathology 223 (2011), 102.

Beltran

Puig

Pena

et al., A natural antisense transcript regulates zeb2/sip1 gene expression during snail1-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition [J], Gene & Development 22 (2008), 756.

Barsyte-Lovejoy

Lau

S.K.

Dboutros

P.C.

et al., The c-myc oncogene directly induces the h19 noncoding RNA by allele-specific binding to potentiate tumor genesis [J], Cancer Research 66 (2006), 5330.

Zhang

Rice

Wang

et al., Matemally expressed gene 3 (meg 3) noncoding ribonucleic acid: Isoform structure, expression, and functions [J], Endocrinology 151 (2010), 939.

Qureshi

I.A.

Mattick

J.S.

and Mehler

M.F.

, Long non-coding RNAs in nervous system function and disease [J], Brain Research 1338 (2010), 20.

Korneev

S.A.

Korneeva

E.I.

Lagarkova

M.A.

et al., Novel noncoding antisense RNA transcribed from human anti-NOS2a locus is differentially regulated during neuronal differentiation of embryonic stem cells [J], RNA 14 (2008), 2030.

Zhou

et al., Knockdown of Long Noncoding RNA GHET1 Inhibits Cell Proliferation and Invasion of Colorectal Cancer [J], Oncol Res 23(6) (2016), 303–309.

10.

et al., Molecular mechanisms of long noncoding RNAs on gastric cancer [J], Oncotarget 7(8) (2016), 8601–8612.

11.

Sun

Yang

et al., Roles of long noncoding RNAs in gastric cancer and their clinical applications [J], J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 142(11) (2016), 2231–2237.

12.

L.J.

Zhu

J.L.

Bao

W.S.

et al., Long noncoding RNA GHET1 promotes the development of bladder cancer [J], Int J Clin Exp Pathol 7(10) (2014), 7196–7205.

13.

Yang

Xue

Zheng

et al., Long non-coding RNA GHET1 promotes gastric carcinoma cell proliferation by increasing c-Myc mRNA stability [J], FEBS J 281(3) (2014), 802–813.

14.

Zhou

et al., Knockdown of Long Noncoding RNA GHET1 Inhibits Cell Proliferation and Invasion of Colorectal Cancer [J], Oncol Res 23(6) (2016), 303–309.

15.

Huang

Liao

Zhu

et al., Knockdown of long noncoding RNA GHET1 inhibits cell activation of gastric cancer [J], Biomed Pharmacother 92 (2017), 562–568.

16.

Zhang

Liu

et al., Overexpression of long non-coding RNA GHET1 promotes the development of multidrug resistance in gastric cancer cells [J], Biomed Pharmacother 92 (2017), 580–585.

17.

Ehtesham

Stevenson

C.B.

and Thompson

R.C.

, Stem cell therapies for malignant glioma [J], Neurosurgical Focus 19 (2005), E5.

18.

Wang

and Jiang

, Understanding high grade glioma: Molecular mechanism, therapy and comprehensive management [J], Cancer Lett 331(2) (2013), 139–146.

19.

Farazi

T.A.

Horlings

H.M.

Ten Hoeve

J.J.

et al., MicoRNA sequence and expression analysis in breast bumors by deep sequencing [J], Cancer Res 71(13) (2011), 4443–4453.

20.

Dinger

M.E.

Amaral

P.P.

Mercer

T.R.

et al., Long noncoding RNAs in mouse embryonic stem cell pluripotency and differentiation [J], Genome Res 18(9) (2008), 1433–1445.

21.

Kogo

Shimamura

Mimori

et al., Long noncoding RNA HOTAIR regulates polycomb-dependent chromatin modification and is associated with poor prognosis in colorectal cancers [J], Cancer Res 71(20) (2011), 6320–6326.

22.

Gupta

R.A.

Shah

Wang

K.C.

et al., Long non-coding RNA HOTAIR reprograms chromatic state to promote cancer metastasis [J], Nature 464(7291) (2010), 1071–1076.

23.

Rhyu

M.S.

Jan

L.Y.

and Jan

Y.N.

, Asymmetric distribution of numb protein during division of the sensory organ precursor cell confers distinct fates to daughter cells [J], Cell 76(3) (1994), 477–491.

24.

Jan

Y.N.

and Jan

L.Y.

, Asymmetric cell division [J], Nature 392(6678) (1998), 775–778.

25.

Shen

Zhong

Jan

Y.N.

et al., Asymmetric Numb distribution is critical for asymmetric cell division of mouse cerebral cortical stem cells and neuroblasts [J], Development 129(20) (2002), 4843–4853.

26.

Siddique

H.R.

Feldman

D.E.

Chen

C.L.

et al., NUMB phosphorylation destabilizes p53 and promotes self-renewal of tumor-initiating cells by a NANOG-dependent mechanism in liver cancer [J], Hepatology 62(5) (2015 Nov), 1466–1479.

27.

Tosoni

Zecchini

Coazzoli

et al., The Numb/p53 circuitry couples replicative self-renewal and tumor suppression in mammary epithelial cells [J], J Cell Biol 211(4) (2015), 845–862.

28.

Dhami

G.K.

Liu

Galka

et al., Dynamic methylation of Numb by Set8 regulates its binding to p53 and apoptosis [J], Mol Cell 50(4) (2013), 565–576.

29.

Muller

P.A.

and Vousden

K.H.

, Mutant p53 in cancer: new functions and therapeutic opportunities [J], Cancer Cell 25(3) (2014), 304–317.

30.

Zeng

Q.Y.

Zeng

L.J.

Huang

et al., 8-60hIPP5(m)-induced G2/M cell cycle arrest involves activation of ATM/p53/p21 (cip1/waf1) pathways and delayed cyclin B1 nuclear translocation [J], Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 15(9) (2014), 4101–4107.

31.

Zheng

Zhang

et al., Hsp90 inhibitors promote p53-dependent apoptosis through PUMA and Bax [J], Mol Cancer Ther 12(11) (2013), 2559–2568.

32.

Curran

and Murray

G.I.

, Matrix metalloproteinases: Molecular aspects of their roles in tumour invasion and metastasis [J], Eur J Cancer 36(13) (2000), 1621–1630.

33.

Dong

Bonfil

R.D.

Chinni

et al., Matrix metalloproteinase activity and osteoclasts in experimental prostate cancer bone metastasis tissue [J], Am J Pathol 166(4) (2005), 1173–1186.

34.

Chang

H.R.

Chen

P.N.

Yang

S.F.

et al., Silibinin inhibits the invasion and migration of renal carcinoma 786-O cells in vitro, inhibits the growth of xenografts in vivo and enhances chemosensitivity to 5-fluorouracil and paclitaxel [J], Mol Carcinog 50(10) (2011), 811–823.

35.

Rink

Chun

F.K.

Robinson

et al., Tissue-based molecular markers for renal cell carcinoma [J], Minerva Urol Nefrol 63(4) (2011), 293–308.

36.

Sun

Wang

Teng

et al., Numb had anti-tumor effects in prostatic cancer [J], Biomed Pharmacother 92 (2017), 108–115.

37.

Sima

Zhang

et al., Overexpression of Numb suppresses growth, migration, and invasion of human clear cell renal cell carcinoma cells [J], Tumour Biol 36(4) (2015), 2885–2892.

lncRNA GHET1 down-regulation suppresses the cell activities of glioma

Abstract

Keywords

1. Introduction

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Clinical sample

2.2 In situ hybridization (ISH)

2.3 Immunohistochemistry (IHC)

2.4 Cell culture and grouping

2.5 Cell transfection

2.7 Cell apoptosis by flow cytometry

2.8 Cell cycle by flow cytometry

2.9 The cell invasion by transwell assay

2.10 Wound healing test

2.11 The relative protein expressions in vitro

2.12 Nude mice model

2.13 TUNEL assay

2.14 Statistical analysis

3. Results

3.1 Clinical data

3.2 GHET1 knock-down suppress cell proliferation in vitro

3.3 GHET1 down-regulation improve cell apoptosis in vitro

3.4 GHET1 knock-down have effects to cell cycle in vitro

3.5 GHET1 down-regulation inhibit cell invasion in vitro

3.6 GHET1 knock-down inhibit cell migration in vitro

3.7 GHET1 down-regulation has effects to relative proteins

3.8 GHET1 down-regulation inhibit tumor growth in vivo

3.9 GHET1 knock-down improve cell apoptosis in vivo

3.10 GHET1 down-regulation have effects to relative proteins expression in vivo

4. Discussion

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

References