Background
Previous studies have revealed the key functions of N6-methyladenosine (m6A) modification in breast cancer (BC). MALAT1 as a highly m6A modified lncRNA associated with cancer development and metastasis, but the functional relevance of m6A methyltransferase and MALAT1 in BC is still unknown. Here, our study investigated the effects of the novel m6A methyltransferase METTL3 on epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in BC via the MALAT1/miR-26b/HMGA2 axis.
Methods
Firstly, we collected clinical BC samples and cultured BC cells, and detected mRNA and protein levels in the human samples and human cell lines by RT-qPCR and Western blot, respectively. Then, the binding of MALAT1 and miR-26b and the targeting relationship between miR-26b and HMGA2 were examined by dual-luciferase assay. Moreover, the binding of MALAT1 and miR-26b was tested by RNA pull down and RNA immunoprecipitation (RIP) assays. Methylated-RNA immunoprecipitation (Me-RIP) was used to detect the m6A modification level of MALAT1. The interaction of METTL3 and MALAT1 was detected by photoactivatable ribonucleoside-crosslinking immunoprecipitation (PAR-CLIP). Finally, effects on invasion and migration were detected by Transwell.
Results
In BC, the level of miR-26b was consistently low, while the levels of METTL3, MALAT1 and HMGA2 were high. Further experiments showed that METTL3 up-regulated MALAT1 expression by modulating the m6A modification of MALAT1, and that MALAT1 could promote the expression of HMGA2 by sponging miR-26b. In BC cells, we found that silencing METTL3 could inhibit EMT and tumor cell invasion by suppressing MALAT1. Furthermore, MALAT1 mediated miR-26b to target HMGA2 and promote EMT, migration, and invasion. In summary, METTL3 promoted tumorigenesis of BC via the MALAT1/miR-26b/HMGA2 axis.
Conclusions
Silencing METTL3 down-regulate MALAT1 and HMGA2 by sponging miR-26b, and finally inhibit EMT, migration and invasion in BC, providing a theoretical basis for clinical treatment of BC.
Increasing the immunogenicity of tumors is considered to be an effective means to improve the synergistic immune effect of radiotherapy. Carbon ions have become ideal radiation for combined immunotherapy due to their particular radiobiological advantages. However, the difference in time and dose of immunogenic changes induced by Carbon ions and X-rays has not yet been fully clarified. To further explore the immunogenicity differences between carbon ions and X-rays induced by radiation in different “time windows” and “dose windows.” In this study, we used principal component analysis (PCA) to screen out the marker genes from the single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) of CD8+ T cells and constructed a protein-protein interaction (PPI) network. Also, ELISA was used to test the exposure levels of HMGB1, IL-10, and TGF-β under different “time windows” and “dose windows” of irradiation with X-rays and carbon ions for A549, H520, and Lewis Lung Carcinoma (LLC) cell lines. The results demonstrated that different marker genes were involved in different processes of immune effect. HMGB1 was significantly enriched in the activated state, while the immunosuppressive factors TGF-β and IL-10 were mainly enriched in the non-functional state. Both X-rays and Carbon ions promoted the exposure of HMGB1, IL-10, and TGF-β in a time-dependent manner. X-rays but not Carbon ions increased the HMGB1 exposure level in a dose-dependent manner. Besides, compared with X-rays, carbon ions increased the exposure of HMGB1 while relatively reduced the exposure levels of immunosuppressive factors IL-10 and TGF-β. Therefore, we speculate that Carbon ions may be more advantageous than conventional X-rays in inducing immune effects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.