Chronic infection with viral hepatitis affects half a billion individuals worldwide and can lead to cirrhosis, cancer, and liver failure. Liver cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-associated mortality, of which hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents 90% of all primary liver cancers. Solid tumors like HCC are complex and have heterogeneous tumor genomic profiles contributing to complexity in diagnosis and management. Chronic infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis delta virus (HDV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV) are the greatest etiological risk factors for HCC. Due to the significant role of chronic viral infection in HCC development, it is important to investigate direct (viral associated) and indirect (immune-associated) mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of HCC. Common mechanisms used by HBV, HCV, and HDV that drive hepatocarcinogenesis include persistent liver inflammation with an impaired antiviral immune response, immune and viral protein-mediated oxidative stress, and deregulation of cellular signaling pathways by viral proteins. DNA integration to promote genome instability is a feature of HBV infection, and metabolic reprogramming leading to steatosis is driven by HCV infection. The current review aims to provide a brief overview of HBV, HCV and HDV molecular biology, and highlight specific viral-associated oncogenic mechanisms and common molecular pathways deregulated in HCC, and current as well as emerging treatments for HCC.

A set of >300 nonredundant high-resolution RNA–protein complexes were rigorously searched for π-contacts between an amino acid side chain (W, H, F, Y, R, E and D) and an RNA nucleobase (denoted π–π interaction) or ribose moiety (denoted sugar–π). The resulting dataset of >1500 RNA–protein π-contacts were visually inspected and classified based on the interaction type, and amino acids and RNA components involved. More than 80% of structures searched contained at least one RNA–protein π-interaction, with π–π contacts making up 59% of the identified interactions. RNA–protein π–π and sugar–π contacts exhibit a range in the RNA and protein components involved, relative monomer orientations and quantum mechanically predicted binding energies. Interestingly, π–π and sugar–π interactions occur more frequently with RNA (4.8 contacts/structure) than DNA (2.6). Moreover, the maximum stability is greater for RNA–protein contacts than DNA–protein interactions. In addition to highlighting distinct differences between RNA and DNA–protein binding, this work has generated the largest dataset of RNA–protein π-interactions to date, thereby underscoring that RNA–protein π-contacts are ubiquitous in nature, and key to the stability and function of RNA–protein complexes.

RNA is involved in all domains of life, playing critical roles in a host of gene expression processes, host-defense mechanisms, cell proliferation, and diseases. A critical component in many of these events is the ability for RNA to interact with proteins. Over the past few decades, our understanding of such RNA–protein interactions and their importance has driven the search and development of new techniques for the identification of RNA-binding proteins. In determining which proteins bind to the RNA of interest, it is often useful to use the approach where the RNA molecule is the “bait” and allow it to capture proteins from a lysate or other relevant solution. Here, we review a collection of methods for modifying RNA to capture RNA-binding proteins. These include small-molecule modification, the addition of aptamers, DNA-anchoring, and nucleotide substitution. With each, we provide examples of their application, as well as highlight their advantages and potential challenges.

Rift Valley fever virus (RVFV) is a mosquito-transmitted virus from the Bunyaviridae family that causes high rates of mortality and morbidity in humans and ruminant animals. Previous studies indicated that DEAD-box helicase 17 (DDX17) restricts RVFV replication by recognizing two primary non-coding RNAs in the S-segment of the genome: the intergenic region (IGR) and 5′ non-coding region (NCR). However, we lack molecular insights into the direct binding of DDX17 with RVFV non-coding RNAs and information on the unwinding of both non-coding RNAs by DDX17. Therefore, we performed an extensive biophysical analysis of the DDX17 helicase domain (DDX17135–555) and RVFV non-coding RNAs, IGR and 5’ NCR. The homogeneity studies using analytical ultracentrifugation indicated that DDX17135–555, IGR, and 5’ NCR are pure. Next, we performed small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS) experiments, which suggested that DDX17 and both RNAs are homogenous as well. SAXS analysis also demonstrated that DDX17 is globular to an extent, whereas the RNAs adopt an extended conformation in solution. Subsequently, microscale thermophoresis (MST) experiments were performed to investigate the direct binding of DDX17 to the non-coding RNAs. The MST experiments demonstrated that DDX17 binds with the IGR and 5’ NCR with a dissociation constant of 5.77 ± 0.15 µM and 9.85 ± 0.11 µM, respectively. As DDX17135–555 is an RNA helicase, we next determined if it could unwind IGR and NCR. We developed a helicase assay using MST and fluorescently-labeled oligos, which suggested DDX17135–555 can unwind both RNAs. Overall, our study provides direct evidence of DDX17135–555 interacting with and unwinding RVFV non-coding regions.

No abstract