No abstract

Bacnkground Approximately 15% of patients with prostate cancer (PCa) are diagnosed with high-risk disease and will face sequelae of diagnosis and treatment. Recently, aberrant expression of circular RNA-ITCH (circ-ITCH) may be associated with the risk of lymph node metastasis and poorer prognosis in tumor patients. The mechanism underlying the role of circ-ITCH in the progression and development of PCa is still under investigation.Objective To elucidate the functional role of the circ-ITCH gene in PCa, assess its possible predictive/prognostic molecular biomarkers of PCa, and possible molecular mechanisms of action.Methods In this study, we collected six sets of paired PCa and normal tissue specimens to explore the relationship between circ-ITCH expression and PCa development; Cell growth was assessed by the Cell Counting Kit-8 assay and cell clone formation assay; Transwell assays were performed to evaluate cell migration and invasion; Apoptotic cells were detected by Annexin-V-isothiocyanate fluorescein and propidium iodide staining; Target gene prediction and screening, luciferase reporter gene assays were utilized to confirm the relationship between circ-ITCH and microRNA.Results In the present study, we found that circ-ITCH, is down-regulated in PCa tissues and cell lines. Moreover, enforced-expression of circ-ITCH inhibited cell proliferation, migration, invasion and metastasis in vitro . Mechanistically, we demonstrate that circ-ITCH upregulates the expression of the target gene SETD2 by 'sponging' miR-106b-5p, which suppressed the aggressive biological behaviors of PCa.Conclusions Circ-ITCH inhibits PCa cell proliferation and metastasis by negatively regulating the miR-106b-5p/SETD2 axis.

Background. Mizoribine (MZR) is widely used in Asia due to its high safety and low cost, and comparative studies of its safety and efficacy with the first-line drug mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) have been carried out. This paper aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of MZR and MMF in immunosuppressive therapy of renal transplantation by meta-analysis. Methods. We searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MZR versus MMF for renal transplantation in PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, WanFang Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM). Articles were assessed for their risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration. Forest plots and funnel plots were also performed on the included articles. Results. A total of twelve studies with 1103 patients were selected in the analysis. No significant difference were observed between the MZR group and the MMF group for the rate of acute rejection (RR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.01, P = 0.008), patient survival (RR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.03, P = 0.56), graft survival (RR = 1.02, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.04, P = 0.12), leucopenia (RR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.10, P = 0.12), and liver damage (RR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.13, P = 0.15). The MZR group was associated with a lower risk of gastrointestinal disorder (RR = 0.28, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.62, P = 0.002) and cytomegalovirus infection (RR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.84, P = 0.003) but had a higher risk of hyperuricemia (RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.75, P = 0.007). No significant publication bias was observed among included studies. Discussion. MZR is similar to MMF in efficacy, and in terms of safety, MZR has a lower risk of gastrointestinal disorder and cytomegalovirus infection but a higher risk of hyperuricemia.