DNA damage modulates interactions between microRNAs and the 26S proteasome

Цимоха, А. С.; Куличкова, В. А.; Карпова, Е. В.; Zaykova, Julia J.; Aksenov, N. D.; Василишина, А. А.; Кропотов, А. В.; Antonov, Alexey V.; Barlev, Nikolai A.

doi:10.18632/oncotarget.1957

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, proteasome, other than to regulate proteins performing miRNA biogenesis and functioning, was found to bind miRNAs; and according to our data, it degrades pri‐ and mature, but not pre‐miR‐1 in vitro . Proteasome primarily known as a proteolytic complex has RNase activity both in plants and in mammals .…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…29,144 Moreover, it can also answer the question raised in our work where we have found the ratio between mature and immature miRNAs to depend on the duration of anoxia-reoxygenation. 145 Recently, proteasome, other than to regulate proteins performing miRNA biogenesis and functioning, was found to bind miRNAs 146 ; and according to our data, it degrades pri-and mature, but not pre-miR-1 in vitro. 147 Proteasome primarily known as a proteolytic complex has RNase activity both in plants and in mammals.…”

Section: Stress Response Factors Directly Affecting Mirnasmentioning

confidence: 51%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stress response factors as hub‐regulators of microRNA biogenesis: implication to the diseased heart

Gurianova

Stroy

Ciccocioppo

et al. 2015

Cell Biochemistry & Function

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are important regulators of heart function and then an intriguing therapeutic target for plenty of diseases. The problem raised is that many data in this area are contradictory, thus limiting the use of miRNA-based therapy. The goal of this review is to describe the hub-mechanisms regulating the biogenesis and function of miRNAs, which could help in clarifying some contradictions in the miRNA world. With this scope, we analyse an array of factors, including several known agents of stress response, mediators of epigenetic changes, regulators of alternative splicing, RNA editing, protein synthesis and folding and proteolytic systems. All these factors are important in cardiovascular function and most of them regulate miRNA biogenesis, but their influence on miRNAs was shown for non-cardiac cells or some specific cardiac pathologies. Finally, we consider that studying the stress response factors, which are upstream regulators of miRNA biogenesis, in the diseased heart could help in (1) explaining some contradictions concerning miRNAs in heart pathology, (2) making the role of miRNAs in pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease more clear, and therefore, (3) getting powerful targets for its molecular therapy.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Section: Stress Response Factors Directly Affecting Mirnasmentioning

confidence: 51%

Stress response factors as hub‐regulators of microRNA biogenesis: implication to the diseased heart

Gurianova

Stroy

Ciccocioppo

et al. 2015

Cell Biochemistry & Function

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently, Anna S et al reported that microRNAs plays an important role in the regulation of proteasome activity [9]. Furthermore, miR-29b replacement inhibits proteasomes in myeloma cells by targeting PSME4 that encodesPA200 [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lovastatin upregulates microRNA-29b to reduce oxidative stress in rats with multiple cardiovascular risk factors

Wang

Liang

et al. 2017

Oncotarget

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimsProteasome-linked oxidative stress is believed to cause endothelial dysfunction, an early event in cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Statin, as HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor, prevents endothelial dysfunction in CVD. However, the molecular mechanism of statin-mediated normalization of endothelial function is not completely elucidated.Methods and ResultsLovastatin time/dose-dependently increased miR-29b expression and decreased proteasome activity in cultured human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs). Anti-miR-29b or overexpression of PA200 abolished lovastatin-induced inhibition of proteasome activity in HUVECs. In contrast, pre-miR-29b or PA200 siRNA mimics these effects of lovastatin on proteasome activity. Lovastatin inhibited oxidative stress induced by multiple oxidants including ox-LDL, H2O2, TNFa, homocysteine thiolactone (HTL), and high glucose (HG), which were reversed by inhibition of miR-29b in HUVECs. Ex vivo analysis indicated that lovastatin normalized the acetylcholine-induced endothelium-dependent relaxation and the redox status in isolated rat aortic arteries exposure to multiple cardiovascular risk factors. In vivo analysis revealed that administration of lovastatin remarkably suppressed oxidative stress and prevented endothelial dysfunction in rats with hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, and hyperhomocysteinemia, as well as increased miR-29b expressions, reduced PA200 protein levels, and suppression of proteasome activity in aortic tissues.ConclusionUpregulation of miR-29b expression is a common mechanism contributing to endothelial dysfunction induced by multiple cardiovascular risk factors through PA200-dependent proteasome-mediated oxidative stress, which is prevented by lovastatin.

show abstract

“…miRNAs also have roles in the cellular response to chemotherapy as well as cell adhesion and metastasis, which makes them a particularly promising set of biomarkers for cancer [70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77]. The discovery that altered levels of miRNAs are associated with certain cancers, including pulmonary, liver and ovarian cancer, has turned focus to the use of miRNA as a new, powerful diagnostic and prognostic tool [78][79][80][81].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting cancer biomarkers in blood: challenges for new molecular diagnostic and point-of-care tests using cell-free nucleic acids

Lewis

Heineck

Heller

2015

Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As we move into the era of individualized cancer treatment, the need for more sophisticated cancer diagnostics has emerged. Cell-free (cf) nucleic acids (cf-DNA, cf-RNA) and other cellular nanoparticulates are now considered important and selective biomarkers. There is great hope that blood-borne cf-nucleic acids can be used for 'liquid biopsies', replacing more invasive tissue biopsies to analyze cancer mutations and monitor therapy. Conventional techniques for cf-nucleic acid biomarker isolation from blood are generally time-consuming, complicated and expensive. They require relatively large blood samples, which must be processed to serum or plasma before isolation of biomarkers can proceed. Such cumbersome sample preparation also limits the widespread use of powerful, downstream genomic analyses, including PCR and DNA sequencing. These limitations also preclude rapid, point-of-care diagnostic applications. Thus, new technologies that allow rapid isolation of biomarkers directly from blood will permit seamless sample-to-answer solutions that enable next-generation point-of-care molecular diagnostics.

show abstract

DNA damage modulates interactions between microRNAs and the 26S proteasome

Cited by 26 publications

References 56 publications

Stress response factors as hub‐regulators of microRNA biogenesis: implication to the diseased heart

Stress response factors as hub‐regulators of microRNA biogenesis: implication to the diseased heart

Lovastatin upregulates microRNA-29b to reduce oxidative stress in rats with multiple cardiovascular risk factors

Detecting cancer biomarkers in blood: challenges for new molecular diagnostic and point-of-care tests using cell-free nucleic acids

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About