| Literature DB >> 30175821 |
Yu Zhu1, Lei Ding1, Bai-Feng Chen1, Jian-Gen Song1, Ying-Shui Yao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND WD40-encoding RNA antisense to p53 (Wrap53) has been implicated in cancer development. However, the role of Wrap53 remains unknown in colorectal cancer. The aim of this study was to elucidate the function of Wrap53 in colorectal cancer tumorigenesis and development. MATERIAL AND METHODS This study analyzed Wrap53 expression in colorectal cancer tissue specimens using The Cancer Genome Atlas data and tumor cell lines and assessed the effects of Wrap53 knockdown on regulation of cancer cell malignant phenotypes in vitro and in nude mouse xenografts. RESULTS Wrap53 expression was upregulated in colorectal cancer tissue specimens and cell lines. Knockdown of Wrap53 expression induced colorectal cancer cell line apoptosis and cell cycle arrest in the G1 phase, but reduced tumor cell line proliferation and invasion in vitro. Knockdown of Wrap53 in a nude mouse xenograft assay inhibited tumor cell line xenograft formation and growth. CONCLUSIONS Wrap53 is likely a potential oncogene or possesses oncogenic activity in colorectal cancer, promoting colorectal tumorigenesis. Targeting Wrap53 expression may represent a novel strategy for the control of colorectal cancer.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30175821 PMCID: PMC6131976 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.910214
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Figure 1Wrap53 expression is upregulated in colorectal cancer tissues and cell lines.(A) TCGA data. The analysis shows higher Wrap53 expression in colorectal cancer tissues than normal tissues (*** P<0.001; t test). (B) qRT-PCR. Colorectal cancer cell lines were grown and subjected to RNA isolation and qRT-PCR. All Δ;CT ≤12 indicated that Wrap53 was highly expressed in 4 cell lines. The experiments were carried out in triplicate.
Figure 2Knockdown of Wrap53 in colorectal cancer cell using lentivirus. (A) qRT-PCR. Colorectal cancer cells were transfected with Wrap53 shRNAs and then subjected to qRT-PCR analysis. The experiments were performed in triplicate. (B) Western blot analysis. Total cellular protein was extracted and subjected to Western blot analysis. (C) Relative quantification of Western blot analysis corrected by shScramble.
Figure 3Knockdown of Wrap53 in colorectal cancer HCT116 cells promotes apoptosis and arrest at the G1 stage but inhibits tumor cell proliferation and invasion. (A) Cell proliferation assay. HCT116 cells were transfected with Wrap53 shRNA or negative control shRNA, and proliferation was assessed by MTT assay (*** P<0.001; t test at day 5). (B) Cell apoptosis assay. HCT116 cells were transfected with Wrap53 shRNA or negative control shRNA and Annexin V staining was assessed by flow cytometry (*** P<0.001; t test). (C) Cell cycle assay. HCT116 cells were transfected with Wrap53 shRNA or negative control shRNA and PI staining was assessed by flow cytometry (* P<0.05, ** P<0.01, *** P<0.001; t test). (D) Transwell invasion assay. HCT116 cells were transfected with Wrap53 shRNA or negative control shRNA and invasion was assessed by Transwell invasion assay (*** P<0.001; t test). All experiments were performed in triplicate.
Figure 4Knockdown of Wrap53 suppresses nude mouse colorectal cancer cell xenograft formation and growth in vivo. (A) Stable Wrap53-B knocked down HCT116 cells or negative control cells were subcutaneously injected into the right flank region of nude mice (n=10 each of group). Twenty-one days later, the mice were killed and photographed. (B) Tumor xenografts. Tumor xenografts were resected and weighted. (C) The weight of shWrap53-B tumor xenografts was significantly less than negative control xenografts (*** P<0.001; t test). (D) Tumor xenograft growth curve. The volume of shWrap53-B tumor xenografts was significantly lower than that of negative control xenografts (** P<0.01; t test at day 21).