Identification of A-to-I RNA editing profiles and their clinical relevance in lung adenocarcinoma

A Wonderful Journey: The Diverse Roles of Adenosine Deaminase Action on RNA 1 (ADAR1) in Central Nervous System Diseases

BACKGROUND

Adenosine deaminase action on RNA 1 (ADAR1) can convert the adenosine in double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) molecules into inosine in a process known as A-to-I RNA editing. ADAR1 regulates gene expression output by interacting with RNA and other proteins; plays important roles in development, including growth; and is linked to innate immunity, tumors, and central nervous system (CNS) diseases.

RESULTS

In recent years, the role of ADAR1 in tumors has been widely discussed, but its role in CNS diseases has not been reviewed. It is worth noting that recent studies have shown ADAR1 has great potential in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, but the mechanisms are still unclear. Therefore, it is necessary to elaborate on the role of ADAR1 in CNS diseases.

CONCLUSIONS

Here, we focus on the effects and mechanisms of ADAR1 on CNS diseases such as Aicardi-AicardiGoutières syndrome, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, glioblastoma, epilepsy, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and autism. We also evaluate the impact of ADAR1-based treatment strategies on these diseases, with a particular focus on the development and treatment strategies of new technologies such as microRNAs, nanotechnology, gene editing, and stem cell therapy. We hope to provide new directions and insights for the future development of ADAR1 gene editing technology in brain science and the treatment of CNS diseases.

Advances in A-to-I RNA editing in cancer

RNA modifications are widespread throughout the mammalian transcriptome and play pivotal roles in regulating various cellular processes. These modifications are strongly linked to the development of many cancers. One of the most prevalent forms of RNA modifications in humans is adenosine-to-inosine (A-to-I) editing, catalyzed by the enzyme adenosine deaminase acting on RNA (ADAR) in double-stranded RNA (dsRNA). With advancements in RNA sequencing technologies, the role of A-to-I modification in cancer has garnered increasing attention. Research indicates that the levels and specific sites of A-to-I editing are significantly altered in many malignant tumors, correlating closely with tumor progression. This editing occurs in both coding and noncoding regions of RNA, influencing signaling pathways involved in cancer development. These modifications can either promote or suppress cancer progression through several mechanisms, including inducing non-synonymous amino acid mutations, altering the immunogenicity of dsRNAs, modulating mRNA interactions with microRNAs (miRNAs), and affecting the splicing of circular RNAs (circRNAs) as well as the function of long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs). A comprehensive understanding of A-to-I RNA editing is crucial for advancing the diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of human cancers. This review explores the regulatory mechanisms of A-to-I editing in cancers and examines their potential clinical applications. It also summarizes current research, identifies future directions, and highlights potential therapeutic implications.

Implications of GCLC in prognosis and immunity of lung adenocarcinoma and multi-omics regulation mechanisms

BACKGROUND

Ferroptosis is an iron-dependent type of regulated cell death, and has been implicated in lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). Evidence has proved the key role of glutamate-cysteine ligase catalytic subunit (GCLC) in ferroptosis, but its role in LUAD remains unclear. Herein, we explored the implications of GCLC and relevant genes in LUAD prognosis and immunity as well as underlying molecular mechanisms.

METHODS

This work gathered mRNA, miRNA, DNA methylation, somatic mutation and copy-number variation data from TCGA-LUAD. WGCNA was utilized for selecting GCLC-relevant genes, and a GCLC-relevant prognostic signature was built by uni- and multivariate-cox regression analyses. Immune compositions were estimated via CIBERSORT, and two immunotherapy cohorts of solid tumors were analyzed. Multi-omics regulatory mechanisms were finally assessed.

RESULTS

Our results showed that GCLC was overexpressed in LUAD, and potentially resulted in undesirable survival. A prognostic model was generated, which owned accurate and independent performance in prognostication. GCLC, and relevant genes were notably connected with immune compositions and immune checkpoints. High GCLC expression was linked with better responses to anti-PD-L1 and anti-CTLA-4 treatment. Their possible DNA methylation sites were inferred, e.g., hypomethylation in cg19740353 might contribute to GCLC up-regulation. Frequent genetic mutations also affected their expression. Upstream transcription factors (E2F1/3/4, etc.), post-transcriptional regulation of miRNAs (hsa-mir-30c-1, etc.), lncRNAs (C8orf34-AS1, etc.), and IGF2BP1-mediated m6A modification were identified. It was also found NOP58-mediated SUMOylation post-translational modification.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, we show that GCLC and relevant genes exert crucial roles in LUAD prognosis and immunity, and their expression can be controlled by complex multi-omics mechanisms.

Research progress of N1-methyladenosine RNA modification in cancer

N1-methyladenosine (m1A) is a post-transcriptionally modified RNA molecule that plays a pivotal role in the regulation of various biological functions and activities. Especially in cancer cell invasion, proliferation and cell cycle regulation. Over recent years, there has been a burgeoning interest in investigating the m1A modification of RNA. Most studies have focused on the regulation of m1A in cancer enrichment areas and different regions. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the methodologies employed for the detection of m1A modification. Furthermore, this review delves into the key players in m1A modification, known as the "writers," "erasers," and "readers." m1A modification is modified by the m1A methyltransferases, or writers, such as TRMT6, TRMT61A, TRMT61B, TRMT10C, NML, and, removed by the demethylases, or erasers, including FTO and ALKBH1, ALKBH3. It is recognized by m1A-binding proteins YTHDF1, TYHDF2, TYHDF3, and TYHDC1, also known as "readers". Additionally, we explore the intricate relationship between m1A modification and its regulators and their implications for the development and progression of specific types of cancer, we discuss how m1A modification can potentially facilitate the discovery of novel approaches for cancer diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Our summary of m1A methylated adenosine modification detection methods and regulatory mechanisms in various cancers provides useful insights for cancer diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis. Video Abstract.

Clinical relevance of RNA editing profiles in lung adenocarcinoma

Background: Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is the most frequently occurring lung cancer worldwide, with increasing death rates. It belongs to the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) type and has a strong association with previous smoking history. Growing evidence has demonstrated the significance of adenosine-to-inosine RNA editing (ATIRE) dysregulation in cancer. The aim of the present study was to evaluate ATIRE events that might be clinically useful or tumorigenic.

Methods: To explore survival-related ATIRE events in LUAD, its ATIRE profiles, gene expression data, and corresponding patients’ clinical information were downloaded from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and the synapse database. We evaluated 10441 ATIRE in 440 LUAD patients from the TCGA database. ATIRE profiles were merged with TCGA survival data. We selected prognostic ATIRE sites, using a univariate Cox analysis (p < 0.001). Cox proportional hazards regression and lasso regression analysis were used to determine survival-related ATIRE sites, create risk ratings for those sites, and build a prognostic model and a nomogram for assessing overall survival (OS). Six ATIRE sites were used in the prognostic model construction and patients were randomly divided into a validation cohort (n = 176) and a training cohort (n = 264). The “Pheatmap” program was used to create risk curves that included risk score, survival time, and expression of ATIRE sites. We also determined the clinical prediction model’s discrimination. The decision curve analysis and the 1-, 2-, and 3-year corrective curves were simultaneously used to evaluate the nomogram. We also evaluated the relationship between the amount of ATIRE sites and host gene expression and the impact of ATIRE expression on transcriptome expression.

Results: The pyroglutamyl-peptidase I (PGPEP1) chr19:18476416A > I, ankyrin repeat domain 36B pseudogene 1 (ANKRD36BP1) (dist = 3,795), T-box transcription factor (TBX19) (dist = 29815) chr1:168220463A > I, Syntrophin Beta 2 (SNTB2) chr16:69338598A > I, hook microtubule-tethering protein 3 (HOOK3) chr8:42883441A > I, NADH dehydrogenase flavoprotein 3 (NDUFV3) chr21:44329452A > I, and FK506-binding protein 11 (FKBP11) chr12:49316769A > I were used in the prognostic model construction. High levels of risk score were significantly associated with worse OS and progression-free survival. Tumour stage and risk score were related to OS in LUAD patients. The predictors were among the prognostic nomogram model’s risk score, age, gender, and tumor stage. The calibration plot and C-index (0.718) demonstrated the significant accuracy of nomogram’s predictions. ATIRE level was markedly elevated in tumor tissues and was highly variable between patients.

Conclusion: Events involving ATIRE in LUAD were highly functional and clinically relevant. The RNA editing-based model provides a solid framework for further investigation of the functions of RNA editing in non-coding areas and may be used as a unique method for predicting LUAD survival.

Single-Cell Analysis in Lung Adenocarcinoma Implicates RNA Editing in Cancer Innate Immunity and Patient Prognosis

RNA editing modifies single nucleotides of RNAs, regulating primary protein structure and protein abundance. In recent years, the diversity of proteins and complexity of gene regulation associated with RNA editing dysregulation has been increasingly appreciated in oncology. Large-scale shifts in editing have been observed in bulk tumors across various cancer types. However, RNA editing in single cells and individual cell types within tumors has not been explored. By profiling editing in single cells from lung adenocarcinoma biopsies, we found that the increased editing trend of bulk lung tumors was unique to cancer cells. Elevated editing levels were observed in cancer cells resistant to targeted therapy, and editing sites associated with drug response were enriched. Consistent with the regulation of antiviral pathways by RNA editing, higher editing levels in cancer cells were associated with reduced antitumor innate immune response, especially levels of natural killer cell infiltration. In addition, the level of RNA editing in cancer cells was positively associated with somatic point mutation burden. This observation motivated the definition of a new metric, RNA editing load, reflecting the amount of RNA mutations created by RNA editing. Importantly, in lung cancer, RNA editing load was a stronger predictor of patient survival than DNA mutations. This study provides the first single cell dissection of editing in cancer and highlights the significance of RNA editing load in cancer prognosis.

SIGNIFICANCE

RNA editing analysis in single lung adenocarcinoma cells uncovers RNA mutations that correlate with tumor mutation burden and cancer innate immunity and reveals the amount of RNA mutations that strongly predicts patient survival. See related commentary by Luo and Liang, p. 351.

Dynamic Variations of 3'UTR Length Reprogram the mRNA Regulatory Landscape

This paper concerns 3′-untranslated regions (3′UTRs) of mRNAs, which are non-coding regulatory platforms that control stability, fate and the correct spatiotemporal translation of mRNAs. Many mRNAs have polymorphic 3′UTR regions. Controlling 3′UTR length and sequence facilitates the regulation of the accessibility of functional effectors (RNA binding proteins, miRNAs or other ncRNAs) to 3′UTR functional boxes and motifs and the establishment of different regulatory landscapes for mRNA function. In this context, shortening of 3′UTRs would loosen miRNA or protein-based mechanisms of mRNA degradation, while 3′UTR lengthening would strengthen accessibility to these effectors. Alterations in the mechanisms regulating 3′UTR length would result in widespread deregulation of gene expression that could eventually lead to diseases likely linked to the loss (or acquisition) of specific miRNA binding sites. Here, we will review the mechanisms that control 3′UTR length dynamics and their alterations in human disorders. We will discuss, from a mechanistic point of view centered on the molecular machineries involved, the generation of 3′UTR variability by the use of alternative polyadenylation and cleavage sites, of mutually exclusive terminal alternative exons (exon skipping) as well as by the process of exonization of Alu cassettes to generate new 3′UTRs with differential functional features.