Regulation of RUNX proteins by long non-coding RNAs and circular RNAs in different cancers

The prognostic, diagnostic, and therapeutic impact of Long noncoding RNAs in gastric cancer

Gastric cancer (GC), ranking as the third deadliest cancer globally, faces challenges of late diagnosis and limited treatment efficacy. Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) emerge as valuable treasured targets for cancer prognosis, diagnosis, and therapy, given their high specificity, convenient non-invasive detection in body fluids, and crucial roles in diverse physiological and pathological processes. Research indicates the significant involvement of lncRNAs in various aspects of GC pathogenesis, including initiation, metastasis, and recurrence, underscoring their potential as novel diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, as well as therapeutic targets for GC. Despite existing challenges in the clinical application of lncRNAs in GC, the evolving landscape of lncRNA molecular biology holds promise for advancing the survival and treatment outcomes of gastric cancer patients. This review provides insights into recent studies on lncRNAs in gastric cancer, elucidating their molecular mechanisms and exploring the potential clinical applications in GC.

The potential role and mechanism of circRNAs in foam cell formation

Atherosclerosis is a significant risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD) and myocardial infarction (MI). Atherosclerosis develops during foam cell generation, which is caused by an imbalance in cholesterol uptake, esterification, and efflux. LOX-1, SR-A1, and CD36 all increased cholesterol uptake. ACAT1 and ACAT2 promote free cholesterol (FC) esterification to cholesteryl esters (CE). The hydrolysis of CE to FC was aided by nCEH. FC efflux was promoted by ABCA1, ABCG1, ADAM10, and apoA-I. SR-BI promotes not only cholesterol uptake but also FC efflux. Circular RNAs (circRNAs), which are single-stranded RNAs with a closed covalent circular structure, have emerged as promising biomarkers and therapeutic targets for atherosclerosis due to their highly tissue, cell, and disease state-specific expression profiles. Numerous studies have shown that circRNAs regulate foam cell formation, acting as miRNA sponges to influence atherosclerosis development by regulating the expression of SR-A1, CD36, ACAT2, ABCA1, ABCG1, ADAM10, apoA-I, SR-B1. Several circRNAs, including circ-Wdr91, circ 0004104, circRNA0044073, circRNA_0001805, circDENND1B, circRSF1, circ 0001445, and circRNA 102682, are potential biomarkers for atherosclerosis to better evaluate cardiovascular risk. It is difficult to deliver synthetic therapeutic circRNAs to the desired target tissues. Nanotechnology, such as GA-RM/GZ/PL, may be an important solution to this problem. In this review, we focus on the potential role and mechanism of circRNA/miRNA axis in foam cell formation in the hopes of discovering new targets for the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of atherosclerosis.

Epigenetic programing of cancer stemness by transcription factors-non-coding RNAs interactions

Cancer 'stemness' is fundamental to cancer existence. It defines the ability of cancer cells to indefinitely perpetuate as well as differentiate. Cancer stem cell populations within a growing tumor also help evade the inhibitory effects of chemo- as well as radiation-therapies, in addition to playing an important role in cancer metastases. NF-κB and STAT-3 are representative transcription factors (TFs) that have long been associated with cancer stemness, thus presenting as attractive targets for cancer therapy. The growing interest in non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) in the recent years has provided further insight into the mechanisms by which TFs influence cancer stem cell characteristics. There is evidence for a direct regulation of TFs by ncRNAs, such as, microRNAs (miRNAs), long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) as well as circular RNAs (circRNAs), and vice versa. Additionally, the TF-ncRNAs regulations are often indirect, involving ncRNA-target genes or the sponging of other ncRNA species by individual ncRNAs. The information is rapidly evolving and this review provides a comprehensive review of TF-ncRNAs interactions with implications on cancer stemness and in response to therapies. Such knowledge will help uncover the many levels of tight regulations that control cancer stemness, providing novel opportunities and targets for therapy in the process.

Demystifying the CXCR4 conundrum in cancer biology: Beyond the surface signaling paradigm

The oncogenic chemokine duo CXCR4-CXCL12/SDF-1 (C-X-C Receptor 4-C-X-C Ligand 12/ Stromal-derived factor 1) has been the topic of intense scientific disquisitions since Muller et al., in her ground-breaking research, described this axis as a critical determinant of organ-specific metastasis in breast cancer. Elevated CXCR4 levels correlate with distant metastases, poor prognosis, and unfavourable outcomes in most solid tumors. Therapeutic impediment of the axis in clinics with Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved inhibitors like AMD3100 or Plerixafor yield dubious results, contrary to pre-clinical developments. Clinical trials entailing inhibition of CXCR7 (C-X-C Receptor 7), another convicted chemokine receptor that exhibits affinity for CXCL12, reveal outcomes analogous to that of CXCR4-CXCL12 axis blockade. Of note, the cellular CXCR4 knockout phenotype varies largely from that of inhibitor treatments. These shaky findings pique great curiosity to delve further into the realm of this infamous chemokine receptor to provide a probable explanation. A multitude of recent reports suggests the presence of an increased intracellular CXCR4 pool in various cancers, both cytoplasmic and nuclear. This intracellular CXCR4 protein reserve seems active as it correlates with vital tumor attributes, viz. prognosis, aggressiveness, metastasis, and disease-free survival. Diminishing this entire intracellular CXCR4 load apart from the surface signals looks encouraging from a therapeutic point of view. Transcending beyond the classically accepted concept of ligand-mediated surface signaling, this review sheds new light on plausible associations of intracellularly compartmentalised CXCR4 with various aspects of tumorigenesis. Besides, this review also puts forward a comprehensive account of CXCR4 regulation in different cancers.

Peculiar features of bone marrow cell proliferation in Djungarian hamsters with genetic disorders under thiotepa effect

The paper aims to examine the proliferation of bone marrow cell pool in Djungarian hamsters and the subsequent restoration of their genetic stability after the action of thiotepa (TT). The study involved 36 animals, of which 16 were in the control group (injected with 0.25 ml of physiological solution), and 20 in the experimental group (0.25 ml of thiotepa at a dose of 1.5 mg per 1 kg of body weight). The maximum number of cells with CA amounting to 30.0% was observed 13 hours after TT injection (p≤0.05 between the control and experimental groups) and rapidly declined to 5.7% over subsequent periods by the 37th hour of the experiment (p≤0.05). The results suggest that the restoration of cell pool genetic stability is largely associated with the cell selection mechanisms, which confers an advantage over cell proliferation without chromosome anomalies.

Epigenetic Regulation of CXCR4 Signaling in Cancer Pathogenesis and Progression

Signaling involving chemokine receptor CXCR4 and its ligand SDF-1/CXL12 has been investigated for many years for its possible role in cancer progression and pathogenesis. Evidence emerging from clinical studies in recent years has further established diagnostic as well as prognostic importance of CXCR4 signaling. CXCR4 and SDF-1 are routinely reported to be elevated in tumors, distant metastases, which correlates with poor survival of patients. These findings have kindled interest in the mechanisms that regulate CXCR4/SDF-1 expression. Of note, there is a particular interest in the epigenetic regulation of CXCR4 signaling that may be responsible for upregulated CXCR4 in primary as well as metastatic cancers. This review first lists the clinical evidence supporting CXCR4 signaling as putative cancer diagnostic and/or prognostic biomarker, followed by a discussion on reported epigenetic mechanisms that affect CXCR4 expression. These mechanisms include regulation by non-coding RNAs, such as, microRNAs, long non-coding RNAs and circular RNAs. Additionally, we also discuss the regulation of CXCR4 expression through methylation and acetylation. Better understanding and appreciation of epigenetic regulation of CXCR4 signaling can invariably lead to identification of novel therapeutic targets as well as therapies to regulate this oncogenic signaling.