Page 98 - Read Online
P. 98

Dixit et al. J Cancer Metastasis Treat 2022;8:47  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2394-4722.2022.70  Page 7 of 11

               reprogramming, and stimulated hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α). Primarily, the target that mediated
               these cellular disturbances downstream of miR-126-3p was insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS1) and its
               complex signaling network that involves the Akt/FoxO1/ACL pathways, converging on HIF-1α lowering
               VEGF-A activity (also a direct target of miR-126-3p). These perturbances inhibited MPM cell growth
               in vitro. With similar caveats to the animal model used to test miR-145-5p, MPM cells as subcutaneous
               xenografts in mice were transfected with miR-126-3p before implantation, but not treated in true in vivo
               fashion upon tumor growth. This study also identified other targets of miR-126-3p, including pyruvate
               dehydrogenase kinase (PDK) and acetyl-CoA-citrate lyase (ACL), which induce autophagy when
               inhibited .
                       [39]

               MIRNAS THAT INHIBIT ONCOGENES
               Hyperactivated (but non-mutated) tyrosine-kinase-RAS signaling is a peculiar pathologic feature of MPM
               that has been an elusive pathway to target by conventional drugs. miR-206 is a member of the miR-1 family
               that is downregulated in MPM tissues and cell lines . Re-expression of miR-206 inhibited cell growth,
                                                             [40]
               clonogenicity, and invasiveness in MPM cell lines. miR-206 caused a G1/S cell cycle arrest and cell death by
               inducing senescence. miR-206 regulates multiple members of the receptor tyrosine kinase/Ras/cell cycle
               network (VEGF-A, EGFR, c-MET, and CDK6), some of which were also prognostic genes in MPM (IGF1R,
               KRAS, CCND1, and CDK4). Along with in vitro anticancer effects, when miR-206 was delivered locally in an
               anatomic compartment, it suppressed the growth of subcutaneous and orthotopic xenografts, increasing
               survival in mice. A novel therapeutic strategy consisting of systemic-route abemaciclib (CDK 4/6 inhibitor)
               and local-route miR-206 was demonstrated to have additive antitumor efficacy, validating the notion that
               simultaneous knockdown of an oncogenic transcript and inhibition of its protein activity is synergistic.

               AMBIGUOUS TUMOR SUPPRESSOR MIRNAS
               Several miRNAs have been purported to be tumor suppressors in MPM largely on the basis of in vitro
               results, but their bona fide status in this category remains unclear because of a lack of in-depth studies and
               characterizations. Using our more stringent criteria for tumor suppressor function, miRNAs whose high
               expression in MPM tissue was associated with worse prognosis or alternatively whose low expression was
               associated with better prognosis were excluded from further review except where noted. Furthermore,
               inconsistency between miRNA expression level and biological activity in MPM cell line experiments
               suggests that such miRNAs may not be robust candidates for ongoing anti-MPM therapeutic development.


               Initially, loss of miR-31-5p was described in MPM cell lines derived from patients with more aggressive
               disease . When re-expressed, miR-31-5p inhibited proliferation, invasion/migration, and clonogenicity of
                     [41]
               MPM cells. These effects were accompanied by G1/S phase cell cycle arrest, which was attributed to reduced
               expression of the direct target pro-survival protein phosphatase PPP6C. Contrary to these effects, when
                                                                                                       [42]
               miR-31-5p was re-expressed in other MPM cells, there was increased chemoresistance, not sensitivity .
               Another discrepancy of miR-31-5p in MPM is that in biphasic and sarcomatoid subtypes (albeit a small
               sample size from a larger pathologic cohort analysis), its expression was elevated and associated with worse
               prognosis . Therefore, the role of miR-31-5p in MPM remains convoluted.
                       [43]
               EphrinA1 binding induced let-7a miRNA, which subsequently repressed the RAS proto-oncogene in MPM
               cells, attenuating proliferation as part of the ephrinA1/EphA2 signaling axis . The baseline expression of
                                                                                [44]
               let-7a in MPM cells was not reported. Furthermore, the relative expression of let-7a in MPM tumors
               compared with normal tissues remains obscure, with mentions of several different let-7 isoforms varying in
                                                                                                    [8]
               their relative expression level in tumors and their importance for either diagnosis or prognosis . The
               primary message in this comprehensive miRNA review was that for let-7 (among several other heavily
   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103