miR-132 can inhibit glioma cells invasion and migration by target MMP16 in vitro
Authors: Tian-Quan Yang
Hangzhou Wang
Zi-Wei Du
Chun Wu
Yan-Yan Li
Xue-Tao Li
Xue-Shun Xie
You-Xin Zhou
Gui-Lin Chen
Yu-Lun Huang
Zhi-Wu Wu
Journal: OncoTargets and Therapy (2015)
Discipline: CLINICAL MEDICINE
Keywords: MT3-MMP; gliocytoma; invasions; microRNA.
Affiliations: Department of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China ; Department of Neurosurgery, Children's Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China., Department of Neurosurgery & Brain and Nerve Research Laboratory, The First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.

Abstract:  Gliomas are the most common malignant primary brain tumors, and new clinical biomarkers and therapeutic targets are imminently required. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are a novel class of small non-coding RNAs (∼22nt) involved in the regulation of various biological processes. Here, by using real-time polymerase chain reaction, miRNA-132 was found to be significantly deregulated in glioma tissues. Based on the prediction of the target genes of miR-132, we hypothesized that there is a significant association between miR-132 and matrix metalloproteinase (MMP) 16 (MT3-MMP), a protein of the MMP family. We showed that the up-expression of miR-132 inhibited cell migration and invasion in the human glioma cell lines A172, SHG44, and U87. Furthermore, the overexpression of miR-132 reduced the expression of MMP16 in A172, SHG44, and U87 cells. Taken together, our study suggested that miR-132 affects glioma cell migration and invasion by MMP16 and implicates miR-132 as a metastasis-inhibiting miRNA in gliomas. 

Retracted: Yes

PubPeer comments:
 Figure 2A appears to have two images which overlap. *** ![file] , 
 Dear Professor: Hello! Thank you very much for your attention to our article and for pointing out inappropriate content in our article. According to the quetion you pointed out, we checked the relevant information, and we found that there are indeed errors in the article. By checking the results of the experiment, we confirmed that this picture indeed from the same transwell experiment. This is due to the improper use of pictures due to improper operation when storing the pictures and improper use of picturesuff0cbut we absolutely did not fake pictures.. We will correct the content of the article and contact the magazine for the next step. The correct picture is shown below, thank you and also apologize to readers. ![file] , 
 #2 Thank you for your reply and for addressing this concern. , 
 Dear Professor Wu, In light of your statement that you made an honest mistake by inserting two panels representing the same sample, could you please also explain the repetitive features in some of the other panels in this figure? I have marked them below in the original figure with boxes of the same color. ![file] , 
 Dear professoruff1aYour question is a very serious issue for us. We will attach great importance to your question and will definitely cooperate actively to solve the doubts.In view of the current suspiciousness of your proposal, we will actively further deal with this matter and further verify the results. Thank you! In addition, we will sort out the original data, and repeat the experiment if necessary, hoping to solve the current doubts, this may take some time, I hope you can understand! Once there is a result, we will contact you and the magazine as soon as possibleThank youuff01 , 
 Dear Professor Wu, With so many repetitive features within photos, I do not think that repeating experiments could ever solve the many concerns I have about the integrity of the data in your paper. Rather, I would suggest that you retract this paper, and investigate how this could have happened. , 
 in addition to Dr Bik ![file] , 
 In addition to the problems mentioned above, Figure 2A also appear to be show overlapping regions with Figure 4A of another paper by the same research group, i.e., Tianu2010Quan Yang et al, Cancer Science (2014), doi: 10.1111 cas.12351, https: pubpeer.com publications 9907809B97CC2AEEBACEE19E84159F Image below marked by an Image Forensics software program, so colors do not correspond to the ones used above. ![file] , 
 Retracted [4 March 2022] . ---------------- The Editor and Publisher of OncoTargets and Therapy wish to retract the published article. Concerns were raised regarding alleged image duplication in Figure 2A and Figure 4. Specifically, - Figure 2A, panel U87 Normal appears to show duplication with parts of Figure 2A, panel U87 Pre-miR-132 NC. - Figure 2A, panel SHG44 Anti-miR-132 appears to show duplicated regions within the same image. - Figure 2A, panel A172 Pre-miR-132 appears to show duplicated regions within the same image. - Figure 2A, panel SHG44 Pre-miR-132 appears to show duplicated regions within the same image. - Figure 2A, panels U87 Normal and Anti-miR-132 NC appear to show duplicated regions with Figure 4A, panel U87 Mock from Yang et al (2014) . - Figure 2A, panel U87 Anti-miR-132 appears to show duplication with parts of Figure 4A, panel U87 Negative from Yang et al (2014) . The authors were contacted and did provide an explanation for the duplicated images, but it was not satisfactory. In addition, the authors did provide some original data but again it was not satisfactory, and the findings of the paper were deemed to be invalid. Our decision-making was informed by our policy on publishing ethics and integrity and the COPE guidelines on retraction. The retracted article will remain online to maintain the scholarly record, but it will be digitally watermarked on each page as u201cRetractedu201d. ,