MiR-491 suppresses migration and invasion via directly targeting TPX2 in breast cancer
Authors: K Mou
G-Z Tan
X Tan
M-L Shi
M Li
Journal: European review for medical and pharmacological sciences (2019)
Discipline: PHARMACOLOGY & TOXICOLOGY
Keywords: Breast cancer; miR-491; metastasis; molecular mechanism; TPX2
Affiliations: Department of Oncology, Jinan City People's Hospital, Jinan, China. .

Abstract:  Objective: Breast cancer (BC) is one of the primary causes of tumor-related female mortalities. Although in recent years, we have made great progress in the systemic therapy and earlier diagnosis for BC patients, recurrence or distant metastasis remains leading obstacles for the successful therapy of BC. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the molecular mechanism underlying the progression may be crucial in developing an effective strategy against BC. The current research aimed to explore the expressions, functions and molecular mechanism of microRNA-491 (miR-491) in BC. Patients and methods: Quantitative Real Time-Polymerase Chain Reaction (qRT-PCR) was performed to examine the level of miR-491 expression in 52 pairs of BC tissues and para-cancerous specimens, and the relation between miR-491 level and the clinical features of BC patient prognosis was analyzed. Transwell invasion and migration assays were conducted to determine whether miR-491 had effects on the regulation of BC metastasis. Potential target genes of miR-491 were found out using TargetScan to explore the molecular functions of miR-491 in inhibiting breast cancer cell invasion and migration. To elucidate the mechanism of TPX2 in suppressing cell invasion and migration medicated by miR-491in breast cancer, we further transfected TPX2 siRNAs into MCF-7 cells to delete endogenous TPX2, along with the transfections with miR-491 inhibitor into MCF-7 cell lines. Results: The findings demonstrated that miR-491 expressions were significantly decreased in BC tissues and cells. The miR-491 restoration suppressed the invasion and migration of BC cells. In addition, we identified the targeting protein for Xklp2 (TPX2) as a direct target of miR-491 in BC. The knockdown of TPX2 markedly reversed miR-491-medicated inhibition of cell invasion and migration in BC cell lines. Conclusions: In short, all the results suggested that miR-491 functioned as a tumor suppressor by targeting TPX2 in BC and the miR-491 restoration may be an effective therapy for the BC treatment in the future. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 Retracted [11 January 2021] . ------------------------------- The Editors-in-Chief have retracted this article [1] at the request of the authors because concerns have been raised regarding validity of data. The authors informed the journal that the bioinformatics analysis and all laboratory contents had been performed by an external company. The outsourced laboratory content includes cell culture, FISH, dual luciferase reporter gene assay, RNA pull down assay, RNA immunoprecipitation (RNA IP) assay, cell grouping and transfection, RT qPCR, western blot analysis, chemosensitivity assay and flow cytometry. This was not made clear in this article. The company has not responded to requests from authors to share raw data. Consequently, the data cannot be verified. The authors stated that they completed the rest of the work, including clinical patient samples immunohistochemistry analysis, statistical analysis and discussion. All authors agree to this retraction. ---------------------------- I was led to the paper by its enigmatic Acknowledgement, one that is often associated with papermill activity fabricated data, only find it already retracted.  We acknowledge and appreciate our colleagues for their valuable efforts and comments on this paper . If the colleagues efforts were so valuable, why not credit them by name, or with co-authorship? It appears that the unnamed outside laboratory provided **everything in the paper** except the authors names. Why not just call it a  papermill ? Why not provide a name? How many other papers in the literature have the same provenance? Consider the implications of the retraction. We can infer that any Western Blots with this general appearance could also be the work of the same contractor. Indeed, it is a familar style: ![file] Flow-cytometry scatterplots with this familiar, lovingly-handstippled appearance? Probably the work of a papermill. ![file] This retraction deserves wider attention than it has received. ,