miR-1182 inhibits growth and mediates the chemosensitivity of bladder cancer by targeting hTERT
Authors: Jianming Song
Wenbin Dai
Jun Zhou
Journal: Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications (2016)
Discipline: BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
Keywords: Bladder cancer; Chemosensitivity; hTERT; miR-1182.
Affiliations: Department of Urology, Huadong Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University, 221 Yan An Road(w), Shanghai 200040, PR China., Department of Urology, Huadong Hospital Affiliated to Fudan University, 221 Yan An Road(w), Shanghai 200040, PR China. Electronic address: ., School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, No.3181 S.W. Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland 97239-3098, OR, USA.

Abstract:  microRNAs (miRNAs) have been demonstrated to contribute to tumor progression and metastasis and proposed to be key regulators of diverse biological processes. In this study, we report that miR-1182 is deregulated in bladder cancer tissues and cell lines. To characterize the role of miR-1182 in bladder cancer cells, we performed functional assays. The overexpression of miR-1182 significantly inhibits bladder cancer cell proliferation, colony formation, and invasion. Moreover, its up-regulation induced cell cycle arrest and apoptosis and mediated chemosensitivity to cisplatin in bladder cancer. Furthermore, a luciferase reporter assay and a rescue experiment indicated that miR-1182 directly targets hTERT by binding its 3'UTR. In conclusion, these results demonstrate that miR-1182 acts as a tumor suppressor and may be a potential biomarker for bladder cancer diagnosis and treatment. 

Retracted: No

PubPeer comments:
 Brought to my attention by a reader. Figures 2E and 5C. Several panels displaying different cell lines or treatments appear to show areas of overlap. Boxes of the same color bring attention to areas that look more similar than expected. ![file] In addition, the article is listed as:  Received 3 January 2016, Accepted 4 January 2016 - does this mean the editorial peer review process only took 1 day? Or does this refer to the revised version? In that case the annotation is confusing. , 
 Figure 3C shows flow cytometry panels from T24 and Hbc cells. Here is the full set of panels first (not marked): ![file] Upon close inspection, some areas of the flow cytometry panels look more similar to each other than expected. Here are the T24 panels (left hand side), marked. Boxes of the same color bring attention to areas that look very similar. ![file] Here are the Hbc panels (right hand side), marked. Boxes of the same color bring attention to areas that look very similar. ![file] , 
 Figure 4C. * Orange arrows point attention to sharp vertical lines in between hTERT bands that could be suggestive of selective lane splicing. These lines are not visible in the corresponding GAPDH blot. Could the authors please provide the original uncut blots? ![file] , 
 Figure 5G. * Orange arrows point out possible sharp vertical lines in between hTERT bands suggestive of lane splicing. * Blue boxes: The GAPDH panels representing the T24 and HBC cells look unexpectedly similar to each other, albeit stretched differently. ![file] , 
 Now that I have permission to disclose the names of the readers who found this, here they are: Kevin J Peterson, professor at Dartmouth in the Department of Biological Sciences, and 12-year old Benson. Thank you for raising these concerns. , 
 #5 Here is the composite for the center set of panels on Fig. 2E.![file] , 
 Confirming that Fig 5G control was just stretched: ![file] ,