Effect of long non-coding RNA AOC4P on gastrointestinal stromal tumor cells
Authors: Meng-Lai Zhang
Li Cai
Li-Xin Jiang
Quan Wang
Zeng-Wu Yao
Jin-Chen Hu
Hui-Yuan Zhai
Ye Feng
Journal: OncoTargets and Therapy (2018)
Discipline: CLINICAL MEDICINE
Keywords: AOC4P; epithelial-mesenchymal transition; gastrointestinal stromal tumors; long non-coding RNA.
Affiliations: Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, China., Department of Gastrointestinal and Anal Surgery, The First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China., Department of Pathology, The Affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University, Yantai, China., Department of Gastrointestinal Colorectal and Anal Surgery, China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China, .

Abstract:  Objective: In this research, we explored the effect of long non-coding RNA (lncRNA) AOC4P on gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) cells. Materials and methods: The expression of lncRNA AOC4P in tissues was detected by real-time PCR (RT-PCR). The epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT)-related proteins in tissues were analyzed by Western blot. The experiment included negative control group (CN), silence AOC4P group (si AOC4P), and silence negative control group (si CT). RT-PCR, MTT, Scratch, Transwell, and Annexin V-FITC methods were used to detect the expression of lncRNA AOC4P, cell proliferation, cell migration ability, cell invasion ability, and apoptosis, respectively. The EMT-related proteins including TGF-β, ZEB1, Vimentin, Snail, and E-cadherin were analyzed by Western blot. Results: The expression of lncRNA AOC4P and the expression of EMT-related proteins in high-risk GISTs were higher than that in low- and intermediate-risk GISTs (P&lt;0.05). It was revealed that cell proliferative migration and invasive ability in si AOC4P group was decreased than that in CN and si CT groups (P&lt;0.05), and cell apoptosis in si AOC4P group was higher than that in si CT group. The results of Western blot demonstrated that the expression of TGF-β1, ZEB1, Vimentin, and Snail in si AOC4P group were lower than that in si CT and CN group (P&lt;0.05), and the expression of E-cadherin in si AOC4P group was higher than that in si CT and CN group (P&lt;0.05). 

Retracted: Yes

PubPeer comments:
 The results of this experiment failed to replicate in a much larger replication study. Therefore the article should not be cited as evidence for the claims made in this article. Camerer CF, Dreber A, Holzmeister F, Ho T-H, Huber J, Johannesson M, et al. Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nat Hum Behav. 2018; 2: 637u2013644. https: doi.org 10.1038 s41562-018-0399-z , 
 The authors also published an article with three replication studies with larger samples (N 400). These studies produced two non-significant results and one just significant result, p = .02. It is clear that the original article inflated effect sizes and that even studies with N 400 are underpowered to detect the effect and estimate its effect size. In short, there is no credible experimental evidence that reading enhances theory of mind. DOI: 10.1177 1948550618775410 , 
 A meta-analysis found a very small effect size without controlling for publication bias, g = .15. As publication bias is likely to be present the true effect size is likely to be lower. It is clear that most studies of the hypotheses are severely underpowered and can only produce significant results with the help of sampling error (random chance). The effect is too small to be practically significant and too small to investigate boundary conditions (moderators). It is unlikely that further experimental work will produce meaningful results. Proper intervention studies with longer intervention intervals are needed to test this hypothesis properly. DOI:10.1037 xge0000395 , 
 The results reported in the original Science article are incedible (Schimmack, 2012); that is, unlikely to have occurred from five independent experiments solely based on a real effect size (see post above, the effect size estimate based on a meta-analysis is only g = .15, which would be too small to produce significant results consistently with N ~ 100 participants. A bias analysis shows that the five p-values, ps = .02, .08, .05, .04, .06, are much too close to each other than we would expect based on sampling error of independent studies. After converting p-values into z-scores, we expect a variance of 1, but the observed variance is only V = .047. The probability of this outcome is only p = .004, 1 out of 237 trials (Test of Insufficient Variance, Schimmack, 2015, Renkewitz Keiner, 2019). Thus, these results cannot be trusted to provide credible information about the actual effect of reading on theory of mind. Renkewitz, F., Keiner, M. (2019). How to detect publication bias in psychological research: A comparative evaluation of six statistical methods. Zeitschrift fu00fcr Psychologie, 227(4), 261-279. http: dx.doi.org 10.1027 2151-2604 a000386 ,