ABSTRACT
Recently, the progression of gastric cancer (GC), as one of the most ordinary malignant tumors, has been reported to be associated with circular RNAs. This study aimed to identify the role of circular RNA_LARP4 in GC. We performed real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) in 46 paired GC patients and GC cell lines to detect the expression of circular RNA_LARP4. Moreover, the role of circular RNA_LARP4 in GC proliferation was identified through proliferation assay and colony formation assay, while the role of circular RNA_LARP4 in GC metastasis was measured through scratch wound assay and transwell assay. Furthermore, the potential targets of circular RNA_LARP4 were predicted through bioinformatics methods and further identified by western blot assay and RT-qPCR. Circular RNA_LARP4 expression was remarkably lower in GC tissues compared with that in adjacent samples. Besides, cell proliferation of GC was inhibited after overexpression of circular RNA_LARP4, while cell migration and invasion of GC was inhibited after overexpression of circular RNA_LARP4. Furthermore, Upstream frameshift 1 (UPF1) was predicted as the potential target of circular RNA_LARP4 and was upregulated via overexpression of circular RNA_LARP4 in GC. Circular RNA_LARP4 inhibits GC cell proliferation and metastasis via targeting UPF1 in vitro, which might provide a new tumor suppressor in GC development.
Subject(s)
Cell Movement , Cell Proliferation , Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic , RNA, Circular , Stomach Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Autoantigens/genetics , Autoantigens/metabolism , Cell Line, Tumor , Cell Movement/genetics , Cell Proliferation/genetics , Neoplasm Invasiveness/genetics , Neoplasm Metastasis , RNA/genetics , RNA/metabolism , RNA, Circular/genetics , RNA, Circular/metabolism , SS-B Antigen , Stomach Neoplasms/genetics , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Stomach Neoplasms/metabolism , Trans-Activators/genetics , Trans-Activators/metabolism , Up-Regulation/geneticsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The safety of propofol sedation during colonoscopy remains unclear, and we performed a meta-analysis to assess the risk of perforation in patients undergoing propofol vs. traditional sedation. METHODS: MEDLINE, CBM, VIP, CNKI, and Wanfang databases were searched up to December 2016. Two reviewers independently assessed abstract of those searched articles. Data about perforation condition in propofol and traditional sedation groups were extracted and combined using the random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies were included in the current meta-analysis. Compared to traditional sedation, propofol sedation did not increase the risk of perforation (RD = - 0.00, 95% CI - 0.00~0.00, p = 0.98; subgroup analysis: OR = 1.30, 95% CI 0.83~2.05, p = 0.25). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggested that propofol sedation did not increase the risk of perforation compared to traditional sedation during colonoscopy.
