↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

RNA-binding protein HuR promotes bladder cancer progression by competitively binding to the long noncoding HOTAIR with miR-1

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
RNA-binding protein HuR promotes bladder cancer progression by competitively binding to the long noncoding HOTAIR with miR-1
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, May 2017
DOI 10.2147/ott.s132728
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dapeng Yu, Chao Zhang, Junqing Gui

Abstract

The elevated expressions of RNA-binding protein HuR and long noncoding HOX transcript antisense RNA (HOTAIR) are observed in numerous cancers. And HuR often exerts its promotive effects on tumorigenesis via binding to AU-rich elements in target transcripts and thus regulating the expression of target transcripts. However, the roles and related mechanisms of HuR/HOTAIR in bladder cancer progression have never been formally tested. Here, we found that the expression level of HuR was higher in clinical bladder cancer samples than in normal adjacent samples, mirroring that of HOTAIR, and their expression showed strong correlation. Knockdown of HuR/HOTAIR in bladder cancer inhibited cell proliferation, migration, invasion, and promoted cell apoptosis. Notably, HuR interacted and stabilized HOTAIR mRNA and knockdown of HuR decreased HOTAIR expression. Additionally, HOTAIR was identified as a potential target of miR-1 in bladder cancer cells. Interestingly, overexpression of HOTAIR enhanced HuR expression and increased cytoplasmic accumulation of HuR, thus enhancing HOTAIR expression in turn. But mutation of miR-1 binding site in HOTAIR canceled the effects of HOTAIR on HuR expression. Overall, we identified a regulatory loop between HOTAIR and HuR during the progression of bladder cancer, which could be exploited to curb bladder cancer progression.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 40%
Student > Postgraduate 1 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 20%
Unspecified 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 40%
Unspecified 1 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 May 2017.
All research outputs
#8,921,363
of 11,174,763 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#659
of 1,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,111
of 266,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#32
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,174,763 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,253 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,340 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.