Cited by 64

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modulation of microRNA-mRNA Target Pairs by Human Papillomavirus 16 Oncoproteins

Harden, Mallory E., Prasad, Nripesh, Griffiths, Anthony, Munger, Karl·2017·mBio

Abstract

The E6 and E7 proteins are the major oncogenic drivers encoded by high-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs). While many aspects of the transforming activities of these proteins have been extensively studied, there are fewer studies that have investigated how HPV E6/E7 expression affects the expression of cellular noncoding RNAs. The goal of our study was to investigate HPV16 E6/E7 modulation of cellular microRNA (miR) levels and to determine the potential consequences for cellular gene expression. We performed deep sequencing of small and large cellular RNAs in primary undifferentiated cultures of human foreskin keratinocytes (HFKs) with stable expression of HPV16 E6/E7 or a control vector. After integration of the two data sets, we identified 51 differentially expressed cellular miRs associated with the modulation of 1,456 potential target mRNAs in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs. We discovered that the degree of differential miR expression in HFKs expressing HPV16 E6/E7 was not necessarily predictive of the number of corresponding mRNA targets or the potential impact on gene expression. Additional analyses of the identified miR-mRNA pairs suggest modulation of specific biological activities and biochemical pathways. Overall, our study supports the model that perturbation of cellular miR expression by HPV16 E6/E7 importantly contributes to the rewiring of cellular regulatory circuits by the high-risk HPV E6 and E7 proteins that contribute to oncogenic transformation. IMPORTANCE High-risk human papillomaviruses (HPVs) are the causative agents of almost all cervical cancers and many other cancers, including anal, vaginal, vulvar, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers. Despite the availability of efficacious HPV vaccines, it is critical to determine how HPVs cause cancer, as many people remain unvaccinated and the vaccine does not prevent cancer development in individuals who are already infected. Two HPV proteins, E6 and E7, are the major drivers of cancer development, and much remains to be learned about how the expression of these viral proteins reprograms infected cells, ultimately resulting in cancer development. Small, noncoding human RNAs, termed microRNAs (miRs), regulate gene expression and have been implicated in almost all human cancers, including HPV-associated cancers. Our study provides a comprehensive analysis of how E6 and E7 alter the expression of human miRs and how this potentially impacts cellular gene expression, which may contribute to cancer development.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/mbio.02170-16

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

FIG 1 miR-seq of HPV16 E6/E7-expressing or control vector-transduced HFKs. (A) Volcano plot of miR-seq data with black dots representing the average expression of individual miRNAs in two HFK populations. The –log10-transformed FDR is plotted on the y axis, and the log2-transformed fold change (FC) in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs compared to controls is on the x axis. Vertical red lines indicate the FC thresholds (−3 ≥ FC ≥3), and horizontal red lines indicate the FDR threshold (FDR, ≤0.05). (B) Graph of the top 15 up- and downregulated miRs in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.
FIG 1 miR-seq of HPV16 E6/E7-expressing or control vector-transduced HFKs. (A) Volcano plot of miR-seq data with black dots representing the average expression of individual miRNAs in two HFK populations. The –log10-transformed FDR is plotted on the y axis, and the log2-transformed fold change (FC) in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs compared to controls is on the x axis. Vertical red lines indicate the FC thresholds (−3 ≥ FC ≥3), and horizontal red lines indicate the FDR threshold (FDR, ≤0.05). (B) Graph of the top 15 up- and downregulated miRs in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIG 2 Validation of selected miRs identified by miR-seq. (A to D) Validation of miR-15b-5p (A), miR-16-5p (B), miR-193b-3p (C), and miR-203a-3p (D) levels in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing (red) and control vector-transduced (blue) HFKs. The top graphs show miR expression from two HFK populations determined by miR-seq. The bottom graphs show expression of the corresponding miRs in three additional HFK populations determined via RT-qPCR. Expression of the noncoding snRNA U6 spliceosomal RNA was used as an internal control in TaqMan miR assays. Results represent averages and standard deviations of at least three independent experiments.
FIG 2 Validation of selected miRs identified by miR-seq. (A to D) Validation of miR-15b-5p (A), miR-16-5p (B), miR-193b-3p (C), and miR-203a-3p (D) levels in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing (red) and control vector-transduced (blue) HFKs. The top graphs show miR expression from two HFK populations determined by miR-seq. The bottom graphs show expression of the corresponding miRs in three additional HFK populations determined via RT-qPCR. Expression of the noncoding snRNA U6 spliceosomal RNA was used as an internal control in TaqMan miR assays. Results represent averages and standard deviations of at least three independent experiments.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIG 3 RNA-seq of large RNAs from HPV16 E6/E7-expressing or control vector-transduced HFKs. (A) Volcano plot of RNA-seq data with black dots representing the average expression of individual RNAs in two HFK populations. The –log10-transformed FDR is plotted on the y axis, and the log2-transformed fold change (FC) in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs compared to controls is on the x axis. Vertical red lines indicate the FC thresholds (−2 ≥ FC ≥2), and horizontal red lines indicate the FDR threshold (FDR, ≤0.05). (B) Graph of the top 15 up- and downregulated RNAs in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.
FIG 3 RNA-seq of large RNAs from HPV16 E6/E7-expressing or control vector-transduced HFKs. (A) Volcano plot of RNA-seq data with black dots representing the average expression of individual RNAs in two HFK populations. The –log10-transformed FDR is plotted on the y axis, and the log2-transformed fold change (FC) in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs compared to controls is on the x axis. Vertical red lines indicate the FC thresholds (−2 ≥ FC ≥2), and horizontal red lines indicate the FDR threshold (FDR, ≤0.05). (B) Graph of the top 15 up- and downregulated RNAs in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIG 4 Schematic of the miR-mRNA expression-pairing pipeline. The miRNA target filter in Qiagen’s IPA software was used for pairing of the miR-seq and RNA-seq data sets. The horizontal red line indicates where threshold cutoffs were used, and blue text denotes key steps in the analysis process. See the text for details.
FIG 4 Schematic of the miR-mRNA expression-pairing pipeline. The miRNA target filter in Qiagen’s IPA software was used for pairing of the miR-seq and RNA-seq data sets. The horizontal red line indicates where threshold cutoffs were used, and blue text denotes key steps in the analysis process. See the text for details.CC BY · PubMed Central
FIG 5 Modulation of miR-203a-3p targets and analysis of miR-203a-3p expression. Effects of a miR-203a-3p mimic (MIM, green) or an LNA inhibitor (light blue) on TP63 (A) and BMI1 (B) levels in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs. Expression of 18S rRNA was used as an internal control, and values were normalized to a negative control (C) mimic or LNA. TP63 and BMI1 expression was assessed by RT-PCR. (C) Expression of miR-203a-3p in three independently derived HFK populations expressing HPV16 E6, E7, or E6/E7 or a control vector via TaqMan miR assay. Expression of the noncoding snRNA U6 spliceosomal RNA was used as an internal control. Results represent averages of at least three independent experiments.
FIG 5 Modulation of miR-203a-3p targets and analysis of miR-203a-3p expression. Effects of a miR-203a-3p mimic (MIM, green) or an LNA inhibitor (light blue) on TP63 (A) and BMI1 (B) levels in HPV16 E6/E7-expressing HFKs. Expression of 18S rRNA was used as an internal control, and values were normalized to a negative control (C) mimic or LNA. TP63 and BMI1 expression was assessed by RT-PCR. (C) Expression of miR-203a-3p in three independently derived HFK populations expressing HPV16 E6, E7, or E6/E7 or a control vector via TaqMan miR assay. Expression of the noncoding snRNA U6 spliceosomal RNA was used as an internal control. Results represent averages of at least three independent experiments.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 59

  1. 10.1016/j.coviro.2012.05.004 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.virusres.2009.06.008 · DOI
  3. 10.1016/j.chom.2014.02.011 · DOI
  4. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81683-9 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Boyer SN Wazer DE Band V . 1996. E7 protein of human papillomavirus-16 induces degradation of retinoblastoma protein through the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. Cancer Res56:4620–4624.
  6. 10.1006/viro.1997.8851 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1016/0092-8674(90)90409-8 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.2174/2211536611302010002 · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1101/gr.082701.108 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.01.002 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.08.028 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1038/nature03315 · DOI · Paper page
  13. 10.1128/JVI.01175-06 · DOI
  14. 10.1073/pnas.1401430111 · DOI
  15. 10.1128/JVI.00153-13 · DOI
  16. 10.1073/pnas.85.19.7169 · DOI · Paper page
  17. 10.1093/nar/gkq1027 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1093/nar/gkm952 · DOI
  19. 10.1093/nar/gkj112 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1093/nar/gkh023 · DOI
  21. 10.1039/c5mb00415b · DOI
  22. 10.1093/emboj/cdf476 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.cell.2008.02.019 · DOI
  24. 10.1016/S1534-5807(03)00227-2 · DOI
  25. 10.1101/gad.1310605 · DOI
  26. 10.1126/science.1109020 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2004.02.019 · DOI
  28. 10.1038/ng1590 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.1155/2014/782490 · DOI
  30. 10.1128/JVI.77.18.9852-9861.2003 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.1126/science.2157286 · DOI · Paper page
  32. 10.1128/JVI.00078-10 · DOI · Paper page
  33. 10.1128/JVI.00703-10 · DOI
  34. 10.3892/ol.2015.3080 · DOI
  35. 10.1016/j.molonc.2012.09.006 · DOI
  36. 10.1038/nature03702 · DOI
  37. 10.1038/ng.2007.30 · DOI
  38. 10.1002/hed.21475 · DOI
  39. 10.1186/s12885-015-1888-3 · DOI
  40. 10.1038/bjc.2011.457 · DOI
  41. 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-13-0121 · DOI
  42. 10.1016/j.ajpath.2014.08.004 · DOI
  43. 10.4161/cc.9.13.12061 · DOI
  44. 10.1128/MCB.01372-09 · DOI
  45. 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.05.017 · DOI
  46. 10.4161/cc.6.13.4436 · DOI
  47. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-1569 · DOI
  48. 10.1371/journal.pone.0010615 · DOI
  49. 10.1038/nature08199 · DOI
  50. 10.3390/ijms160612773 · DOI
  51. 10.1126/scisignal.2000594 · DOI · Paper page
  52. 10.1038/onc.2012.424 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.1128/jvi.65.1.473-478.1991 · DOI · Paper page
  54. 10.1155/2014/289548 · DOI
  55. 10.1016/0306-9877(95)90228-7 · DOI
  56. 10.1186/gb-2009-10-3-r25 · DOI · Paper page
  57. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp120 · DOI
  58. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352 · DOI · Paper page
  59. 10.1186/gb-2010-11-3-r25 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Harden, M. E., Prasad, N., Griffiths, A., & Munger, K.
Affiliations
  • Program in Virology, Division of Medical Sciences, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  • Genomic Services Laboratory, HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology, Huntsville, Alabama, USA
  • Department of Virology and Immunology, Texas Biomedical Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas, USA
  • Department of Developmental, Molecular and Chemical Biology, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Venue
mBio
Published
2017-03-08
Volume
8
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 2161-2129
  • 2150-7511
Cited by
64
References
8
Language
en
Funders
HHS | NIH | National Cancer Institute (5F31CA180516-02, 5R01CA066980-22)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review