↓ Skip to main content

miR-16 induction after CDK4 knockdown is mediated by c-Myc suppression and inhibits cell growth as well as sensitizes nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells to chemotherapy

Overview of attention for article published in Tumor Biology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
miR-16 induction after CDK4 knockdown is mediated by c-Myc suppression and inhibits cell growth as well as sensitizes nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells to chemotherapy
Published in
Tumor Biology, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s13277-015-3966-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Qingping Jiang, Yajie Zhang, Mengyang Zhao, Qiulian Li, Ruichao Chen, Xiaobing Long, Weiyi Fang, Zhen Liu

Abstract

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4) is a member of cyclin-dependent kinase family which regulates G1 to S cell cycle transition. CDK4 activity is increased in many tumor types. Here, we report a negative automodulatory feedback loop between CDK4 and miR-16 that regulates cell cycle progression in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). By miRNA array and real-time PCR, we identified upregulation of tumor suppressor miR-16a, which inhibited cell cycle progression and sensitized NPC cells to chemotherapy. CDK4 knockdown reduced the expression of c-Myc, the latter of which directly suppresses the miR-16 expression by directly binding to the miR-16 promoter. Moreover, we found that miR-16 upregulation could reduce CDK4 expression by repressing CCND1 and thus forms a feedback loop via the CDK4/c-Myc/miR-16/CCND1 pathway. Finally, miR-16 was negatively correlated with CDK4 expression in NPC biopsies. In summary, our results define a double-negative feedback loop involving CDK4 and miR-16 mediated by c-Myc that modulates NPC cell growth and chemotherapy sensitivity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 3 19%
Unknown 4 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 19%
Chemical Engineering 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 19%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,291,881
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Tumor Biology
#1,834
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#228,664
of 272,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tumor Biology
#156
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,622 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 272,396 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.