BioMed Research International

BioMed Research International / 2015 / Article

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2015 |Article ID 532451 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/532451

Balázs Murnyák, László Bognár, Álmos Klekner, Tibor Hortobágyi, "Epigenetics of Meningiomas", BioMed Research International, vol. 2015, Article ID 532451, 6 pages, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/532451

Epigenetics of Meningiomas

Academic Editor: Valeria Barresi
Received25 Nov 2014
Accepted14 Dec 2014
Published25 May 2015

Abstract

Meningiomas account for one-third of all adult central nervous system tumours and are divided into three WHO grades. In contrast to the relatively well characterized genetic alterations, our current understanding of epigenetic modifications involved in the meningioma-genesis and progression is rather incomplete. Contrary to genetic alterations, epigenetic changes do not alter the primary DNA sequence and their reversible nature serves as an excellent basis for prevention and development of novel personalised tumour therapies. Indeed, growing body of evidence suggests that disturbed epigenetic regulation plays a key role in the pathogenesis of meningiomas. Altered DNA methylation, microRNA expression, histone, and chromatin modifications are frequently noted in meningiomas bearing prognostic and therapeutic relevance. In this review we provide an overview on recently identified epigenetic alterations in meningiomas and discuss their role in tumour initiation, progression, and recurrence.

1. Introduction

Meningiomas originate from arachnoidal cap cells of the leptomeninges and account for around 30% of all central nervous system (CNS) tumours in adults. Their incidence increases with age with a female : male ratio of 2 : 1. Furthermore, autopsy and imaging studies indicate that the prevalence of subclinical meningiomas is roughly 3% in the population [1]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) meningiomas can be divided into three histological grades: benign (grade 1), atypical (grade 2), and anaplastic meningiomas (grade 3). Besides this classification several other subtypes and variants exist (Table 1) [2, 3]. Although, 90% of meningiomas are typically benign slow-growing tumours, grade 2 and 3 tumours exhibit aggressive clinical phenotype with an increased risk of recurrence and invasive growth pattern [4]. The main histopathological characteristics of the different grades and subtypes were thoroughly reviewed by Riemenschneider et al. [5].


Histological subtypes

Benign meningioma 
(WHO grade 1)
Meningothelial, fibrous or fibroblastic, transitional or mixed, psammomatous, angiomatous, microcystic, secretory, lymphoplasmacyte-rich, and metaplastic meningioma

Atypical meningioma 
(WHO grade 2)
Chordoid, clear cell, atypical, and brain invasive meningioma

Anaplastic meningioma 
(WHO grade 3)
Papillary, rhabdoid, and anaplastic or malignant meningioma

However, most meningiomas are sporadic; they are rarely associated with familial tumour syndromes such as Li-Fraumeni, Turcot, Gardener, von Hippel-Lindau, Cowden, Gorlin, and multiple endocrine neoplasia type I (MEN1) [6]. The aetiology of meningiomas is still unclear; ionizing radiation, head trauma, hormone-replacement therapy, and advanced age are the established risk factors though [7]. While the cytogenetic landscape of tumours is well known, the molecular mechanisms underlying progression and recurrence are not well defined. Cytogenetic alterations of chromosome 22 and NF2 gene are characteristic genetic alterations in early tumorigenesis and are frequently noted in higher grade tumours. In contrast to benign meningiomas, grade 2 and 3 tumours display more complex cytogenetic and molecular background with activation of oncogenes, inactivation of tumour suppressor genes, and alterations in other genes involved in several cellular pathways (Figure 1) [8]. Despite the identification of many potential molecular targets current treatment strategies are still limited to conventional forms of tumour therapy [9].

During the last decade, disruption of normal epigenetic regulation has been recognized as a novel hallmark of cancer [10]. Deeper understanding of epigenetic modifications in meningiomas may increase our knowledge regarding tumorigenesis, progression, and recurrence. The goal of our review is to provide an overview of advances in the field of meningioma epigenetics with focus on possible biomarkers which may open the door to novel and more effective molecular diagnosis and therapies.

2. Epigenetic Profile of Meningiomas

In the past cancer was viewed as a disease initiated by the accumulation of genetic alterations causing neoplastic transformation in the respective cell type of origin. However, in the new millennium, it has become evident that also epigenetic regulation plays a prominent role in tumorigenesis. In principle, epigenetic modifications are heritable changes that influence gene expression without altering the primary sequence of DNA [11]. Besides cancer, disruption of the normal epigenetic regulation may also contribute to the pathogenesis of inflammatory, autoimmune, metabolic, neurological, and blood disorders [12]. Since the basics of epigenetics in cancer had been established it has become one of the most promising research fields of neurooncology which may reveal potential targets for drug development and therapy [13]. However, the epigenetic landscape of meningiomas remains still incomplete with altered DNA methylation, aberrant microRNA expression, and mutant epigenetic modifiers (EMGs) involved in histone and chromatin modifications being potential epigenetic markers of progression and recurrence (Table 2).


Epigenetic alterationsAffected genesDistribution between WHO gradesPossible effects in meningioma

Promoter methylationTIMP3 Grades 1 < 2 < 3Associated with tumour progression and aggressiveness parameters
HOXA7, HOXA9, and HOXA10 Grades 1 < 2 < 3Associated with tumour progression and aggressiveness parameters
RASSF1A Grades 1 < 2 < 3Associated with the malignant transformation of a meningioma
TP73 Grades 1 < 2 < 3Associated with the malignant transformation of a meningioma
NDRG2 Grades 1 < 2 < 3Associated with malignant progression and predisposition to recurrence
MAL2 Grade 1Unknown
IGF2BP1 Grade 2Increases the malignant potential of tumours
PDCD1 Grade 2Increases the malignant potential of tumours

Disturbed chromatin regulationKDM5C Grades 1 and 3Disturbed chromatin regulation
KDM6A Grade 2Disturbed chromatin regulation
SMARCB1 Grade 1 Abnormal chromatin remodelling

Abnormal microRNAs expressionmiR-29c-3p Grades 1 > 2 > 3Associated with advanced clinical stages
miR-219-5pGrades 1 > 2 > 3Associated with advanced clinical stages
miR-190aGrades 1 < 2 < 3Associated with advanced clinical stages
miR-200aUnknownFunctions as a multifunctional tumour suppressor miRNA
miR-145Grades 1 > 2; 3Has an important antimigratory and antiproliferative function

2.1. Aberrant DNA Methylation in Meningiomas

Altered DNA methylation was the first epigenetic mark shown to be associated with cancer caused by both global DNA hypomethylation and/or promoter hypermethylation of certain genes. De novo methylation of DNA is catalysed by the enzymes DNMT3A and DNMT3B whereas maintenance of methylation is mediated by DNMT1 (Figure 2) [14, 15].

Intriguingly, NF2 (neurofibromatosis-2; a gene known to be frequently involved in development of meningiomas) promoter methylation does not play a key role in meningioma development [16]. Nevertheless, emerging evidence supports the involvement of DNA methylation in meningioma progression [13]. In contrast to NF2, the promoter methylation of tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 3 (TIMP3), located quite close to the NF2 gene, is inactivated in meningiomas [17]. Hypermethylation of TIMP3 is present in 67% of anaplastic meningiomas, but only in 22% of atypical and 17% of benign meningiomas. Thus, inactivation of TIMP3 by methylation may be involved in meningioma progression and can be a potential marker of an aggressive, high-grade meningioma phenotype [18]. Similar to TIMP3, repression of HOXA7, HOXA9, and HOXA10  in meningioma is also associated with clinically aggressive behaviour. DNA methylation levels of HOXA7, HOXA9, and HOXA10  were reported to be significantly higher in atypical and anaplastic meningiomas than in the benign form [19]. The methylation status of these three genes was lower in newly diagnosed grade 1 meningiomas in contrast to their recurrent counterpart and multiplex meningiomas presented with significantly higher HOXA10 methylation as compared to solitary meningiomas [20]. Promoter methylation of RASSF1A, TP73, and NDRG2 is more frequent in higher grade tumours than in benign meningioma [21, 22]. Repressed O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) by promoter methylation is a prognostic biomarker in glioblastoma (GBM) [23]. The alkylating chemotherapeutic agent temozolomide (TMZ) increases the overall survival in GBM patients where the MGMT gene is methylated [24]. Unlike the vast majority of gliomas, testing the MGMT methylation status is not essential because the gene is unmethylated in the majority of meningiomas [25]. On the other hand, Larijani et al. found an increased but statistically not significant MGMT methylation with higher tumour grade, it was more frequent in males [26].

High-throughput techniques have made the genome-wide methylation analysis of human tumours including meningiomas possible. Evidence suggests that anaplastic meningioma could be distinguished from atypical and benign tumours according to DNA methylation patterns [19]. In addition, unlike in benign meningiomas, grade 2 and 3 tumours demonstrate increased global DNA hypomethylation. Interestingly, the majority of hypermethylated genes are suppressed in all tumours, but MAL2 is highly expressed in grade 1 and silenced in grade 3 meningiomas [27]. Another study identified nine differentially methylated genes by whole genome methylation analysis of benign and atypical meningiomas. The largest difference in methylation status was observed in IGF2BP1 and PDCD1 [28]. IGF2BP1 encodes the IGF2 mRNA binding protein 1 (IGF2BP1) which mediates the cytoplasmic fate of specific target mRNAs including ACTB and CD44. IGF2BP1 is a potent oncogenic factor that regulates the adhesion, migration, and invasiveness of tumour cells by modulating intracellular signalling [29].

Using genome-wide methylation analysis, grade 1 and 2 meningiomas can be divided into three subgroups. Based on this result, a simplified scoring system with five hypermethylated genes (HOXA6, HOXA9, PENK, UPK3A, and IGF2BP1) was proposed. This classification correlates well with recurrence and progression but there was no association with WHO histological or Simpson neurosurgical grades [30].

2.2. Mutations Related to Histone Modifications

Histone modifications are disturbed in many diseases including cancer. Histone octamer cores are formed by two copies of each histone protein (H2A, H2B, H3, and H4) and one H1 linker histone [31, 32]. Besides DNA condensation, histone proteins are also involved in regulation of gene expression by posttranslational modifications which mainly occur along their N-terminal tail. Histones can be modified by acetylation, methylation, phosphorylation, sumoylation, and ubiquitination. These modifications can result in an open (euchromatin) or closed (heterochromatin) state of the chromatin [31, 33]. Hence, methylated H3K9, H3K27, and H4K20 can result in a closed chromatin conformation, while open chromatin structure can be caused by methylated H3K4, H3K36, and H3K79 [34].

Not much is known about the precise role of these modifications in the initiation and progression of cancer. Histone modification pattern such as histone H3 lysine 9 trimethylation (H3K9me3), which has a prognostic relevance in glioblastoma, has not been detected in meningiomas yet [35]. On the other hand, current genome-wide studies reported mutations of epigenetic modifier genes encoding proteins that regulate the chromatin structure of cells. Among the affected EMGs KDM5C and KDM6A are histone demethylases, while SMARCB1 and SMARCE1 are members of the SWI/SNF chromatin-remodelling complex [36, 37].

2.3. Role of MicroRNAs in Meningiomas

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are single-stranded noncoding RNAs, composed of 19 to 24 nucleotides, and play regulatory roles in important biological processes, such as cell cycle, proliferation, differentiation, migration, and apoptosis [38]. They cause posttranslational gene expression silencing by binding to complementary sites on their target mRNAs and initiate either degradation or inhibition of translation. Dysregulated miRNAs expression was described in a number of human diseases, including cardiovascular, autoimmune, inflammatory, neurodevelopmental diseases and cancer [39, 40]. Altered miRNA expression is associated with both genetic and epigenetic mechanisms. miRNAs usually have reduced levels in tumour cells and probably function as oncogenes or as tumour suppressors [41]. In cancer, several miRNAs correlate well with clinicopathological features, such as metastasis, recurrence, and length of survival [42].

MicroRNA expression profiling of meningiomas revealed downregulation of miR-29c-3p and miR-219-5p, which were associated with advanced clinical stages. High expression of miR-190a and low expression of miR-29c-3p and miR-219-5p are correlated with significantly higher recurrence rates in meningioma patients. Importantly, miR-190a expression level is a prognostic predictor of postsurgical outcomes [43]. The mRNA of β-catenin is a target for miR-200a; consequently β-catenin translation and Wnt signalling are suppressed by overexpressed miR-200a [44], and miR-200a may act as a multifunctional tumour suppressor miRNA. A direct correlation was found between the downregulation of miR-200a and the upregulation of β-catenin in meningiomas. Reduced miR-200a causes decreased expression of the ZEB1 and SIP1 transcription factors resulting in the downregulation of E-cadherin [45]. Moreover, it provokes an increased β-catenin and cyclin D1 expression and activates the Wnt signalling pathway in meningiomas [46]. miR-145 may have an important antimigratory and antiproliferative function in cancer [47]. Contrary to grade 1 meningiomas, significantly decreased miR-145 levels were detected in grade 2 and 3 tumours. Increased levels of miR-145 may result in downregulated collagen type V alpha (COL5A1) expression. Accordingly, COL5A1 expression is upregulated in atypical and anaplastic meningiomas [48].

3. Conclusion

In the past decade it has become evident that epigenetic factors are involved in tumour pathogenesis. Contrary to genetic alterations, epigenetic changes do not alter the primary DNA sequence and their reversible nature serves as an excellent basis for prevention and development of novel and personalised cancer therapies. Similar to other tumours, disturbed epigenetic regulation plays a key role in the pathogenesis of meningiomas. DNA methylation, microRNA expression, histone, and chromatin modifications can be altered in meningiomas with a prognostic relevance and may become a potential therapeutic target in the future.

Disclosure

Both Tibor Hortobágyi and Álmos Klekner are “last/senior authors” of this paper.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

Recent review was supported by the National Brain Research Program, Hungary, Grants nos. KTIA_13_NAP-A-II/7 (Tibor Hortobágyi) and KTIA_13_NAP-A-V/3 (Álmos Klekner) and by the Janos Bolyai Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (Álmos Klekner).

References

  1. J. Wiemels, M. Wrensch, and E. B. Claus, “Epidemiology and etiology of meningioma,” Journal of Neuro-Oncology, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 307–314, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. D. N. Louis, H. Ohgaki, O. D. Wiestler et al., “The 2007 WHO classification of tumours of the central nervous system,” Acta Neuropathologica, vol. 114, no. 2, pp. 97–109, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. T. Csonka, B. Murnyák, R. Szepesi, A. Kurucz, Á. Klekner, and T. Hortobágyi, “Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP1) and p53 labelling index correlates with tumour grade in meningiomas,” Folia Neuropathologica, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 111–120, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. Á. Klekner, G. Röhn, G. Schillinger, R. Schröder, N. Klug, and R.-I. Ernestus, “ODC mRNA as a prognostic factor for predicting recurrence in meningiomas,” Journal of Neuro-Oncology, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 67–75, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. M. J. Riemenschneider, A. Perry, and G. Reifenberger, “Histological classification and molecular genetics of meningiomas,” The Lancet Neurology, vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 1045–1054, 2006. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. C. Mawrin and A. Perry, “Pathological classification and molecular genetics of meningiomas,” Journal of Neuro-Oncology, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 379–391, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. B. Murnyák, T. Csonka, and T. Hortobágyi, “Molecular pathology of meningiomas,” Ideggyogy Sz. In press. View at: Google Scholar
  8. M. L. Suvà and D. N. Louis, “Next-generation molecular genetics of brain tumours,” Current Opinion in Neurology, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 681–687, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. W. C. Choy, W. Kim, D. Nagasawa et al., “The molecular genetics and tumor pathogenesis of meningiomas and the future directions of meningioma treatments,” Neurosurgical Focus, vol. 30, no. 5, article E6, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. N. Azad, C. A. Zahnow, C. M. Rudin, and S. B. Baylin, “The future of epigenetic therapy in solid tumours—lessons from the past,” Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 256–266, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. J. Sandoval and M. Esteller, “Cancer epigenomics: beyond genomics,” Current Opinion in Genetics and Development, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 50–55, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. V. A. DeWoskin and R. P. Million, “The epigenetics pipeline,” Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 661–662, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. M. Rodríguez-Paredes and M. Esteller, “Cancer epigenetics reaches mainstream oncology,” Nature Medicine, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 330–339, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. H.-C. Tsai and S. B. Baylin, “Cancer epigenetics: linking basic biology to clinical medicine,” Cell Research, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 502–517, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. M. Esteller, “Cancer epigenetics for the 21st century: what's next?” Genes and Cancer, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 604–606, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. C. M. Hansson, P. G. Buckley, G. Grigelioniene et al., “Comprehensive genetic and epigenetic analysis of sporadic meningioma for macro-mutations on 22q and micro-mutations within the NF2 locus,” BMC Genomics, vol. 8, article 16, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. S. Linsler, D. Kraemer, C. Driess et al., “Molecular biological determinations of meningioma progression and recurrence,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 4, Article ID e94987, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. D. Barski, M. Wolter, G. Reifenberger, and M. J. Riemenschneider, “Hypermethylation and transcriptional downregulation of the TIMP3 gene is associated with allelic loss on 22q12.3 and malignancy in meningiomas,” Brain Pathology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 623–631, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. S. He, M. H. Pham, M. Pease et al., “A review of epigenetic and gene expression alterations associated with intracranial meningiomas,” Neurosurgical Focus, vol. 35, no. 6, article E5, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. A. Di Vinci, C. Brigati, I. Casciano et al., “HOXA7, 9, and 10 are methylation targets associated with aggressive behavior in meningiomas,” Translational Research, vol. 160, no. 5, pp. 355–362, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. Y. Nakane, A. Natsume, T. Wakabayashi et al., “Malignant transformation-related genes in meningiomas: allelic loss on 1p36 and methylation status of p73 and RASSF1A,” Journal of Neurosurgery, vol. 107, no. 2, pp. 398–404, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. E. A. Lusis, M. A. Watson, M. R. Chicoine et al., “Integrative genomic analysis identifies NDRG2 as a candidate tumor suppressor gene frequently inactivated in clinically aggressive meningioma,” Cancer Research, vol. 65, no. 16, pp. 7121–7126, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. A. L. Rivera, C. E. Pelloski, M. R. Gilbert et al., “MGMT promoter methylation is predictive of response to radiotherapy and prognostic in the absence of adjuvant alkylating chemotherapy for glioblastoma,” Neuro-Oncology, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 116–121, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  24. M. E. Hegi, A.-C. Diserens, T. Gorlia et al., “MGMT gene silencing and benefit from temozolomide in glioblastoma,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 352, no. 10, pp. 997–1003, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. P. de Robles, J. McIntyre, S. Kalra et al., “Methylation status of MGMT gene promoter in meningiomas,” Cancer Genetics and Cytogenetics, vol. 187, no. 1, pp. 25–27, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. L. Larijani, Z. Madjd, A. Samadikuchaksaraei et al., “Methylation of O6-methyl guanine methyltransferase gene promoter in meningiomas—comparison between tumor grades I, II, and III,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 33–38, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. F. Gao, L. Shi, J. Russin et al., “DNA methylation in the malignant transformation of meningiomas,” PLoS ONE, vol. 8, no. 1, Article ID e54114, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. J. Vengoechea, A. E. Sloan, Y. Chen et al., “Methylation markers of malignant potential in meningiomas,” Journal of Neurosurgery, vol. 119, no. 4, pp. 899–906, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. N. Stöhr and S. Hüttelmaier, “IGF2BP1: a post-transcriptional “driver” of tumor cell migration,” Cell Adhesion & Migration, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 312–318, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. Y. Kishida, A. Natsume, Y. Kondo et al., “Epigenetic subclassification of meningiomas based on genome-wide DNA methylation analyses,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 436–441, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. T. Waldmann and R. Schneider, “Targeting histone modifications—epigenetics in cancer,” Current Opinion in Cell Biology, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 184–189, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. Y. Chervona and M. Costa, “Histone modifications and cancer: biomarkers of prognosis?” American Journal of Cancer Research, vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 589–597, 2012. View at: Google Scholar
  33. A. Spyropoulou, C. Piperi, C. Adamopoulos, and A. G. Papavassiliou, “Deregulated chromatin remodeling in the pathobiology of brain tumors,” NeuroMolecular Medicine, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1–24, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. Y. Z. Kim, “Altered histone modifications in gliomas,” Brain Tumor Research and Treatment, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 7–21, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. S. Venneti, M. M. Felicella, T. Coyne et al., “Histone 3 lysine 9 trimethylation is differentially associated with isocitrate dehydrogenase mutations in oligodendrogliomas and high-grade astrocytomas,” Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology, vol. 72, no. 4, pp. 298–306, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. M. J. Smith, J. O'Sullivan, S. S. Bhaskar et al., “Loss-of-function mutations in SMARCE1 cause an inherited disorder of multiple spinal meningiomas,” Nature Genetics, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 295–298, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. P. K. Brastianos, P. M. Horowitz, S. Santagata et al., “Genomic sequencing of meningiomas identifies oncogenic SMO and AKT1 mutations,” Nature Genetics, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 285–289, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. Q. Yang, C. Zhang, B. Huang et al., “Downregulation of microRNA-206 is a potent prognostic marker for patients with gastric cancer,” European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 953–957, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. A. M. Ardekani and M. M. Naeini, “The role of microRNAs in human diseases,” Avicenna Journal of Medical Biotechnology, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 161–179, 2010. View at: Google Scholar
  40. G. Arunachalam, R. Upadhyay, H. Ding, and C. R. Triggle, “MicroRNA signature and cardiovascular dysfunction,” Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. S. A. Melo and M. Esteller, “Dysregulation of microRNAs in cancer: playing with fire,” FEBS Letters, vol. 585, no. 13, pp. 2087–2099, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. P. D. C. Monroig and G. A. Calin, “MicroRNA and epigenetics: diagnostic and therapeutic opportunities,” Current Pathobiology Reports, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 43–52, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. F. Zhi, G. Zhou, S. Wang et al., “A microRNA expression signature predicts meningioma recurrence,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 132, no. 1, pp. 128–136, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. K. Huang, J.-X. Zhang, L. Han et al., “MicroRNA roles in beta-catenin pathway,” Molecular Cancer, vol. 9, article 252, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. P. A. Gregory, A. G. Bert, E. L. Paterson et al., “The miR-200 family and miR-205 regulate epithelial to mesenchymal transition by targeting ZEB1 and SIP1,” Nature Cell Biology, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 593–601, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. O. Saydam, Y. Shen, T. Würdinger et al., “Downregulated microRNA-200a in meningiomas promotes tumor growth by reducing E-cadherin and activating the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 29, no. 21, pp. 5923–5940, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. P. Dynoodt, R. Speeckaert, O. de Wever et al., “miR-145 overexpression suppresses the migration and invasion of metastatic melanoma cells,” International Journal of Oncology, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 1443–1451, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. N. Kliese, P. Gobrecht, D. Pachow et al., “MiRNA-145 is downregulated in atypical and anaplastic meningiomas and negatively regulates motility and proliferation of meningioma cells,” Oncogene, vol. 32, no. 39, pp. 4712–4720, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2015 Balázs Murnyák et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder
Views2491
Downloads1046
Citations

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.