Journal of Oncology

Journal of Oncology / 2019 / Article
Special Issue

Role of the Microenvironment in Gastrointestinal Tumors

View this Special Issue

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 |Article ID 4903152 | 11 pages |

MicroRNAs as Potential Biomarkers for Chemoresistance in Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagogastric Junction

Academic Editor: Kenneth J. Vega
Received14 Feb 2019
Accepted15 Jul 2019
Published29 Jul 2019


Concerning adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is regularly implemented, but patients’ response varies greatly, with some cases showing no therapeutic effect, being deemed as chemoresistant. Small, noncoding RNAs (miRNAs) have evolved as key players in biological processes, including malignant diseases, often promoting tumor growth and expansion. In addition, specific miRNAs have been implicated in the development of chemoresistance through evasion of apoptosis, cell cycle alterations, and drug target modification. We performed a retrospective study of 33 patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy by measuring their miRNA expression profiles. Histologic tumor regression was evaluated using resection specimens, while miRNA profiles were prepared using preoperative biopsies without prior therapy. A preselected panel of 96 miRNAs, known to be of importance in various malignancies, was used to test for significant differences between responsive (chemosensitive) and nonresponsive (chemoresistant) cases. The cohort consisted of 12 nonresponsive and 21 responsive cases with the following 4 miRNAs differentially expressed between both the groups: hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miRNA-221-3p, hsa-miRNA-31-5p, and hsa-miRNA-191-5p. The former 3 showed upregulation in chemoresistant cases, while the latter showed upregulation in chemosensitive cases. In addition, significant correlation between high expression of hsa-miRNA-194-5p and prolonged survival could be demonstrated ( value <0.0001). In conclusion, we identified a panel of 3 miRNAs predicting chemoresistance and a single miRNA contributing to chemosensitivity. These miRNAs might function as prognostic biomarkers and enable clinicians to better predict the effect of one or more reliably select patients benefitting from (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy.

1. Introduction

Since the discovery of microRNAs (miRNAs), which are small, noncoding RNAs with a length of 19–22 nucleotides [1], multiple studies have focused on the importance of their function and participation in human diseases ranging from inflammatory disorders and autoimmune diseases to malignant tumors including melanoma, various epithelial cancers, and hematological malignancies [2]. miRNAs have increasingly been used not only as diagnostic but also as prognostic biomarkers, and several studies have suggested the existence of tissue-specific miRNA signatures which might be used to classify different cancer types [35].

Regarding human cancer in general, miRNAs have been found to act not only as oncogenes, promoting tumor growth and dissemination, but also as tumor suppressors, inhibiting tumor cell proliferation and migration and inducing apoptosis [6]. Sometimes, their function varies in a single organ, showing divergent behavior in specific histologic tumor types (for example, adenocarcinoma vs. squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus) [7].

Concerning carcinomas of the upper gastrointestinal tract, especially gastric cancer and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction, a multitude of miRNAs have been identified as useful biomarkers: for example, upregulation of miRNA-17-5p, miRNA-20a, miRNA-106b, miRNA-150, and miRNA-93 has been reported to inhibit apoptosis and to promote cell cycle progression, whereas downregulation of miRNA-29 and miRNA-375 has been shown to increase cell growth and migration [4, 8]. Other commonly dysregulated miRNAs include miRNA-21 and miRNA-19a/b which both promote lymph node and distant metastases as well as invasion of blood vessels when overexpressed [4]. In addition, a seven-miRNA panel consisting of miRNA-10b, miRNA-21, miRNA-223, miRNA-338, let-7a, miRNA-30a-5p, and miRNA-126 has been found to reliably predict survival in gastric cancer patients and is related not only to overall but also relapse free survival [9]. Besides, various miRNAs have been found to be associated with poor survival in both gastric carcinomas and adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction, including miRNA-16, miRNA-21, miRNA-29, miRNA-125b, miRNA-130a, miRNA-141, miRNA-203a, miRNA-222, miRNA-302c, and miRNA-451 [8, 1015].

Complementing their diagnostic and prognostic significance, miRNAs have also been found to contribute to chemoresistance and/or chemosensitivity via regulation of apoptosis, DNA damage, and repair mechanisms, and epithelial-mesenchymal transition and modulation of drug targets, drug-metabolizing enzymes, and drug efflux transporters [16, 17]. Especially in gastric cancer, the following miRNAs (amongst others) have been found to substantially contribute to chemoresistance: let-7b, miRNA-106a, miRNA-142, miRNA-143, miRNA-21, miRNA-338, miRNA-340, miRNA-497, miRNA-503, and miRNA-582—their target genes including PTEN (phosphatase and tension homolog), BCL2 (B-cell lymphoma 2), and IGF1R (insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor) [1825]. For esophageal (adeno-) carcinoma, miRNA-141, miRNA-148a, miRNA-200c, miRNA-221, miRNA-27a, and miRNA-296 are said to contribute to chemoresistance [26]. This miR-mediated chemoresistance is mainly directed against commonly used therapeutic agents such as cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and vincristine [27].

Following these observations and taking into account that data concerning chemoresistance in carcinomas of the esophagogastric junction are still scarce and many studies have focused on cell lines rather than tissue specimen, our study aimed to further contribute to the knowledge for this entity by comparing miRNA profiles in chemoresistant and chemosensitive cancer tissue.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Selection of Cases

Samples from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue containing adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction were included in the present study. All patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Only tumor-containing samples of preoperative biopsies (without prior therapy) were used for miRNA analysis, while whole-resection specimens (postchemotherapeutic) were taken to determine the degree of histological regression and thereby treatment response. All cases were collected as part of routine clinical care at the University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck, during 1997–2013. All analyses performed were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and had been approved by the local Ethics Committee beforehand (reference number 14-242A).

2.2. Histologic Examination

Samples were carefully examined by two researchers (CJ and JK) with a light microscope (Axioskop, Zeiss, Jena, Germany), and histologic tumor types were determined using the current WHO standard [28]. Regression after chemotherapy was determined using haematoxylin- and eosin-(H&E-) stained slides and rated according to the system devised by Becker et al. [29]. Regression grades 1a and 1b were considered as having responded to therapy (responder group), while regression grade 3 was considered nonresponsive (nonresponder group). Cases with regression grade 2 were not included in the study as an assignment to either group could not reliably be undertaken (partial response).

2.3. RNA Isolation and miRNA Profiling

RNA for profiling of miRNA was isolated from FFPE tissue using the RecoverAll™ total nucleic acid isolation kit (Applied Biosystems, Carlsbad, California, USA). RNA concentrations were quantified using the NanoDrop Spectrophotometer (Nanodrop Technologies, Montchanin, New Castle, Delaware, USA). Afterwards, reverse transcription (RT) using amounts of 20 ng of total RNA by applying the miRCURY LNA™ Universal cDNA Synthesis Kit II (Exiqon, Vedbaek, Denmark), containing synthetic RNA Spike Ins, was performed. 5 μl of the RT products was combined with the PCR master mix and nuclease-free water from the miRCURY LNA™ ExiLENT SYBR® Green master mix (Exiqon, Vedbaek, Denmark). After that, 10 μl of the PCR Master mix-cDNA mix was added to each 384-well plate of the miRCURY LNA™ Universal RT miR Ready-to-Use PCR, Cancer focus panel, V4 (Exiqon, Vedbaek, Denmark). Finally, qPCR was performed by using the LightCycler® 480 instrument (Roche molecular systems Inc., Mannheim, Germany). All reactions were carried out according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Initial data analysis was executed by using the LightCycler® 480 Software (Roche molecular systems Inc., Mannheim, Germany) to obtain raw Ct values. Ct values were used to determine the amount of miRNA in a sample (both parameters showing an inverse correlation).

2.4. Preprocessing of Data

In order to compensate for variations in quality of extracted RNA, extraction yield, and efficiency of reverse transcription, normalization of data was carried out using GenEx Software Version 6.1 (Trial Version; MultiD Analyses AB, Munich). The first normalization method used was the Normfinder algorithm which has been described in detail earlier [30]. In our analysis, a panel of 38 miRs from the data set and a single miR (hsa-miRNA-103a-3p) were selected for preprocessing as hsa-miRNA-103a-3p was stably expressed throughout the cohort and has been reported as being highly reliable for normalization of data [31]. Secondly, external controls (so-called Spike Ins—preformulated, commercially available RNAs with defined lengths and binding capacities), which were included in the beginning as potential references, were used to normalize the data [32]. The last normalization method used was the global mean algorithm which—in three steps—reduces nonspecific background noise, calculates the arithmetic mean value for all samples, and then subtracts this value from each individual value [33]. The global mean method is usually applied in cases where large numbers of miRNAs are tested and has been reported to be superior to other normalization methods in this particular setting [34].

2.5. Analysis of Subgroups

To test for significant differences in miRNA expression profiles between responder and nonresponder groups, the Mann–Whitney-U test for unpaired samples was applied using SPSS Statistics Version 22 (IBM, Ehringen, Germany). Because exploratory data analysis was performed, adjusting for multiple testing was not required. Afterwards, overlaps of differentially expressed miRNAs between the applied normalization procedures described above were compared.

2.6. Correlation with Clinical Characteristics

To estimate differences in clinical features (age, gender, differentiation grade, nodal status, depth of infiltration, perineural invasion, lymphovascular invasion, and presence of distant metastases) between both groups and between clinical features and miRNA expression levels, the χ2 test was applied and a value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

2.7. Correlation with Overall Survival

To assess the prognostic value of miRNA expression, the median for each analyzed miRNA was calculated. Cases were then dichotomized, either showing an expression level above or below the median as described previously [35]. Overall survival curves were visualized via Kaplan–Meier estimates using SPSS Statistics Version 22 (IBM, Ehringen, Germany). In addition, Cox regression analysis was used to test for independence, taking into consideration gender, depth of infiltration, differentiation grade, nodal status, and presence or absence of distant metastases.

Data were adjusted for multiple testing using the Bonferroni procedure; after that, a value <0.00052 was considered statistically significant for this test.

3. Results

3.1. Histology

Overall, 24 cases were classified as tubular adenocarcinoma, 3 cases as poorly cohesive carcinoma, 2 cases as mucinous adenocarcinoma, and 4 cases as undifferentiated/unclassifiable according to the current WHO standard [36]. After thorough histologic examination of whole-resection specimens, the cohort consisted of 12 nonresponders (regression grade 3) and 21 responders (regression grades 1a and 1b). Tumor regression was determined as mentioned above; representative examples of regression grading are shown in Figure 1. Further characteristic features of the study cohort are summarized in Table 1.

CharacteristicsRespondersNonresponders value

Total n2112
WHO classification
 Poorly cohesive21
Differentiation grade
 Well (G1)000.043
 Moderately (G2)197
 Poor (G3)25
pT (low)
pT (high)
Perineural invasion
Distant metastases

LVSI: lymphovascular space invasion; bold lettering in values indicates a statistically significant difference.
3.2. Correlation with Clinical Characteristics

Correlation between both groups showed that undifferentiated carcinomas and poorly differentiated carcinomas (differentiation grade 3) were more common in the nonresponder group, while responders showed a higher proportion of tubular adenocarcinomas ( values 0.034 and 0.043, respectively). No differences could be detected concerning gender, depth of infiltration, lymphovascular/perineural invasion, nodal status, or presence of distant metastases ( values between 0.087 and 0.443, as shown in Table 1).

3.3. Therapy Regimen

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered in all cases, and 3 patients received radiation therapy in addition (both belonging to the responder group with irradiation doses of 45 Gy, 59 Gy, and 66 Gy, respectively).

Concerning the nonresponder group, neoadjuvant chemotherapy consisted in most cases of 5-fluorouracil combined with leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and docetaxel (so-called FLOT regimen; 8/12 patients). The remaining patients received either 5-fluorouracil in combination with cisplatin (2 cases) or epirubicin combined with oxaliplatin (2 cases).

In the responder group, a combination of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil was administered in most cases (12/21 patients). Only 4 patients received treatment using the FLOT regimen, and 2 were treated with 5-fluorouracil in combination with leucovorin and etoposide. The remaining three patients received chemotherapy without 5-fluorouracil containing oxaliplatin, etoposide, and irinotecan.

3.4. miRNA Analysis

Overall, the following 4 miRNAs were differentially expressed between responder and nonresponder groups: hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miRNA-191-5p, hsa-miRNA-221-3p, and hsa-miRNA-31-5p.

Concerning the different normalisation methods, only minor variations were detected: applying the Normfinder algorithm, hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miRNA-191-5p, and hsa-miRNA-31-5p were differentially expressed ( values 0.03, 0.005, and 0.047). For normalisation with Spike Ins, differences in expression of hsa-miRNA-221-3p and hsa-miRNA-31-5p could be observed ( values 0.022 and 0.02). For normalisation with global mean, hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miRNA-191-5p, hsa-miRNA-221-3p, and hsa-miRNA-31-5p were differentially expressed ( values 0.025, 0.014, 0.04, and 0.033, respectively). Finally, for normalisation using hsa-miRNA-103a-3p, hsa-let-7f-5p and hsa-miRNA-31-5p showed differences in expression ( values 0.038 and 0.036).

Throughout all normalization methods, there was higher expression of hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miRNA-221-3p, and hsa-miRNA-31-5p in the nonresponder group, while hsa-miRNA-191-5p showed higher expression in the responder group. The respective miRNA expression patterns (Ct values) are depicted in Figure 2.

3.5. miRNAs and Tumor Differentiation Grade

Correlation between miRNA expression profiles and tumor differentiation grade found that poorer differentiation (G3) was significantly associated with decreased levels of hsa-miRNA-200a-3p and elevated levels of hsa-miRNA-21-5p, hsa-miRNA-222-3p, hsa-miRNA-25-3p, and hsa-let-7d-5p ( values 0.03–0.031).

3.6. miRNAs and Patients’ Prognosis

Complete survival data were available for 29 patients with a mean follow-up period of 44.52 months (range 1–100 months). During follow-up, 12 patients (41.38%) died. After adjusting for multiple testing, significant differences in survival according to high or low expression of miRNAs were detected only for hsa-miRNA-194-5p with a value <0.0001. Survival times in patients with higher expression were nearly three times longer than in those with low expression (97.67 months vs. 32.69 months). Cox regression analysis, however, could not show independence for prediction of patients’ survival after taking into consideration gender, depth of infiltration, differentiation grade, nodal status, and presence or absence of distant metastases (; hazard ratio 1.469; 95% confidence interval 0.527–4.096). In addition, there was no correlation between expression levels of hsa-miRNA-194-5p and drug response ().

Appropriate survival curves and mean survival times including 95% confidence interval are shown in Figure 3 and Table 2.

Average survival (months)SD95% CI value


4. Discussion

The mechanisms underlying chemotherapy and multidrug resistance in human cancer are polymorphic [37]. In this context, miRNAs have been found to regulate apoptosis, DNA repair, and epithelial-mesenchymal transition and to modulate drug targets, drug-metabolizing enzymes, or drug efflux transporters [16, 17]. In our study, analyzing adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction, we identified a panel of four miRNAs which were differentially expressed between patients responding or not responding to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We found higher expression of hsa-let-7f-5p, hsa-miRNA-221-3p, and hsa-miRNA-31-5p in the nonresponder group, while hsa-miRNA-191-5p showed higher expression in the responder group. The molecular mechanisms contributing to chemoresistance or chemosensitivity concerning these four miRNAs are—up to date—not fully understood. Nevertheless, the function and effects of these miRNAs as stated in the literature might give some clues as to what the underlying mechanisms might be: for hsa-let-7f-5p, a proangiogenic effect has been reported; thus, overexpression might contribute to tumor progression via tumor neoangiogenesis [3840]. For hsa-miRNA-221-3p, cell cycle regulation has been reported as a key mechanism in tumor progression; in addition, in cervical cancer, increased expression levels are associated with epithelial-mesenchymal transition, migration, and invasion by targeting TWIST2 [41, 42]. For human glioblastomas, cervical and colon carcinoma cells downregulation of PTEN and activation of Akt and STAT3—mediated by increased levels of hsa-miRNA-221-3p—have been shown as key players in tumor cell survival and radio- and chemoresistance [4346]. In addition, in hepatocellular carcinoma, upregulation of hsa-miRNA-221-3p decreases the expression of HDAC6, a tumor suppressor, and promotes tumorigenesis [47]. One study focusing solely on esophageal adenocarcinomas showed that the chemoresistance was conveyed through alteration of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway and DKK2, CDH1, CD44, MYC, and ABCG2 expression [26]. Concerning hsa-miRNA-31-5p, only few studies have addressed how increased expression contributes to chemoresistance: in malignant pleural mesothelioma and hepatocellular carcinoma, it promotes chemoresistance by targeting OCT1 and ABCB9 [48, 49]. In ovarian cancer, chemoresistance is increased by modulation of specific calcium-regulated potassium channels [50]. Conversely, an opposite effect has also been reported: overexpression of hsa-miRNA-31-5p decreases levels of stathmin 1, a microtubule-depolymerizing molecule that leads to reduced chemosensitivity in ovarian cancer [51]. In addition, in osteosarcoma, upregulation of hsa-miRNA-31-5p inhibits tumor cell migration and invasion by targeting PI3K3C2A [52]. Regarding hsa-miRNA-191-5p, the few studies conducted so far show that overexpression promotes chemoresistance by modulating p53 and TET1 in cholangiocarcinomas [53]. Furthermore, an association with various estrogen-dependent genes such as ANXA1, PIWIL2, CASP4, ESR1/ESR2, PLAC1, and SOCS2, has been shown in breast cancer—however, up to date, no such data concerning adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction have been published [54].

The miRNA signature we discovered seems to differ from previously published data; other studies found that especially in esophageal carcinoma—in addition to miRNA-221—miRNA-141, miRNA-200c, miRNA-148a, miRNA-296, miRNA-23, miRNA-223, and miRNA-27a are substantially contributing to chemoresistance [26, 55]. Nevertheless, as some studies focus on plasma-circulating miRNAs or cell lines and not exclusively on expression in tumor tissue, results are comparable only to a limited degree [13]. Ours is—to our knowledge—the first study focusing on miRNA expression profiles in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction and their meaning for therapeutic response based on tissue specimens.

Hsa-let-7f-5p is located on the long arm of chromosome 9 (9q22.3) and shows involvement in immune cell differentiation, angiogenesis, and cellular growth arrest [5658]. It is commonly affected in multiple human cancers, including melanoma, lung, and head/neck cancer, with downregulation in the majority of cases [5961]. Nevertheless, upregulation is also encountered, for instance, in papillary, follicular, and anaplastic thyroid cancer as well as breast cancer and ovarian cancer [6264]. It has been associated not only with chemosensitivity and treatment response in gastric cancer [65] but also with chemotherapy resistance in breast cancer [37]. In our study, increased expression of hsa-let-7f-5p showed a distinctive association with chemoresistance which seems to be in contrast to previously published data concerning carcinomas of the upper gastrointestinal tract [65]. Still, as data concerning the association of miR expression levels and chemotherapy response are still often controversial and sometimes different functions (either as a tumor suppressor or as an oncogene) have been reported for different histologic tumor types (adenocarcinoma vs. squamous cell carcinoma) in a single organ, our data might only mirror a specific effect for a defined subset of patients [7].

Hsa-miRNA-221-3p is well characterized, and its function and involvement in human cancer has been extensively described. It is commonly known as an onco-miRNA, promoting tumor proliferation, invasion, dissemination, and metastasis [66, 67]. Multiple analyses have focused on cell lines where overexpression is commonly associated with chemoresistance and knockdown restores chemo- and/or radio sensitivity and induces tumor cell apoptosis [26, 68, 69]. In addition, in tissue experiments, hsa-miRNA-221-3p has been shown to promote resistance to a variety of regularly used therapeutic agents including 5-fluorouracil, tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and antiandrogens [37, 7073].

These findings are difficult to compare with our study population as both responders and nonresponders had been treated using a combination chemotherapy containing 5-fluorouracil in most cases (28/33 cases).

Downregulation of hsa-miRNA-31-5p has been described in a variety of human cancers, for instance, triple-negative breast carcinoma [67] and indicates shortened overall survival in gastric cancer [74] as well as the presence of locally advanced tumor stages, implicating the function as a miRNA with tumor suppressor properties.

Data concerning its association with therapy response are more controversial: while some studies report that overexpression promotes chemoresistance in gastric and ovarian cancer [50, 75] and breast carcinomas [76], others could demonstrate that upregulation in gallbladder carcinomas leads to increased chemosensitivity [77]. In addition, hsa-miRNA-31-5p expression levels seem to influence the therapy response not only in general but also according to different chemotherapeutic agents: in cell line experiments, it has been demonstrated that downregulation can promote resistance to platinum-based therapies and paclitaxel [78], while upregulation correlates with resistance against 5-fluorouracil [79]. Our study adds to the current understanding as we could demonstrate increased chemotherapy resistance in cases with higher hsa-miRNA-31-5p expression levels. It seems as if the therapeutic response might not only depend on the tumor subtype analyzed but also on the therapy applied and that hsa-miRNA-31-5p might exhibit both oncogenic and tumor suppressive functions according to a specific context.

Throughout the literature, hsa-miRNA-191-5p is described as having oncogenic properties, leading to increased tumor cell proliferation, invasion, and inhibition of apoptosis [80]. This holds true for various epithelial cancer types such as breast, pancreatic, and hepatocellular carcinomas [81] or cholangiocarcinoma. Here, overexpression is additionally associated with decreased overall survival [53]. Concerning its association with chemotherapy outcome, single studies have found hsa-miRNA-191-5p to promote chemoresistance [54], while others could show no influence on chemosensitivity or chemoresistance at all [82]. Overall, literature addressing this particular issue is still very sparse. In contrast to the data described above, in our study, high levels of hsa-miRNA-191-5p showed a clear-cut association with chemosensitive cases responding to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

It remains to be seen whether these results can be reproduced in larger studies or if a similar effect can be shown in other cancer entities. It may be conceivable that our findings reflect—as it is possibly the case with both hsa-let-7f-5p and hsa-miRNA-31-5p—an effect which is only discernible in a defined subset of tumors or specific tumor entities.

Due to the small case number in our study and the often limited availability of both pretherapeutic biopsies and resection specimen in a single institution, we additionally consulted a web database (GEO database) to supplement our data. Here, we could find only one additional study analyzing chemotherapy response in a very small cohort (8 cases) of upper gastrointestinal carcinomas, namely, stomach cancer, proposing a miRNA signature used for predicting chemotherapy outcome [65]. This signature, however, differed from our findings, showing an association of chemoresistance and high expression of let-7g, miR-342, miR-16, miR-181, miR-1, and miR-34. Whether this might be due to small case numbers in both studies or whether this reflects differences between two cancer entities with a fundamentally different pathophysiology remains to be seen. Another study analyzed esophageal adenocarcinomas (14 cases) and reported that miRNA-221 contributes to chemoresistance via the Wnt/β-catenin pathway, supporting our findings [26].

In addition, we correlated the miRNA expression with patients’ overall survival and could demonstrate that overall survival was significantly correlated with expression levels of hsa-miRNA-194-5p ( value <0.0001) although independence could not be demonstrated applying Cox regression analysis (; hazard ratio 1.469; 95% confidence interval 0.527–4.096). In accordance with our results, where higher levels of hsa-miRNA-194-5p corresponded to prolonged survival (97.67 months vs. 32.69 months), overexpression has been reported to inhibit cell proliferation and to act as a tumor suppressor in laryngeal SCC, prostate cancer, melanoma, bladder cancer, NSCLC, and clear cell renal carcinoma [8387]. In addition, overexpression has been found to inhibit growth and proliferation in gastric cancer cell lines and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma [88, 89]. Other miRNAs which are commonly linked to prolonged or shortened overall survival in gastric or esophageal carcinomas—for instance, miRNA-16, miRNA-21, miRNA-29, miRNA-125b, miRNA-130a, miRNA-141, miRNA-203a, miRNA-222, miRNA-302c, and miRNA-451—could not be reproduced in our study [4, 8, 9, 11, 14]. This might well be due to a smaller number of patients included in our study which limits the statistical reliability as well as the fact that, after adjusting for multiple testing, only a value <0.00052 was considered statistically significant which excluded a few otherwise statistically significant miRNAs.

5. Conclusion

Our results imply that miRNAs might play an important role in the evolution of chemoresistance and/or chemosensitivity in adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. Nevertheless, as—due to the restricted availability of both pre- and posttherapeutic tissue samples in a single institution—the number of patients in our study was limited, statistical results should be interpreted with caution. In addition, only tumor tissue was compared without establishing baseline levels of miRNA expression in nonneoplastic mucosa.

Regardless of the abovementioned limitations, our results contribute to other studies postulating that miRNAs might be a pretherapeutic means to predict therapy response in the future and better stratify patients who benefit from neoadjuvant therapy or who might not benefit at all and therefore could be spared of adverse effects of noneffective treatment strategies.

It remains to be seen if the miRNA signature we established for adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction can be reproduced in future studies or for different tumor entities.


Ct:Cycle threshold
hsa:Homo sapiens

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.


Part of this study has been presented as a scientific poster at the ASCP Annual Meeting 2017 (Chicago, Illinois).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Christina Just and Juliana Knief contributed equally to this work.


  1. R. C. Lee, R. L. Feinbaum, and V. Ambros, “The C. elegans heterochronic gene lin-4 encodes small RNAs with antisense complementarity to lin-14,” Cell, vol. 75, no. 5, pp. 843–854, 1993. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. J. Song, Y. Ouyang, J. Che et al., “Potential value of miR-221/222 as diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic biomarkers for diseases,” Frontiers in Immunology, vol. 8, p. 56, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  3. G. Juodzbalys, D. Kasradze, M. Cicciù et al., “Modern molecular biomarkers of head and neck cancer. Part I. Epigenetic diagnostics and prognostics: systematic review,” Cancer Biomarkers: Section A of Disease Markers, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 487–502, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. H.-S. Liu, “MicroRNAs as potential biomarkers for gastric cancer,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 20, no. 34, pp. 12007–12017, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. M. Zhou, H. Hara, Y. Dai et al., “Circulating organ-specific MicroRNAs serve as biomarkers in organ-specific diseases: implications for organ allo-and xeno-transplantation,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 17, no. 8, p. 1232, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. A. M. Strubberg and B. B. Madison, “MicroRNAs in the etiology of colorectal cancer: pathways and clinical implications,” Disease Models & Mechanisms, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 197–214, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  7. R. Hezova, A. Kovarikova, J. Srovnal et al., “MiR-205 functions as a tumor suppressor in adenocarcinoma and an oncogene in squamous cell carcinoma of esophagus,” Tumor Biology, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 8007–8018, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. D. Wang, Z. Fan, F. Liu, and J. Zuo, “Hsa-mir-21 and Hsa-mir-29 in tissue as potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for gastric cancer,” Cellular Physiology and Biochemistry, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 1454–1462, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  9. X. Li, Y. Zhang, Y. Zhang, J. Ding, K. Wu, and D. Fan, “Survival prediction of gastric cancer by a seven-microRNA signature,” Gut, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 579–585, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. H. Jiang, W.-W. Yu, L.-L. Wang, and Y. Peng, “miR-130a acts as a potential diagnostic biomarker and promotes gastric cancer migration, invasion and proliferation by targeting RUNX3,” Oncology Reports, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1153–1161, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. W. Liu, Z. Dong, J. Liang et al., “Downregulation of potential tumor suppressor miR-203a by promoter methylation contributes to the invasiveness of gastric cardia adenocarcinoma,” Cancer Investigation, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 506–516, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. Y. B. Lu, J. J. Hu, W. J. Sun, X. H. Duan, and X. Chen, “Prognostic value of miR-141 downregulation in gastric cancer,” Genetics and Molecular Research, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 17305–17311, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. M. Odenthal, J. Hee, and I. Gockel, “Serum microRNA profiles as prognostic/predictive markers in the multimodality therapy of locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 137, no. 1, pp. 230–237, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  14. C. Ren, H. Chen, C. Han, D. Fu, D. Wang, and M. Shen, “High expression of miR-16 and miR-451 predicating better prognosis in patients with gastric cancer,” Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, vol. 142, no. 12, pp. 2489–2496, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. J. G. Wu, J.-J. Wang, X. Jiang et al., “MiR-125b promotes cell migration and invasion by targeting PPP1CA-RB signal pathways in gastric cancer, resulting in a poor prognosis,” Gastric Cancer: Official Journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 729–739, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. G. Xiong, M. Feng, G. Yang et al., “The underlying mechanisms of non-coding RNAs in the chemoresistance of pancreatic cancer,” Cancer Letters, vol. 397, pp. 94–102, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. T. Zheng, J. Wang, X. Chen, and L. Liu, “Role of microrna in anticancer drug resistance. International journal of cancer,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 126, no. 1, pp. 2–10, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. Y. Fang, H. Shen, H. Li et al., “miR-106a confers cisplatin resistance by regulating PTEN/Akt pathway in gastric cancer cells,” Acta biochimica et biophysica Sinica, vol. 45, no. 11, pp. 963–972, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. X. Han, J.-J. Zhang, Z.-Q. Han, H.-B. Zhang, and Z.-A. Wang, “Let-7b attenuates cisplatin resistance and tumor growth in gastric cancer by targeting AURKB,” Cancer Gene Therapy, vol. 25, no. 11-12, pp. 300–308, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  20. X. Liu, H. Cai, W. Sheng, H. Huang, Z. Long, and Y. Wang, “microRNAs expression profile related with response to preoperative radiochemotherapy in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer,” BMC Cancer, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 1048, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. T. Wang, G. Ge, Y. Ding et al., “MiR-503 regulates cisplatin resistance of human gastric cancer cell lines by targeting IGF1R and BCL2,” Chinese Medical Journal, vol. 127, no. 12, pp. 2357–2362, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  22. S. M. Yang, C. Huang, X.-F. Li, M.-Z. Yu, Y. He, and J. Li, “miR-21 confers cisplatin resistance in gastric cancer cells by regulating PTEN,” Toxicology, vol. 306, pp. 162–168, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. Y. Zhang, Q. Lu, and X. Cai, “MicroRNA-106a induces multidrug resistance in gastric cancer by targeting RUNX3,” FEBS Letters, vol. 587, no. 18, pp. 3069–3075, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  24. W. Zhu, D. Zhu, S. Lu et al., “miR-497 modulates multidrug resistance of human cancer cell lines by targeting BCL2,” Medical Oncology, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 384–391, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. M. Zhuang, Q. Shi, X. Zhang et al., “Involvement of miR-143 in cisplatin resistance of gastric cancer cells via targeting IGF1R and BCL2,” Tumour Biology, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 2737–2745, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. Y. Wang, Y. Zhao, A. Herbst et al., “miR-221 mediates chemoresistance of esophageal adenocarcinoma by direct targeting of DKK2 expression,” Annals of Surgery, vol. 264, no. 5, pp. 804–814, 2016b. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. I. Riquelme, P. Letelier, A. Riffo-Campos, P. Brebi, and J. Roa, “Emerging role of miRNAs in the drug resistance of gastric cancer,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 17, no. 3, p. 424, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  28. J.-F. Flejou, “who classification of digestive tumors: the fourth edition,” Annales de Pathologie, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. S27–S31, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. K. Becker, J. D. Mueller, C. Schulmacher et al., “Histomorphology and grading of regression in gastric carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy,” Cancer, vol. 98, no. 7, pp. 1521–1530, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  30. C. L. Andersen, J. L. Jensen, and T. F. Ørntoft, “Normalization of real-time quantitative reverse transcription-PCR data: a model-based variance estimation approach to identify genes suited for normalization, applied to bladder and colon cancer data sets,” Cancer Research, vol. 64, no. 15, pp. 5245–5250, 2004. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. H. J. Peltier and G. J. Latham, “Normalization of microRNA expression levels in quantitative RT-PCR assays: identification of suitable reference RNA targets in normal and cancerous human solid tissues,” RNA, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 844–852, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. P. Fardin, S. Moretti, B. Biasotti, A. Ricciardi, S. Bonassi, and L. Varesio, “Normalization of low-density microarray using external spike-in controls: analysis of macrophage cell lines expression profile,” BMC Genomics, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 17, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. P. Mestdagh, P. V. Vlierberghe, A. D. Weer et al., “A novel and universal method for microRNA RT-qPCR data normalization,” Genome Biology, vol. 10, no. 6, p. R64, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. B. D’Haene, P. Mestdagh, J. Hellemans, and J. Vandesompele, “miRNA expression profiling: from reference genes to global mean normalization,” in Methods in Molecular Biology, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. D. Calatayud, C. Dehlendorff, M. K. Boisen et al., “Tissue MicroRNA profiles as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and periampullary cancers,” Biomarker Research, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 8, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. F. T. Bosman, F. Carneiro, R. H. Hruban, and N. D. Theise, Who Classification of Tumours of the Digestive System, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France, 4th edition, 2010.
  37. K. R. Kutanzi, O. V. Yurchenko, F. A. Beland, V. F. Checkhun, and I. P. Pogribny, “MicroRNA-mediated drug resistance in breast cancer,” Clinical Epigenetics, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 171–185, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. A. Eirin, S. M. Riester, X.-Y. Zhu et al., “MicroRNA and mRNA cargo of extracellular vesicles from porcine adipose tissue-derived mesenchymal stem cells,” Gene, vol. 551, no. 1, pp. 55–64, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  39. X. Qin, F. Chang, Z. Wang, and W. Jiang, “Correlation of circulating pro-angiogenic mirnas with cardiotoxicity induced by epirubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by docetaxel in patients with breast cancer,” Cancer Biomarkers, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 473–484, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  40. C. Urbich, A. Kuehbacher, and S. Dimmeler, “Role of microRNAs in vascular diseases, inflammation, and angiogenesis,” Cardiovasc Research, vol. 79, no. 4, pp. 581–588, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  41. X. Y. He, Z.-L. Tan, Q. Mou et al., “microRNA-221 enhances MYCN via targeting nemo-like kinase and functions as an oncogene related to poor prognosis in neuroblastoma,” Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 2905–2918, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  42. W. F. Wei, C.-F. Zhou, X.-G. Wu et al., “MicroRNA-221-3p, a TWIST2 target, promotes cervical cancer metastasis by directly targeting THBS2,” Cell Death & Disease, vol. 8, no. 12, p. 3220, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  43. J. Du, W. LiNa, C. Li et al., “MicroRNA-221 targets PTEN to reduce the sensitivity of cervical cancer cells to gefitinib through the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway,” Tumour Biology, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 3939–3947, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  44. W. Li, F. Guo, P. Wang, S. Hong, and C. Zhang, “miR-221/222 confers radioresistance in glioblastoma cells through activating Akt independent of PTEN status,” Current Molecular Medicine, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 185–195, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  45. Y. Ren, M. Yang, R. Ma et al., “Microcystin-LR promotes migration via the cooperation between microRNA-221/PTEN and STAT3 signal pathway in colon cancer cell line DLD-1,” Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, vol. 167, pp. 107–113, 2019. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  46. Q. Xie, Y. Yan, Z. Huang, X. Zhong, and L. Huang, “MicroRNA-221 targeting PI3-K/Akt signaling axis induces cell proliferation and BCNU resistance in human glioblastoma,” Neuropathology, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 455–464, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  47. H. J. Bae, K. H. Jung, J. W. Eun et al., “MicroRNA-221 governs tumor suppressor HDAC6 to potentiate malignant progression of liver cancer,” Journal of Hepatology, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 408–419, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  48. H. L. Moody, M. J. Lind, and S. G. Maher, “MicroRNA-31 regulates chemosensitivity in malignant pleural mesothelioma,” Molecular Therapy—Nucleic Acids, vol. 8, pp. 317–329, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  49. K. T. Que, Y. Zhou, Y. You et al., “MicroRNA-31-5p regulates chemosensitivity by preventing the nuclear location of PARP1 in hepatocellular carcinoma,” Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, vol. 37, no. 1, p. 268, 2018. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  50. P. Samuel, R. C. Pink, D. P. Caley et al., “Over-expression of miR-31 or loss of KCNMA1 leads to increased cisplatin resistance in ovarian cancer cells,” Tumour Biology, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 2565–2573, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  51. M. K. Hassan, H. Watari, T. Mitamura et al., “P18/Stathmin1 is regulated by miR-31 in ovarian cancer in response to taxane,” Oncoscience, vol. 2, pp. 294–308, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  52. L. M. Chao, W. Sun, H. Chen, B. Y. Liu, P. F. Li, and D. W Zhao, “MicroRNA-31 inhibits osteosarcoma cell proliferation, migration and invasion by targeting PIK3C2A,” European review for medical and pharmacological sciences, vol. 22, no. 21, pp. 7205–7213, 2018. View at: Google Scholar
  53. H. Li, Z.-Q. Zhou, Z.-R. Yang et al., “MicroRNA-191 acts as a tumor promoter by modulating the TET1-p53 pathway in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma,” Hepatology, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 136–151, 2017a. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  54. N. Nagpal, H. M. Ahmad, B. Molparia, and R. Kulshreshtha, “MicroRNA-191, an estrogen-responsive microRNA, functions as an oncogenic regulator in human breast cancer,” Carcinogenesis, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1889–1899, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  55. S. Komatsu, D. Ichikawa, T. Kawaguchi et al., “Plasma microRNA profiles: identification of miR-23a as a novel biomarker for chemoresistance in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma,” Oncotarget, vol. 7, no. 38, pp. 62034–62048, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  56. A. Kuehbacher, C. Urbich, A. M. Zeiher, and S. Dimmeler, “Role of dicer and drosha for endothelial microrna expression and angiogenesis,” Circulation Research, vol. 101, no. 1, pp. 59–68, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  57. O. C. Maes, H. Sarojini, and E. Wang, “Stepwise up-regulation of MicroRNA expression levels from replicating to reversible and irreversible growth arrest states in WI-38 human fibroblasts,” Journal of Cellular Physiology, vol. 221, no. 1, pp. 109–119, 2009. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  58. H. Wu, J. R. Neilson, P. Kumar et al., “miRNA profiling of naive, effector and memory CD8 T cells,” PLoS One, vol. 2, no. 10, Article ID e1020, 2007. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  59. S. S. Chang, W. W. Jiang, I. Smith et al., “MicroRNA alterations in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma,” International Journal of Cancer, vol. 123, no. 12, pp. 2791–2797, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  60. J. Y. Lee, H. J. Kim, N. A. Yoon et al., “Tumor suppressor p53 plays a key role in induction of both tristetraprolin and let-7 in human cancer cells,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 41, no. 11, pp. 5614–5625, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  61. S. Liang, L. He, X. Zhao et al., “MicroRNA let-7f inhibits tumor invasion and metastasis by targeting myh9 in human gastric cancer,” PLoS One, vol. 6, no. 4, Article ID e18409, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  62. A. I. Damanakis, S. Eckhardt, A. Wunderlich et al., “MicroRNAs let7 expression in thyroid cancer: correlation with their deputed targets HMGA2 and SLC5A5,” Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology, vol. 142, no. 6, pp. 1213–1220, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  63. L. X. Yan, X.-F. Huang, Q. Shao et al., “MicroRNA miR-21 overexpression in human breast cancer is associated with advanced clinical stage, lymph node metastasis and patient poor prognosis,” RNA, vol. 14, no. 11, pp. 2348–2360, 2008. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  64. H. Zheng, L. Zhang, Y. Zhao et al., “Plasma mirnas as diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers for ovarian cancer,” PLoS One, vol. 8, no. 11, Article ID e77853, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  65. C. H. Kim, H. K. Kim, R. L. Rettig et al., “miRNA signature associated with outcome of gastric cancer patients following chemotherapy,” BMC Medical Genomics, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 79, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  66. W. Liu, N. Song, H. Yao, L. Zhao, H. Liu, and G. Li, “miR-221 and miR-222 simultaneously target reck and regulate growth and invasion of gastric cancer cells,” Medical Science Monitor: International Medical Journal of Experimental and Clinical Research, vol. 21, pp. 2718–2725, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  67. M. Ouyang, Y. Li, S. Ye et al., “MicroRNA profiling implies new markers of chemoresistance of triple-negative breast cancer,” PLoS One, vol. 9, no. 5, Article ID e96228, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  68. Z. Chun-Zhi, H. Lei, Z. An-ling et al., “MicroRNA-221 and microRNA-222 regulate gastric carcinoma cell proliferation and radioresistance by targeting PTEN,” BMC Cancer, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 367, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  69. C. W. Dai, Q.-W. Bai, G.-S. Zhang et al., “MicroRNA let-7f is down-regulated in patients with refractory acute myeloid leukemia and is involved in chemotherapy resistance of adriamycin-resistant leukemic cells,” Leukemia & Lymphoma, vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1645–1648, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  70. M. Garofalo and C. M. Croce, “MicroRNAs as therapeutic targets in chemoresistance,” Drug Resistance Updates: Reviews and Commentaries in Antimicrobial and Anticancer Chemotherapy, vol. 16, no. 3–5, pp. 47–59, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  71. P. Magee, L. Shi, and M. Garofalo, “Role of microRNAs in chemoresistance,” Annals of Translational Medicine, vol. 3, no. 21, p. 332, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  72. L. Zhao, D. Zou, X. Wei et al., “MiRNA-221-3p desensitizes pancreatic cancer cells to 5-fluorouracil by targeting RB1,” Tumour Biology, vol. 37, no. 12, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  73. R. L. Zheng, Y.-J. Jiang, and X. Wang, “Role of micrornas on therapy resistance in Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma,” International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, vol. 7, no. 11, pp. 3818–3832, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  74. H. Wang, X. Zhang, Y. Liu et al., “Downregulated miR-31 level associates with poor prognosis of gastric cancer and its restoration suppresses tumor cell malignant phenotypes by inhibiting E2F2,” Oncotarget, vol. 7, no. 24, pp. 36577–36589, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  75. A. Korourian, R. Roudi, A. Shariftabrizi, and Z. Madjd, “MicroRNA-31 inhibits RhoA-mediated tumor invasion and chemotherapy resistance in MKN-45 gastric adenocarcinoma cells,” Experimental Biology and Medicine, vol. 242, no. 18, pp. 1842–1847, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  76. J. Lv, K. Xia, P. Xu et al., “miRNA expression patterns in chemoresistant breast cancer tissues,” Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, vol. 68, no. 8, pp. 935–942, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  77. M. Li, W. Chen, H. Zhang et al., “MiR-31 regulates the cisplatin resistance by targeting Src in gallbladder cancer,” Oncotarget, vol. 7, no. 50, pp. 83060–83070, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  78. T. Mitamura, H. Watari, L. Wang et al., “Downregulation of miRNA-31 induces taxane resistance in ovarian cancer cells through increase of receptor tyrosine kinase MET,” Oncogenesis, vol. 2, no. 3, p. e40, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  79. R. Hummel, C. Sie, D. I. Watson et al., “MicroRNA signatures in chemotherapy resistant esophageal cancer cell lines,” World Journal of Gastroenterology, vol. 20, no. 40, pp. 14904–14912, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  80. E. Elyakim, E. Sitbon, A. Faerman et al., “hsa-miR-191 is a candidate oncogene target for hepatocellular carcinoma therapy,” Cancer Research, vol. 70, no. 20, pp. 8077–8087, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  81. J. Zhao, C.-R. Qiao, Z. Ding et al., “A novel pathway in NSCLC cells: miR191, targeting NFIA, is induced by chronic hypoxia, and promotes cell proliferation and migration,” Molecular Medicine Reports, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 1319–1325, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  82. S. K. Patnaik, E. Kannisto, and S. Yendamuri, “Overexpression of microrna miR-30a or miR-191 in A549 lung cancer or BEAS-2B normal lung cell lines does not alter phenotype,” PLoS One, vol. 5, no. 2, Article ID e9219, 2010. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  83. B. Guo, Q. Hui, Y. Zhang, P. Chang, and K. Tao, “miR-194 is a negative regulator of GEF-H1 pathway in melanoma,” Oncology Reports, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 2412–2420, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  84. Q. Kong and X.-S. ChenT. TianX.-Y. Xia and P. Xu, “Microrna-194 suppresses prostate cancer migration and invasion by downregulating human nuclear distribution protein,” Oncology Reports, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 803–812, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  85. R. Nofech-Mozes, H. W. Z. Khella, A. Scorilas et al., “MicroRNA-194 is a marker for good prognosis in clear cell renal cell carcinoma,” Cancer Medicine, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 656–664, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  86. X. Zhu, D. Li., F. Yu et al., “miR-194 inhibits the proliferation, invasion, migration, and enhances the chemosensitivity of non-small cell lung cancer cells by targeting forkhead box a1 protein,” Oncotarget, vol. 7, no. 11, pp. 13139–13152, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  87. P. Li, H. Liu, A.-K. Yang et al., “MiR-194 functions as a tumor suppressor in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma by targeting Wee1,” Journal of Hematology & Oncology, vol. 10, no. 1, p. 32, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  88. J. Bao, J. H. Zou, C. Y. Li, and G. Q. Zheng, “miR-194 inhibits gastric cancer cell proliferation and tumorigenesis by targeting KDM5B,” European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 20, no. 21, pp. 4487–4493, 2016. View at: Google Scholar
  89. G. Cui, D. Liu, W. Li et al., “Original research: miR-194 inhibits proliferation and invasion and promotes apoptosis by targeting KDM5B in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma cells,” Experimental Biology and Medicine, vol. 242, no. 1, pp. 45–52, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2019 Christina Just 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

685 Views | 251 Downloads | 2 Citations
 PDF  Download Citation  Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

We are committed to sharing findings related to COVID-19 as quickly and safely as possible. Any author submitting a COVID-19 paper should notify us at to ensure their research is fast-tracked and made available on a preprint server as soon as possible. We will be providing unlimited waivers of publication charges for accepted articles related to COVID-19. Sign up here as a reviewer to help fast-track new submissions.