Combination of hepatocyte specific delivery and transformation dependent expression of shRNA inducing transcriptional gene silencing of c-Myc promoter in hepatocellular carcinoma cells
- Mohammad Khalid Zakaria†1,
- Imran Khan†1,
- Prashant Mani2,
- Parthaprasad Chattopadhyay1Email author,
- Debi P Sarkar2Email author and
- Subrata Sinha1, 3Email author
© Zakaria et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014
Received: 4 April 2014
Accepted: 28 July 2014
Published: 10 August 2014
A specific targeting modality for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) could ideally encompass a liver cell specific delivery system of a transcriptional unit that is active only in neoplastic cells. Sendai virosomes, derived from Sendai viral envelopes, home to hepatocytes based on the liver specific expression of asialoglycoprotein receptors (ASGPRs) which are recognized by the Sendai virosomal fusion (F) proteins. As reported earlier by us and other groups, transcriptional gene silencing (TGS) does not require continuous presence of the effector siRNA/shRNA molecule and is heritable, involving epigenetic modifications, leading to long term transcriptional repression. This could be advantageous over conventional gene therapy approaches, since continuous c-Myc inactivation is required to suppress hepatocarcinoma cells.
Exploiting such virosomal delivery, the alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) promoter, in combination with various tumour specific enhancers, was used to drive the expression of shRNA directed against ME1a1 binding site of the proto-oncogene c-Myc P2 promoter, in order to induce TGS in neoplastic liver cells.
The dual specificity achieved by the Sendai virosomal delivery system and the promoter/enhancer guided expression ensured that the shRNA inducing TGS was active only in liver cells that had undergone malignant transformation. Our results indicate that such a bimodal therapeutic system induced specific activation of apoptosis in hepatocarcinoma cells due to heterochromatization and increased DNA methylation of the CpG islands around the target loci.
The Sendai virosomal delivery system, combined with AFP promoter/enhancer expression machinery, could serve as a generalized mechanism for the expression of genes deleterious to transformed hepatocarcinoma cells. In this system, the epigenetic suppression of c-Myc could have an added advantage for inducing cell death in the targeted cells.
KeywordsHepatocellular carcinoma Sendai virosome Asialoglycoprotein receptors Transcriptional gene silencing shRNA c-Myc Alpha-fetoprotein Heterochromatization DNA methylation
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the sixth most prevalent cancer and the third leading cause of worldwide cancer related deaths . Genes of fetal or embryonic origin are often re-expressed in various tumours and alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) expression has been shown to be re-activated in HCC . In cancer gene therapy, the biggest challenges are cell specific targeting and tumour selective expression of the therapeutic gene. A number of reports have raised the issue of specificity and efficiency of gene transfer [3, 4], specifically to neoplastic cells. Specificity can be at two levels. Firstly, it could be at the level of delivery to a particular cell type. Usually, cell type specific antibodies/ligand-receptor units can be used [5–7]. These include binding to generalized ligands like the transferrin or folate receptors [8–11] or antibodies to cell surface antigens [12, 13]. Sendai virosomes specifically fuse with the hepatocytes through their fusion (F) protein’s terminal galactose moiety, that binds specifically with asialoglycoprotein receptors (ASGPRs) present only on the surface of hepatocytes . The Sendai F-virosomal system, lacking the hemagglutinin neuraminidase (HN) protein, is non-toxic and comparatively non-immunogenic. One of us earlier (D.P.S), has successfully demonstrated the expression of human uridinediphosphoglucuronate glucuronosyltransferase-1A1 (hUGT1A1) gene in the hepatocytes of Gunn rats for the treatment of jaundice . The expression of a transgene might be low due to its lysosomal translocation and failure to integrate into the host genome. Sendai F-virosome mediated delivery overcomes this limitation since the entrapped cargo is directly delivered into the cytoplasm, thus evading the endosomal pathway [16, 17]. This could enhance transgene expression and its longevity for therapeutic purposes.
Another level of specificity is at the level of tumour specific promoters . This relies on the fact that several genes, including oncofetal genes are expressed upon cell transformation, implying that the activation of such promoters takes place only in the transformed but not in the normal cells. Such neoplasia activated promoters include carcinogenic embryonic antigen (CEA), prostate specific antigen (PSA), L-plastin, osteocalcin, midkine etc. . For liver neoplasms, it has been shown that an AFP promoter could help achieve a HCC-targeted gene therapy [20–22]. Often, the tumour specific promoters are weak which can be augmented by utilizing various tumour specific enhancers  without compromising the specificity. The 5′ flanking region of the AFP gene consists of several enhancer like sequences  where one of the core enhancer region can augment gene expression in an engineered construct . However, the possibility of other enhancers could also be explored.
c-Myc regulates several cellular processes  and is crucial for stem cell maintenance . It is also essential for normal growth and proliferation since its inactivation produces lethal effects [28, 29], indicating its level has to be tightly regulated. Down-regulation of c-Myc both in vitro and in vivo has been shown to induce growth inhibition and differentiation of HCC [30–32]. ME1a1 binding site between P1 and P2 promoter of c-Myc is required for sustenance of transcriptionally active dual c-Myc promoters . Since the P2 promoter is associated with 75-90% of the c-Myc transcripts , it serves as an ideal candidate for targeting therapy. We have previously demonstrated that siRNA against c-Myc could induce TGS in glioma cells, leading to increased cell death .
Post-transcriptional gene silencing (PTGS) involves direct cleavage of the target mRNA by double stranded RNA (dsRNA) [35, 36], whereas Transcriptional Gene Silencing (TGS) induces epigenetic modifications such as CpG methylation and heterochromatization (H3K9Me2 and H3K27Me3) around the target loci [37–40]. The effects of TGS are heritable and lead to long term transcriptional repression of the target gene .
In the current study, we have tried to assess the combination of cell type specific delivery and tumour dependent activation for inducing TGS in hepatocellular carcinoma cells. There are no reports of TGS by shRNA driven through a tumour specific promoter delivered by a target specific vehicle. In order to impart strength and specificity to the induction of TGS, we have first generated novel combinations of the AFP promoter with AFP enhancer as well as with the nuclear factor kappa beta (NFκB) response element to drive the expression of shRNA targeting c-Myc P2 promoter. Usually shRNA has been expressed by constitutive polymerase (pol) III promoters  which fail to elicit tumour specificity. However, in this study, we have tried to achieve specificity as well as efficiency in transcription by using pol II based AFP promoter along with various enhancer elements. Since one of the key events in hepatic oncogenesis is the constitutive activation of NFκB transcription factor  and AFP , we have compared enhancer systems from both in our study.
Our results indicate that the Sendai virosomal delivery, combined with the AFP promoter/enhancer driven shRNA system, has the necessary specificity and efficiency to activate TGS in hepatocarcinoma cells, leading to cell death. The combination of both targeting entities is likely to be of an added advantage for cancer therapeutics.
HepG2, Huh7, and CHO cells were procured from American type culture collection (ATCC, USA) whereas Chang Liver cells were obtained from National centre for cell sciences (N.C.C.S), Pune. Cells were maintained in Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle’s Medium (DMEM; Sigma-Aldrich, Germany) supplemented with 10% calf fetal serum (Biowest, USA). The molecular characterization of Chang Liver cells was done before any experimentation (Additional file 1: Figure S1).
Generation of AFP promoter/enhancer +25-luciferase reporter systems
Generation of TGS inducing system: AFP promoter/enhancer +2 c-MycshRNA
100 pmoles of both sense and antisense oligonucleotides of c-Myc (with pre-added sticky ends; 5′ BamHI and 3′ HindIII) were suspended in 100 μl of 1X Annealing Buffer (10 mM Tris-HCL pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA and 100 mM NaCl). Oligonucleotides were heated for few minutes in boiling water. Temperature was maintained at 95-100°C for 5 minutes and was allowed to cool over night to room temperature. Agarose Gel Electrophoresis was performed to analyze and excise annealed oligonucleotides.
Test and control c-Myc shRNA sequence
Sequence 5′ to 3′
c-myc shRNA test sense strand
c-myc shRNA test antisense strand
c-myc shRNA scrambled sense strand
c-myc shRNA scrambled antisense strand
Cells were plated at 105 cells per well in a six-well plate, 3 × 105 cells per 25 cm2 flask or 106 cells per 75 cm2 flask (Corning, USA). Twenty-four hours later, they were transfected with different reporter or shRNA constructs using Lipofectamine™ 2000 (Invitrogen, USA) as per the manufacturer’s protocol.
Dual luciferase assay
All the three constructs: AFPPr + 25 – luc, AFPEn–Pr + 25 – luc and NFκBEn–Pr + 25 – luc (Figure 1A) were transfected in HepG2, Huh7, Chang Liver and CHO cells. After 48 hours, transactivation study was done by Dual Luciferase Assay (Promega, USA) following manufacturer’s protocol. The firefly luciferase activity was normalized against Renilla luciferase activity and expressed relative to promoter-less pGl3-Basic control vector. Results are representative of three independent sets of experiments.
Quantitative RT-PCR to evaluate c-Mycdown-regulation and shRNA expression
On the 5th and 6th day, post transfection of various test/scrambled shRNA constructs, RNA was isolated from HepG2, Huh7, Chang Liver and CHO cell lines using Trizol (Sigma-Aldrich, Germany). It was treated with DNase (MBI, Fermentas, USA) and quantified by Nanodrop 2000 (Thermo Fischer Scientific, USA). 1 μg of RNA was converted to cDNA using random decamer primers and Moloney Murine Leukemia Virus Reverse Transcriptase (MBI, Fermentas, USA). Real time PCR (RT-PCR) was done on Rotor-Gene 6000 real time PCR machine (Corbett Research, Australia) with the reaction mix containing SYTO 9 green fluorescent dye (Invitrogen, USA). Accurate quantification was done by averaging the geometric mean of multiple internal control reference genes  such as β-Actin, 18S, GAPDH and relative expression was estimated by Relative Expression Software Tool (REST; ). Primers utilized are given in Additional file 3: Table S1.
Similarly, for c-Myc shRNA quantitation, 1st-Strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Agilent) was utilized, as per the manufacturer’s protocol, and siRNA expression was estimated by RT-PCR. Custom made c-Myc siRNA specific primer was obtained separately (sequence in the Additional file 3: Table S1). Luciferase shRNA under CMV promoter (CMV - luc shRNA) served as a control.
Cell survival assay
2 × 104 cells seeded on to 24 well plates (Corning, USA) were transfected with various AFP promoter/enhancer driven shRNA constructs or their respective scrambled controls. On the 6th day, cells were subjected to MTT (Sigma-Aldrich, Germany) assay for percent cell survival. Furthermore, cell survival was also evaluated by cell counting, post staining with trypan blue (Sigma-Aldrich, Germany), by following manufacturer’s protocol.
105 cells were seeded in 25 cm2 cell culture flask (Corning, USA) followed by transfection with various shRNA constructs. On the 6th day, cells were fixed overnight in 70% ice-cold ethanol. Staining of cells was done using Propidium Iodide (PI; Sigma-Aldrich, Germany) and fluorescence was captured using Flow Cytometer (BD Biosciences, USA). Percentage of apoptotic cells (subG1) and other cell cycle phases were estimated using WinMDI software (http://winmdi.software.informer.com/2.8/).
On the 6th day, post transfection/virosomal delivery of various c-Myc shRNA constructs, cell lysates were prepared using triple lysis buffer and protein was estimated by Pierce BCA Protein Assay Kit (Thermo-scientific, USA). Proteins were run on 5% to 12% SDS-PAGE gels and electro transferred to nitrocellulose membranes (Bio-Rad, USA). Blocking was done with 4% bovine serum albumin (Sigma-Aldrich, Germany) and Immunoblotting was done with requisite primary antibodies: anti-actin (sc-8432), anti-c-Myc (9E10), anti-TERT (sc-377511) and anti-cyclin D3 (sc-6283); from SantaCruz Biotechnology, USA. Detection of specific proteins was done with horseradish peroxidase (HRP) conjugated secondary antibodies using ECL detection system (Applied Biosystems, USA).
Sendai virus culture
Sendai virus (Z strain) was grown in 10 - 11 day old embryonated chicken eggs, and extracted by utilizing procedure described in our previous report .
Generation of Sendai fusion (F) virosomes and R18 labeling
Sendai F-virosomes were prepared as described earlier . For Octadecyl Rhodamine B Chloride (R18; Invitrogen, USA) labeling, F-virosome (1 mg/ml) suspension was labeled by adding 10 μl ethanolic soution (1 mg/ml) of R18 in falcon tube while vortex mixing. The mixture was incubated in dark at room temperature for 30 minutes. Excess unbound R18 was removed by ultracentrifugation at 1,00,000 g for 1 hour at 4°C. The pellet was re-suspended in 10 mM phosphate buffered saline (PBS).
Study of live cell fusion: kinetics of F-virosomes
A measure of Sendai virus fusion with HepG2, Huh7, Chang Liver and CHO cells was done using R18 labeled F-virosomes. Heat inactivation of virosomal F-proteins was performed using procedure described in our earlier reports [16, 17]. HepG2, Huh7, Chang Liver and CHO cells (1 × 106 cells) were incubated with 2 mg of R18 labeled F-virosomes for 1 hour at 4°C. After incubation, cells were centrifuged at 2000 rpm for 5 minutes to remove unbound virosomes. The pellet was suspended in 100 μl of cold 10 mM PBS. For measuring fusion kinetics, 50 μl of the labeled F-virosome-cell complex was added in a cuvette having 3 ml of PBS with 1.5 mM Ca2+ (pre-warmed to 37°C). Fusion kinetics was studied by a spectrofluorimeter (FL3-22; Horiba, USA). For data normalization, percent fluorescence dequenching (% FDQ) at a time point was calculated as per the equation: % FDQ = [(F-F0)/Ft -F0)] x 100 where F0 denotes fluorescence intensity at time point zero, F is the intensity at a given time point and Ft is the intensity recorded when 0.1% Triton X-100 was added to the cell-virosome complex and is designated as fluorescence at “infinite” dilution of the probe (100%).
Packaging and delivery of AFP promoter/enhancer +2 c-MycshRNA constructs by Sendai F-virosomes
50 mg of Sendai virus envelope was reduced with 3 mM Dithiothreitol (DTT) at 37°C. Viral genetic material and HN were removed from the virosomal suspension by treatment with non-ionic detergent Triton X-100 for 1 hour followed by ultra-centrifugation. From this detergent extract, supernatant was recovered and mixed with required amount of various AFP promoter/enhancer driven c-Myc shRNA plasmids. This mixture was reconstituted by step-wise removal of detergent by utilizing SM-2 Biobeads (Bio-Rad, USA). Packaging of shRNA plasmids was confirmed by SDS based lysis and running the contents on 0.8% agarose gel. Cells were plated at 105 cells per well in a six-well plate, 3 × 105 cells per 25 cm2 flask, or 106 cells per 75 cm2 flask (Corning, USA) followed by transfection with c-Myc shRNA loaded F-virosomes.
CpG methylation study: bisulfite PCR and sequencing
Following virosomal delivery of AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc or its scrambled control in HepG2 cells, genomic DNA was isolated on the 6th day using Gen Elute Mammalian genomic DNA Miniprep Kit (Sigma-Aldrich, Germany). Bisulfite PCR was done using Epi Tech Bisulfite Kit (Qiagen, Germany) as per the manufacturer’s protocol. http://bisearch.enzim.hu/ was utilized for designing specific primers. Primers were M13-tagged for sequencing of PCR products.
Assessment of heterochromatization by chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assay
Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assay for H3K9Me2 and H3K27Me3 was done using EZ ChIP kit (Millipore, USA) as per manufacturer’s protocol. Input DNA, anti-H3K9Me2 (mAbcam1220), anti-H3K27Me3 (mAbcam6002), anti-histone 3 acetylated (Upstate) and control mouse IgG antibody (Upstate) immunoprecipitated DNA was amplified using primers specific for the target region on the c-Myc P2 promoter listed in Additional file 3: Table S1. Immunoprecipitation percentage was calculated as described by Haring et al. . Centrosome of chromosome 16 served as a positive control, since it has 100% methylated histone tails.
Suppression of histone deacetylase (HDAC) and DNA methyl transferase (DNMT)
Trichostatin A (TSA; Sigma-Aldrich, Germany; 300nM) and 5-aza-2-deoxycytidine (AZA; Sigma-Aldrich, Germany; 5 mM) were prepared as per manufacturer’s datasheet. Cells were pre-treated with TSA/AZA or both for 48 hours followed by virosomal delivery of the AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc or its scrambled control.
Caspase 3/7 assay for evaluation of apoptosis after virosomal delivery of shRNA
Caspase 3/7 activity of HepG2, Huh7 and Chang Liver cell lines was measured post virosomal delivery of AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc or AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc Scr by using caspase 3/7 assay kit (Promega, USA) as per manufacturer’s protocol.
All experiments including dual luciferase assay, cell survival assays and RT-PCR was repeated thrice and performed in triplicates. Western blotting, virosome fluorescence dequenching assay, Flow cytometric analysis, Bisulfite PCR, ChIP assay and capase 3/7 assay were repeated at least twice. Student’s t-test was utilized to calculate the significance in all experiments and p < 0.05 was considered significant whereas p < 0.001 as highly significant. The data are shown as mean ± SD.
Characterization of the novel NFκB/AFP enhancer – AFP promoter +25 based constructs
The AFP enhancer – AFP promoter +25 (AFPEn-Pr + 25), NFκB response element – AFP promoter +25 (NFκBEn-Pr + 25) and AFP promoter +25 (AFPPr + 25) generated constructs (Figure 1A) were verified by sequencing. The sequence encompassing different restriction sites on pGl3-Basic vector are given in Additional file 4: Figure S7.
AFP promoter/enhancer mediated expression is hepatocarcinoma specific
The generated luciferase constructs were transfected in both transformed and untransformed cell lines and their proficiency was determined by dual luciferase assay after 48 hours. In the transformed HCC cells, HepG2 and Huh7, the luciferase activity was highest with AFPEn–Pr + 25 – luc followed by NFκBEn–Pr + 25 – luc and lastly by AFPPr + 25 – luc, indicating the relative activity of the AFPEn–Pr + 25 in the transformed cells is significantly higher than SV40 promoter (Figure 1B and C). However, in the untransformed Chang Liver and non-hepatic CHO cells, significant activity was observed only with SV40 – luc and not in case of AFP promoter/enhancer constructs (Figure 1D and E).
Decrease in c-Myclevel by TGS inducing shRNA
Various c-Myc shRNA constructs, against c-Myc P2 promoter (Figure 2A), were generated as described in methods (Figure 2B). AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc and AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc Scr were transfected in HepG2 cells and fall in the expression of c-Myc was evaluated consecutively for 6 days by RT-PCR (Figure 2C). The decrease in c-Myc mRNA level was significant at all-time points (p < 0.05) with respect to its control and was maximum on the 5th day. Slight apparent increase on the 6th day when compared to that of 5th day was insignificant (p = 0.25). Similarly, fall in the c-Myc expression, by other shRNA constructs was also evaluated 5 days post transfection in HepG2 cells (Figure 2D). Similar results were observed for Huh7 cells (Figure 2E). However, the absolute levels of c-Myc were higher in HepG2 as compared to Huh7. No significant decrease in c-Myc was observed in the Chang Liver and CHO cells (p > 0.05 for both; Figure 2F and G). The levels of c-Myc protein (Figure 2H) corroborated with mRNA data but the tissue non-specific CMV promoter driven c-Myc shRNA (CMVPr – myc) decreased the level of c-Myc even in Chang Liver and CHO cells (p < 0.001 for both; Figure 2F and G).
TGS of c-Mycreduced cell survival and increased apoptosis
Specific binding of Sendai F-virosomes to cells of liver origin
Once significant fusion was confirmed, the generated constructs were packaged and delivered by Sendai F-virosomes to both transformed and untransformed liver cells. Time dependent fall in the c-Myc level post virosomal delivery in HepG2 cells (Figure 6B) was highly comparable to that by conventional method (Figure 2B). Maximum suppression of c-Myc was observed on the 5th day with AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc and slight increase on the 6th day when compared to the 5th was insignificant (p = 0.41). Significant fall in the expression of c-Myc mRNA was seen both in HepG2 and Huh7 by other AFP promoter/enhancer constructs, (p < 0.05 for both; Figure 6C and D). Even though the fluorescence dequenching experiments demonstrated fusion of F-virosomes with Chang Liver, TGS was not effective in these cells due to inactivation of AFP promoter/enhancer system (Figure 6E). Decrease in c-Myc protein levels were in concordance with its mRNA levels (Figure 6F).
No interferon response is mounted by c-MycshRNA
c-Mycinactivation caused down-regulation of other proliferative genes
c-Myc regulates growth and proliferation by regulating various genes . Cyclin D3 as well as human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) were studied in HepG2 cells at both mRNA and protein level. Fall in c-Myc by F-virosomes loaded with AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc led to significant decrease in Cyclin D3 and hTERT both at mRNA (p = 0.0022 and p < 0.001) and protein levels, suggesting the down-regulation of c-Myc effector molecules (Figure 7B and C).
Increase in caspase 3/7 activity following TGS of c-Myc
To validate the activation of apoptosis after c-Myc suppression by chimeric AFP promoter driven c-Myc shRNA, caspase 3/7 activity was evaluated in HepG2, Huh7 and Chang Liver cell lines, 5 days after virosomal delivery of AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc (Figure 7D). The increase in caspase activity was in agreement with the magnitude of chimeric AFP promoter driving the shRNA. In HepG2 cells, significant increase in caspase 3/7 activity was observed (p = 0.005) as compared to its scrambled control, however, activation of caspase 3/7 was to a lesser degree in Huh7 (p = 0.035). No increase in the activity was seen in Chang Liver cells (p = 0.38).
shRNA induced TGS by chromatin condensation and CpG methylation of c-MycP2 promoter
We also determined the effect of TSA/AZA or both in combination on c-Myc transcription in HepG2 cells by RT-PCR. Cells pre-treated with both AZA and TSA showed no significant decrease in c-Myc levels by AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc on the 6th day after treatment. Additionally, when the cells were pretreated with AZA or TSA individually, AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc down-regulated c-Myc levels significantly, indicating that both HDACs and DNMTs are involved in gene silencing of c-Myc (Additional file 5: Figure S12).
It is known that TGS can continue for a significant number of days after transfection [39, 52, 53]. In this study, we performed real time PCR to study the dynamics of c-Myc mRNA as well as shRNA expression after transient transfection of various shRNA constructs in HepG2 cells. For AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc construct, shRNA was maximally expressed after 48 hours while declining to around 18% of the maximum on day 6 (Additional file 5: Figure S13). On day 6, c-Myc mRNA was continued to be suppressed (Figure 2C and 6B) and all the molecular markers of TGS were present (Figure 8). On day 7, almost all the cells detached from the culture plate due to extensive cell death, making it impossible to do any mRNA/shRNA quantitation. This supports the possibility that TGS continues even after the reduction of shRNA, even though because of cell death, we were unable to reach zero expression.
Specificity is the cornerstone of cancer therapy and a considerable part of the current research on cancer therapeutics tries to address this issue in the context of efficacy. In this study, we have tried to combine modalities for achieving specificity at two levels – that of the delivery system as well as the transcription of its cargo. This approach has been utilized for the expression of shRNA for inducing the suppression of c-Myc by TGS. Although majority of the c-Myc transcripts are P2 promoter driven , targeting approaches are hindered by the lack of specificity. Since c-Myc is required for normal growth and proliferation, its non specific suppression might lead to hazarduous effects .
Sendai virosomes are naturally hepatotropic in nature because of their internalization through the ASGPRs of hepatocytes . One of us has earlier described their properties both in vitro and in vivo and has used this system for gene delivery to hepatocytes in the Gunn rat model with good efficacy . Sendai virosomes were shown to have high degree of direct cytoplasmic delivery with low immunogenicity [15–17].
At the second level of specificity we have tried to use liver tumour specific AFP promoter based fusion constructs. The AFP promoter has been used earlier to drive specific genes, mostly apoptotic or pro-drug metabolizing enzymes in hepatoma cells [55–59]. However, in our study, we have taken the minimal AFP promoter and added upstream enhancer regions from the AFP gene itself and, in another construct, the NFκB response element. This was done to increase the extent of promoter specific gene expression. Our studies showed that the AFP promoter fused with AFP enhancer (AFPEn–Pr + 25), had the strongest and specific expression in HCC cells.As demonstrated by Dual Luciferase Assay, various AFP promoter based enhancer sytems specifically and optimally expressed luciferase in hepatoma models HepG2 and Huh7 but not in untransformed Chang Liver and non liver CHO cells (Figure 1B-E). Only the positive control construct (SV40 – luc) expressed luciferase in both Chang Liver and CHO cells because of its nonspecific nature (Figure 1D and E).
The specially designed AFP promoter/enhancer driven c-Myc shRNA encompassing ME1a1 site upstream of c-Myc P2 promoter resulted in reduced c-Myc expression only in transformed hepatocarcinoma cells (Figure 2D and E). However, due to its universal nature, CMVPr – myc decreased the level of c-Myc even in Chang Liver and CHO cells (Figure 2F and G). The suppression of c-Myc in transformed cells was in concordance with the strength of each construct (Figure 2D-G). The AFP Enhancer – AFP promoter construct was equivalent in strength to the known constitutive viral promoter CMV and stronger than SV40, while retaining specificity for HCC cells. However, Huh7 having lower basal level of c-Myc compared to HepG2 was less responsive to c-Myc suppression. Previous studies have shown that c-Myc could abrogate the p53-induced cell-cycle arrest , and it is possible that HepG2 cells, which contain wild-type p53 compared to mutant p53 in Huh7 , were more sensitive to c-Myc suppression. Additionally, increased activity of Wnt/β-catenin pathway in HepG2 than Huh7, which is a direct regulator of c-Myc, also might add on to the greater c-Myc level and its consequent implications in HepG2.
c-Myc suppressed cells showed decreased cell survival and increased apoptosis, as evaluated by MTT Assay and Flow Cytometric analysis respectively (Figures 3 and 5). Moreover, cell survival estimated by trypan blue cell counting corroborated with the MTT data (Figure 4). This was concordant with the strength of promoter/enhancer construct driving shRNA expression. The effect on HepG2 cells (Figures 3A, 4A and 5A) were more pronounced than that of Huh7 cells (Additional file 4: Figure S8, S9 and S10). However, no decrease in cell viability was observed in the case of Chang Liver cells as the AFP promoter based system was inactive in these cells (Figures 3B and 4B). Moreover, the specificity for transformed hepatocytes was clear as c-Myc shRNA under the CMV promoter induced apoptosis even in Chang Liver cells (Figure 5B). Due to c-Myc suppression, via TGS, majority of the transformed cells were found to be present within the subG1 phase followed by G0-G1 phase.
Since the use of antisense oligonucleotides or siRNA/shRNA is potentially limited by ineffective delivery into cancer cells , to ensure specific and substantial level of therapeutic entry, shRNA constructs were packaged and delivered to various cell lines through Sendai F-virosomal system. Post virosomal delivery, the reduction in the level of c-Myc was significantly comparable to that by conventional transfection reagent (Figures 2 and 6).
c-Myc shRNA did not induce IFN response since there was no significant increase in the level of IFN marker OAS1 in HepG2, Huh7 and Chang Liver cells, post 5 days of virosomal delivery (Figure 7A) as well as at earlier time points (up to 4 days; Additional file 4: Figure S11 ). Some of the c-Myc effector molecules are hTERT  and Cyclin D3 . Although hTERT is not oncogenic per se, the activation of hTERT is essential for maintaining neoplastic transformation . Following virosomal delivery of AFPEn–Pr + 2 – myc, significant decrease in hTERT and Cyclin D3 mRNA and protein was observed in HepG2 cells following c-Myc suppression (Figure 7B and C). Furthermore, the more pronounced increase in caspase 3/7 activity in HepG2 and not in Chang Liver was in agreement with Flow cytometric studies (Figure 7D).
Earlier reports of TGS have shown that silencing occurs through histone modifications [67–69], CpG methylation [70, 71] or interference of RNA polymerase binding . In our case, we could demonstrate the induction of TGS by both heterochromatization and DNA methylation. Previously, other groups have targeted different regions of c-Myc promoter by siRNAs. siRNA against c-Myc transcription start site has shown promising results in suppressing prostate cancer cells, for a longer duration, by interfering with the binding of RNA polymerase . The same group has recently shown an effective strategy in suppressing prostate cancer stem cells, with good efficacy, both in culture and in mouse model through the promoter directed siRNAs . Small molecule inhibitor of c-Myc has proved useful in suppressing as well as chemo sensitizing HepG2 cells towards conventional drugs . Additionally, several reports have demonstrated that suppression in c-Myc levels induces shrinkage in tumour volume [30–32].
In published literature, it is indicated that while PTGS would require sustained presence of the effector siRNA molecule, TGS would be long lasting, by virtue of its capability to induce heritable epigenetic changes [37, 74]. Hence PTGS would also work in this cell specific promoter/delivery system albeit possibly for a shorter duration. However, we have not demonstrated the same experimentally. There is a report that after 7 days of continuous induction by siRNA against human ubiquitin c gene’s (UbC) promoter, TGS persisted for over a month . In a recent study from our lab, TGS of HIV clade C LTR was shown to be effective for at least 21 days after siRNA transfection .
In our study, we could follow the expression of c-Myc mRNA and shRNA for only 6 days after transfection (Figures 2C and 6B and Additional file 5: Figure S13). Extensive cell death, of HepG2 cells, prevented us from quantifying mRNA and shRNA levels on day 7 and beyond. While on day 6, shRNA levels were around 18% of the maximum (on day 2), the molecular markers of TGS were observed to be sustained (Figure 8). This indicates the possibility of a long term sustainability of TGS, even when shRNA levels have declined, although the persistence of TGS in the absolute absence of shRNA could not be determined because of the extensive cell death on day 7. In this study we observed that TGS could result in the reduction of c-Myc for up to 6 days after single transfection.
By ChIP assay and bisulfite PCR/DNA sequencing, we demonstrated that the shRNA induces both histone and DNA methylation in HepG2 cells, which is accompanied by reduced c-Myc promoter acetylation (Figure 8). This was also confirmed by RT-PCR, since the test shRNA failed to decrease c-Myc transcript levels significantly in cells pretreated with both AZA and TSA (Additional file 5: Figure S12). In our earlier report, we were successfully able to induce TGS in glioma cell line U87 and this was shown to be by DNA methylation . The current study is based on HCC cells and involves both heterochromatization and DNA methylation. It is possible that the variation in HDAC involvement is related to the cell type. As the primary message in the paper is related to the internalization of cargo via the ASGPRs, we have not explored the subtle differences in the mechanism of c-Myc TGS in this study.
Here we have demonstrated two levels of specificity by combining a liver cell specific delivery system with a hepatocarcinoma specific promoter/enhancer system. The effector arm of the system is the shRNA inducing TGS of c-Myc. With this we have been able to demonstrate silencing of the c-Myc, specifically in transformed liver cells, leading to extensive cell death. It is expected that combined cell delivery/transformation specific gene expression system, would be a prototype for therapeutic gene delivery in transformed cells. The shRNA inducing TGS of c-Myc, would also serve as an effective mechanism for inducing cell death in the targeted cells.
The dual specificity resulting from Sendai F-virosomal delivery and tumour specific activation offers a novel mode of targeting HCC at two levels, first by targeted liver cell specific delivery and secondly by promoter/enhancer driven expression only in transformed hepatocarcinoma cells. Such approaches might also be utilized for other therapeutic modalities that are based on specific gene transcription e.g. Gene dependent enzyme pro-drug therapy (GDEPT). shRNA induced suppression of c-Myc expression by TGS is a possible gene therapy modality that could be utilized in such a delivery system. In the long run, such a targeting system may also be considered for introducing specific genes for expression in the embryonic liver or putting a check on recalcitrant cancer cells with deregulated c-Myc.
Human uridinediphosphoglucuronate glucuronosyltransferase-1A1
Carcinogenic embryonic antigen
Prostate specific antigen
Small interfering RNA
Post-transcriptional gene silencing
Double stranded RNA
Transcriptional gene silencing
Histone three lysine nine dimethylated
Histone three lysine twenty seven trimethylated
Short hairpin RNA
Nuclear factor kappa beta
- Pol III:
- Pol II:
American type cell culture
National center for cell science
Dulbecco’s modified eagle’s medium
Simian virus 40
Transcription start site
Glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase
Relative expression software tool
Sodium dodecyl sulphate
Rhodamine beta chloride
Phosphate buffered saline
Revolutions per minute
Chromatin immunoprecipitation assay
DNA methyl transferase
Oligo adenylate synthetase 1
Human telomerase reverse transcriptase
Gene dependent enzyme pro-drug therapy.
This study was supported by Department of Biotechnology, Government of India (Grant No BT/PR13733/AGR/36/667/2010). J.C.Bose fellowship from the Department of Science and Technology and grant from Delhi University to Professor Debi P. Sarkar is highly acknowledged. Mohammad Khalid Zakaria and Imran Khan were supported by Indian Council of Medical Research (I.C.M.R) and University Grants Commission (U.G.C), Government of India respectively. We thank Mr. Pappu Prasad and Mr. Satish for their technical support.
- Forner A, Llovet JM, Bruix J: Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet. 2012, 379: 1245-1255.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ali M, Sahib MK: Developmental changes in the expression of alpha-fetoprotein & albumin genes in rat liver: correlation of rates of synthesis of the two proteins in the hepatocytes, their hepatic contents & serum levels during development. Indian J Biochem Biophys. 1983, 20: 218-221.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schiffelers RM, Ansari A, Xu J, Zhou Q, Tang Q, Storm G, Molema G, Lu PY, Scaria PV, Woodle MC: Cancer siRNA therapy by tumor selective delivery with ligand-targeted sterically stabilized nanoparticle. Nucleic Acids Res. 2004, 32: e149-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Tang Q, Cao B, Wu H, Cheng G: Selective gene delivery to cancer cells using an integrated cationic amphiphilic peptide. Langmuir ACS J Surf Colloids. 2012, 28: 16126-16132.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Lee J, Yun K-S, Choi CS, Shin S-H, Ban H-S, Rhim T, Lee SK, Lee KY: T cell-specific siRNA delivery using antibody-conjugated chitosan nanoparticles. Bioconjug Chem. 2012, 23: 1174-1180.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kim S-H, Yang I-Y, Jang S-H, Kim J, Truong TT, Van Pham T, Truong NU, Lee K-Y, Jang Y-S: C5a receptor-targeting ligand-mediated delivery of dengue virus antigen to M cells evokes antigen-specific systemic and mucosal immune responses in oral immunization. Microbes Infect Inst Pasteur. 2013, 15: 895-902.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Han L, Guo Y, Ma H, He X, Kuang Y, Zhang N, Lim E, Zhou W, Jiang C: Acid active receptor-specific Peptide ligand for in vivo tumor-targeted delivery. Small Weinh Bergstr Ger. 2013, 9: 3647-3658.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Du W, Fan Y, Zheng N, He B, Yuan L, Zhang H, Wang X, Wang J, Zhang X, Zhang Q: Transferrin receptor specific nanocarriers conjugated with functional 7peptide for oral drug delivery. Biomaterials. 2013, 34: 794-806.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Li H, Qian ZM: Transferrin/transferrin receptor-mediated drug delivery. Med Res Rev. 2002, 22: 225-250.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Qian ZM, Li H, Sun H, Ho K: Targeted drug delivery via the transferrin receptor-mediated endocytosis pathway. Pharmacol Rev. 2002, 54: 561-587.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhao X, Li H, Lee RJ: Targeted drug delivery via folate receptors. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2008, 5: 309-319.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jin L, Lee EM, Ramshaw HS, Busfield SJ, Peoppl AG, Wilkinson L, Guthridge MA, Thomas D, Barry EF, Boyd A, Gearing DP, Vairo G, Lopez AF, Dick JE, Lock RB: Monoclonal antibody-mediated targeting of CD123, IL-3 receptor alpha chain, eliminates human acute myeloid leukemic stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2009, 5: 31-42.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yao Y, Sun T, Huang S, Dou S, Lin L, Chen J, Ruan J, Mao C, Yu F, Zeng M, Zang J, Liu Q, Su F, Zhang P, Lieberman J, Wang J, Song E: Targeted delivery of PLK1-siRNA by ScFv suppresses Her2+ breast cancer growth and metastasis. Sci Transl Med. 2012, 4: 130ra48-View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bagai S, Puri A, Blumenthal R, Sarkar DP: Hemagglutinin-neuraminidase enhances F protein-mediated membrane fusion of reconstituted Sendai virus envelopes with cells. J Virol. 1993, 67: 3312-3318.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Wang X, Sarkar DP, Mani P, Steer CJ, Chen Y, Guha C, Chandrasekhar V, Chaudhuri A, Roy-Chowdhury N, Kren BT, Roy-Chowdhury J: Long-term reduction of jaundice in gunn rats by nonviral liver-targeted delivery of sleeping beauty transposon. Hepatol Baltim Md. 2009, 50: 815-824.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Verma SK, Mani P, Sharma NR, Krishnan A, Kumar VV, Reddy BS, Chaudhuri A, Roy RP, Sarkar DP: Histidylated lipid-modified Sendai viral envelopes mediate enhanced membrane fusion and potentiate targeted gene delivery. J Biol Chem. 2005, 280: 35399-35409.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sharma NR, Mani P, Nandwani N, Mishra R, Rana A, Sarkar DP: Reciprocal regulation of AKT and MAP kinase dictates virus-host cell fusion. J Virol. 2010, 84: 4366-4382.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Guo ZS, Li Q, Bartlett DL, Yang JY, Fang B: Gene transfer: the challenge of regulated gene expression. Trends Mol Med. 2008, 14: 410-418.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Robson T, Hirst DG: Transcriptional targeting in cancer gene therapy. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2003, 2003: 110-137.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Grünwald GK, Klutz K, Willhauck MJ, Schwenk N, Senekowitsch-Schmidtke R, Schwaiger M, Zach C, Göke B, Holm PS, Spitzweg C: Sodium iodide symporter (NIS)-mediated radiovirotherapy of hepatocellular cancer using a conditionally replicating adenovirus. Gene Ther. 2013, 20: 625-633.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zhang K-J, Zhang J, Wu Y-M, Qian J, Liu X-J, Yan L-C, Zhou X-M, Xiao R-J, Wang Y-G, Cao X, Wei N, Liu X-R, Tang B, Jiao X-Y, Chen K, Liu X-Y: Complete eradication of hepatomas using an oncolytic adenovirus containing AFP promoter controlling E1A and an E1B deletion to drive IL-24 expression. Cancer Gene Ther. 2012, 19: 619-629.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Peng Y-F, Shi Y-H, Ding Z-B, Zhou J, Qiu S-J, Hui B, Gu C-Y, Yang H, Liu W-R, Fan J: Alpha-fetoprotein promoter-driven Cre/LoxP-switched RNA interference for hepatocellular carcinoma tissue-specific target therapy. PLoS One. 2013, 8: e53072-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Qiao J, Doubrovin M, Sauter BV, Huang Y, Guo ZS, Balatoni J, Akhurst T, Blasberg RG, Tjuvajev JG, Chen S-H, Woo SLC: Tumor-specific transcriptional targeting of suicide gene therapy. Gene Ther. 2002, 9: 168-175.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Groupp ER, Crawford N, Locker J: Characterization of the distal alpha-fetoprotein enhancer, a strong, long distance, liver-specific activator. J Biol Chem. 1994, 269: 22178-22187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Watanabe K, Saito A, Tamaoki T: Cell-specific enhancer activity in a far upstream region of the human alpha-fetoprotein gene. J Biol Chem. 1987, 262: 4812-4818.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wierstra I, Alves J: The c-myc promoter: still MysterY and challenge. Adv Cancer Res. 2008, 99: 113-333.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wilson A, Murphy MJ, Oskarsson T, Kaloulis K, Bettess MD, Oser GM, Pasche A-C, Knabenhans C, MacDonald HR, Trumpp A: c-Myc controls the balance between hematopoietic stem cell self-renewal and differentiation. Genes Dev. 2004, 18: 2747-2763.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Davis AC, Wims M, Spotts GD, Hann SR, Bradley A: A null c-myc mutation causes lethality before 10.5 days of gestation in homozygotes and reduced fertility in heterozygous female mice. Genes Dev. 1993, 7: 671-682.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mateyak MK, Obaya AJ, Adachi S, Sedivy JM: Phenotypes of c-Myc-deficient rat fibroblasts isolated by targeted homologous recombination. Cell Growth Differ Mol Biol J Am Assoc Cancer Res. 1997, 8: 1039-1048.Google Scholar
- Ebinuma H, Saito H, Saito Y, Wakabayashi K, Nakamura M, Kurose I, Ishii H: Antisense oligodeoxynucleotide against c-myc mRNA induces differentiation of human hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Int J Oncol. 1999, 15: 991-999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shachaf CM, Kopelman AM, Arvanitis C, Karlsson A, Beer S, Mandl S, Bachmann MH, Borowsky AD, Ruebner B, Cardiff RD, Yang Q, Bishop JM, Contag CH, Felsher DW: MYC inactivation uncovers pluripotent differentiation and tumour dormancy in hepatocellular cancer. Nature. 2004, 431: 1112-1117.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Xu Y, Wang Y-H, Gao J-D, Ye J, Zhu H-X, Xu N-Z, Wang X-Y, Sun Z-T: Suppression of c-myc expression by interference RNA in HepG2 hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2004, 26: 458-460.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Albert T, Wells J, Funk JO, Pullner A, Raschke EE, Stelzer G, Meisterernst M, Farnham PJ, Eick D: The chromatin structure of the dual c-myc promoter P1/P2 is regulated by separate elements. J Biol Chem. 2001, 276: 20482-20490.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mehndiratta M, Palanichamy JK, Pal A, Bhagat M, Singh A, Sinha S, Chattopadhyay P: CpG hypermethylation of the C-myc promoter by dsRNA results in growth suppression. Mol Pharm. 2011, 8: 2302-2309.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fire A, Xu S, Montgomery MK, Kostas SA, Driver SE, Mello CC: Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature. 1998, 391: 806-811.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hammond SM, Bernstein E, Beach D, Hannon GJ: An RNA-directed nuclease mediates post-transcriptional gene silencing in Drosophila cells. Nature. 2000, 404: 293-296.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Morris KV, Chan SW-L, Jacobsen SE, Looney DJ: Small interfering RNA-induced transcriptional gene silencing in human cells. Science. 2004, 305: 1289-1292.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Suzuki K, Juelich T, Lim H, Ishida T, Watanebe T, Cooper DA, Rao S, Kelleher AD: Closed chromatin architecture is induced by an RNA duplex targeting the HIV-1 promoter region. J Biol Chem. 2008, 283: 23353-23363.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Hawkins PG, Santoso S, Adams C, Anest V, Morris KV: Promoter targeted small RNAs induce long-term transcriptional gene silencing in human cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009, 37: 2984-2995.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Kim DH, Villeneuve LM, Morris KV, Rossi JJ: Argonaute-1 directs siRNA-mediated transcriptional gene silencing in human cells. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2006, 13: 793-797.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Morris KV: Non-coding RNAs, epigenetic memory and the passage of information to progeny. RNA Biol. 2009, 6: 242-247.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Giering JC, Grimm D, Storm TA, Kay MA: Expression of shRNA from a tissue-specific pol II promoter is an effective and safe RNAi therapeutic. Mol Ther J Am Soc Gene Ther. 2008, 16: 1630-1636.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Arsura M, Cavin LG: Nuclear factor-kappaB and liver carcinogenesis. Cancer Lett. 2005, 229: 157-169.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kanai F: Transcriptional targeted gene therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma by adenovirus vector. Mol Biotechnol. 2001, 18: 243-250.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pranski EL, Dalal NV, Herskowitz JH, Orr AL, Roesch LA, Fritz JJ, Heilman C, Lah JJ, Levey AI, Betarbet RS: Neuronal RING finger protein 11 (RNF11) regulates canonical NF-κB signaling. J Neuroinflammation. 2012, 9: 67-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Xia H, Mao Q, Paulson HL, Davidson BL: siRNA-mediated gene silencing in vitro and in vivo. Nat Biotechnol. 2002, 20: 1006-1010.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vandesompele J, De Preter K, Pattyn F, Poppe B, Van Roy N, De Paepe A, Speleman F: Accurate normalization of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multiple internal control genes. Genome Biol. 2002, 3: RESEARCH0034-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Pfaffl MW, Horgan GW, Dempfle L: Relative expression software tool (REST©) for group-wise comparison and statistical analysis of relative expression results in real-time PCR. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002, 30: e36-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Haring M, Offermann S, Danker T, Horst I, Peterhansel C, Stam M: Chromatin immunoprecipitation: optimization, quantitative analysis and data normalization. Plant Methods. 2007, 3: 11-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Sledz CA, Holko M, de Veer MJ, Silverman RH, Williams BRG: Activation of the interferon system by short-interfering RNAs. Nat Cell Biol. 2003, 5: 834-839.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Scacheri PC, Rozenblatt-Rosen O, Caplen NJ, Wolfsberg TG, Umayam L, Lee JC, Hughes CM, Shanmugam KS, Bhattacharjee A, Meyerson M, Collins FS: Short interfering RNAs can induce unexpected and divergent changes in the levels of untargeted proteins in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004, 101: 1892-1897.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Napoli S, Pastori C, Magistri M, Carbone GM, Catapano CV: Promoter-specific transcriptional interference and c-myc gene silencing by siRNAs in human cells. EMBO J. 2009, 28: 1708-1719.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Singh A, Palanichamy JK, Ramalingam P, Kassab MA, Bhagat M, Andrabi R, Luthra K, Sinha S, Chattopadhyay P: Long-term suppression of HIV-1C virus production in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells by LTR heterochromatization with a short double-stranded RNA. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014, 69: 404-415.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lin C-P, Liu C-R, Lee C-N, Chan T-S, Liu HE: Targeting c-Myc as a novel approach for hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Hepatol. 2010, 2: 16-20.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Cai X, Zhou J, Chang Y, Sun X, Li P, Lin J: Targeting gene therapy for hepatocarcinoma cells with the E. coli purine nucleoside phosphorylase suicide gene system directed by a chimeric alpha-fetoprotein promoter. Cancer Lett. 2008, 264: 71-82.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cao G, Kuriyama S, Tsujinoue H, Chen Q, Mitoro A, Qi Z: A novel approach for inducing enhanced and selective transgene expression in hepatocellular-carcinoma cells. Int J Cancer. 2000, 87: 247-252.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cao G, Kuriyama S, Gao J, Nakatani T, Chen Q, Yoshiji H, Zhao L, Kojima H, Dong Y, Fukui H, Hou J: Gene therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma based on tumour-selective suicide gene expression using the alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) enhancer and a housekeeping gene promoter. Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl 1990. 2001, 37: 140-147.Google Scholar
- Kanai F, Lan KH, Shiratori Y, Tanaka T, Ohashi M, Okudaira T, Yoshida Y, Wakimoto H, Hamada H, Nakabayashi H, Tamaoki T, Omata M: In vivo gene therapy for alpha-fetoprotein-producing hepatocellular carcinoma by adenovirus-mediated transfer of cytosine deaminase gene. Cancer Res. 1997, 57: 461-465.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Willhauck MJ, Sharif Samani BR, Klutz K, Cengic N, Wolf I, Mohr L, Geissler M, Senekowitsch-Schmidtke R, Göke B, Morris JC, Spitzweg C: Alpha-fetoprotein promoter-targeted sodium iodide symporter gene therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma. Gene Ther. 2008, 15: 214-223.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ho JSL, Ma W, Mao DYL, Benchimol S: p53-dependent transcriptional repression of c-myc is required for G1 cell cycle arrest. Mol Cell Biol. 2005, 25: 7423-7431.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Müller M, Strand S, Hug H, Heinemann EM, Walczak H, Hofmann WJ, Stremmel W, Krammer PH, Galle PR: Drug-induced apoptosis in hepatoma cells is mediated by the CD95 (APO-1/Fas) receptor/ligand system and involves activation of wild-type p53. J Clin Invest. 1997, 99: 403-413.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Wei W, Chua M-S, Grepper S, So SK: Soluble Frizzled-7 receptor inhibits Wnt signaling and sensitizes hepatocellular carcinoma cells towards doxorubicin. Mol Cancer. 2011, 10: 16-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Robinson R: RNAi therapeutics: how likely, how soon?. PLoS Biol. 2004, 2: e28-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Wu KJ, Grandori C, Amacker M, Simon-Vermot N, Polack A, Lingner J, Dalla-Favera R: Direct activation of TERT transcription by c-MYC. Nat Genet. 1999, 21: 220-224.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jänicke RU, Lin XY, Lee FH, Porter AG: Cyclin D3 sensitizes tumor cells to tumor necrosis factor-induced, c-Myc-dependent apoptosis. Mol Cell Biol. 1996, 16: 5245-5253.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Jang KY, Noh SJ, Lehwald N, Tao G-Z, Bellovin DI, Park HS, Moon WS, Felsher DW, Sylvester KG: SIRT1 and c-Myc promote liver tumor cell survival and predict poor survival of human hepatocellular carcinomas. PLoS One. 2012, 7: e45119-View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Gonzalez S, Pisano DG, Serrano M: Mechanistic principles of chromatin remodeling guided by siRNAs and miRNAs. Cell Cycle Georget Tex. 2008, 7: 2601-2608.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Palanichamy JK, Mehndiratta M, Bhagat M, Ramalingam P, Das B, Das P, Sinha S, Chattopadhyay P: Silencing of integrated human papillomavirus-16 oncogenes by small interfering RNA-mediated heterochromatization. Mol Cancer Ther. 2010, 9: 2114-2122.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Weinberg MS, Villeneuve LM, Ehsani A, Amarzguioui M, Aagaard L, Chen Z-X, Riggs AD, Rossi JJ, Morris KV: The antisense strand of small interfering RNAs directs histone methylation and transcriptional gene silencing in human cells. RNA N Y N. 2006, 12: 256-262.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Hoffman AR, Hu JF: Directing DNA methylation to inhibit gene expression. Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2006, 26: 425-438.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tufarelli C, Stanley JAS, Garrick D, Sharpe JA, Ayyub H, Wood WG, Higgs DR: Transcription of antisense RNA leading to gene silencing and methylation as a novel cause of human genetic disease. Nat Genet. 2003, 34: 157-165.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Civenni G, Malek A, Albino D, Garcia-Escudero R, Napoli S, Di Marco S, Pinton S, Sarti M, Carbone GM, Catapano CV: RNAi-mediated silencing of Myc transcription inhibits stem-like cell maintenance and tumorigenicity in prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 2013, 73: 6816-6827.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lin C-P, Liu J-D, Chow J-M, Liu C-R, Liu HE: Small-molecule c-Myc inhibitor, 10058-F4, inhibits proliferation, downregulates human telomerase reverse transcriptase and enhances chemosensitivity in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Anticancer Drugs. 2007, 18: 161-170.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Morris KV: Long antisense non-coding RNAs function to direct epigenetic complexes that regulate transcription in human cells. Epigenetics Off J DNA Methylation Soc. 2009, 4: 296-301.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/14/582/prepub
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.