Skip to main content
Oncotarget logoLink to Oncotarget
. 2018 Jan 4;9(15):11948–11963. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.23946

Competitive endogenous RNA networks: integrated analysis of non-coding RNA and mRNA expression profiles in infantile hemangioma

Jun Li 1, Qian Li 1, Ling Chen 1, Yanli Gao 1, Bei Zhou 1, Jingyun Li 1
PMCID: PMC5844720  PMID: 29552284

Abstract

Infantile hemangioma (IH) is the most common vascular tumour in infants. The pathogenesis of IH is complex and poorly understood. Therefore, achieving a deeper understanding of IH pathogenesis is of great importance. Here, we used the Ribo-Zero RNA-Seq and HiSeq methods to examine the global expression profiles of protein-coding transcripts and non-coding RNAs, including miRNAs and lncRNAs, in IH and matched normal skin controls. Bioinformatics assessments including gene ontology (GO) and kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes (KEGG) pathway analyses were performed. Of the 16370 identified coding transcripts, only 144 were differentially expressed (fold change ≥ 2, P ≤ 0.05), including 84 up-regulated and 60 down-regulated transcripts in the IH samples compared with the matched normal skin controls. Gene ontology analysis of these differentially expressed transcripts revealed 60 genes involved in immune system processes, 62 genes involved in extracellular region regulation, and 35 genes involved in carbohydrate derivative binding. In addition, 256 lncRNAs and 142 miRNAs were found to be differentially expressed. Of these, 177 lncRNAs and 42 miRNAs were up-regulated in IH, whereas 79 lncRNAs and 100 miRNAs were down-regulated. By analysing the Ribo-Zero RNA-Seq data in combination with the matched miRNA profiles, we identified 1256 sponge modulators that participate in 87 miRNA-mediated, 70 lncRNA-mediated and 58 mRNA-mediated interactions. In conclusion, our study uncovered a competitive endogenous RNA (ceRNA) network that could further the understanding of the mechanisms underlying IH development and supply new targets for investigation.

Keywords: non-coding RNA, lncRNA, miRNA, mRNA, infantile hemangioma

INTRODUCTION

Infantile hemangioma (IH) is the most common vascular tumour in childhood, affecting 4% to 5% of infants worldwide [1]. Hemangiomas can show severe progression, which leads to tissue and organ damage that in some cases becomes life-threatening. Clinical treatment varies, including steroids, interferon-alfa, and β-blocker propranolol [2, 3]. However, no definitive therapy is available for IH due to the adverse effects of each drug. The risk factors for IH include preterm birth and placental anomalies [4]. In most cases, IH has a unique clinical course with proliferation and involution phases [5]. Numerous genes involved in IH have been identified. However, the pathogenesis and cause of hemangioma remain largely unknown.

The competitive endogenous RNA (ceRNA) hypothesis proposes that RNA transcripts, both coding and non-coding, compete for post-transcriptional control and coregulate each other using microRNA response elements (MREs) [6, 7]. Mounting evidence has shown that long non-coding RNAs and messenger RNAs can function as ceRNAs in diverse physiological and pathophysiological states such as myogenesis, melanoma development and cancer [811]. A recent study profiled the expression of distinct long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) in infantile hemangioma using microarray analysis and suggested that lncRNAs regulated several genes with important roles in angiogenesis [12]. Endothelial and circulating C19MC microRNAs are biomarkers of infantile hemangioma [13]. Additionally, integrative meta-analysis identified microRNA-regulated networks in infantile hemangioma [14]. However, the role of the ceRNA network in IH has not been elucidated.

In this study, we used Ribo-Zero RNA-Seq and HiSeq to examine the global expression profiles of protein-coding transcripts and non-coding RNAs, including miRNAs and lncRNAs, in IH and matched normal skin controls. Subsequently, gene ontology and pathway analysis displayed that, compared with the matched normal skin controls, many processes over-represented in IH were related to immune system processes, extracellular region regulation, and carbohydrate derivative binding. Further ceRNA network analysis identified 1256 sponge modulators including 87 miRNA-mediated, 70 lncRNA-mediated and 58 mRNA-mediated interactions. Our study may help expand understanding of the roles of the transcriptome, particularly non-coding transcripts, in the mechanisms underlying IH development and provide new research directions.

RESULTS

Differential expression profiles and bioinformatics analysis of mRNAs in IH compared with matched normal skin controls

To profile differentially expressed mRNAs, lncRNAs and miRNAs in IH, we performed RNA-seq on 3 IH samples and matched normal skin controls. We used an Illumina HiseqXTen platform (Illumina, San Diego, CA) for sequencing with (2 × 150 bp) the paired-end module. Fold changes (IH vs. matched normal skin controls) and p values were calculated from the normalized expression levels. Hierarchical clustering showed distinguishable mRNA expression patterns among the samples (Figure 1A). Up to 144 mRNAs were differentially expressed in the IH samples compared with the matched normal skin controls (fold change ≥2, P ≤ 0.05; for a list of differentially expressed mRNAs, see Table 1). A total of 84 and 60 mRNAs were up-regulated or down-regulated, respectively, by more than two-fold in IH vs. adjacent normal skin tissues (P < 0.05) (Figure 1B). KEGG Pathway analysis indicated that the chemokine, NF-kappa B and TGF-beta signalling pathways, as well as cell adhesion molecules (CAMs), were mostly found in the IH samples compared with matched normal skin (Figure 1C). In addition, gene ontology (GO) analysis revealed that numerous biological processes, molecular functions and cellular components were involved. Many of the processes that are deregulated in IH were related to immune system processes, carbohydrate derivative binding and extracellular region regulation (Figure 1D).

Figure 1. Expression profiles, Gene ontology (GO) terms and pathways for differentially expressed mRNAs between infantile hemangioma and adjacent normal skin tissues.

Figure 1

(A) Hierarchical clustering shows a distinguishable mRNA expression profiling among groups. (B) Volcano analysis exhibit differentially expressed mRNAs. Red dots represent up-regulated genes. Green dots illustrate down-regulated genes. (C) The top 20 pathways that are associated with the coding genes are listed. The enrichment Q value or false discovery rate correct the p value for multiple comparisons. P values are calculated using Fisher’s exact test. The term/pathway on the vertical axis is drawn according to the first letter of the pathway in descending order. The horizontal axis represents the enrichment factor, i.e., (the number of dysregulated genes in a pathway/the total number of dysregulated gene)/(the number of genes in a pathway in the database/the total number of genes in the database). Top 20 enriched pathways are selected according to the enrichment factor value. The selection standards were the number of genes in a pathway ≥4. The different colours from green to red represent the Q value (False discovery rate value). The different sizes of the round shapes represent the gene count number in a pathway. (D) Most enriched GO terms of the three ontologies that are associated with the differentially expressed coding genes are listed. The horizontal axis represents the gene number. The term/GO on the vertical axis is drawn according to the first letter of the GO in descending order. Red bar represents the biological process, blue bar displays the molecular function, and green bar illustrates the cellular component. Norm or Ctr, matched normal skin tissue; Tum, infantile hemangioma skin tissue.

Table 1. List of up-regulated and down-regulated mRNAs detected using RNA-seq (FC ≥ 2.83, P < 0.05).

Gene Name log2(Tum/Ctr) up-or-down P_value Description
MPO –6.18461 down 0.00635 myeloperoxidase
MAGEB2 –5.44166 down 0.0158 MAGE family member B2
CD8A –3.35204 down 0.00275 CD8a molecule
BPI –3.31652 down 0.0279 bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein
PGLYRP1 –3.3111 down 0.0412 peptidoglycan recognition protein 1
LOC283788 –3.17651 down 0.0005 FSHD region gene 1 pseudogene
IL18R1 –3.02589 down 5.00E-05 interleukin 18 receptor 1
ADCYAP1 –2.96929 down 0.031 adenylate cyclase activating polypeptide 1
CXCL13 –2.90547 down 0.02165 C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 13
MS4A1 –2.78553 down 0.013 membrane spanning 4-domains A1
SERPINB4 –2.67117 down 0.02235 serpin family B member 4
MMP12 –2.65413 down 0.02265 matrix metallopeptidase 12
PIP –2.63046 down 0.00195 prolactin induced protein
LEFTY2 –2.59114 down 0.0361 left-right determination factor 2
IL13RA2 –2.54593 down 0.04385 interleukin 13 receptor subunit alpha 2
CSMD3 –2.54162 down 0.00145 CUB and Sushi multiple domains 3
OR51E1 –2.45263 down 0.0003 olfactory receptor family 51 subfamily E member 1
PTH2R –2.32814 down 0.03325 parathyroid hormone 2 receptor
ADRB3 –2.30562 down 0.0493 adrenoceptor beta 3
CCL4L2 –2.18575 down 0.01295 C-C motif chemokine ligand 4 like 2
ERAP2 –2.14489 down 5.00E-05 endoplasmic reticulum aminopeptidase 2
LTF –2.14431 down 0.00755 lactotransferrin
PADI4 –2.08682 down 0.0333 peptidyl arginine deiminase 4
OR51E2 –2.0297 down 0.01705 olfactory receptor family 51 subfamily E member 2
FKBP5 –1.98625 down 0.00045 FK506 binding protein 5
FOLH1 –1.97677 down 0.0032 folate hydrolase (prostate-specific membrane antigen) 1
CD3G –1.862 down 0.04425 CD3g molecule
COL6A5 –1.72947 down 0.0316 collagen type VI alpha 5
TUBBP5 –1.70945 down 0.0228 tubulin beta pseudogene 5
CLEC4M –1.6691 down 0.0217 C-type lectin domain family 4 member M
S100A9 –1.66717 down 0.0021 S100 calcium binding protein A9
DIO3 –1.65761 down 0.009 deiodinase, iodothyronine, type III
LOC645752 –1.64348 down 0.0449 golgin A6 family member A pseudogene
CD3E –1.61303 down 0.0266 CD3e molecule
TNNT3 –1.55491 down 0.00495 troponin T3, fast skeletal type
S100A8 –1.53696 down 0.0022 S100 calcium binding protein A8
FUT9 –1.50479 down 0.00195 fucosyltransferase 9
KRT31 1.50307 up 0.02565 keratin 31
KRTAP11-1 1.51562 up 0.00975 keratin associated protein 11-1
KRT85 1.51808 up 0.01765 keratin 85
KRT81 1.54671 up 0.0292 keratin 81
KRT34 1.54769 up 0.03615 keratin 34
EPSTI1 1.574 up 0.0017 epithelial stromal interaction 1 (breast)
IFI6 1.57562 up 0.0033 interferon alpha inducible protein 6
IFI35 1.59026 up 0.0059 interferon induced protein 35
KRTAP3-2 1.61219 up 0.0107 keratin associated protein 3-2
KC6 1.62074 up 0.0318 keratoconus gene 6
KRT83 1.65762 up 0.0203 keratin 83
OAS3 1.69667 up 0.00105 2'-5'-oligoadenylate synthetase 3
USP18 1.72046 up 0.00215 ubiquitin specific peptidase 18
CYP26B1 1.74162 up 0.00045 cytochrome P450 family 26 subfamily B member 1
LNX1-AS2 1.74788 up 0.022 LNX1 antisense RNA 2
IFI44 1.75064 up 0.00015 interferon induced protein 44
TNFRSF4 1.75918 up 0.0375 tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily member 4
LOC339975 1.76055 up 0.02065 uncharacterized LOC339975
CLDN11 1.7733 up 0.012 claudin 11
KRT35 1.78149 up 0.0024 keratin 35
KRT33A 1.80012 up 0.00445 keratin 33A
OAS2 1.83729 up 0.00145 2'-5'-oligoadenylate synthetase 2
KRT86 1.85155 up 0.0094 keratin 86
DCD 1.85338 up 0.0401 dermcidin
ACAN 1.85416 up 0.0002 aggrecan
PKD1L2 1.90338 up 0.0378 polycystin 1 like 2 (gene/pseudogene)
SCGB1B2P 1.91013 up 0.01375 secretoglobin family 1B member 2, pseudogene
CMPK2 1.92066 up 0.00015 cytidine/uridine monophosphate kinase 2
ADAMTS18 1.95193 up 0.0003 ADAM metallopeptidase with thrombospondin type 1 motif 18
KRT33B 1.9594 up 0.0128 keratin 33B
IFIT1 1.97285 up 0.0001 interferon induced protein with tetratricopeptide repeats 1
MX1 1.99777 up 0.00015 MX dynamin like GTPase 1
RSAD2 2.07171 up 5.00E-05 radical S-adenosyl methionine domain containing 2
IFI44L 2.31465 up 5.00E-05 interferon induced protein 44 like
LINC00487 2.42803 up 0.0367 long intergenic non-protein coding RNA 487
ISG15 2.47094 up 5.00E-05 ISG15 ubiquitin-like modifier
SULT1A2 2.52975 up 0.02025 sulfotransferase family 1A member 2
DMC1 2.61725 down 0.00415 DNA meiotic recombinase 1
FAM132B 2.69101 up 0.0118 -
NRIR 2.97361 up 0.0399 negative regulator of interferon response (non-protein coding)
MTHFD2P1 3.49824 up 0.01845 methylenetetrahydrofolate dehydrogenase (NADP+ dependent) 2, methenyltetrahydrofolate cyclohydrolase pseudogene 1
OR8B2 4.67189 up 0.0423 olfactory receptor family 8 subfamily B member 2
LOC101929128 4.88337 up 0.0419 uncharacterized LOC101929128

Ctr, matched normal skin tissue; Tum, infantile hemangioma skin tissue.

Bioinformatics analysis of lncRNAs in IH compared with matched normal skin controls

Using the Gencode, RefSeq and UCSC Knowngene databases for non-coding transcripts, we identified 256 differentially expressed lncRNAs with greater than two-fold changes in IH and p values < 0.05 (Figure 2A). Of these, 177 were overexpressed and 79 were underexpressed in IH relative to the matched normal skin controls (fold change ≥ 2, P ≤ 0.05; for a list of differentially expressed lncRNAs, see Table 2). LncRNAs (long non-coding RNAs), are defined as greater than 200 nucleotides in length, transcribed by RNA polymerase II (RNA PII), and lacking an open reading frame [15]. LncRNAs have been found to regulate protein-coding (pc) gene expression at both the transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels [16]. To identify the potential mRNA targets of lncRNAs, we use RNAplex to predict the binding of lncRNAs with the antisense target mRNAs. mRNAs 10 kb upstream or downstream of lncRNAs were considered to be the conceivable lncRNA targets and defined as cis target mRNAs. Gene ontology (GO) analysis revealed that cis target mRNAs of differentially expressed lncRNAs were mostly involved in regulatory mechanisms related to transcription, nucleic acid binding transcription factor activity and intracellular components (Figure 2B). KEGG Pathway analysis indicated that the MAPK signalling pathway, regulation of autophagy and metabolic pathways were implicated for the cis target mRNAs of differentially expressed lncRNAs (Figure 2C).

Figure 2. Gene ontology (GO) terms and pathways for target mRNAs of differentially expressed lncRNAs between infantile hemangioma and adjacent normal skin tissues.

Figure 2

(A) Hierarchical clustering shows a distinguishable lncRNA expression profiling among groups. (B) Most enriched GO terms of the three ontologies that are associated with the cis target mRNAs of differentially expressed lncRNAs are listed. (C) The top 20 pathways that are associated with the cis target mRNAs of differentially expressed lncRNAs are listed. (B) The horizontal axis represents the gene number. The term/GO on the vertical axis is drawn according to the first letter of the GO in descending order. Red bar represents the biological process, blue bar displays the molecular function, and green bar illustrates the cellular component. (C) The enrichment Q value or false discovery rate correct the p value for multiple comparisons. P values are calculated using Fisher’s exact test. The term/pathway on the vertical axis is drawn according to the first letter of the pathway in descending order. The horizontal axis represents the enrichment factor, i.e., (the number of dysregulated genes in a pathway/the total number of dysregulated gene)/(the number of genes in a pathway in the database/the total number of genes in the database). Top 20 enriched pathways are selected according to the enrichment factor value. The selection standards were the number of genes in a pathway ≥4. The different colours from green to red represent the Q value (False discovery rate value). The different sizes of the round shapes represent the gene count number in a pathway. Ctr, matched normal skin tissue; Tum, infantile hemangioma skin tissue.

Table 2. List of up-regulated and down-regulated lncRNAs detected using RNA-seq (FC ≥ 2.83, P < 0.05).

LncRNAID GenePos log2 (Tum/Ctr) up-or-down p_value LncRNA GeneID
TCONS_00116532 chr5:101515283-101519050 –2.74762 down 0.0153 XLOC_074583
TCONS_00049881 chr16:76805140-76807266 –2.74208 down 0.03405 XLOC_031473
TCONS_00140157 chr8:111620546-111622506 –2.65655 down 0.02805 XLOC_090179
TCONS_00108080 chr4:97512593-97516549 –2.51518 down 0.03695 XLOC_068366
TCONS_00049878 chr16:76790731-76793194 –2.36369 down 0.0245 XLOC_031470
TCONS_00116531 chr5:101510927-101514253 –2.31673 down 0.03415 XLOC_074582
TCONS_00125444 chr6:77144877-77146646 –2.19865 down 0.0304 XLOC_080698
TCONS_00047386 chr15:95209116-95212765 –1.62607 down 0.04695 XLOC_030120
TCONS_00099093 chr3:117310248-117315662 1.60464 up 0.026 XLOC_061648
TCONS_00094390 chr3:115548706-115554914 1.63654 up 0.045 XLOC_058344
TCONS_00112159 chr5:104342703-104346581 1.6409 up 0.0436 XLOC_071442
TCONS_00099090 chr3:117295535-117304861 1.65949 up 0.0244 XLOC_061645
TCONS_00125869 chr6:92532111-92539501 1.72153 up 0.01895 XLOC_081015
TCONS_00092337 chr3:21220256-21226664 1.73612 up 0.01655 XLOC_056961
TCONS_00036940 chr13:105981280-105999840 1.8649 up 0.0291 XLOC_023137
TCONS_00022826 chr11:26799455-26802752 1.995 up 0.04175 XLOC_013761
TCONS_00092345 chr3:21256300-21262413 2.01955 up 0.0065 XLOC_056969
TCONS_00125870 chr6:92539642-92542765 2.05275 up 0.0118 XLOC_081016
TCONS_00144439 chr9:13841053-13843543 2.11565 up 0.04215 XLOC_093201
TCONS_00132673 chr7:94029530-94036098 2.1175 up 0.03365 XLOC_085154
TCONS_00088818 chr22:11878998-11880540 2.12569 up 0.04895 XLOC_054900
TCONS_00099084 chr3:117263272-117265249 2.13489 up 0.0322 XLOC_061639
TCONS_00089156 chr22:23536916-23548776 2.23141 up 0.00335 XLOC_055095
TCONS_00112938 chr5:136193267-136196387 2.2618 up 0.03135 XLOC_072057
TCONS_00093724 chr3:76746891-76748374 2.30541 up 0.02505 XLOC_057834
TCONS_00021543 chr11:124180846-124186471 2.31143 up 0.04245 XLOC_012894
TCONS_00099092 chr3:117307664-117309582 2.31645 up 0.0351 XLOC_061647
TCONS_00077659 chr2:12602918-12606149 2.33745 up 0.02735 XLOC_047338
TCONS_00106552 chr4:19193285-19198298 2.3654 up 0.02555 XLOC_067212
TCONS_00109906 chr4:187247968-187249825 2.40602 up 0.02915 XLOC_069754
TCONS_00106583 chr4:19283454-19288399 2.44245 up 0.0258 XLOC_067243
TCONS_00142894 chr8:98381305-98382530 2.46222 up 0.04195 XLOC_092151
TCONS_00092347 chr3:21263525-21265295 2.50214 up 0.0228 XLOC_056971
TCONS_00126048 chr6:104495681-104497908 2.57552 up 0.04765 XLOC_081156
TCONS_00021618 chr11:124429567-124433267 2.6993 up 0.00985 XLOC_012968
TCONS_00142579 chr8:89240840-89241898 2.72566 up 0.0405 XLOC_091914
TCONS_00116213 chr5:86348589-86351550 3.02011 up 0.0077 XLOC_074350
TCONS_00013577 chr10:64133769-64134877 3.14074 up 0.04865 XLOC_008097
TCONS_00021614 chr11:124419031-124423063 3.17524 up 0.02925 XLOC_012964
TCONS_00138013 chr8:9196728-9203476 3.31685 up 0.04465 XLOC_088644
TCONS_00117017 chr5:130223107-130225700 3.34741 up 0.0088 XLOC_074967
TCONS_00032295 chr12:91627173-91631603 3.74738 up 0.0054 XLOC_019826
TCONS_00116260 chr5:86539574-86547371 3.90234 up 0.00265 XLOC_074397
TCONS_00116261 chr5:86548066-86552126 4.02636 up 0.004 XLOC_074398
TCONS_00032240 chr12:91452883-91455961 4.05433 up 0.00415 XLOC_019771
TCONS_00087133 chr21:38178744-38181900 4.62793 up 0.04685 XLOC_053685
TCONS_00116241 chr5:86436761-86447930 5.05555 up 0.00105 XLOC_074378

Ctr, matched normal skin tissue; Tum, infantile hemangioma skin tissue.

Differential expression and bioinformatics analysis of miRNAs in IH compared with matched normal skin controls

We also determines the miRNA expression profiles between IH and matched normal skin controls using HiSeq. One hundred forty-two miRNA candidates were found to be differentially expressed (fold change ≥ 2, P ≤ 0.05; for a list of differentially expressed miRNAs, see Table 3). Of these, 42 miRNAs were up-regulated in IH, whereas 100 miRNAs were down-regulated (Figure 3A). To examine the potential biological functions of the miRNAs of interest in IH, we use miRanda, targetscan and PITA software to identify the target genes of known miRNAs with differential expression profiles and extracted intersections or unions of target genes as the final prediction result. Gene ontology (GO) analysis revealed that the target mRNAs of differentially expressed miRNAs were mostly involved in cellular processes, cell components and binding (Figure 3B).

Table 3. List of up-regulated and down-regulated miRNAs detected using small RNA-seq (FC ≥ 2.83, P < 0.05).

miR_name fold-change(log2 Tum/Ctr) up-or-down p_value sig-lable
hsa-miR-9-3p –7.10538475 down 0.000122742 **
hsa-miR-1303 –6.86430997 down 0.000490585 **
hsa-miR-223-3p –3.53749571 down 1.65E-266 **
hsa-miR-509-3-5p –3.49076386 down 4.54E-10 **
hsa-miR-509-5p –2.50137905 down 0.00149862 **
hsa-miR-450a-2-3p –2.22132264 down 0.007574552 **
hsa-miR-337-5p –2.13638952 down 0.000918863 **
hsa-miR-135a-5p –2.11442989 down 0.012782924 *
hsa-miR-513c-5p –2.11442989 down 0.012782924 *
hsa-miR-2355-3p –2.08634155 down 0.004368201 **
hsa-miR-202-5p –1.99889374 down 0.007235532 **
hsa-miR-200c-5p –1.99886536 down 0.021358055 *
hsa-miR-664b-3p –1.99886536 down 0.021358055 *
hsa-miR-3648 –1.93753391 down 0.001441353 **
hsa-miR-429 –1.93708866 down 1.47E-256 **
hsa-miR-26a-1-3p –1.92492452 down 0.004102228 **
hsa-miR-3611 –1.92492452 down 0.004102228 **
hsa-miR-187-3p –1.89198508 down 0.000828053 **
hsa-miR-664a-3p –1.87801528 down 1.82E-41 **
hsa-miR-383-5p –1.87335512 down 0.03528718 *
hsa-miR-335-3p –1.84083467 down 7.07E-87 **
hsa-miR-203a-3p –1.72913403 down 0 **
hsa-miR-3912-3p –1.71155782 down 2.01E-06 **
hsa-miR-183-3p –1.69939239 down 0.031012226 *
hsa-miR-135b-5p –1.69929888 down 3.86E-09 **
hsa-miR-141-5p –1.69460943 down 6.85E-21 **
hsa-miR-377-5p –1.65878433 down 7.03E-08 **
hsa-miR-16-5p –1.65065115 down 0 **
hsa-miR-150-5p –1.62494834 down 2.07E-49 **
hsa-miR-627-5p –1.6233869 down 0.000309094 **
hsa-miR-6510-3p –1.58388025 down 0.000271487 **
hsa-miR-548p –1.58387326 down 0.026725738 *
hsa-miR-203b-3p –1.58383438 down 1.74E-09 **
hsa-miR-195-5p –1.5823761 down 0 **
hsa-miR-141-3p –1.5772266 down 0 **
hsa-miR-200b-3p –1.57584304 down 0 **
hsa-miR-944 –1.5589637 down 4.65E-10 **
hsa-miR-200b-5p –1.53135387 down 2.72E-13 **
hsa-miR-31-5p –1.5239109 down 6.16E-159 **
hsa-miR-183-5p –1.52252398 down 2.78E-140 **
hsa-miR-92a-1-5p –1.52249641 down 0.007046614 **
hsa-miR-493-5p –1.51904529 down 6.20E-36 **
hsa-miR-320d 1.58604035 up 0.004519782 **
hsa-miR-524-3p 1.69892552 up 4.81E-139 **
hsa-miR-7704 1.8311765 up 0.000268926 **
hsa-miR-450a-1-3p 2.00090764 up 0.021183756 *
hsa-miR-185-5p 2.03429793 up 1.64E-39 **
hsa-miR-503-5p 2.10316253 up 1.37E-29 **
hsa-miR-122-5p 2.13865463 up 0.00090565 **
hsa-miR-1-3p 2.40555691 up 2.02E-13 **
hsa-miR-7-5p 2.40555691 up 2.02E-13 **
hsa-miR-520e 2.41594514 up 0.002562365 **
hsa-miR-1269b 3.39374391 up 3.56E-05 **
hsa-miR-1268a 3.8087166 up 0.000515933 **
hsa-miR-1268b 3.8087166 up 0.000515933 **

Ctr, matched normal skin tissue; Tum, infantile hemangioma skin tissue.

Figure 3. Expression profiles of differentially expressed miRNAs and Gene ontology (GO) terms for target mRNAs of differentially expressed miRNAs between infantile hemangioma and adjacent normal skin tissues.

Figure 3

(A) Scatter plot shows the differentially expressed miRNAs. Red dots represent up-regulated miRNAs. Green dots illustrate down-regulated miRNAs. (B) Most enriched GO terms of the three ontologies that are associated with the target mRNAs of differentially expressed miRNAs are listed. The term/GO on the horizontal axis is drawn according to the first letter of the GO in ascending order from left to right. The vertical axis represents the percent of genes and gene number. Ctr, matched normal skin tissue; Tum, infantile hemangioma skin tissue.

Real-time quantitative PCR validation

To validate the RNA-seq data, we randomly selected 9 differentially expressed RNAs (bold-face type in Tables 13). Real-time quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR) and Bulge-Loop™ qRT-PCR analyses were performed on an additional 9 independent IH skin samples (Table 4). The results revealed that similar up-regulation or down-regulation patterns were observed in both the RNA-seq and qRT-PCR samples for the 9 RNAs (Figure 4, bold in Tables 13). Therefore, our RNA-seq data were reliable and stable. Among the 9 RNAs, IFI44L, ISG15, TCONS_00088818, TCONS_000112159, TCONS_000125870, miR-503-5p and miR-524-3p were all expressed to a greater extent in the IH tissues than in the matched normal skin controls.

Table 4. Demographic and clinical characteristics of infantile hemangioma (IH) patients (capillary hemangioma).

No. Age Gender Position Pathology Sample use
1 3 months 8 days Male Left axilla IH RNA-seq
2 7 months 5 days Female Head IH RNA-seq
3 12 months Female Left Abdomen IH RNA-seq
4 9 months Female Right thoracic wall IH qRT-PCR
5 5 months Male Thoracic wall IH qRT-PCR
6 6 months 9 days Female Occiput IH qRT-PCR
7 8 months 13 days Female Right posterior neck IH qRT-PCR
8 10 months Female Left abdomen IH qRT-PCR
9 4 months Female Right thoracic wall IH qRT-PCR
10 11 months Male Thoracic wall IH qRT-PCR
11 8 months 21 days Female Occiput IH qRT-PCR
12 5 months 12 days Female Head IH qRT-PCR

Figure 4. The differential expression of mRNAs, lncRNAs and miRNAs between additional IH skin (n = 9) and matched normal skin tissues (n = 9).

Figure 4

mRNAs and lncRNAs expression were validated by quantitative real-time PCR using 2(–△△Ct) method. miRNAs expression was validated by Bulge-Loop™ qRT-PCR. *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.

The ceRNA network construction

Recently, lncRNAs and mRNAs have been demonstrated to be function as ceRNAs in diverse physiological and pathophysiological states. It is known that mRNAs or lncRNAs can bind miRNAs through microRNA response elements (MREs). Therefore, we use rna22 and targetscan to screen the lncRNAs and mRNAs with MREs. To ascertain the associations of differentially expressed lncRNAs and miRNAs with mRNAs, based on the 142 differentially expressed miRNAs, 144 differentially expressed mRNAs, and 256 differentially expressed lncRNAs, an lncRNA-miRNA-mRNA correlation network was constructed (Figure 5). The network displayed the associations among 87 miRNAs, 70 lncRNAs and 58 mRNAs mediated interactions. For example, miR-26a-1-3p could bind to lncRNAs TCONS_00074621 and mRNA CD24, miR-24-3p bind with TCONS_00000006 and LEFTY2, moreover, miR-514a-3p bind to TCONS_00040753 and FLT1. As shown in Figure 5, one miRNA was associated with one to tens of mRNAs and vice versa. One lncRNA was related to one to tens of miRNAs. In total, 1256 sponge modulators participated in 87 miRNA-mediated, 70 lncRNA-mediated and 58 mRNAs’ transcripts-mediated interactions. These findings indicated that the expression profiles of miRNAs, mRNAs and lncRNAs were significantly correlated.

Figure 5. The ceRNA network of the differentially expressed miRNA-mediated lncRNAs and mRNAs interactions.

Figure 5

Red color represents the mRNA name, green color displays the lncRNA name, and orange color illustrates the miRNA name. Taken TCONS_00126150 | CD24 and TCONS_00126153 | CD24 as an example, the TCONS_ number before | means the ID number of each transcript, one gene has many transcripts.

DISCUSSION

Currently, with the advent of next-generation sequencing technologies, RNA-Seq is gradually replacing microarrays for the detection of transcript expression profiling. IH is one of the most common tumors diagnosed in young children. The pathogenesis of hemangioma is largely unknown due to its sophisticated etiology. Although a lot of papers report the RNA networks in IH [12, 14, 1719], those work all used microarrays methods. In this study, we used Ribo-Zero RNA-Seq and HiSeq means to examine the global expression profiles of protein-coding transcripts and non-coding RNAs, including miRNAs and lncRNAs, in IH and matched normal skin controls. Totally, 144 mRNAs, 256 lncRNAs and 142 miRNAs were found to be differentially expressed (fold change ≥ 2, P ≤ 0.05) in IH compared to matched normal skin. Further integrated ceRNA network analysis revealed that 353 sponge modulators participate in 39 miRNA, 29 lncRNA and 147 mRNA mediated interactions.

Competitive endogenous (ce) RNAs cross-regulate each other through sequestration of shared microRNAs and form complex regulatory networks based on their microRNA signatures [20]. Genome-wide transcriptional profiling of vessels from proliferating and involuting hemangiomas has been used to identify differentially expressed genes [19]. A lncRNA microarray study reported that a large number of genes are differentially expressed in IH [12]. Integrative meta-analysis identifies miRNA-regulated networks in IH [14]. Here, based on RNA-seq technology, using IH tissues and matched normal skin, we presented a new ceRNA network that determined the functions of particular miRNAs, lncRNAs and mRNAs in IH development (Figure 5). Alterations in one ceRNA may have striking effects on the integrated ceRNA and transcriptional networks. Taken miR-664a-3p as an example, it was down-regulated in IH tissues from the small RNA-seq data (Table 3). Bulge-Loop™ qRT-PCR demonstrated that expression of miR-664a-3p was decreased in another nine IH tissues (Figure 4). The ceRNA network analysis revealed that three lncRNAs TCONS_00020616, TCONS_00058199 and TCONS_00108595 could bind to miR-664a-3p. Moreover, nine mRNAs including ADCYAP1, CSMD3, IL18R1, IKZF3, CD8A, FGL2, FUT9, IGF2BP1, and TMEM38B were predicted to bind with miR-664a-3p (Figure 5). This ceRNA network indicated that those nine mRNAs’ expression could be regulated by miR-664a-3p, and three lncRNAs TCONS_00020616, TCONS_00058199, TCONS_00108595 could compete to bind with miR-664a-3p and then affect those nine mRNAs’ expression.

The pathogenesis of IH has been linked to pathways affecting angiogenesis and vasculogenesis [21]. Those microarray analyses concluded that angiogenin may be a useful serum marker for hemangiomas [22], IH endothelial cells (HEMECs) reflects a pro-proliferative cell type with altered adhesive characteristics [17], proliferating hemangiomas display increased expression of genes involved in endothelial-pericyte interactions, as well as those involved in neural and vascular patterning [19], lncRNAs likely regulate several genes in angiogenesis [12], miRNA-mRNA expression networks display that deregulated genes play roles in cell growth and differentiation, cell signaling, angiogenesis and vasculogenesis [14]. In the present study, using RNA-seq technology, we found that deregulated mRNAs related to immune system processes, carbohydrate derivative binding, extracellular region regulation, chemokine, NF-kappa B and TGF-beta signalling pathways, as well as cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) (Figure 1). Moreover, cis target mRNAs of differentially expressed lncRNAs were mostly involved in regulatory mechanisms related to transcription, nucleic acid binding transcription factor activity, intracellular components, MAPK signalling pathway, regulation of autophagy and metabolic pathways (Figure 2). Additionally, target mRNAs of differentially expressed miRNAs were mostly involved in cellular processes, cell components and binding (Figure 3). These results are partly consistent with those of previous studies in that CAMs are involved. Besides, RNA-seq data show some new findings in that regulation of autophagy and metabolic pathways, TGF-beta, NF-kappa B signalling and chemokine signalling were involved in the pathogenesis of IH.

Endothelial TGF-β signalling has been implicated in the regulation of angiogenesis [23]. Expression of NF-kappa B target genes was demonstrated in proliferating IH. Targeting NF-kappa B in infantile hemangioma-derived stem cells reduced VEGF-A expression [24]. The chemokine CXCL-14 has been reported to be involved in the occurrence and development of infantile hemangioma [25]. Our RNA-seq data found that TGF-beta, NF-kappa B signalling and chemokine signalling were involved in the pathogenesis of IH. The results are consistent with those of previous studies, which suggested that the RNA-seq data are reliable.

By carefully comparing our data with other’s, IGF2, FOXF1 and EGFL7 were reported to be up-regulated in IH, FOXC1 and EGFR were down-regulated in IH [12]. In this study, we found that IGF2 mRNA-binding proteins (IGF2BPs) including IGF2BP1, IGF2BP2 and IGF2BP3 were all downregualted in IH. Although recent publication reported that results obtained by RNA-seq and microarrays were highly reproducible [26], some discrepancy may be existed in the differentially expressed RNAs. Therefore, further demonstrating the function of particular RNA in IH development is urgently needed. In addition, larger samples are needed to perform receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to prove that some of the IH RNAs are promising biomarkers.

Taken together, understanding the functional interactions among lncRNAs, miRNAs and mRNAs could lead to new explanations for IH disease pathogenesis [7]. Further elucidating the underlying mechanisms of the functions of miRNAs, lncRNAs and mRNAs in IH would be helpful in revealing the biological aetiology and potentially provide useful information for IH evaluation and treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ethics statement

This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Hospital affiliated with Nanjing Medical University (No. [2015] 91). Children with IH underwent surgery at out hospital. The IH samples and matched normal skin controls were collected from patients who underwent surgery and whose parents provided written consent.

Tissue samples

Proliferating capillary infantile hemangioma (IH) and matched normal skin tissues were obtained from 12 different patients who were admitted to the Obstetrics and Gynaecology Hospital affiliated with Nanjing Medical University for IH removal. Patient information is listed in Table 4. A diagnosis of proliferative infantile hemangioma was confirmed by routine pathological examination. The collected skin samples were immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen for total RNA preparation.

Total RNA isolation

Total RNA was extracted from biopsy samples using the Qiagen RNeasy mini kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA). After ribosomal RNA depletion, RNA-seq libraries were prepared using ScriptSeq complete kits from Epicenter (Madison, WI). RNA purity was assessed using the Nano Photometer® spectrophotometer (IMPLEN, CA, USA), and RNA concentration was measured using the Qubit® RNA Assay Kit in Qubit® 2.0 Flurometer (Life Technologies, CA, USA). RNA integrity was assessed using the RNA Nano 6000 Assay Kit from the Bioanalyser 2100 system (Agilent Technologies, CA, USA).

Library preparation, quality examination and sequencing for mRNAs and lncRNAs

The sequencing libraries were prepared following manufacturer recommendations from the VAHTS™ Total RNA-seq (H/M/R) Library Prep Kit for Illumina®. The details of library construction were patented by the company (Vazyme, China). After cluster generation, the libraries were sequenced on an Illumina Hiseq X10 platform, and 150-bp paired-end reads were generated.

Raw reads in fastq format were first processed using in-house perl scripts. Clean reads were obtained by removing reads with adapters, reads in which unknown bases were more than 5% and low quality reads (if the percentage of low quality bases was greater than 50% in a given read, we defined the low quality base to be the base whose sequencing quality was no more than 10). At the same time, Q20, Q30, and GC contents were calculated for the clean reads. All downstream analyses were based on the clean reads.

The reference genome and gene model annotation files were downloaded directly from the genome website. The reference genome index was built using Bowtie (v2.1.0) [27], and the paired-end clean reads were aligned to the reference genome using TopHat (v2.1.1) [28].

Transcriptome assembly, lncRNA prediction and target gene prediction

The mapped reads from each sample were assembled using Cufflinks (v2.2.1) [29] with a reference-based approach. Cufflinks uses a probabilistic model to simultaneously assemble and quantify the expression levels of a minimal set of isoforms, which provides a maximum likelihood explanation of the expression data in a given locus. Then, Cuffmerge was used to merge these sample assemblies into a master transcriptome, which was compared to known transcripts via Cuffcompare. The lncRNAs were predicted by several strict steps based on RNA structural characteristics and non-coding properties. The steps were as follows: 1) transcripts, not in any class code of “ j, i, o, u, x ”, were filtered out; 2) transcripts shorter than 200 bp were filtered out; 3) transcripts aligned to sequences in the NONCODE database [30] by blastn were identified as known lncRNAs; 4) the retained transcripts (known lncRNAs were not included) were used to predict protein coding potential by Coding Potential Calculator (CPC) [31] and TransDecoder (http://transdecoder.github.io/), transcripts with coding potential were removed, and those without coding potential were identified as novel lncRNAs. The known lncRNAs and novel lncRNAs were together used for subsequent analyses.

LncRNAs can negatively or positively affect expression of the downstream gene via an upstream noncoding promoter. Genes within 10 kb upstream or downstream of lncRNAs were abstracted by bedtools (http://bedtools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/) as lncRNA target genes. However, antisense lncRNAs can regulate overlapping sense transcripts. Transcripts that overlapped with LncRNAs on the opposite strand were also identified as lncRNA target genes, and the interactions between lncRNAs and transcripts were revealed by RNAplex [32].

Quantification of gene expression levels and differential expression analysis

Cuffdiff (v2.2.1) [33] was used to calculate FPKMs for both lncRNAs and coding genes in each group. Gene FPKMs were computed by summing the FPKMs of the transcripts in each gene group. FPKM stands for “fragments per kilobase of exon per million fragments mapped” and is calculated based on the length of the fragments and the reads count mapped to each fragment.

Cuffdiff (v2.2.1) provides statistical routines for determining differential expression in digital transcripts or gene expression datasets using a model based on a negative binomial distribution. Transcripts or genes with corrected p values less than 0.05 and absolute values of log2 (fold change) <1 were classified as significantly differentially expressed.

Small RNA sequencing and bioinformatics analysis

Total RNA was separated by 15% agarose gels to extract the small RNA (18–30 nt). After ethanol precipitation and centrifugal enrichment of small RNA samples, the library was prepared according to the methods and processes described in the Small RNA Sample Preparation Kit (Illumina, RS-200-0048). Insert size was assessed using the Agilent Bioanalyser 2100 system (Agilent Technologies, CA, USA), and after the insert size was consistent with expectations, qualified insert size was accurately quantitated using a Taqman fluorescence probe from the AB Step One Plus Real-Time PCR system (Library valid concentration > 2 nM). The qualified libraries were sequenced using an Illumina Hiseq 2500 platform, and 50-bp single-end reads were generated.

First, the tags were mapped to the reference genome by SOAP [34] to analyse their distributions within the genome and were aligned to the miRBase database [35] using blast. The tags were identified as known miRNAs when they satisfied the following criteria: 1) there were no mismatches when aligned to the miRNA precursors in the miRBase database; 2) based on the first criteria, the tags were aligned to the mature miRNAs in the miRBase database with at least 16-nt overlap while allowing offsets. The miRNA target genes were predicted using two software programs (targetscan and miRanda) as we previously described [36], and the intersection of target genes (the intersections were the same target genes of the same miRNAs) were the final target genes.

The miRNA expression levels were measured by “Transcripts Per Kilobase Million” (TPM).

TPM=106C/L

where C is the read count of a miRNA and L is the total count of clean reads in sample.

Differentially expressed miRNAs were evaluated using the following statistical tests:

1) Statistical algorithm developed by Audic and Claverie (1997) [37]

P(y|x)=[N2N1]y(x+y)!x!y![1+N2N1](x+y+1)

where N1 is the total clean reads from sample 1, N2 is the total clean reads from sample 2, x is the number of reads from sample 1 mapped to miRNA A and y is the number of reads from sample 2 mapped to miRNA A.

Gene Ontology (GO) and KEGG enrichment analysis

GO enrichment analysis of differentially expressed genes or target genes of differentially expressed lncRNAs was implemented using a perl module (GO::TermFinder) [38]. GO terms with corrected p values less than 0.05 were considered to be significantly enriched among the differentially expressed genes or the target genes of differentially expressed lncRNAs. R functions (phyper and qvalue) were used to test for statistical enrichment of the differentially expressed genes or target genes of the differentially expressed lncRNAs among the KEGG pathways. KEGG pathways with corrected p values less than 0.05 were considered to be significantly enriched among the differentially expressed genes or the target genes of the differentially expressed lncRNAs.

Validation of RNA-seq data

To confirm the RNA-seq data, the expression profiles of randomly selected mRNAs and lncRNAs were tested in another 9 IH patients using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reactions (qRT-PCR) with the SYBR green method on an Applied Biosystems ViiA™ 7 Dx (Life Technologies, USA). Patient information is listed in Table 4. The sequences of the specific PCR primer sets used for qRT-PCR are listed in Table 5. The RNA expression levels were normalized to the internal control gene, glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH), using the 2(–△△Ct) method as we previously described [39]. Three selected miRNAs were further examined by Bulge-Loop™ qRT-PCR according to the manufacturer’s protocol (RIBOBIO, Guangzhou, China) with the SYBR green method on an Applied Biosystems ViiATM 7 Dx (Life Technologies, USA). The miRNA expression levels were normalized to u6 (RIBOBIO, Guangzhou, China), using the 2(–△△Ct) method.

Table 5. Details of primer pairs used in analysis of mRNAs and lncRNAs expression by qRT-PCR.

Gene name Forward primer (5′-3′) Reverse primer (5′-3′)
IFI44L ACAGAGCCAAATGATTCCCTATG TCGATAAACGACACACCAGTTG
ISG15 CGCAGATCACCCAGAAGATCG TTCGTCGCATTTGTCCACCA
PIP GTCAGTACGTCCAAATGACGAA CTGTTGGTGTAAAAGTCCCAGT
TCONS_00088818 GCCTTGTGGTGTCTCCTCAG TAGACCAGGCGTCATAGCAGAA
TCONS_00112159 GAAACAGCCACGGAGGGAAC GATTTCTGCAATGCCGTGCC
TCONS_00125870 CCTAGAACCAGGGGCCACAA TTTGCTGGGCACTCTGTAGC

CeRNA network analysis

The miRanda and TargetScan assessments were used to identify ceRNAs (competing endogenous RNAs, including protein-coding messenger RNAs, long non-coding RNAs and circular RNAs), containing microRNA response elements (MREs). Then, ceRNAs with common miRNAs were selected to predict the global interactions between miRNAs and ceRNAs. Additionally, the ceRNAs with common miRNAs that were up- or down-regulated by miRNAs were abstracted based on differential expression to predict the co-regulated interactions of miRNAs and ceRNAs. The co-regulated ceRNA network was generated by Cytoscape (V. 3.4.0) [40].

Statistical analysis

Data were analysed using the SPSS 20.0 software package (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA) with an independent-samples T test performed between the two groups. All values are represented as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) from at least three independent experiments. Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND FUNDING

This study was supported by the Nanjing Science and Technology project (201503047); the Jiangsu Provincial Medical Youth Talent; and the Jiangsu Maternal and Child Health Research Project (F201608).

Author contributions

Jun Li projected the experiment. Jingyun Li performed the sample preparation and wrote the manuscript. Qian Li, Ling Chen, Yanli Gao and Bei Zhou performed the bioinformatics analysis. Jun Li edited the manuscript.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Munden A, Butschek R, Tom WL, Marshall JS, Poeltler DM, Krohne SE, Alio AB, Ritter M, Friedlander DF, Catanzarite V, Mendoza A, Smith L, Friedlander M, et al. Prospective study of infantile haemangiomas: incidence, clinical characteristics and association with placental anomalies. Br J Dermatol. 2014;170:907–913. doi: 10.1111/bjd.12804. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Kim KH, Choi TH, Choi Y, Park YW, Hong KY, Kim DY, Choe YS, Lee H, Cheon JE, Park JB, Park KD, Kang HJ, Shin HY, et al. Comparison of Efficacy and Safety Between Propranolol and Steroid for Infantile Hemangioma: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153:529–536. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.0250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Frieden IJ. Infantile hemangioma research: looking backward and forward. J Invest Dermatol. 2011;131:2345–2348. doi: 10.1038/jid.2011.315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Smith C, Friedlander SF, Guma M, Kavanaugh A, Chambers CD. Infantile Hemangiomas: An Updated Review on Risk Factors, Pathogenesis, and Treatment. Birth Defects Res. 2017;109:809–815. doi: 10.1002/bdr2.1023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Leaute-Labreze C, Prey S, Ezzedine K. Infantile haemangioma: part I. Pathophysiology, epidemiology, clinical features, life cycle and associated structural abnormalities. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2011;25:1245–1253. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2011.04102.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Li LJ, Zhao W, Tao SS, Leng RX, Fan YG, Pan HF, Ye DQ. Competitive endogenous RNA network: potential implication for systemic lupus erythematosus. Expert Opin Ther Targets. 2017;21:639–648. doi: 10.1080/14728222.2017.1319938. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Thomson DW, Dinger ME. Endogenous microRNA sponges: evidence and controversy. Nat Rev Genet. 2016;17:272–283. doi: 10.1038/nrg.2016.20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Sun Y, Cheng H, Wang G, Yu G, Zhang D, Wang Y, Fan W, Yang W. Deregulation of miR-183 promotes melanoma development via lncRNA MALAT1 regulation and ITGB1 signal activation. Oncotarget. 2017;8:3509–3518. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.13862. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13862. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cao C, Zhang T, Zhang D, Xie L, Zou X, Lei L, Wu D, Liu L. The long non-coding RNA, SNHG6–003, functions as a competing endogenous RNA to promote the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma. Oncogene. 2017;36:1112–1122. doi: 10.1038/onc.2016.278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Han X, Yang F, Cao H, Liang Z. Malat1 regulates serum response factor through miR-133 as a competing endogenous RNA in myogenesis. FASEB J. 2015;29:3054–3064. doi: 10.1096/fj.14-259952. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Liu XH, Sun M, Nie FQ, Ge YB, Zhang EB, Yin DD, Kong R, Xia R, Lu KH, Li JH, De W, Wang KM, Wang ZX, et al. Lnc RNA HOTAIR functions as a competing endogenous RNA to regulate HER2 expression by sponging miR-331–3p in gastric cancer. Mol Cancer. 2014;13:92. doi: 10.1186/1476-4598-13-92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Liu X, Lv R, Zhang L, Xu G, Bi J, Gao F, Zhang J, Xue F, Wang F, Wu Y, Fu C, Wang Q, Huo R. Long noncoding RNA expression profile of infantile hemangioma identified by microarray analysis. Tumour Biol. 2016 doi: 10.1007/s13277-016-5434-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Strub GM, Kirsh AL, Whipple ME, Kuo WP, Keller RB, Kapur RP, Majesky MW, Perkins JA. Endothelial and circulating C19MC microRNAs are biomarkers of infantile hemangioma. JCI Insight. 2016;1:e88856. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.88856. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Bertoni N, Pereira LM, Severino FE, Moura R, Yoshida WB, Reis PP. Integrative meta-analysis identifies microRNA-regulated networks in infantile hemangioma. BMC Med GeneT. 2016;17:4. doi: 10.1186/s12881-015-0262-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Batista PJ, Chang HY. Long noncoding RNAs: cellular address codes in development and disease. Cell. 2013;152:1298–1307. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.02.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Kornienko AE, Guenzl PM, Barlow DP, Pauler FM. Gene regulation by the act of long non-coding RNA transcription. Bmc Biol. 2013;11:59. doi: 10.1186/1741-7007-11-59. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Stiles JM, Rowntree RK, Amaya C, Diaz D, Kokta V, Mitchell DC, Bryan BA. Gene expression analysis reveals marked differences in the transcriptome of infantile hemangioma endothelial cells compared to normal dermal microvascular endothelial cells. Vasc Cell. 2013;5:6. doi: 10.1186/2045-824X-5-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ritter MR, Moreno SK, Dorrell MI, Rubens J, Ney J, Friedlander DF, Bergman J, Cunningham BB, Eichenfield L, Reinisch J, Cohen S, Veccione T, Holmes R, et al. Identifying potential regulators of infantile hemangioma progression through large-scale expression analysis: a possible role for the immune system and indoleamine 2,3 dioxygenase (IDO) during involution. Lymphat Res Biol. 2003;1:291–299. doi: 10.1089/153968503322758094. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Calicchio ML, Collins T, Kozakewich HP. Identification of signaling systems in proliferating and involuting phase infantile hemangiomas by genome-wide transcriptional profiling. Am J Pathol. 2009;174:1638–1649. doi: 10.2353/ajpath.2009.080517. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ala U, Karreth FA, Bosia C, Pagnani A, Taulli R, Leopold V, Tay Y, Provero P, Zecchina R, Pandolfi PP. Integrated transcriptional and competitive endogenous RNA networks are cross-regulated in permissive molecular environments. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110:7154–7159. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1222509110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Greenberger S, Bischoff J. Pathogenesis of infantile haemangioma. Br J Dermatol. 2013;169:12–19. doi: 10.1111/bjd.12435. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jiang C, Lin X, Hu X, Chen H, Jin Y, Ma G, Chen D, Chen X, Gu W. Angiogenin: a potential serum marker of infantile hemangioma revealed by cDNA microarray analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134:231e–239e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000367. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Wang X, Abraham S, McKenzie J, Jeffs N, Swire M, Tripathi VB, Luhmann U, Lange C, Zhai Z, Arthur HM, Bainbridge J, Moss SE, Greenwood J, et al. LRG1 promotes angiogenesis by modulating endothelial TGF-beta signalling. NATURE. 2013;499:306–311. doi: 10.1038/nature12345. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Greenberger S, Adini I, Boscolo E, Mulliken JB, Bischoff J. Targeting NF-kappaB in infantile hemangioma-derived stem cells reduces VEGF-A expression. Angiogenesis. 2010;13:327–335. doi: 10.1007/s10456-010-9189-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Xu GQ, Lu RR, Huo R, Guo X. [The expression of CEACAM-1 and CXCL-14 in infantile hemangioma] Zhonghua Zheng Xing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2010;26:195–198. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Chen L, Sun F, Yang X, Jin Y, Shi M, Wang L, Shi Y, Zhan C, Wang Q. Correlation between RNA-Seq and microarrays results using TCGA data. Gene. 2017 doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2017.07.056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Langmead B, Salzberg SL. Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods. 2012;9:357–359. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.1923. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kim D, Pertea G, Trapnell C, Pimentel H, Kelley R, Salzberg SL. TopHat2: accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol. 2013;14:R36. doi: 10.1186/gb-2013-14-4-r36. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Trapnell C, Roberts A, Goff L, Pertea G, Kim D, Kelley DR, Pimentel H, Salzberg SL, Rinn JL, Pachter L. Differential gene and transcript expression analysis of RNA-seq experiments with TopHat and Cufflinks. Nat Protoc. 2012;7:562–578. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2012.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Zhao Y, Li H, Fang S, Kang Y, Wu W, Hao Y, Li Z, Bu D, Sun N, Zhang MQ, Chen R. NONCODE 2016: an informative and valuable data source of long non-coding RNAs. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44:D203–D208. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkv1252. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Kong L, Zhang Y, Ye ZQ, Liu XQ, Zhao SQ, Wei L, Gao G. CPC: assess the protein-coding potential of transcripts using sequence features and support vector machine. NUCLEIC ACIDS RES. 2007;35:W345–W349. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkm391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Tafer H, Hofacker IL. RNAplex: a fast tool for RNA-RNA interaction search. Bioinformatics. 2008;24:2657–2663. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn193. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Trapnell C, Hendrickson DG, Sauvageau M, Goff L, Rinn JL, Pachter L. Differential analysis of gene regulation at transcript resolution with RNA-seq. Nat Biotechnol. 2013;31:46–53. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2450. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Li R, Yu C, Li Y, Lam TW, Yiu SM, Kristiansen K, Wang J. SOAP2: an improved ultrafast tool for short read alignment. Bioinformatics. 2009;25:1966–1967. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kozomara A, Griffiths-Jones S. miRBase: annotating high confidence microRNAs using deep sequencing data. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:D68–D73. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkt1181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Li J, Zou J, Li Q, Chen L, Gao Y, Yan H, Zhou B, Li J. Assessment of differentially expressed plasma microRNAs in nonsyndromic cleft palate and nonsyndromic cleft lip with cleft palate. Oncotarget. 2016;7:86266–86279. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.13379. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Audic S, Claverie JM. The significance of digital gene expression profiles. GENOME RES. 1997;7:986–995. doi: 10.1101/gr.7.10.986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Boyle EI, Weng S, Gollub J, Jin H, Botstein D, Cherry JM, Sherlock G. GO::TermFinder—open source software for accessing Gene Ontology information and finding significantly enriched Gene Ontology terms associated with a list of genes. Bioinformatics. 2004;20:3710–3715. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bth456. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Li J, Long W, Li Q, Zhou Q, Wang Y, Wang H, Zhou B, Li J. Distinct expression profiles of lncRNAs between regressive and mature scars. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2015;35:663–675. doi: 10.1159/000369727. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Shannon P, Markiel A, Ozier O, Baliga NS, Wang JT, Ramage D, Amin N, Schwikowski B, Ideker T. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 2003;13:2498–2504. doi: 10.1101/gr.1239303. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Oncotarget are provided here courtesy of Impact Journals, LLC

RESOURCES