Abstract
Background
Curcumin is well known for its anticancer properties. Its cytotoxic activity has been documented in several cancer cell lines, including breast cancer. The pleiotropic activity of curcumin as an antioxidant, an antiangiogenic, antiproliferative, and pro‐apoptotic, is due to its diverse targets, such as signaling pathways, protein/enzyme, or noncoding gene.
Aim
This study aimed to identify key miRNAs and mRNAs induced by curcumin in breast cancer cells MCF7, T47D (hormone positive), versus MDA‐MB231 (hormone negative) using comparative analysis of global gene expression profiles.
Methods
RNA was isolated and subjected to mRNA and miRNA library sequencing to study the global gene expression profile of curcumin‐treated breast cancer cells. The differential expression of gene and miRNA was performed using the DESeq R package. The enriched pathways were studied using cluster profileR, and integrated miRNA–mRNA analysis was carried out using miRtarvis and miRmapper tools.
Results
Curcumin treatment led to upregulation of 59% TSGs in MCF7, 21% in MDA‐MB‐231 cells, and 36% TSGs in T47D, and downregulation of 57% oncogenes in MCF7, 76% in MDA‐MB‐231, and 91% in T47D. Similarly, curcumin treatment led to upregulation of 32% TSmiRs in MCF7, 37.5% in MDA‐MB231, and 62.5% in T47D, and downregulation of 77% oncomiRs in MCF7, 50% in MDA‐MB231 and 28.6% in T47D. Integrated analysis of miRNA–mRNA led to the identification of a common NFKB pathway altered by curcumin in all three cell lines. Analysis of uniquely enriched pathway revealed non‐integrin membrane–ECM interactions and laminin interactions in MCF7; extracellular matrix organization and degradation in MDA‐MB‐231 and cell cycle arrest and G2/M transition in T47D.
Conclusion
Curcumin regulates miRNA and mRNA in a cell type‐specific manner. The integrative analysis led to the detection of miRNAs and mRNAs pairs, which can be used as biomarkers associated with carcinogenesis, diagnostic, and treatment response in breast cancer.
Keywords: breast cancer, curcumin, pathways, transcriptomics
1. INTRODUCTION
Molecular tumor heterogeneity is the biggest hurdle in breast cancer treatment. 1 , 2 , 3 Though surgery, radiation therapy, hormonal therapy, immunotherapy, and targeted therapy are routine treatment regimes, breast cancer metastasis, drug resistance, and relapse lead to poor patient survival. 4 , 5 Hence the development of newer and better therapeutics is required. Drug development processes can be challenging due to the complexity of the biological system. 6 Therefore exploring bioactive substances from herbs, medicinal plants, and natural products can be utilized as these have the potential to minimize the side effects and resistance associated with chemotherapy.
Curcumin, a polyphenol extracted from turmeric, is well known for its multifaceted properties like anti‐inflammatory, antioxidant, anti‐bacterial, anti‐malarial, and anticancer. 7 , 8 , 9 Clinical and preclinical studies have validated the role of curcumin in varied human chronic diseases, including cancer. 10 The therapeutic potential of curcumin can be attributed to its capability to regulate both epigenome and transcriptome. 10 , 11
Out of 25 000 genes (encoded by the human genome), roughly 600 targets of the drug, primarily receptors, and enzymes, have been targeted in the diseased state. 12 With advances in next‐generation sequencing technology (NGS), the time required for drug target study and biomarker discovery has reduced significantly. 6 RNA‐seq is an important application of (NGS) because it can generate comprehensive transcriptome information at different levels, including quantification of protein‐coding and noncoding gene expression, identification of noncoding RNAs (ncRNAs), and/or fusion genes, and determination of alternative splicing. Using RNA‐seq to catalog events in drug‐treated samples against normal provides insights into pathway analysis, gene ontology, and gene regulation. 13 RNA‐seq analysis helps in the unbiased detection of both coding and noncoding novel transcripts and transcripts with low abundance. 14 As compared to microarrays, RNA‐seq is more sensitive and accurate in discriminating between highly similar sequences. 15 Tools like the NCI Transcriptional Pharmacodynamics Workbench (NCI TPW) have been developed to decipher gene expression, molecular pathways, drug target, and drug sensitivity across the NCI‐60 panel in response to 15 anticancer agents. 16
Since drugs cannot target every protein, alternate such as miRNA therapeutics can be utilized. MiRNAs are ~22 nucleotides noncoding RNAs that regulate gene expression by RNA interference post‐transcriptionally. 17 , 18 These noncoding RNAs play an important role in protein expression by modifying the sequence structure of expression of the mRNA. 17 This regulation is based on the complementarity of miRNA with the 3'UTR region of target mRNA. However, miRNAs can also bind to the 5'UTR or coding region of target mRNA and activate translation. 19 miRNAs can modulate epigenetic machinery, and reciprocally, their expression can be modulated by the epigenetic machinery. 18 miRNA‐seq gives the miRNA profile of the disease and the miRNA profile induced by the drug, which can target undruggable proteins. 20
Integrated RNA‐seq and miRNA‐seq analysis provide insight into drug‐induced global alterations in the transcriptome. It also helps in deciphering the molecular mechanism of the disease via gene expression and gene regulation. 21 Interestingly, genes and miRNAs involved in drug resistance can also be studied by comparing expression profiles of resistant and non‐resistant cells using the whole transcriptome approach. 21 Thus, genome‐wide transcriptome profiling is instrumental in accurately representing the expression pattern of the coding and noncoding genome in homeostasis and early and late events leading to disease. 22
RNA‐seq has been employed to study the changes in tumorigenesis in the presence of different drugs such as curcumin, 23 shikonin, 14 gefitinib, 24 Gallic acid, 25 benzo[α]pyrene (BaP), 26 Fructus Meliae Toosendan (FMT), 27 citral, 28 Quercetin 29 and so on. In this study, we have explored the whole transcriptome (mRNA and miRNA) effect post‐curcumin treatment in MDA‐MB‐231, MCF7, and T47D cells. The analysis had led to the identification of drug‐induced cell specific miRNA–mRNA networks, pathways, and new targets involved in three different breast cancer cells.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Cell culture
MDA‐MB‐231, MCF7, and T47D cells were purchased from the National Centre of Cell Culture (NCCS), Pune, Maharashtra, India. All the cell lines were authenticated at NCCS by short tandem repeat (STR) analysis. Dulbecco's Modified Eagles Medium (DMEM high glucose with L‐glutamine; Lonza) was used for MDA‐MB‐231 cells, Eagle's Minimum Essential Medium (EMEM; Lonza supplemented with non‐essential amino acids [NEAA] from MP biomedicals) was used for MCF7 cells, and Roswell Park Memorial Institute‐1640 (RPMI; Lonza) media was used for T47D cells. All three media were supplemented with heat‐inactivated 10% fetal bovine serum (Gibco), 100 IU mg/ml penicillin/streptomycin (Gibco) at 37°C in a humidified atmosphere containing 5% CO2. 100 mM curcumin stocks were prepared in DMSO, and the treatment was given so that all treatments had equal concentrations of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) between 0.1% and 0.2%. The molecular signatures of each cell line are tabulated in Table 1.
TABLE 1.
Characteristic Molecular Signatures of Cell lines used in the study
| Characteristics | MCF7 | T47D | MDA‐MB‐231 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breast Cancer Subtype 30 , 31 | Luminal A | Luminal A | Claudin‐low triple negative |
| ER,PR, Her2 status 30 , 31 | ER +ve, PR +ve, Her2 −ve | ER +ve, PR +ve, Her2 −ve | ER −ve, PR −ve, Her2 −ve |
| p53 Status 32 | Wild type | Mutant (protein variant p.L194F) | Mutant (protein variant p.R280K) |
| BRCA1 status 33 | Wild type | Wild type | Wild type |
2.2. RNA preparation and HiSeq2500 sequencing
2.2.1. Drug treatment, RNA isolation, and library preparation
Drug treatment and RNA isolation: 0.75 × 105 cells were seeded in each well of a 6‐well plate. After 24 h, MCF7, T47D, and MDA‐MB‐231 cells were treated with 10 μM curcumin. After 48 h of treatment, cells were trypsinized, and cells from three wells having the same treatment were pooled together. After two PBS washes, RNA extraction was done using Trizol Reagent (Ambion) following the manufacturer's recommendations. RNA concentration and purity were checked using Qubit (Invitrogen, Life Technologies), and its integrity was examined by capillary electrophoresis (Tapestation, Agilent Technologies) to ensure RNA integrity number >9, for a good RNA library preparation. Paired‐end RNA‐seq libraries were prepared using Illumina TruSeq RNA Library Prep Kit v2.
mRNA library preparation: In brief, from the total RNA, mRNAs were separated using oligo‐dT beads and fragmented to 200–250 bp. After cDNA was synthesized, the ends were repaired for blunt ends, and the 3' ends were adenylated. To the adenylated sites, adapters were linked, and subsequently, PCR amplification of the library was done. After constructing the libraries, their concentrations and insert sizes were detected using Qubit and Agilent Tapestation, respectively. High throughput sequencing was performed using Illumina HiSeq2500 to obtain 100‐bp paired‐end reads.
2.2.2. miRNA library preparation
RNA isolation was done as mentioned above, and RNA sample was given for library preparation. miRNA‐library preparation was outsourced to SciGenom Labs, India. In brief, after checking the quality, RIN of RNA, 3′ and 5′ adapters were ligated to the short mature miRNA sequences. After adapter ligation, reverse transcription was done to obtain single‐stranded cDNAs. The cDNA was then PCR amplified, and the amplicons were run on 8% native PAGE. The ~150 bp library was gel purified and the quality of libraries was checked using Tapestation 2200, Agilent. The libraries were pooled and sequenced using Hiseq 2500, Illumina.
2.3. Differential expression analysis
2.3.1. mRNA‐seq
Data analysis was carried out, beginning with filtering raw reads output from Illumina Hiseq2500 platform. The sequencing depth for each sample was >40 million reads. The quality of the reads was checked using the FastQC tool. 34 The reads were aligned with Bowtie2 35 to the hg38 reference genome. The tool coverage bed from BEDTools 36 was used to extract the count per transcript per sample using the annotation files. Differential expression analyses of drug‐treated samples against control samples were performed using the DESeq R package. 37 Heatmap and hierarchical clustering were done to understand the expression profile based on the value of significantly differentially expressed transcripts.
2.3.2. miRNA‐seq
Data analysis was carried out in the following steps: filtering was done on raw reads output from Illumina Hiseq2500 platform. The sequencing depth for each sample was >10 million reads. The quality of the reads was checked using the FastQC tool, 34 and >90% of reads had a Phred score (Q) >30. Trimming was done using trim_galore 38 to obtain read lengths of 18–25 bp. The alignment was performed using Bowtie2, 35 and differentially expressed miRNA was obtained, as mentioned above.
2.4. Enrichment and pathway analysis for mRNA‐seq data
For pathway analysis of the differentially expressed genes, we have used clusterprofileR. 39 The significant pathways were considered based on p‐value.
2.5. Integrated enrichment and network analysis of mRNA–miRNA
miRtarvis+ 40 , 41 and miRmapper 42 tools were used for studying 40 , 41 the interaction between mRNA and miRNA. The mRNA–miRNA network was generated using miRtarvis+. 40 , 41 Every miRNA target was verified using TargetScan, 43 mirTarBase 44 and miRDB. 45
2.6. Quantitative real‐time PCR
cDNA was synthesized from 1–2 μg RNA using cDNA synthesis kit from Takara Bio according to the manufacturer's instructions. The PCR reaction was performed using StepOnePlus™ real‐time PCR system from Applied Biosystems using iTaq™ Universal SYBR® Green supermix from Bio‐Rad with PCR primers for genes (ANKRD12, CTDSP1, ZNF292, FAM83D) and miRNAs (miR‐16, miR‐34). The sequences for the primers are provided in Supplementary Table 4. The relative level of the target gene from each sample was determined by normalizing it to β‐actin. All experiments were done in triplicates and repeated at least twice to duplicate results.
2.7. Immunoblotting
To perform this assay, 0.8 × 105 MCF7 cells/ml were seeded and treated with curcumin (1, 5, and 10 μM) for 48 h, and whole cell lysate was prepared as described in. 46 , 47 30 μg of cell lysates were electrophoresed on 10%–12% of SDS‐polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) and transferred to Polyvinylidene fluoride membrane. The membrane was blocked using 5% skim milk in 1× PBS and then probed with primary antibodies: GAPDH were purchased from Cloud clone Corp., NF‐KB from Biolegend, Horseradish peroxidase‐labeled secondary anti‐rabbit antibody from Cell Signalling Technology. The membrane was probed with appropriate antibodies and was developed using a chemiluminescence reagent (Clarity Western ECL blotting substrateBiorad). The blot image was captured by using the Chemidoc‐XRS Biorad gel doc system, and the protein band images were quantified using GelQuant.Net, BiochemLab solutions.
3. RESULTS
3.1. Transcriptomic analysis of breast cancer cells upon curcumin treatment using RNA‐seq
The dose–response study of curcumin in breast cancer cells (MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, T47D) was performed, 47 and accordingly, the concentration of curcumin was determined. Differential gene expression analysis was performed after 48 h curcumin (10 μM) treatment on three breast cancer cells of different origins MCF‐7 (luminal), T47D (luminal), and MDA‐MB‐231 (TNBC). The data was generated by pooling three biological replicates, and gene expression profiling was performed using RNA‐seq. On average, 40 million reads were generated, with ~80%–84% alignment with the hg38 reference genome for all the RNA‐seq data (Supplementary Table 1).
The PCA plots of differentially expressed genes among three breast cancer cell lines MCF7, MDA‐MB231, and T47D, treated with curcumin (Supplementary Figure 1), show that the three cell lines clustered away from each other suggesting differences in the origin of cell lines and their expression patterns.
A total of 5530 genes in MCF7, 807 in MDA‐MB‐231423 in T47D genes were differentially expressed (DE) (Log2 Fold Change > ±1, p‐value <.05). A transcriptome summary shows the percentage of up and down‐regulated genes among the total DE genes (Supplementary Figure 2A). 45%, 32%, 21% DE genes were upregulated, and 55%, 68%, 79% DE genes were downregulated in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D respectively. 22 DE genes were common to all three cell lines after curcumin treatment (Figure 1A). 5074 DE genes were unique to MCF7, 486 were unique to MDA‐MB‐231, and 207 were unique to T47D (Figure 1A). 4.6% DE genes were common between MCF7 and MDA‐MB‐231, 3% DE genes between MCF7 and T47D, whereas 4.1% DE genes were common between T47D and MDA‐MB‐231. 91.7%, 60%, 48.9% DE genes were uniquely altered in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D cells after curcumin treatment. Among the 22 common genes, 15 DE genes were downregulated, and 3 DE genes were upregulated in all three cell lines upon curcumin treatment. Oncogenic genes like FAM83D, CTDSP1, and SAPCD2 were downregulated in all three cells, and tumor suppressor genes (TSGs) like ZNF292, ANKRD12, NKAPL, and CCL21 were upregulated in all three breast cancer cells upon curcumin treatment. FAM83D 48 and SAPCD2 49 are known to promote cell proliferation, induce cell motility, and hence their downregulation by curcumin is a positive outcome.
FIGURE 1.

Venn diagram for DE genes from curcumin treated MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D cells (A). (B) Real‐time PCR validation of common genes. Pathways regulated by curcumin in MCF7 (C), MDA‐MB‐231 (D), and T47D (E). Bars represent p‐value for the pathway and the trendline represents the number of DE genes in the pathway. Heatmap showing DE of TSGs and oncogenes in MDA‐MB‐231 (F), MCF7 (G), and T47D (H) cells upon curcumin treatment
We validated few genes like ZNF292, ANKRD12, CTDSP1, and FAM83D by real‐time (RT) PCR. The qRT‐PCR results showed a similar differential expression pattern, validated the expression of genes, that is upregulation/ downregulation, as obtained from the RNA‐Seq results. However, the log2 fold change of the differentially expressed genes in the qRT‐PCR did not perfectly match the RNA‐Seq. For example, the ANKRD12 gene was upregulated by 3.95,1.89, and 2.16 log2 fold change in RNA‐seq data of curcumin treated MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D cell respectively. In contrast, in RT‐PCR, the ANKRD12 gene was upregulated by 0.39, 1.46, and 0.67 log2 fold change for curcumin treated MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D.
Further, DE genes were subjected to pathway analysis in all three cell lines to identify altered pathways upon curcumin treatment. Common pathways altered in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231 by curcumin were ER‐Phagosome pathway, Antigen processing‐Cross presentation Interferon gamma signaling, Endosomal/Vacuolar pathway, Antigen Presentation: Folding, assembly and peptide loading of class I MHC pathways. Extracellular matrix (ECM) related interactions with non‐integrin membrane and laminin pathways were regulated by curcumin uniquely in MCF7(Figure 1C) cells, whereas ECM degradation and Collagen degradation were enriched in MDA‐MB‐231 (Figure 1D). Pathways related to the cell cycle were uniquely regulated in T47D cells by curcumin (Figure 1E).
Cancer is driven by an imbalance of oncogene and tumor suppressor gene (TSG) expression. Thus, we analyzed the significant DE genes for TSGs and oncogenes. For TSGs, we used the TSG database 50 and selected TSGs associated with breast invasive carcinoma samples, and for oncogenes, we used the Oncogene database. 51 589 TSGs were found in the TSG database for breast adenocarcinoma (BRCA) and 803 oncogenes in the Oncogene database. The percentage of upregulated TSGs and downregulated oncogenes were calculated using the significant DE genes after curcumin treatment. 59% TSGs were upregulated in MCF7, 21% in MDA‐MB‐231 cells and 36% TSGs were upregulated in T47D after curcumin treatment. 57% oncogenes were downregulated in MCF7, 76% in MDA‐MB‐231, and 91% in T47D cells after curcumin treatment. Heatmaps were plotted for these TSGs and oncogenes, indicating cell type specific regulation of TSGs after curcumin treatment in all three breast cancer cells namely, MDA‐MB‐231, MCF7, and T47D (Figure 1F‐H).
3.2. Comparative analysis of curcumin treatment in breast cancer cell line at a chromosomal level
The chromosomal distribution of the altered transcripts (significant DE genes) across all cell lines was plotted using Circos. 52 As expected, Chromosome Y showed no expression of genes. Curcumin showed an even distribution of down and upregulated genes in MCF7 and MDA‐MB‐231 cell lines at the chromosomal level. However, curcumin‐treated T47D showed an absence of gene expression from chromosomes 13, 18, and 21; genes from chromosomes 14, 16, 17, 20, and X were downregulated, and genes from chromosomes 4 and 12 were upregulated (Figure 2). Chromosome 13, 16, 17, and 18 are associated with breast cancer. 53 , 54 , 55 For example, BRCA1 and BRCA2, two major genes mapped to the long arms of chromosomes 17 and 13, determine predisposition to breast cancer. 53 Loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at the long arm of chromosome 16 is a genetic alteration that is frequently observed in differentiated ductal breast cancer. 54 This analysis, combined with all earlier analyses, validates the observation that the transcriptome's global profiling induced by the drug is cell line specific. Thus, curcumin altered genes in a unique fashion specific to each breast cancer cell line in the study, with T47D having a distinct expression pattern from MCF‐7 and MDA‐MB‐231.
FIGURE 2.

Circos plot for curcumin treatment in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D cells (Innermost Track: MCF7, Middle track: T47D, Outermost Track: MDA‐MB‐231; Red color highlights upregulation, and green color highlights downregulation)
3.3. miRNA‐seq analysis of breast cancer cells upon curcumin treatment
The MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D cells were treated with curcumin as mentioned above, and miRNA‐seq was performed. To prepare the miRNA library, three biological replicates were pooled. Sequencing was performed with 2 sets of biological replicates. More than 20 million reads were obtained for each sample. 82%–97% alignment was achieved with processed reads using the reference genome (hg38) (Supplementary Table 2), and differentially expressed (DE) miRNAs (log2 fold change >0.5) in three different human breast cancer cell lines were obtained. 2169 miRNAs were DE for MCF7, 1989 for MDA‐MB‐231, and 2102 for T47D after curcumin treatment. Of these DE miRNAs, 44%, 51%, 61% were upregulated in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, T47D, respectively, and 56%, 49%, 39% DE miRNAs were downregulated in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, T47D respectively after curcumin treatment (Supplementary Figure 2B).
819 miRNAs were commonly regulated between all three breast cancer cells (Figure 3). ~4% of miRNAs were commonly regulated among every two cell lines, and ~15–18% of miRNAs were uniquely regulated in each cell line after curcumin treatment. We then analyzed tumor suppressor (TS) and oncogenic miRNA (oncomiR) on the common DE miRNAs. A validated list of 39 TS miRs and 17 oncomiRs specific for breast cancer was literature mined for breast cancer (Supplementary Table 3). The percentage for the common DE miRNAs was calculated for all three breast cancer cells after curcumin treatment (Table 2). Table 3 shows the list of these miRNAs.
FIGURE 3.

Venn diagram for DE miRNAs from curcumin treated MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D cells
TABLE 2.
Percentage of common DE TS miRNAs and oncomiRs regulated by Curcumin
| MDA‐MB‐231 | MCF7 | T47D | |
|---|---|---|---|
| % Common TS miRNAs upregulated by Curcumin | 37.5 | 32 | 62.5 |
| % Common oncomiRs downregulated by Curcumin | 50 | 77 | 28.6 |
TABLE 3.
List of TS miRNAs upregulated and oncomiRS downregulated in breast cancer cells upon curcumin treatment
| MCF7 OncomiRs downregulated | hsa‐miR‐1207‐5p,hsa‐miR‐210,hsa‐miR‐492,hsa‐miR‐191,hsa‐miR‐374a,hsa‐miR‐155,hsa‐miR‐191‐5p |
|---|---|
| MCF7 TSmiRs upregulated | hsa‐miR‐22,hsa‐miR‐143,hsa‐miR‐421,hsa‐miR‐30c‐2‐3p,hsa‐miR‐148a,hsa‐miR‐126 |
| MDA OncomiRS downregulated | hsa‐miR‐519a‐3p,hsa‐miR‐210 |
| MDA TSmiRs upregulated | hsa‐miR‐148a,hsa‐miR‐543,hsa‐miR‐494,hsa‐miR‐206,hsa‐miR‐708, hsa‐miR‐512‐5p |
| T47D OncomiRS downregulated | hsa‐miR‐374a,hsa‐miR‐155 |
| T47D TSmiRs upregulated | hsa‐miR‐140‐5p,hsa‐miR‐204,hsa‐miR‐497,hsa‐miR‐22,hsa‐miR‐204‐5p,hsa‐miR‐335,hsa‐miR‐494,hsa‐miR‐126,hsa‐miR‐206,hsa‐miR‐211‐5p,hsa‐miR‐708,hsa‐miR‐193a,hsa‐miR‐100,hsa‐miR‐424,hsa‐miR‐455 |
3.4. Integrated mRNA–miRNA seq analysis of breast cancer cells upon curcumin treatment
The integrated analysis of mRNA–miRNA of breast cancer cell lines namely, MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, T47D upon curcumin treatment was performed and all the DE miRNAs with log fold change >0.5 and mRNA DE genes with log fold change >1.5, p‐value <0.05 were given as input for miRTarVis 40 , 41 analysis. miRTarVis returned inversely related pairs of miRNA–mRNA, which was used as input for miRmapper. 42 Using miRmapper, we obtained the list of miRNAs that regulated the maximum number of DE genes. The top 40 miRNAs regulating DE genes from each cell line have been represented as a bar graph (Figure 4). It is known that one miRNA can regulate several genes. Figure 4 shows that 10%–20% of the genes are targets of a particular miRNA, but only 1%–2% of them showed differential expression upon drug treatment. In MCF7 miR‐590‐3p, in MDA‐MB‐231 miR‐106a‐3p and in T47D let‐7c‐3p regulates maximum number of DE genes upon curcumin treatment. miR‐590‐3p is known to regulate the proliferation, apoptosis by targeting PTPN1 via the JNK/STAT/NF‐kB pathway. 55 , 56 miR‐106a and let‐7 are also known to regulate the NF‐kB pathway, 57 , 58 confirming the previous observations in several cancer cell lines that curcumin exerts its effect via the inhibition of the NF‐kB pathway. To dissect the mechanism of NF‐KB inhibition induced by curcumin treatment, we further analyzed the NF‐kB pathway in all three cells upon curcumin treatment. We identified DE miRNAs whose regulation might influence the NF‐KB pathway. We checked for the downstream targets of NFKB in the DE gene list too. NKFB is a major TF and is known to target 1667 distinct genes. 59 Out of these, 526, 89, and 52 targets were found DE in the MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D gene list, respectively, upon curcumin treatment (Supplementary File 2). Among these, CCL21 was the only common NFKB target among the DE gene list of three cell lines indicating that NF‐KB mediated gene regulation was cell type specific. We also prepared a miRNA–mRNA network for NFKB targets in each cell line (Supplementary Figure 3). The common target CCL21 was regulated by miR‐370, miR‐370‐3p in MCF7 cells.
FIGURE 4.

miRmapper output for curcumin treatment on MCF7 (A), MDA‐MB‐231 (B), and T47D (C) cells
3.5. miRNA–mRNA network analysis
We built a miRNA–mRNA network for pathways regulated by curcumin in each cell line. Genes enriched in non‐integrin membrane‐ECM interactions and laminin interactions were selected for MCF7; genes enriched in Extracellular matrix organization and degradation were selected for MDA‐MB‐231, and genes enriched in cell cycle arrest and G2/M transition were selected for T47D. Using miRtarvis+, we built an interaction network of miRNA–mRNA (Figure 5A–C). We got an intricate network of miRNA–mRNA for all three cell lines.
FIGURE 5.

miRNA–mRNA network for non‐integrin and laminin interactions, regulated by curcumin in MCF7 cells (A). miRNA–mRNA network for ECM organization and degradation, regulated by curcumin in MDA‐MB‐231cells (B). miRNA–mRNA network for G2/M transition and G2 cell cycle arrest, regulated by curcumin in T47D cells (C). Drug induced changes, which were either upregulated/downregulated for expression in tumor and reverted to normal expression MDA‐MB‐231 (D), MCF7 (E), and T47D (F)
The genes enriched in each network were subjected to GEPIA analysis. 60 Most of the genes in the network restored normal expression (compared to the tumor) after curcumin treatment in each cell line (Figure 5D–F). Integrin and laminin interacting genes like SDC1 and AGRN were downregulated and LAMA3 and NTN4 were significantly upregulated in MCF7 cells upon curcumin treatment. As shown in Figure 5A, miR‐302c, miR‐302d, and miR‐302e regulate SDC1 expression, miR‐27a‐5p regulates AGRNA expression and miR‐196b‐3p regulated NTN4 expression in MCF7 post curcumin treatment. Curcumin significantly downregulated ECM organization and degradation genes like MMP11, LOXL2, and BMP7 in MDA‐MB‐231 cells. miR‐135a‐5p, let‐7c‐3p, miR‐4319, miR‐135a‐2 regulate MMP11 expression, miR‐1297 regulates LOXL2 expression, and miR‐367, miR‐363 regulate BMP7 expression in MDA‐MB‐231 cells upon curcumin treatment (Figure 5B). G2/M transition and G2/M arrest regulating genes like CCNA2, CCNB1, FOXM1, EXO1, AURKA, and AURKB were significantly downregulated in T47D cells upon curcumin treatment. miR‐590‐3p, miR‐379, and miR‐3529 regulated CCNB1 expression, miR‐300, miR‐381 together regulated CCNA2, EXO1 expression, let7 family members were mainly involved in AURKB expression, miR‐302 family regulated FOXM1 expression while miR‐363, miR‐92, miR‐32, and miR‐25 regulated AURKA expression in T47D cells upon curcumin treatment (Figure 5C).
Network analysis showed miR‐363, curcumin commonly regulated miR‐363‐3p in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and T47D. miR‐363 targeted BMP7 in MDA‐MB‐231 cells and regulated the ECM pathway. miR‐363 targeted integrins like ITGAV, ITGA6 in MCF7, and AURKA in T47D cells to regulate the cell cycle G2/M phase. Dolati et al. have reported regulation of miR‐363 by nano curcumin treatment in multiple sclerosis, 61 indicating miR‐363 as one of the curcumin targets. These are novel miRNA–mRNA pairs of curcumin regulation in breast cancer that need further validation.
4. DISCUSSION
In this study, the whole transcriptome (mRNA and miRNA) post curcumin treatment in mesenchymal MDA‐MB‐231 (TNBC), epithelial hormone‐responsive MCF7 (luminal), and T47D (luminal) breast cancer cells have been explored. To evaluate the transcriptomic changes, IC50 values of curcumin on all three cell lines were obtained. 47 This is the first study identifying differentially expressed genes, miRNAs, and altered pathways by using a very effective integrated miRNA–mRNA approach post curcumin treatment in breast cancer cell lines.
Identification of DE genes and DE miRNAs can be good predictors of response to chemotherapy, biomarker selection, early diagnosis of disease subtypes, and the development of targeted therapeutics. 62 In addition, cancer heterogeneity and evolution, cancer drug resistance, and the cancer microenvironment can be well studied using transcriptomic data. 63 Tools like the NCI Transcriptional Pharmacodynamics Workbench (NCI TPW) capture gene expression modulation by molecular pathway, drug target, and association with drug sensitivity across the NCI‐60 panel in response to 15 cytotoxic, targeted anticancer agents. 16 The understanding of gene regulation involves several molecular players. Integration of the molecular players enhances the knowledge of the regulatory mechanism in complex cellular systems in greater depths, potentially decreases false discovery rate, and facilitates interventional experiments to validate the targets. 64 In addition, the integration of multi‐omic platforms helps identify relevant miRNA–mRNA pairs that can be putative targets for therapy and diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive markers. 65
The study showed that 22 DE genes and 819 miRNAs were common in all cell lines after curcumin treatment. More than 48% of genes were uniquely regulated after curcumin treatment. Similarly, RNA‐seq post Shikonin treatment showed more than ~60% DE genes uniquely regulated in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, and SK‐BR‐3. 14 ~15% of miRNAs were uniquely regulated by curcumin in breast cancer cells, indicating miRNA expression to be cell‐type specific, where MCF7 and T47D represent luminal A (ER +ve, PR +ve, HER2 −ve) type whereas MDA‐MB‐231 represent basal, claudin‐low subtype (ER −ve, PR −ve, HER2 −ve), 31 , 66
Curcumin regulated Antigen processing and presentation, Interferon alpha/beta/gamma signaling in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231, whereas pathways related to cell cycle regulation in T47D. In a previous study, Ruihua Li et al. reported that curcumin induced ferroptosis in MCF7, MDA‐MB‐231 cells by upregulating HO‐1 and downregulating GPX4. 67 The antigen processing and presentation pathways are altered by cancer cells to evade the immune response, which leads to tumor development. 68 Various chemotherapeutic drugs like Cisplatin, 69 Gemcitabine, 70 Melphalan 71 are used to enhance antigen presentation by the tumor cells, which upregulate MHC‐I, II molecules. 72 Curcumin upregulates MHC‐I, II molecules which might help sensitize the tumor cells to the cytotoxic T cells (CTLs). In MDA‐MB‐231 cells, curcumin showed regulation of ECM, which plays a significant role in breast metastasis. 73 , 74 Naci Cine et al. also reported the role of curcumin in regulating ECM by modulating pathways related to adherens junction. 75 Overall, curcumin treatment altered cell cycle, apoptosis, and extracellular matrix regulated pathways in breast cancer cells.
The overall tilt in the balance between oncogenic to tumor suppressor after all treatments were evident. Breast cancer progression involves genetic events like an amplification of oncogenes and loss of function of TSGs, leading to malignancy. 76 Curcumin treatment showed significant downregulation of oncogenes, oncomiRs, and an appreciable increase in TSGs and TSmiRs. For the first time, we showed that oncogenes like FAM83D, SAPCD2 were downregulated upon curcumin treatment in all three cells, and TSGs like ZNF292, 77 NKAPL, and CCL21 were upregulated in breast cancer cell lines. FAM83D 78 , 79 , 80 and SAPCD2 81 are known to promote tumorigenesis, induce drug resistance and promote invasiveness. FAM83D promotes cell proliferation and motility by downregulating TSG FBXW7. 48 Also, FAM83D is a potential biomarker in TNBC. 82 The promoter of NF‐κB‐Activating Protein‐Like (NKAPL) is hypermethylated in breast 83 , 84 and hepatocellular 85 carcinoma leading to its downregulation, which is correlated, with poor prognosis. CCL21 is a TSG that improved the immunogenicity of MCF7 cells with the assistance of TLR2 and triggered the antitumor response of lymphocytes in vivo. 86
miR‐21, miR‐27b, miR‐10b‐3p, and miR‐200a‐5p have been reported oncomiRs in breast cancer whereas miR‐26a/b, miR‐628, miR‐205, and miR‐124 have been reported TS‐miRs in breast cancer. 87 Curcumin downregulated OncomiRsmiR‐21, miR‐210, miR‐155, miR‐374a, and miR‐519a‐3p, and upregulated TS miRNAs like miR‐708, miR‐494, miR‐22, and miR‐148a in breast cancer cells. miR‐374a is reported to promote tumorigenesis in TNBC cells by targeting arrestin beta 1(ARRB1), which has a positive association with TNBC patient survival. 88 Like curcumin, the derivative of Isoliquiritigenin, a natural flavonoid, represses miR‐374a in MDA‐MB‐231 cells and inhibits cell proliferation, foci formation, migration, invasion. miR‐519a‐3p is another oncomiR that is reported to confer tamoxifen resistance in ER +ve breast cancer. 89 In addition, miR‐519a‐3p leads to apoptosis resistance and their evasion from immunosurveillance. 90 Thus, downregulation of miR‐519a‐3p by curcumin can be considered as a positive outcome. miR‐494 inhibits breast cancer progression by targeting PAK1 91 and inducing apoptosis. 92 miR‐22, a TS‐miR, inhibits breast cancer metastasis by targeting SIRT1 93 and inducing cellular senescence. 94 miR‐148a functions as TS of breast cancer metastasis 95 via inhibiting migration, invasion by targeting WNT‐1. 96 In all, curcumin regulated unique miRNA and mRNA in MCF7(luminal), MDA‐MB‐231(TNBC), and T47D (luminal, in a cell type specific manner.
A practical and unique approach was used for mRNA‐miRNA data integration using two tools, miRTarVis 40 , 41 and miRmapper. 42 miRmapper is a tool for the interpretation of miRNA–mRNA interaction networks. It helps us quantify the genes regulated by miRNA in a given miRNA−mRNA seq dataset. miRmapper showed that 15%–20% of the genes are regulated by miRNAs, of which around 4% DE genes were regulated by miRNAs under each treatment. The integrated approach using miRmapper thus helped focus on the predicted targets of differentially expressed miRNAs (DEMs) that were also differentially expressed following drug exposure, indicating miRNA modulation is one of the mechanisms by which curcumin regulates gene expression. Lizarraga et al. also used a miRNA−mRNA integrated approach which showed that benzo[α]pyrene (BaP) is a genotoxic carcinogen modulating apoptotic signaling, cell cycle arrest, DNA damage response, and DNA damage repair pathways. 26 Another study revealed the lipid metabolism mediated mechanism of Fructus Meliae Toosendan (FMT), a traditional Chinese medicine, to induce liver injury using an integrated miRNA–mRNA approach. 27
miRmapper analysis showed that in MCF7 miR‐590‐3p, MDA‐MB‐231 miR‐106a‐3p, and T47D, let‐7c‐3p regulates the maximum number of DE genes upon curcumin treatment. All these miRs regulate the NFKB pathway indicating the pivotal role of curcumin in the pathway. Thus, we mined for NFKB targets in the DE gene list and their respective regulating DE miRNAs. We obtained 526 DE NFKB targets in MCF7 cells, 89 in MDA‐MB‐231, and 56 in T47D cells. CCL21 was commonly DE in all the cells after curcumin treatment, indicating its role in immunomodulating breast cancer cells. Curcumin is known to interact with various immunomodulators like dendritic cells, macrophages, both B and T lymphocytes, cytokines, and various transcription factors with their downstream signaling pathways. 97 , 98 , 99 NFKB is a major immunomodulator regulated by curcumin. 100 , 101 Our approach showed an intricate miRNA–mRNA network for NFKB regulation via curcumin. miR‐370, miR‐370‐3p that regulates CCL21, has an oncogenic role in breast cancer 102 , 103 and was downregulated by curcumin in MCF7 cells.
miRNA−mRNA networks were generated for Non‐integrin membrane‐ECM interactions and Laminin interactions in MCF7, Extracellular matrix organization and its degradation pathways in MDA‐MB‐231 and Cell Cycle Arrest and G2/M transition pathways in T47D. We got intricate networks for these pathways in curcumin‐treated cells. In addition, GEPIA analysis of these genes in breast cancer helped classify them as TSG or oncogene and further interpret the effect of curcumin on breast cancer cells. SDC1 regulates ECM fiber organization in breast cancer stromal fibroblasts and thus is involved in cell motility. 104 It promotes breast cancer metastasis to the Brain by regulating cytokines. 105 Our network shows downregulation of SDC1 via miR‐302c, miR‐302d, and miR‐302e in MCF7 cells post curcumin treatment. Guo et al. have shown downregulation of SDC1 via miR‐302a in ovarian cancer. 106 AGRN is overexpressed in both primary 107 and highly metastatic tumors. 108 For the first time, we show downregulation of AGRN in MCF7 cells via miR‐27a‐5p post curcumin treatment. The promoter of LAMA3 is methylated in breast carcinoma, and the frequency of methylation is associated with tumor stage and tumor size, 109 indicating that LAMA3 upregulation might have a tumor‐suppressive role in breast cancer. NTN4 is a secreted protein and is downregulated in breast cancer. When overexpressed, it leads to the inhibitory effect on invasion, migration via regulation of epithelial‐mesenchymal transition (EMT)‐related biomarkers. 110 NTN4 upregulation post curcumin treatment via miR‐196b‐3p in MCF7 cells indicates a positive outcome.
Downregulation of MMP11, LOXL2, and BMP7 by curcumin in aggressive, mesenchymal MDA‐MB‐231 cells indicates a positive outcome. miR‐125b is known to regulate MMP11 expression in breast cancer. 111 Here we show other miRNAs like miR‐135a‐5p, let‐7c‐3p, miR‐4319, and miR‐135a‐2 that regulate MMP11 expression upon curcumin treatment. MMP11 expression by cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAFs) and intratumoral mononuclear inflammatory cells (MICs) was associated with relapse‐free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in breast cancer. 112 The lysyl oxidase‐like protein LOXL2 promotes lung metastasis in breast cancer via premetastatic niche formation. 113 Hence, LOX inhibition is now considered an effective therapeutic approach for breast cancer treatment. 114 Our study showed that curcumin regulated miR‐1297 to modulate LOXL2 expression. BMP7 is another marker for proliferation, migration, and invasion of breast cancer cells, 115 and BMP7 protein is detected in breast tumors. 116 One of the modes of downregulation of BMP7 is via upregulation of miRNA. Curcumin modulated BMP7 downregulation via miR‐367, miR‐363. BMP7 is also known to be regulated by miR‐22 in the kidney. 117
CCNA2 and CCNB1 are prognostic markers for ER +ve breast cancer and are closely associated with hormone therapy resistance. 118 , 119 miR‐219‐5p is known to regulate CCNA2, while miR‐144, 120 and miR‐718 121 regulate CCNB1. Here we show other miRNAs that downregulate CCNA2, CCNB2 post curcumin treatment. FOXM1 is a master transcription factor that regulates breast cancer s proliferation, mitosis, and EMT. 122 , 123 FOXM1 is overexpressed in breast tumors, including TNBC, 124 and is strongly associated with tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, lymph node metastases, and advanced metastatic stages. 125 Targeting FOXM1 can thus be a promising therapeutic strategy to treat resistant, aggressive, metastatic breast cancers. 122 , 126 Our study showed that curcumin had the potential to downregulate FOXM1 in T47D cells, which signifies the therapeutic value of curcumin. Curcumin significantly downregulated ECM organization and degradation genes like MMP11, LOXL2, and BMP7. AURKA and AURKB were downregulated upon curcumin treatment and both promote tumorigenesis in both solid and hematological malignancies. 127 Both are highly expressed in breast cancer and are associated with poor patient survival and worst prognosis. 128 , 129 Basal‐line breast cancer exhibits AURKA gene amplification and elevated mRNA expression. 130 Hence, targeting aurora kinases can provide an effective therapeutic solution for treating breast cancer. 131 Our study showed that the let7 family might be regulating AURKB in breast cancer, which needs further exploration. Let‐7b‐5p was reported to target AURKB in asthenozoospermia, 132 although, it is the role needs further validation in cancer. miR‐124‐3p regulates AURKA in bladder cancer. 133 Our study showed other miRs like miR‐363, miR‐92, miR‐32, miR‐25 that regulated AURKA expression in T47D cells upon curcumin treatment.
miR‐363‐3p functions as TS miRNA in lung cancer, 134 , 135 colorectal cancer, 136 papillary thyroid cancer 137 and glioma. 138 Curcumin regulating miR‐363 was reported by Dolati et al. 61 Here we show the first time regulation of miR‐363 and miR‐363‐3p by curcumin in breast cancer cells via the NGS approach. miR‐363 regulated different genes in each cell line leading to the regulation of three distinct pathways.
In conclusion, curcumin regulates miRNA and mRNA in a cell type specific manner. Curcumin altered different pathways in breast cancer cell lines such as cell cycle, migration, invasion, and so forth. The integrative analysis led to the detection of miRNAs and mRNAs pairs, which can be used as biomarkers, associated with carcinogenesis, diagnosis and treatment response in breast cancer.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors have stated explicitly that there are no conflicts of interest in connection with this article.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
All authors had full access to the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Conceptualization, S.N. and B.C; Methodology, S.N., S.D., B.C.; Investigation, S.N. and B.C.; Formal Analysis, S.N.; Resources, B.C.; Writing ‐ Original Draft, S.N.; Writing ‐ Review & Editing, S.N. and B.C; Visualization, S.N. and B.C.; Supervision, B.C.; Funding Acquisition, B.C. SN and BC conceived the idea, designed the experiments, analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. SN performed experiments on breast cancer cells. SN and SD performed the bioinformatics analysis. All authors reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
ETHICAL STATEMENT
The study was given institutional approval.
Supporting information
Supplementary Table 1 Inhouse Sequencing mRNA Data Summary for total reads and overall alignment with Hg38 Reference genome
Supplementary Table 2: Inhouse Sequencing miRNA Data Summary for total reads and overall alignment with Hg38 Reference genome
Supplementary Table 3: List of TS miRs and oncomiRs regulated in breast cancer
Supplementary Table 4: Sequences for RT‐PCR primers used un the study
Supplementary Figure 1: PCA plots for Curcumin treated MCF7,MDA‐MB‐231 and T47D mRNA(A) and miRNA(B) samples.(Abbreviations‐ Curcumin:Cur; VC: Vehicle Control)
Supplementary Figure 2: Transcriptome Summary of % Upregulation and % downregulation of DE significant mRNAs(A) and miRNAs(B) in Curcumin treatment (.(Abbreviations‐ Curcumin:Cur)
Supplementary Figure 3: miRNA‐mRNA network for NFKB targets regulated by Curcumin in MCF7(A), MDA‐MB‐231(B) and T47D(C) cells. (D) Assessment of NFkB in MCF7 breast cancer cells treated with Curcumin: Western blot analysis NFkB protein was done on Curcumin treated MCF7 cell lysates. The experiment was done in duplicates and representative image is shown. Quantification was done (B) and is represented as bar graph of mean +/− SEM. One sample t test and one way ANOVA test was performed and the p value was calculated between control and Curcumin treated groups (*: p value < 0.05, **: p value < 0.005)
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by grants from the Department of Science and Technology (SR/FST/LSI‐536/2012), the Department of Biotechnology (BT/PR13458/COE/34/33/2015), (BT/PR13616/GET/119/9/2015), Department of IT, BT and S&T and Government of Karnataka. SN was supported by DST‐INSPIRE (Ref. no. IF140949/2015, Innovation in Science Pursuit for Inspired Research, Dept. of Science and Technology, Govt. of India).
Nirgude S, Desai S, Choudhary B. Curcumin alters distinct molecular pathways in breast cancer subtypes revealed by integrated miRNA/mRNA expression analysis. Cancer Reports. 2022;5(10):e1596. doi: 10.1002/cnr2.1596
Funding information Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India, Grant/Award Numbers: BT/PR13458/COE/34/33/2015, BT/PR13616/GET/119/9/20; Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India, Grant/Award Number: SR/FST/LSI‐536/2012
Contributor Information
Snehal Nirgude, Email: nirgudes@chop.edu.
Sagar Desai, Email: dsagar@ibab.in.
Bibha Choudhary, Email: vibha@ibab.ac.in.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERENCES
- 1. Ellsworth RE, Blackburn HL, Shriver CD, Soon‐Shiong P, Ellsworth DL. Molecular heterogeneity in breast cancer: state of the science and implications for patient care. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2017;64:72. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2016.08.025 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Turashvili G, Brogi E. Tumor heterogeneity in breast cancer. Front Med. 2017;4:227. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Aleskandarany MA, Vandenberghe ME, Marchiò C, Ellis IO, Sapino A, Rakha EA. Tumour heterogeneity of breast cancer: from morphology to personalised medicine. Pathobiology. 2018;85:23‐34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Luque‐Bolivar A, Pérez‐Mora E, Villegas VE, Rondón‐Lagos M. Resistance and overcoming resistance in breast cancer. Breast Cancer: Targets Ther. 2020;12:211‐229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Chemoresistance mechanisms of breast cancer and their countermeasures Biomed Pharmacother 2019, 114, 108800 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Khatoon Z, Figler B, Zhang H, Cheng F. Introduction to RNA‐Seq and its applications to drug discovery and development. Drug Dev Res. 2014;75:330. doi: 10.1002/ddr.21215 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Koroth J, Nirgude S, Tiwari S, et al. Investigation of anti‐cancer and migrastatic properties of novel curcumin derivatives on breast and ovarian cancer cell lines. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2019;19:1‐16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Xu YX, Pindolia KR, Janakiraman N, Noth CJ, Chapman RA, Gautam SC. Curcumin, a compound with anti‐inflammatory and anti‐oxidant properties, down‐regulates chemokine expression in bone marrow stromal cells. Exp Hematol. 1997;25:413‐422. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Reddy RC, Vatsala PG, Keshamouni VG, Padmanaban G, Rangarajan PN. Curcumin for malaria therapy. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2005;326:472‐474. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Mo F, Xiao Y, Zeng H, et al. Curcumin‐induced global profiling of transcriptomes in small cell lung cancer cells. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021;8:588299. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Schnekenburger M, Dicato M, Diederich MF. Anticancer potential of naturally occurring immunoepigenetic modulators: a promising avenue? Cancer. 2019;125:1612‐1628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Schmidt MF. Drug target miRNAs: chances and challenges. Trends in Biotechnology. 2014;32:(11):578‐585. 10.1016/j.tibtech.2014.09.002 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 13. Zhao Z, Meng F, Wang W, Wang Z, Zhang C, Jiang T. Comprehensive RNA‐Seq transcriptomic profiling in the malignant progression of gliomas. Sci Data. 2017;4:170024. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2017.24 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Lin K‐H, Huang M‐Y, Cheng W‐C, et al. RNA‐Seq transcriptome analysis of breast cancer cell lines under shikonin treatment. Sci Rep. 2018;8:2672. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Shi Y, Ye P, Long X. Differential expression profiles of the transcriptome in breast cancer cell lines revealed by next generation sequencing. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2017;44:804‐816. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Monks A, Zhao Y, Hose C, et al. The NCI transcriptional pharmacodynamics workbench: a tool to examine dynamic expression profiling of therapeutic response in the NCI‐60 cell line panel. Cancer Res. 2018;78:6807‐6817. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Epigenetic modification of MicroRNAs. MicroRNA in Regenerative Medicine. Academic Press; 2015:77‐109. [Google Scholar]
- 18. Yao Q, Chen Y, Zhou X. The roles of microRNAs in epigenetic regulation. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2019;51:11‐17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Sarnow P. Faculty opinions recommendation of MicroRNA‐10a binds the 5'UTR of ribosomal protein mRNAs and enhances their translation. Biomed Lit. 2008;30(4):460‐471. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Schmidt MF. Drug target miRNAs: chances and challenges. Trends Biotechnol. 2014;32(11):578‐585. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2014.09.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Yang X, Kui L, Tang M, et al. High‐throughput transcriptome profiling in drug and biomarker discovery. Front Genet. 2020;11:19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Karagianni N, Kranidioti K, Fikas N, et al. An integrative transcriptome analysis framework for drug efficacy and similarity reveals drug‐specific signatures of anti‐TNF treatment in a mouse model of inflammatory polyarthritis. PLoS Comput Biol. 2019;15:e1006933. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Guo Y, Wu R, Gaspar JM, et al. DNA methylome and transcriptome alterations and cancer prevention by curcumin in colitis‐accelerated colon cancer in mice. Carcinogenesis. 2018;39:669‐680. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Wei N, Song Y ‘an; Zhang F, Sun Z, Zhang X. Transcriptome profiling of acquired gefitinib resistant lung cancer cells reveals dramatically changed transcription programs and new treatment targets Front Oncol 2020;10:1424. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Yang C, Xie X, Tang H, Dong X, Zhang X, Huang F. Transcriptome analysis reveals GA induced apoptosis in HCT116 human colon cancer cells through calcium and p53 signal pathways. RSC Adv. 2018;8:12449‐12458. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Lizarraga D, Gaj S, Brauers KJ, Timmermans L, Kleinjans JC, van Delft JHM. Benzo[a]pyrene‐induced changes in microRNA‐mRNA networks. Chem Res Toxicol. 2012;25:838‐849. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Ji C, Zheng J, Tong W, Lu X, Fan X, Gao Y. Revealing the mechanism of fructus meliae toosendan‐induced liver injury in mice by integrating microRNA and mRNA‐based toxicogenomics data. RSC Adv. 2015;5:81774‐81783. [Google Scholar]
- 28. Balusamy SR, Ramani S, Natarajan S, Kim YJ, Perumalsamy H. Integrated transcriptome and in vitro analysis revealed anti‐proliferative effect of citral in human stomach cancer through apoptosis. Sci Rep. 2019;9:1‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Zhang Z, Li B, Xu P, Yang B. Integrated whole transcriptome profiling and bioinformatics analysis for revealing regulatory pathways associated with quercetin‐induced apoptosis in HCT‐116 cells. Front Pharmacol. 2019;10:798. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Dai X, Cheng H, Bai Z, Li J. Breast cancer cell line classification and its relevance with breast tumor subtyping. J Cancer. 2017;8:3131‐3141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Holliday DL, Speirs V. Choosing the right cell line for breast cancer research. Breast Cancer Res. 2011;13:215. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Leroy B, Girard L, Hollestelle A, Minna JD, Gazdar AF, Soussi T. Analysis of TP53 mutation status in human cancer cell lines: a reassessment. Hum Mutat. 2014;35:756‐765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. https://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/canres/66/1/41.full.pdf. Accessed December 1, 2020.
- 34. Andrews S. (2010). FastQC: a quality control tool for high throughput sequence data. Available online at: http://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/fastqc, authors.
- 35. Bowtie 2. http://bowtie-bio.sourceforge.net/bowtie2/index.shtml. Accessed October 21, 2020.
- 36. Bedtools: A Powerful Toolset for Genome Arithmetic — Bedtools 2.29.2. https://bedtools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/. Accessed October 21, 2020.
- 37. DESeq. http://bioconductor.org/packages/DESeq/. Accessed October 21, 2020.
- 38. Babraham Bioinformatics ‐ Trim Galore!. https://www.bioinformatics.babraham.ac.uk/projects/trim_galore/. Accessed October 29, 2020.
- 39. Yu G, Wu T, Hu E, et al. clusterProfiler 4.0: A universal enrichment tool for interpreting omics data. The Innovation. 2021;2:(3):100141. doi: 10.1016/j.xinn.2021.100141 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 40. Jung D, Kim B, Freishtat RJ, Giri M, Hoffman E, Seo J. miRTarVis: an interactive visual analysis tool for microRNA‐mRNA expression profile data. BMC Proc. 2015;9:S2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. L'Yi S, Jung D, Oh M, et al. miRTarVis: web‐based interactive visual analytics tool for microRNA target predictions. Methods. 2017;124:78‐88. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. da Silveira WA, Renaud L, Simpson J, et al. miRmapper: a tool for interpretation of miRNA–mRNA interaction networks. Genes. 2018;9:458. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. TargetScanHuman 7.2. http://www.targetscan.org. Accessed December 3, 2020.
- 44. Huang H‐Y, Lin Y‐C‐D, Li J, et al. miRTarBase 2020: updates to the experimentally validated microRNA–target interaction database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;48:D148‐D154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Chen Y, Wang X. miRDB: an online database for prediction of functional microRNA targets. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48:D127‐D131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Koroth J, Nirgude S, Tiwari S, et al. Investigation of anti‐cancer and migrastatic properties of novel curcumin derivatives on breast and ovarian cancer cell lines. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2019;19:273. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Nirgude S, Mahadeva R, Koroth J, et al. ST09, a novel curcumin derivative, blocks cell migration by inhibiting matrix metalloproteases in breast cancer cells and inhibits tumor progression in EAC mouse tumor models. Molecules. 2020;25(19):4499. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Wang Z, Liu Y, Zhang P, et al. FAM83D promotes cell proliferation and motility by downregulating tumor suppressor gene FBXW7. Oncotarget. 2013;4:2486. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.1581 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Zhang Y, Liu JL, Wang J. SAPCD2 promotes invasiveness and migration ability of breast cancer cells via YAP/TAZ. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2020;24(7):3786‐3794. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Tumor Suppressor Gene Database (TSGene). https://bioinfo.uth.edu/TSGene/. Accessed February 7, 2021.
- 51. ONGene. http://ongene.bioinfo-minzhao.org/. Accessed February 7, 2021.
- 52. Krzywinski M, Schein J, Birol I, et al. Circose: an information aesthetic for comparative genomics. Genome Res. 2009;19:1645. doi: 10.1101/gr.092759.109 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Grimmond SM, Palmer JM, Walters MK, et al. Confirmation of susceptibility locus on chromosome 13 in Australian breast cancer families. Hum Genet. 1996;98:85. doi: 10.1007/s004390050164 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Cleton‐Jansen AM, Buerger H, Nt H, et al. Different mechanisms of chromosome 16 loss of heterozygosity in well‐ versus poorly differentiated ductal breast cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2004;41:116. doi: 10.1002/gcc.20070 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Bullerdiek J, Bonk U, Staats B, et al. Trisomy 18 as the first chromosome abnormality in a medullary breast cancer. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 1994;73:78. doi: 10.1016/0165-4608(94)90186-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Wang F, Zhang H, Wang C. MiR‐590‐3p regulates cardiomyocyte P19CL6 proliferation, apoptosis and differentiation in vitro by targeting PTPN1 via JNK/STAT/NF‐kB pathway. Int J Exp Pathol. 2020;101:202. doi: 10.1111/iep.12377 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Wang Q, Wang Z, Chu L, et al. The effects and molecular mechanisms of MiR‐106a in multidrug resistance reversal in human glioma U87/DDP and U251/G cell lines. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0125473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Liu J, Zhu L, Xie G‐L, Bao J‐F, Yu Q. Let‐7 miRNAs modulate the activation of NF‐κB by targeting TNFAIP3 and are involved in the pathogenesis of lupus nephritis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0121256. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Yang Y, Wu J, Wang J. A database and functional annotation of NF‐κB target genes. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2016;9(5):7986‐7995. [Google Scholar]
- 60. GEPIA (Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis). http://gepia.cancer-pku.cn/. Accessed May 14, 2021.
- 61. Dolati S, Aghebati‐Maleki L, Ahmadi M, et al. Nanocurcumin restores aberrant miRNA expression profile in multiple sclerosis, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. Journal of Cellular Physiology. 2018;233(7):5222‐5230. doi: 10.1002/jcp.26301 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Sager M, Yeat NC, Pajaro‐Van der Stadt S, Lin C, Ren Q, Lin J. Transcriptomics in cancer diagnostics: developments in technology, clinical research and commercialization. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2015;15:1589‐1603. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Hong M, Tao S, Zhang L, et al. RNA sequencing: new technologies and applications in cancer research. J Hematol Oncol. 2020;13:1‐16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Bahrami A, Miraie‐Ashtiani SR, Sadeghi M, Najafi A. miRNA–mRNA network involved in folliculogenesis interactome: systems biology approach. Reproduction. 2017;154:51‐65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Integrated miRNA and mRNA expression analysis uncovers drug targets in laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma patients. Oral Oncol. 2019;93:76‐84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Goel A, Kunnumakkara AB, Aggarwal BB. Curcumin as “Curecumin”: From kitchen to clinic. Biochemical Pharmacology. 2008;75:(4):787‐809. doi: 10.1016/j.bcp.2007.08.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Li R, Zhang J, Zhou Y, et al. Transcriptome investigation and in vitro verification of curcumin‐induced HO‐1 as a feature of ferroptosis in breast cancer cells. Oxidative Med Cell Longev. 2020;2020:3469840. doi: 10.1155/2020/3469840 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Emma Reeves EJ. Antigen processing and immune regulation in the response to tumours. Immunology. 2017;150(16):24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. de Biasi AR, de Biasi AR, Villena‐Vargas J, Adusumilli PS. Cisplatin‐induced antitumor immunomodulation: a review of preclinical and clinical evidence. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:5384‐5391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Liu WM, Fowler DW, Smith P, Dalgleish AG. Pre‐treatment with chemotherapy can enhance the antigenicity and immunogenicity of tumours by promoting adaptive immune responses. Br J Cancer. 2010;102:115‐123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Murphy SP, Holtz R, Lewandowski N, Tomasi TB, Fuji H. DNA alkylating agents alleviate silencing of class II transactivator gene expression in L1210 lymphoma cells. J Immunol. 2002;169:3085‐3093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. de Charette M, Marabelle A, Houot R. Turning tumour cells into antigen presenting cells: the next step to improve cancer immunotherapy? Eur J Cancer. 2016;68:134‐147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Oskarsson T. Extracellular matrix components in breast cancer progression and metastasis. Breast. 2013;(22 Suppl 2):S72. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2013.07.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Jena MK, Janjanam J. Role of extracellular matrix in breast cancer development: a brief update. F1000Res. 2018;7:274. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Cine N, Limtrakul P, Sunnetci D, Nagy B, Savli H. Effects of curcumin on global gene expression profiles in the highly invasive human breast carcinoma cell line MDA‐MB 231: a gene network‐based microarray analysis. Exp Ther Med. 2013;5(23):27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Integrated transcriptome interactome study of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes in breast cancer. Genes Dis. 2019;6:78‐87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Lee JH, Song SY, Kim MS, Yoo NJ, Lee SH. Frameshift mutations of a tumor suppressor gene ZNF292 in gastric and colorectal cancers with high microsatellite instability. APMIS. 2016;124:556‐560. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Bartel CA, Parameswaran N, Cipriano R, Jackson MW. FAM83 proteins: fostering new interactions to drive oncogenic signaling and therapeutic resistance. Oncotarget. 2016;7:52597‐52612. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Bartel CA, Parameswaran N, Cipriano R, Jackson MW. FAM83 proteins: Fostering new interactions to drive oncogenic signaling and therapeutic resistance. Oncotarget. 2016;7:(32):52597‐52612. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.9544 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. FEBS Press. doi: 10.1002/1878-0261.12016. Accessed May 12, 2021), 11, 167, 179. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Zhu B, Wu Y, Niu L, et al. Silencing SAPCD2 represses proliferation and lung metastasis of fibrosarcoma by activating hippo signaling pathway. Front. Oncologia. 2020;10:574383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Zhai X, Yang Z, Liu X, Dong Z, Zhou D. Identification of NUF2 and FAM83D as potential biomarkers in triple‐negative breast cancer. PeerJ. 2020;8:e9975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Zhang X, Kang X, Jin L, et al. ABCC9, NKAPL, and TMEM132C are potential diagnostic and prognostic markers in triple negative breast cancer. Cell Biol Int. 2020;44:2002‐2010. doi: 10.1002/cbin.11406 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Feng L, Jin F. Screening of differentially methylated genes in breast cancer and risk model construction based on TCGA database. Oncol Lett. 2018;16:6407‐6416. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Ng PKS, Lau CPY, Lam EKY, et al. Hypermethylation of NF‐κB‐activating protein‐like (NKAPL) promoter in hepatocellular carcinoma suppresses its expression and predicts a poor prognosis. Dig Dis Sci. 2018;63:676‐686. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Wu S, Lu X, Zhang ZL, et al. CC chemokine ligand 21 enhances the immunogenicity of the breast cancer cell line MCF‐7 upon assistance of TLR2. Carcinogenesis. 2011;32:296‐304. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Yang Z, Liu Z. The emerging role of MicroRNAs in breast cancer. J Oncol. 2020;2020:1‐7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. miR‐374a‐5p promotes tumor progression by targeting ARRB1 in triple negative breast cancer. Cancer Lett. 2019;454:224‐233. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Ward A, Shukla K, Balwierz A, et al. MicroRNA‐519a is a novel Oncomir conferring tamoxifen resistance by targeting a network of tumour‐suppressor genes in ER+ breast cancer. J Pathol. 2014;233:368‐379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Breunig C, Pahl J, Küblbeck M, et al. MicroRNA‐519a‐3p mediates apoptosis resistance in breast cancer cells and their escape from recognition by natural killer cells. Cell Death Dis. 2017;8:e2973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Zhan M‐N, Yu X‐T, Tang J, et al. MicroRNA‐494 inhibits breast cancer progression by directly targeting PAK1. Cell Death Dis. 2017;8:e2529‐e2529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Ghorbanhosseini SS, Nourbakhsh M, Zangooei M, et al. MicroRNA‐494 induces breast cancer cell apoptosis and reduces cell viability by inhibition of nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase expression and activity. EXCLI J. 2019;18:838. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Zou Q, Tang Q, Pan Y, et al. MicroRNA‐22 inhibits cell growth and metastasis in breast cancer via targeting of SIRT1. Exp Ther Med. 2017;14:1016. doi: 10.3892/etm.2017.4590 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
- 94. Xu D, Takeshita F, Hino Y, et al. miR‐22 represses cancer progression by inducing cellular senescence. J Cell Biol. 2011;193(409):424. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Xu X, Zhang Y, Jasper J, et al. MiR‐148a functions to suppress metastasis and serves as a prognostic indicator in triple‐negative breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7:20381‐20394. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Jiang Q, He M, Ma M‐T, et al. MicroRNA‐148a inhibits breast cancer migration and invasion by directly targeting WNT‐1. Oncol Rep. 2016;35:1425‐1432. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Catanzaro M, Corsini E, Rosini M, Racchi M, Lanni C. Immunomodulators inspired by nature: a review on curcumin and echinacea. Molecules. 2018;23:2778. doi: 10.3390/molecules23112778 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Srivastava RM, Singh S, Dubey SK, Misra K, Khar A. Immunomodulatory and therapeutic activity of curcumin. International Immunopharmacology. 2011;11:(3):331‐341. doi: 10.1016/j.intimp.2010.08.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Tuyaerts S, Rombauts K, Everaert T, Van Nuffel AMT, Amant F. A phase 2 study to assess the immunomodulatory capacity of a lecithin‐based delivery system of curcumin in endometrial cancer. Front Nutr. 2019;5:138. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Ni H, Jin W, Zhu T, et al. Curcumin modulates TLR4/NF‐κB inflammatory signaling pathway following traumatic spinal cord injury in rats. J Spinal Cord Med. 2015;38(199):206. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101. Kohli K, Ali J, Ansari MJ, Raheman Z. Curcumin: a natural antiinflammatory agent. Indian J Pharmcol. 2005;37:141. [Google Scholar]
- 102. Mollainezhad H, Eskandari N, Pourazar A, Salehi M, Andalib A. Expression of microRNA‐370 in human breast cancer compare with normal samples. Adv Biomed Res. 2016;5:129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103. Wong JS, Cheah YK. Potential miRNAs for miRNA‐based therapeutics in breast cancer. Noncoding RNA. 2020;6:29. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Yang N, Mosher R, Seo S, Beebe D, Friedl A. Syndecan‐1 in breast cancer stroma fibroblasts regulates extracellular matrix fiber organization and carcinoma cell motility. Am J Pathol. 2011;178(325):335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Sayyad MR, Puchalapalli M, Vergara NG, et al. Syndecan‐1 facilitates breast cancer metastasis to the brain. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;178:49. doi: 10.1007/s10549-019-05347-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Guo T, Yu W, Lv S, Zhang C, Tian Y. MiR‐302a inhibits the tumorigenicity of ovarian cancer cells by suppression of SDC1. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8(4869):4880. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107. Tian C., Öhlund D., Rickelt S., Lidström T., Huang Y., Hao L., Zhao RT., Franklin O., Bhatia SN., Tuveson DA. & Hynes RO. Cancer Cell–Derived Matrisome Proteins Promote Metastasis in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Cancer Research. 2020;80(7):1461‐1474. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-19-2578 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Naba A, Clauser KR, Lamar JM, Carr SA, Hynes RO. Extracellular matrix signatures of human mammary carcinoma identify novel metastasis promoters. eLife. 2014;3:e01308. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Sathyanarayana UG, Padar A, Huang CX, et al. Aberrant promoter methylation and silencing of laminin‐5‐encoding genes in breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:6395‐6400. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110. Xu X, Yan Q, Wang Y, Dong X. NTN4 is associated with breast cancer metastasis via regulation of EMT‐related biomarkers. Oncol Rep. 2017;37:449‐457. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Wang Y, Wei Y, Fan X, et al. MicroRNA‐125b as a tumor suppressor by targeting MMP11 in breast cancer. Thoracic Cancer. 2020;11:1613‐1620. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Error ‐ Cookies Turned Off https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/his.13956. Accessed May 14, 2021.
- 113. Salvador F, Martin A, López‐Menéndez C, et al. Lysyl oxidase‐like protein LOXL2 promotes lung metastasis of breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2017;77:5859. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-3152 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114. Ferreira S, Saraiva N, Rijo P, Fernandes AS. LOXL2 inhibitors and breast cancer progression. Antioxidants. 2021;10:312. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 115. Alarmo EL, Pärssinen J, Ketolainen JM, Savinainen K, Karhu R, Kallioniemi A. BMP7 influences proliferation, migration, and invasion of breast cancer cells. Cancer Lett. 2009;275:43. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2008.09.028 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116. Schwalbe M, Sänger J, Eggers R, et al. Differential expression and regulation of bone morphogenetic protein 7 in breast cancer. Int J Oncol. 2003;23(89):95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117. Long J, Badal SS, Wang Y, Chang BHJ, Rodriguez A, Danesh FR. MicroRNA‐22 is a master regulator of bone morphogenetic Protein‐7/6 homeostasis in the kidney. J Biol Chem. 2013;288:36202‐36214. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Gao T, Han Y, Yu L, Ao S, Li Z, Ji J. CCNA2 is a prognostic biomarker for ER+ breast cancer and Tamoxifen resistance. PLoS One. 2014;9:e91771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119. Ding K, Li W, Zou Z, Zou X, Wang C. CCNB1 is a prognostic biomarker for ER+ breast cancer. Med Hypotheses. 2014;83:364. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2014.06.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120. Ma Q. MiR‐219‐5p suppresses cell proliferation and cell cycle progression in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma by targeting CCNA2. Cell Mol Biol Lett. 2019;24:1‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121. Wang S, Sun H, Zhan X, Wang Q. MicroRNA‐718 serves a tumor‐suppressive role in non‐small cell lung cancer by directly targeting CCNB1. Int J Mol Med. 2020;45:33‐44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
- 122. O'Regan RM, Nahta R. Targeting Forkhead box M1 transcription factor in breast cancer. Biochem Pharmacol. 2018;154(407):413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123. Ziegler Y, Laws MJ, Guillen VS, et al. Suppression of FOXM1 activities and breast cancer growth in vitro and in vivo by a new class of compounds. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2019;5:1‐11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124. Tan Y, Wang Q, Xie Y, et al. Identification of FOXM1 as a specific marker for triple‐negative breast cancer. Int J Oncol. 2019;54:87‐97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125. Saba R, Alsayed A, Zacny JP, Dudek AZ. The role of Forkhead box protein M1 in breast cancer progression and resistance to therapy. Int J Breast Cancer. 2016;2016:1‐8. doi: 10.1155/2016/9768183 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126. Lu X‐F, Zeng D, Liang W‐Q, Chen C‐F, Sun S‐M, Lin H‐Y. FoxM1 is a promising candidate target in the treatment of breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2017;9:842‐852. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127. Du R, Huang C, Liu K, Li X, Dong Z. Targeting AURKA in cancer: molecular mechanisms and opportunities for cancer therapy. Mol Cancer. 2021;20:1‐27. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128. Siggelkow W, Boehm D, Gebhard S, et al. Expression of aurora kinase a is associated with metastasis‐free survival in node‐negative breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:1‐11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129. Huang D, Huang Y, Huang Z, Weng J, Zhang S, Gu W. Relation of AURKB over‐expression to low survival rate in BCRA and reversine‐modulated aurora B kinase in breast cancer cell lines. Cancer Cell Int. 2019;19:1‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130. Staff S, Isola J, Jumppanen M, Tanner M. Aurora—a gene is frequently amplified in basal‐like breast cancer. Oncol Rep. 2010;23:307‐312. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131.Staff S, Isola J, Jumppanen M, Tanner M. Aurora‐A gene is frequently amplified in basal‐like breast cancer. Oncology Reports. 2009;23(2):307‐12. doi: 10.3892/or_00000637 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132. Zhou R, Zhang Y, Du G, et al. Down‐regulated let‐7b‐5p represses glycolysis metabolism by targeting AURKB in asthenozoospermia. Gene. 2018;663:87. doi: 10.1016/j.gene.2018.04.022, [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133. Yuan Q, Sun T, Ye F, Kong W, Jin H. MicroRNA‐124‐3p affects proliferation, migration and apoptosis of bladder cancer cells through targeting AURKA. Cancer Biomark. 2017;19:93‐101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134. Wang Y, Chen T, Huang H, et al. miR‐363‐3p inhibits tumor growth by targeting PCNA in lung adenocarcinoma. Oncotarget. 2017;8:20133‐20144. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135. Jiang C, Cao Y, Lei T, et al. microRNA‐363‐3p inhibits cell growth and invasion of non‐small cell lung cancer by targeting HMGA2. Mol Med Rep. 2018;17:2712‐2718. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136. Dong J, Geng J, Tan W. MiR‐363‐3p suppresses tumor growth and metastasis of colorectal cancer via targeting SphK2. Biomed Pharmacother. 2018;105:931. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2018.06.052 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137. Dong S, Xue S, Sun Y, et al. MicroRNA‐363‐3p downregulation in papillary thyroid cancer inhibits tumor progression by targeting NOB1. J Investig Med. 2021;69:66‐74. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138.Xu DX, Guo JJ, Zhu GY, Wu HJ, Zhang QS, Cui T. MiR‐363‐3p modulates cell growth and invasion in glioma by directly targeting pyruvate dehydrogenase B. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2018;22(16):5230‐5239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supplementary Table 1 Inhouse Sequencing mRNA Data Summary for total reads and overall alignment with Hg38 Reference genome
Supplementary Table 2: Inhouse Sequencing miRNA Data Summary for total reads and overall alignment with Hg38 Reference genome
Supplementary Table 3: List of TS miRs and oncomiRs regulated in breast cancer
Supplementary Table 4: Sequences for RT‐PCR primers used un the study
Supplementary Figure 1: PCA plots for Curcumin treated MCF7,MDA‐MB‐231 and T47D mRNA(A) and miRNA(B) samples.(Abbreviations‐ Curcumin:Cur; VC: Vehicle Control)
Supplementary Figure 2: Transcriptome Summary of % Upregulation and % downregulation of DE significant mRNAs(A) and miRNAs(B) in Curcumin treatment (.(Abbreviations‐ Curcumin:Cur)
Supplementary Figure 3: miRNA‐mRNA network for NFKB targets regulated by Curcumin in MCF7(A), MDA‐MB‐231(B) and T47D(C) cells. (D) Assessment of NFkB in MCF7 breast cancer cells treated with Curcumin: Western blot analysis NFkB protein was done on Curcumin treated MCF7 cell lysates. The experiment was done in duplicates and representative image is shown. Quantification was done (B) and is represented as bar graph of mean +/− SEM. One sample t test and one way ANOVA test was performed and the p value was calculated between control and Curcumin treated groups (*: p value < 0.05, **: p value < 0.005)
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
