Back

IGF2BP3 is essential for the growth heterogeneity of colorectal adenoma cells by regulating MYC

Sunami, T.; Coppo, R.; Onuma, K.; Kondo, J.; Uematsu, H.; Hoshi, D.; Yamamoto, Y.; Kikuchi, O.; Ohashi, S.; Takeuchi, Y.; Kugou, K.; Hasegawa, Y.; Itatani, Y.; Obama, K.; Hippo, Y.; Muto, M.; Yamada, A.; Inoue, M.

2025-09-12 cancer biology
10.1101/2025.09.08.674833 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Adenoma is a major precancerous lesion in colorectal cancer (CRC), and the adenoma-carcinoma sequence is a well-known multistep progression to CRC caused by the accumulation of genetic mutations. On the other hand, the non-genetic mechanisms in the adenoma-carcinoma sequence remain largely unknown. In this study, organoids were established from 31 colorectal adenomas from 19 patients. Some adenomas showed heterogeneity in the proliferative potential of single cells, and this heterogeneity was regulated by non-genetic mechanisms. IGF2BP3 was identified as a differentially expressed gene between organoids with different growth patterns. IGF2BP3 positively regulated MYC expression at the transcriptional level and negatively regulated it at the translational level. This promoted high proliferative potential with high levels of oxidative phosphorylation, while allowing cells to avoid MYC-induced cell death. IGF2BP3 affected the tumorigenicity of mouse adenomas in vivo. Intra-tumor heterogeneity in growth potential is acquired at the precancerous stage in the adenoma-carcinoma sequence of colorectal carcinogenesis, and IGF2BP3 plays an important role in regulating MYC levels. These findings provide new insights into the non-genetic regulation of adenomas during CRC development.

Published in iScience (predicted rank #2) · training set

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 2%
22.3%
Similar papers in this journal
iScience · published here
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
6.8%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Cell Reports
○ 1498 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.9%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.4%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.4%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Disease Models & Mechanisms
139 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
3.5%
7
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 5%
3.3%
8
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 38%
2.7%
50% of probability mass above
9
Cancers
○ 213 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
10
Cancer Research
● 130 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.2%
11
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
○ 233 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
12
Developmental Cell
○ 196 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
13
Molecular Cancer
○ 16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.8%
14
Cells
○ 249 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
15
Cell Death & Disease
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
Life Science Alliance
● 285 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
17
Med
○ 39 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
18
Cancer Letters
○ 35 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
19
Cell Death & Differentiation
○ 48 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.1%
20
Molecular Oncology
○ 55 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.1%
21
EMBO Reports
○ 263 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
22
Gastro Hep Advances
○ 11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
23
Neoplasia
○ 23 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.1%
24
Journal of Genetics and Genomics
○ 38 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
25
Genome Medicine
○ 183 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
26
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 30%
0.9%
27
Journal of Experimental Medicine
● 119 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
28
JCI Insight
● 277 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.9%
29
Translational Oncology
○ 21 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.6%
30
Biology Open
● 156 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.