p53 knockout drives stage-specific long non-coding RNA reprogramming during human neural differentiation and glioma organoid tumorigenesis.
Stasi, F.; Manzari, A. R.; Siciliano, V.; Binda, E.; Pazienza, V.; Brunetti, V.; De Vittorio, M.
Show abstract
Background: Long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are emerging regulators of tumor initiation and progression through their effects on stemness, lineage commitment, and transcriptional plasticity. The contribution of lncRNA reprogramming during early p53-deficient gliomagenesis remains poorly understood. Methods: Human induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) carrying a complete TP53 knockout were differentiated into neural progenitor cells (NPCs) and cerebral organoids. Bulk RNA sequencing was performed at multiple differentiation stages and compared with established glioblastoma cell lines (U87 and U118) to identify lncRNA expression changes associated with p53 loss and tumor-like transformation. Results: p53 deficiency induced a progressive and stage-specific remodeling of the lncRNA landscape, with the most pronounced transcriptional shift observed in 40-day NPCs. This late-stage profile partially overlapped with glioblastoma-like cell lines and was characterized by the upregulation of five lncRNAs enriched in both p53-deficient neural models and glioma cells. Principal component analysis showed that these lncRNAs clustered with tumor-associated samples and were strongly co-expressed with mitotic cell-cycle genes. In particular, LINC00973 and LINC01583 were highly expressed in primary glioblastoma datasets, while RP5-875H18.9 and RP11-1094H24.4 emerged as previously unrecognized glioma-associated transcripts. Conclusion: Loss of p53 drives stage-dependent lncRNA reprogramming during neural differentiation and promotes the emergence of glioma-associated transcriptional features. These findings identify candidate lncRNAs that may contribute to early gliomagenesis and represent potential biomarkers or therapeutic targets in glioblastoma.
Matching journals
The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- FYN tyrosine kinase, a downstream target of receptor tyrosine kinases, modulates anti-glioma immune responses 92%
- TIGIT expression dictates the immunosuppressive reprogramming of myeloid cells in glioblastoma 92%
- Transcriptomic landscape identifies two unrecognized ependymoma subtypes and novel pathways in medulloblastoma 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- MTAP loss correlates with an immunosuppressive profile in GBM and its substrate MTA stimulates alternative macrophage polarization 93%
- Challenges in the discovery of tumor-specific alternative splicing-derived cell-surface antigens in glioma 91%
- Cell type specific long non-coding RNA targets identified by integrative analysis of single-cell and bulk colorectal cancer transcriptomes 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Cellular Reprogramming of H3K27M Pediatric High-Grade Glioma to Neuron-like State 94%
- Integrative analysis of DNA methylation suggests down-regulation of oncogenic pathways and reduced de-novo mutation in survival outliers of glioblastoma 93%
- MiR-212-3p functions as a tumor suppressor gene in group 3 medulloblastoma via targeting Nuclear Factor I/B (NFIB) 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Disrupting Akt-Wnt/β-catenin signaling suppresses glioblastoma stem cell growth and tumor progression in immunocompetent mice 92%
- Transcription factors NFIA and NFIB induce cellular differentiation high-grade astrocytoma 90%
- Rapid DNA methylation-based classification of pediatric brain tumours from ultrasonic aspirate specimens 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Transcriptome-wide analysis of circRNA and RBP profiles and their molecular and clinical relevance for GBM 93%
- NOX4 regulates TGFβ-induced proliferation and self-renewal in glioblastoma stem cells. 92%
- CRISPR targeting of FOXL2 c.402C>G mutation reduces malignant phenotype in granulosa tumor cells and identifies anti-tumoral compounds 91%
"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.