FOXM1-Mediated LINC-ROR Regulates the Proliferation and Sensitivity to Sorafenib in Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the second leading cause of cancer-associated death worldwide. Indeed, despite the benefit of sorafenib in the treatment of some patients with HCC, the majority of these patients have a poor response to or intolerance of sorafenib, resulting in further tumor progression. Exploring the mechanisms underlying sorafenib resistance is essential to the treatment of HCC. Long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs) are known as participants in tumorigenesis. In this study, we identified that long intergenic non-protein coding RNA, regulator of reprogramming (LINC-ROR), was upregulated in HCC cell lines, which was transcriptionally activated by FOXM1. Furthermore, the sponging of miR-876-5p by LINC-ROR released FOXM1, thereby forming a positive-feedback loop. Additionally, we demonstrated that upregulation of both FOXM1 and LINC-ROR impaired the sensitivity to sorafenib in HCC cells. The role of this feedback loop was demonstrated by rescue assays. These results revealed a novel molecular feedback loop between LINC-ROR and FOXM1 and elucidated their functions in sorafenib sensitivity of HCC cell lines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".