Propofol promotes apoptosis of colorectal cancer cells via alleviating the suppression of lncRNA HOXA11-AS on miRNA let-7i
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To date, surgical resection is the mainstay for the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). Propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol), one of the most commonly used intravenous anaesthetic agents, has been reported to be involved in modulating the malignancy of a variety of human cancers. However, the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. In this study, using a cell counting kit (CCK-8), flow cytometry, and caspase-3 cleavage assays, we found that propofol promoted cell apoptosis and inhibited cell proliferation in both Colo205 and SW620 cells, through the down-regulation of HOXA11-AS and up-regulation of let-7i. Moreover, gain-of-function studies of HOXA11-AS or loss-of-function studies of let-7i also revealed a negative correlation between HOXA11-AS and let-7i in propofol-mediated biological functions of CRC cells. Furthermore, our mechanistic experiments revealed that HOXA11-AS acts as a molecular sponge for let-7i, thereby regulating the expression of ABCC10. We investigate the theory that propofol suppresses colorectal cancer tumorigenesis by modulating the HOXA11-AS-let-7i-ABCC10 regulatory network, indicating the potential for propofol to control CRC development.
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".