RNA-Binding Protein Motifs Predict microRNA Secretion and Cellular Retention in Hypothalamic and Other Cell Types
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular microRNAs (miRNAs) can be selectively secreted or retained, adding another layer to their critical role in regulating human health and disease. To date, select RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) have been proposed to be a mechanism underlying miRNA localization, but the overall relevance of RBPs in systematic miRNA sorting remains unclear. This study profiles intracellular and small extracellular vesicles' (sEVs) miRNAs in NPY-expressing hypothalamic neurons. These findings were corroborated by the publicly available sEV and intracellular miRNA profiles of white and brown adipocytes, endothelium, liver, and muscle from various databases. Using experimentally determined binding motifs of 93 RBPs, our enrichment analysis revealed that sEV-originating miRNAs contained significantly different RBP motifs than those of intracellularly retained miRNAs. Multiple RBP motifs were shared across cell types; for instance, RBM4 and SAMD4 are significantly enriched in neurons, hepatocytes, skeletal muscle, and endothelial cells. Homologs of both proteins physically interact with Argonaute1/2 proteins, suggesting that they play a role in miRNA sorting. Machine learning modelling also demonstrates that significantly enriched RBP motifs could predict cell-specific preferential miRNA sorting. Non-optimized machine learning modeling of the motifs using Random Forest and Naive Bayes in all cell types except WAT achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.77-0.84, indicating a high predictive accuracy. Given that the RBP motifs have a significant predictive power, these results underscore the critical role that RBPs play in miRNA sorting within mammalian cells and reinforce the importance of miRNA sequencing in preferential localization. For the future development of small RNA therapeutics, considering these RBP-RNA interactions could be crucial to maximize delivery effectiveness and minimize off-target effects.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".