Search

Nucleic acid modifications have attracted increasing attention in recent years since they have been found to be related to a number of diseases including cancer. Previous studies have shown that the early development of endometrial cancer (EC) is often accompanied by changes in methylation levels of related genes, and the expression of related proteins that regulate reactive oxygen species (ROS) shows significant differences in EC cells and tissues. However, it has not been reported whether nucleic acid modifications related to methylation or ROS can serve as biomarkers for EC. Accurate quantification of these nucleic acid modifications still has challenges because their amounts in urine are very low and the interferences in urine are complicated. In this study, a novel dispersive solid-phase extraction (DSPE) method based on chitosan-carbon nanotube-Al2O3 (CS-CNT-Al2O3) has been established for the analysis of 5-hydroxymethyluracil (5 mU), 5-methyl-2′-deoxycytidine (5-mdC), 5-hydroxymethyl-2′-deoxycytidine (5-hmdC), 5-formyl-2′-deoxycytidine (5-fdC), and 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) in EC patient urine samples coupled with UHPLC-QE-Orbitrap-MS/MS and HPLC–UV. Firstly, the synthesis of the CS-CNT-Al2O3 nanocomposite was conducted by a sono-coprecipitation method and was characterized by scanning electron microscope (SEM), energy dispersive spectrometer (EDS), and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR). Under the optimal extraction conditions of DSPE, we successfully quantified 5 mU, 5-mdC, 5-hmdC, 5-fdC, and 8-OHdG in urine samples from 37 EC patients and 39 healthy controls. The results showed that there were significant differences in the levels of 5-mdC, 5-hmdC, 5-fdC, and 8-OHdG in EC patients compared to the healthy control group. The receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was carried out to evaluate the potential of 5-mdC, 5-hmdC, 5-fdC, and 8-OHdG to distinguish EC patients from healthy volunteers. The area under the curve (AUC) for 5-mdC, 5-hmdC, 5-fdC, and 8-OHdG was 0.7412, 0.667, 0.8438, and 0.7981, respectively. It indicated that 5-mdC, 5-hmdC, 5-fdC, and 8-OHdG had certain potential in distinguishing between EC patients and healthy volunteers and they could act as potential non-invasive biomarkers for early diagnosis of EC. Moreover, the present study would stimulate investigations of the effects of nucleic acid modifications on the initiation and progression of EC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cell migration is an essential manner of different cell lines that are involved in embryological development, immune responses, tumorigenesis, and metastasis in vivo. Physical confinement derived from crowded tissue microenvironments has pivotal effects on migratory behaviors. Distinct migration modes under a heterogeneous extracellular matrix (ECM) have been extensively studied, uncovering potential molecular mechanisms involving a series of biological processes. Significantly, multi-omics strategies have been launched to provide multi-angle views of complex biological phenomena, facilitating comprehensive insights into molecular regulatory networks during cell migration. In this review, we describe biomimetic devices developed to explore the migratory behaviors of cells induced by different types of confined microenvironments in vitro. We also discuss the results of multi-omics analysis of intrinsic molecular alterations and critical pathway dysregulations of cell migration under heterogeneous microenvironments, highlighting the significance of physical confinement–triggered intracellular signal transduction in order to regulate cellular behaviors. Finally, we discuss both the challenges and promise of mechanistic analysis in confinement-induced cell migration, promoting the development of early diagnosis and precision therapeutics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a correction notice for an article titled "A new methodology to reveal potential nucleic acid modifications associated with the risk of endometrial cancer through dispersive solid-phase extraction coupled with UHPLC-QE-Orbitrap-MS/MS and HPLC-UV." The correction addresses an error in Table 4 of the original article, where the order of literature numbers in column 8 was incorrect. The correct order should be "32, 33, 34, 35, 36" instead of "28, 29, 30, 31, 32." The correction has been made to the original article. The document also includes a note from the publisher stating their neutrality regarding jurisdictional claims and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]