Gene Expression Alterations and Molecular Analysis of CHEK1 in Solid Tumors

Abstract

Alterations in the Checkpoint kinase (CHEK1) gene, its regulation, and the possible clinical outcomes in human solid tumors have not been previously examined. Therefore, the present study was carried out to evaluate the expression of CHEK1 in solid tumors as well as the mechanism by which it can be regulated through non-coding RNAs. The expression of CHEK1 was investigated using Oncomine analysis. cBioPortal, Kaplan–Meier Plotter, and PrognoScan were performed to identify the prognostic roles of this gene in solid tumors. The copy number alteration, mutation, interactive analysis, and visualization of the altered networks were performed by cBioPortal. The molecular binding analysis was carried out by Schrodinger suite, PATCHDOCK, and discovery studio visualizer. The study demonstrated that the CHEK1 gene was differentially expressed in four different cancers, and that reduced CHEK1 mRNA expression is an unfavorable prognostic factor for patients with gastric and colorectal cancer. The molecular docking results showed that the CHEK1 gene can be regulated by microRNAs (miR-195-5p) due to the number of stable hydrogen atoms observed within the distance of 2.0 Å and the favorable amino acids (Ala221, Ile353, Ile365, Ile756, Val797, Val70, Val154, Ile159, Val347, Tyr804, Phe811, Tyr815, and Phe156) identified in the binding pocket of the argonaute protein. Due to the possibility of CHEK1’s involvement in solid tumors, it may potentially be a target for therapeutic intervention in cancer. Further studies into the interaction between CHEK1 and other co-expressed genes may give further insight into other modes of regulation of this gene in cancer patients.

In silico inhibition of SGTP4 as a therapeutic target for the treatment of schistosomiasis

“…Designing a structure-based drug with high efficacy could elude these problems faced by the existing drug. Indeed, conventional methodologies employed in the identification and development of inhibitors are capital and timeconsuming, hence, computational techniques have been used and gained importance in recent years Aruleba et al, 2018Aruleba et al, , 2020Fadaka et al, 2020;Ojo et al, 2019;Oyinloye et al, 2019).…”

MicroRNA-based regulation of Aurora A kinase in breast cancer

“…In addition, deletion of CRISPR/Cas9 suggested the oncogenic roles of miR-23b and miR-27b in BC [75]. Mature microRNAs assist AGO by guiding the complex to target sites in mRNAs that are partially complementary to the microRNA sequence (the seed region) [76], and induce repression of gene expression at the level of mRNA stability or translation [77]. Several proteins interfere with mRNA degradation and translational repression, some of them are necessary components of the RNA induced silencing complex (RISC) that transports those microRNAs to complementary sites within mRNA [78].…”

Construction of a disease‐specific lncRNA‐miRNA‐mRNA regulatory network reveals potential regulatory axes and prognostic biomarkers for hepatocellular carcinoma

“…In addition, miR‐195‐5p also acted as an anti‐oncogene via targeting PHF19 in HCC 54 . CHEK1 was a serine/threonine‐specific protein kinase mediating cell cycle arrest in response to DNA damage and functioned through the PLK‐4/ATR/CHEK1 pathway in HCC 55,56 . RASGEF1B was a guanine‐nucleotide exchange factor(GEF) expressed in macrophages under the stimulation of Toll‐like receptor (TLR) agonists, and could mediate innate immune responses triggered during microbial infection 57 .…”