Onconase, the smallest member of RNase A super family that was isolated from oocytes or early embryos of the Northern Leopard Frog (Rana pipiens), has been granted as an orphan drug for the treatment of malignant mesothelioma by US FDA1,2. It was also tested in clinical trials for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, breast cancer, and renal cell cancer2. Onconase is extremely stable with a Tm of ∼87 °C, resists degradation by various proteases, and evades ribonulease inhibitors (RI) present in mammalian cell cytosol3,4,5, which confers advantages to its application in cancer treatment. More importantly, onconase specifically induces apoptosis of cancer cells but has low cytotoxicity to their normal counterparts2. One rational hypothesis for this selectivity is that onconase, a highly cationic protein with calculated pI > 9.5, is selectively internalized by tumor cells given that tumor cells generally are more negatively charged than cognate normal cells2. Nevertheless, as an anti-cancer drug, the mechanisms of its antitumor activity are not well understood. The current model of onconase-mediated cytotoxicity favors that onconase degrades tRNAs in tumor cells after its cytosolic internalization, which leads to ubiquitous inhibition of protein synthesis and apoptosis2. However, increasing evidence indicates that degradation of tRNAs and inhibition of protein synthesis are not the sole cause of onconase-induced apoptosis6,7,8. Consistent with the well-documented causal roles of microRNAs (miRNAs) in cancers, a recent study indicates that onconase regulates the expression of miRNAs in malignant pleural mesothelioma cell lines (H2959, H2373, and H2591), and reveals that onconase controls cell proliferation, invasion, migration, and apoptosis through modulating miRNAs9. However, how onconase affects miRNA expression remains unclear. Here our biochemical studies showed that miRNAs are the direct downstream RNA species of onconase. Intriguingly, we found that onconase downregulates miRNAs by cleavage of miRNA precursors, thus reducing the amount of mature miRNAs produced from Dicer processing.

Using recombinant onconase that was prepared as described previously10, we found that miR-155 and miR-21, two well-known oncogenic miRNAs with high endogenous levels in mesothelioma cell line Msto-211h, were dose- and time-dependently downregulated by onconase in these cells (Supplementary information, Figure S1A, S1B, S1D and S1E), accompanied by a significant upregulation of their respective targets examined, including miR-155 targets SOCS111, C/EBPβ12,13, and ETS-114, and miR-21 targets PTEN15 and PDCD416 (Supplementary information, Figure S1C and S1F). Furthermore, our miRNA microarray assays showed that the majority of miRNAs in Msto-211h cells were significantly downregulated by onconase (Supplementary information, Figure S2A), while our quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) assays validated the onconase-mediated downregulation of let-7 family miRNAs, miR-21, miR-29a, miR-92a, miR-92b, miR-155, miR-221, and miR-222 (Supplementary information, Figure S2B). These results indicate that miRNA expression is susceptible to onconase, consistent with the recent report9. However, different from the findings of upregulation of 5 miRNAs in addition to downregulation of the majority in mesothelioma cells by onconase in that study9, we found that onconase appears to globally downregulate miRNAs in Msto-211h cells. This dissimilarity is likely due to a different cell line examined in this study. Nevertheless, our microarray assays also showed that four miRNAs (miR-181a, miR-30a, miR-1280, and miR-720) were upregulated by onconase treatment (Supplementary information, Figure S2A); however, further analyses revealed that all these four miRNAs showed low intensities in microarray assays (Supplementary information, Figure S2C). Moreover, our qRT-PCR assays showed that miR-181a expression was actually reduced > 2-fold by onconase treatment (Supplementary information, Figure S2B), while the other three miRNAs were undetectable in qRT-PCR assays (data not shown), implicating low endogenous levels of these miRNAs in Msto-211h cells and false positive in microarray assays. It is noteworthy that 4 out of 5 upregulated miRNAs have extremely low values of intensities in their miRNA microarray data9, while all of these five upregulated miRNAs do not meet the cutoff of mean intensities above 500 in our microarray assays.

Log in or create a free account to read this content

Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com

Access through your institution

or

Sign in or create an account
Continue with Google
Continue with ORCiD