Rajesha Rupaimoole

Bio: Rajesha Rupaimoole is an academic researcher from University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. The author has contributed to research in topics: Ovarian cancer & Cancer. The author has an hindex of 38, co-authored 71 publications receiving 6835 citations. Previous affiliations of Rajesha Rupaimoole include University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston & Rice University.

MicroRNA therapeutics: towards a new era for the management of cancer and other diseases

Abstract: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small non-coding RNAs that can modulate mRNA expression. Insights into the roles of miRNAs in development and disease have led to the development of new therapeutic approaches that are based on miRNA mimics or agents that inhibit their functions (antimiRs), and the first such approaches have entered the clinic. This Review discusses the role of different miRNAs in cancer and other diseases, and provides an overview of current miRNA therapeutics in the clinic. In just over two decades since the discovery of the first microRNA (miRNA), the field of miRNA biology has expanded considerably. Insights into the roles of miRNAs in development and disease, particularly in cancer, have made miRNAs attractive tools and targets for novel therapeutic approaches. Functional studies have confirmed that miRNA dysregulation is causal in many cases of cancer, with miRNAs acting as tumour suppressors or oncogenes (oncomiRs), and miRNA mimics and molecules targeted at miRNAs (antimiRs) have shown promise in preclinical development. Several miRNA-targeted therapeutics have reached clinical development, including a mimic of the tumour suppressor miRNA miR-34, which reached phase I clinical trials for treating cancer, and antimiRs targeted at miR-122, which reached phase II trials for treating hepatitis. In this article, we describe recent advances in our understanding of miRNAs in cancer and in other diseases and provide an overview of current miRNA therapeutics in the clinic. We also discuss the challenge of identifying the most efficacious therapeutic candidates and provide a perspective on achieving safe and targeted delivery of miRNA therapeutics.

Paraneoplastic Thrombocytosis in Ovarian Cancer

Abstract: From the Departments of Gynecologic Oncology and Reproductive Medicine (R.L.S., A.M.N., H.D.H., J.B.-M., W.H., H.G., K.M., M.M.K.S., E.R.K., A.K.S.), Cancer Biology (R.R., G.L.-B., A.K.S.), Experimental Therapeutics (G.N.A.-P., I.T., B.O., G.L.-B.), Hematology and Oncology (C.V.P.), Pathology (M.T.D.), Benign Hematology (H.G.V., V.A.-K.), Biostatistics (D.U.), and Leukemia (F.G.), and the Center for RNA Interference and Non-Coding RNA (H.D.H., G.L.-B.,

miRNA Deregulation in Cancer Cells and the Tumor Microenvironment

Abstract: miRNAs are a key component of the noncoding RNA family. The underlying mechanisms involved in the interplay between the tumor microenvironment and cancer cells involve highly dynamic factors such as hypoxia and cell types such as cancer-associated fibroblasts and macrophages. Although miRNA levels are known to be altered in cancer cells, recent evidence suggests a critical role for the tumor microenvironment in regulating miRNA biogenesis, methylation, and transcriptional changes. Here, we discuss the complex protumorigenic symbiotic role between tumor cells, the tumor microenvironment, and miRNA deregulation. Significance: miRNAs play a central role in cell signaling and homeostasis. In this article, we provide insights into the regulatory mechanisms involved in the deregulation of miRNAs in cancer cells and the tumor microenvironment and discuss therapeutic intervention strategies to overcome this deregulation. Cancer Discov; 6(3); 235–46. ©2016 AACR .

Tumour angiogenesis regulation by the miR-200 family

Abstract: The miR-200 family is well known to inhibit the epithelial-mesenchymal transition, suggesting it may therapeutically inhibit metastatic biology. However, conflicting reports regarding the role of miR-200 in suppressing or promoting metastasis in different cancer types have left unanswered questions. Here we demonstrate a difference in clinical outcome based on miR-200's role in blocking tumour angiogenesis. We demonstrate that miR-200 inhibits angiogenesis through direct and indirect mechanisms by targeting interleukin-8 and CXCL1 secreted by the tumour endothelial and cancer cells. Using several experimental models, we demonstrate the therapeutic potential of miR-200 delivery in ovarian, lung, renal and basal-like breast cancers by inhibiting angiogenesis. Delivery of miR-200 members into the tumour endothelium resulted in marked reductions in metastasis and angiogenesis, and induced vascular normalization. The role of miR-200 in blocking cancer angiogenesis in a cancer-dependent context defines its utility as a potential therapeutic agent.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

Comprehensive molecular characterization of gastric adenocarcinoma

Abstract: Gastric cancer was the world’s third leading cause of cancer mortality in 2012, responsible for 723,000 deaths1. The vast majority of gastric cancers are adenocarcinomas, which can be further subdivided into intestinal and diffuse types according to the Lauren classification2. An alternative system, proposed by the World Health Organization, divides gastric cancer into papillary, tubular, mucinous (colloid) and poorly cohesive carcinomas3. These classification systems have little clinical utility, making the development of robust classifiers that can guide patient therapy an urgent priority. The majority of gastric cancers are associated with infectious agents, including the bacterium Helicobacter pylori4 and Epstein–Barr virus (EBV). The distribution of histological subtypes of gastric cancer and the frequencies of H. pylori and EBV associated gastric cancer vary across the globe5. A small minority of gastric cancer cases are associated with germline mutation in E-cadherin (CDH1)6 or mismatch repair genes7 (Lynch syndrome), whereas sporadic mismatch repair-deficient gastric cancers have epigenetic silencing of MLH1 in the context of a CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP)8. Molecular profiling of gastric cancer has been performed using gene expression or DNA sequencing9–12, but has not led to a clear biologic classification scheme. The goals of this study by The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) were to develop a robust molecular classification of gastric cancer and to identify dysregulated pathways and candidate drivers of distinct classes of gastric cancer.

Single-cell RNA-seq highlights intratumoral heterogeneity in primary glioblastoma

Abstract: Human cancers are complex ecosystems composed of cells with distinct phenotypes, genotypes, and epigenetic states, but current models do not adequately reflect tumor composition in patients. We used single-cell RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) to profile 430 cells from five primary glioblastomas, which we found to be inherently variable in their expression of diverse transcriptional programs related to oncogenic signaling, proliferation, complement/immune response, and hypoxia. We also observed a continuum of stemness-related expression states that enabled us to identify putative regulators of stemness in vivo. Finally, we show that established glioblastoma subtype classifiers are variably expressed across individual cells within a tumor and demonstrate the potential prognostic implications of such intratumoral heterogeneity. Thus, we reveal previously unappreciated heterogeneity in diverse regulatory programs central to glioblastoma biology, prognosis, and therapy.

Molecular mechanisms of cell death: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2018.

Abstract: Over the past decade, the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death (NCCD) has formulated guidelines for the definition and interpretation of cell death from morphological, biochemical, and functional perspectives. Since the field continues to expand and novel mechanisms that orchestrate multiple cell death pathways are unveiled, we propose an updated classification of cell death subroutines focusing on mechanistic and essential (as opposed to correlative and dispensable) aspects of the process. As we provide molecularly oriented definitions of terms including intrinsic apoptosis, extrinsic apoptosis, mitochondrial permeability transition (MPT)-driven necrosis, necroptosis, ferroptosis, pyroptosis, parthanatos, entotic cell death, NETotic cell death, lysosome-dependent cell death, autophagy-dependent cell death, immunogenic cell death, cellular senescence, and mitotic catastrophe, we discuss the utility of neologisms that refer to highly specialized instances of these processes. The mission of the NCCD is to provide a widely accepted nomenclature on cell death in support of the continued development of the field.