ArticleScientific reports2022
A-to-I nonsynonymous RNA editing was significantly enriched in the ubiquitination site and correlated with clinical features and immune response.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The TRAP complex (SSR1-SSR4): mechanistic roles and therapeutic opportunities.Annals of medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative Analysis of Lifecycle-Dependent A to I RNA Editing in Three Members of theJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Zα and Zβ Localize ADAR1 to Flipons That Modulate Innate Immunity, Alternative Splicing, and Nonsynonymous RNA Editing.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Identification of prognostic RNA editing profiles for clear cell renal carcinoma.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- RBPs: an RNA editor's choice.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RNA editing is a post-transcriptional process that alters RNA sequence in a site-specific manner. A-to-I editing is the most abundant as well as the most well-studied type of RNA editing. About 0.5% of A-to-I editing sites were located in the coding regions. Despite of thousands of identified A-to-I nonsynonymous editing sites, the function of nonsynonymous editing was poorly studied. Here, we found that the nonsynonymous editing was significantly enriched in the ubiquitination site, compared to the synonymous editing. This enrichment was also in a modification type dependent manner, since it was not significantly enriched in other modification types. This observation was consistent with previous study that the codons for lysine (AAG and AAA) were enriched in the preferred deamination site for RNA editing. The peptides from proteomic data in CPTAC supported that mRNAs harboring edited ubiquitination sites can be translated into protein in cells. We identified the editing sites on ubiquitination site were significantly differential edited between tumor and para-tumor samples as well as among different subtypes in TCGA datasets and also correlated with clinical outcome, especially for the nonsynonymous editing sites on GSTM5, WDR1, SSR4 and PSMC4. Finally, the enrichment analysis revealed that the function of these above genes was specifically enriched in the immune response pathway. Our study shed a light on understanding the functions of nonsynonymous editing in tumorigenesis and provided nonsynonymous editing targets for potential cancer diagnosis and therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.