Objective To investigate the effects of inhibitor of growth 5 (ING5) gene on the proliferation, apoptosis, migration and cell cycle of human breast cancer Bcap-37 cells.Methods The eukaryotic ING5-expressing plasmid and GFP-empty plasmid were steadily transfected in Bcap-37 cells, the expression of green fluorescent protein was measured with fluorescence microscopy, and the high expression of ING5 was measured by real time-PCR. Bcap-37-ING5 cells served as the experimental group, Bcap-37-GFP cells as the mock group and Bcap-37 as the control group. The effects of ING5 on the proliferation were detected by MTT, the cell cycle and apoptosis were detected by Flow cytometry, and the cell migration was detected by cell wound scratch assay and Transwell experiment.Results Bcap-37 cell lines steadily expressing ING5 protein with GFP-tag were acquired by stable transfection. ING5 over-expression inhibited the proliferation and led to G2 arrest of Bcap-37 cells, increased cells apoptosis and decreased the cell migration ability (P<0.05).Conclusion ING5 over-expression may have reverse effect for malignant phenotype of breast cancer cells, and may be employed to indicate the biomarker of prognosis of breast cancer patients and regarded as a target of gene therapy.

Objective:To investigate the clinical efficacy of avatrombopag combined with recombinant human thrombopoietin (rhTPO) versus avatrombopag in the treatment of severe thrombocytopenia associated with chronic liver disease.Methods:The retrospective cohort study was conducted. The clinical data of 56 patients with severe thrombocytopenia associated with chronic liver disease who were admitted to the First Affiliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of China from May 2020 to October 2021 were collected. There were 36 males and 20 females, aged from 33 to 74 years, with a median age of 54 years. Of 56 patients, 21 cases undergoing treatment of avatrombopag combined with rhTPO were allocated into the combined treatment group and 35 cases undergoing treatment of avatrombopag were allocated into the monotherapy group. Observation indicators: (1) changes of platelet after treatment; (2) adverse drug reaction. Follow-up was conducted using outpatient examination and telephone interview to detect changes of platelet and effects of treatment within 2 weeks after treatment. The follow-up was up to October 2021. Measurement data with normal distribution were represented as Mean± SD, and comparison between groups was analyzed using the t test. Measurement data with skewed distribution were represented as M(range), and comparison between groups was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U test. Count data were described as absolute numbers or percentages, and compari-son between groups was analyzed using the chi-square test or Fisher exact probability. Repeated measurement data were analyzed using the repeated ANOVA. Results:(1) Changes of platelet after treatment. The platelet level within 1 to 5 days and 6 to 10 days after treatment in the combined treatment group were (35±19)×10 9/L and (73±41)×10 9/L, respectively. The above indicators of the monotherapy group were (40±30)×10 9/L and (70±51)×10 9/L, respectively. There was no significant difference in change trends of platelet before and after treatment between the two groups ( Fgroup=0.30, P>0.05). There was a significant difference in platelet count before and after treatment between the two groups ( Ftime=59.96, P<0.05). There was no interaction effect in change trends of platelet between the two groups ( Finteraction=0.40, P>0.05). The effective rates were 66.67%(14/21) in the combination therapy group and 54.29%(19/35) in the monotherapy group. There was no significant difference in the effective rate between the two groups ( χ2=0.83, P>0.05). (2) Adverse drug reaction. Cases with headache, dizziness, blood transfusion reaction, hematuria, proteinuria, fever, abdominal pain, diarrhea, dyspepsia, fatigue, nausea or peripheral tissue edema were 2, 4, 1, 2, 2, 7, 10, 6, 8, 14, 12, 5 in the combined treatment group, versus 5, 8, 1, 3, 5, 7, 19, 11,20, 19, 14, 5 in the monotherapy group, respectively. There was no significant difference in cases with headache, dizziness, blood transfusion reaction, hematuria, proteinuria between the two groups ( P>0.05), and there was no significant difference in cases with fever, abdominal pain, diarrhea, dyspepsia, fatigue, nausea, peripheral tissue edema between the two groups ( χ2=1.24, 0.23, 0.05, 1.91, 0.83, 2.04, 0.81, P>0.05). Conclusion:Both of avatrombopag combined with rhTPO and monotherapy of avatrom-bopag can be used to promote the platelet level in patients with severe thrombocytopenia associated with chronic liver disease, and avatrombopag combined with rhTPO does not provide better clinical benefits compared with monotherapy avatrombopag.