Gene expression signatures of site-specificity in cancer metastases

Targeting the core program of metastasis with a novel drug combination

BACKGROUND

We previously reported that metastases are generally characterized by a core program of gene expression that activates tissue remodeling/vascularization, alters ion homeostasis, induces the oxidative metabolism, and silences extracellular matrix interactions. This core program distinguishes metastases from their originating primary tumors as well as from their destination host tissues. Therefore, the gene products involved are potential targets for anti-metastasis drug treatment.

METHODS

Because the silencing of extracellular matrix interactions predisposes to anoiks in the absence of active survival mechanisms, we tested inhibitors against the other three components.

RESULTS

Individually, the low-specificity VEGFR blocker pazopanib (in vivo combined with marimastat), the antioxidant dimethyl sulfoxide (or the substitute atovaquone, which is approved for internal administration), and the ionic modulators bumetanide and tetrathiomolybdate inhibited soft agar colony formation by breast and pancreatic cancer cell lines. The individual candidate agents have a record of use in humans (with limited efficacy when administered individually) and are available for repurposing. In combination, the effects of these drugs were additive or synergistic. In two mouse models of cancer (utilizing 4T1 cells or B16-F10 cells), the combination treatment with these medications, applied immediately (to prevent metastasis formation) or after a delay (to suppress established metastases), dramatically reduced the occurrence of disseminated foci.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of tissue remodeling inhibitors, suppressors of the oxidative metabolism, and ion homeostasis modulators has very strong promise for the treatment of metastases by multiple cancers.

Liver Microenvironment Response to Prostate Cancer Metastasis and Hormonal Therapy

Prostate cancer-associated deaths arise from disease progression and metastasis. Metastasis to the liver is associated with the worst clinical outcomes for prostate cancer patients, and these metastatic tumors can be particularly resistant to the currently widely used chemotherapy and hormonal therapies, such as anti-androgens which block androgen synthesis or directly target the androgen receptor. The incidence of liver metastases is reportedly increasing, with a potential correlation with use of anti-androgen therapies. A key player in prostate cancer progression and therapeutic response is the microenvironment of the tumor(s). This is a dynamic and adaptive collection of cells and proteins, which impart signals and stimuli that can alter biological processes within prostate cancer cells. Investigation in the prostate primary site has demonstrated that cells of the microenvironment are also responsive to hormones and hormonal therapies. In this review, we collate information about what happens when cancer moves to the liver: the types of prostate cancer cells that metastasize there, the response of resident mesenchymal cells of the liver, and how the interactions between the cancer cells and the microenvironment may be altered by hormonal therapy.

Alterations of Ion Homeostasis in Cancer Metastasis: Implications for Treatment

We have previously reported that metastases from all malignancies are characterized by a core program of gene expression that suppresses extracellular matrix interactions, induces vascularization/tissue remodeling, activates the oxidative metabolism, and alters ion homeostasis. Among these features, the least elucidated component is ion homeostasis. Here we review the literature with the goal to infer a better mechanistic understanding of the progression-associated ionic alterations and identify the most promising drugs for treatment. Cancer metastasis is accompanied by skewing in calcium, zinc, copper, potassium, sodium and chloride homeostasis. Membrane potential changes and water uptake through Aquaporins may also play roles. Drug candidates to reverse these alterations are at various stages of testing, with some having entered clinical trials. Challenges to their utilization comprise differences among tumor types and the involvement of multiple ions in each case. Further, adverse effects may become a concern, as channel blockers, chelators, or supplemented ions will affect healthy and transformed cells alike.

Site-Specific and Common Prostate Cancer Metastasis Genes as Suggested by Meta-Analysis of Gene Expression Data

Anticancer therapies mainly target primary tumor growth and little attention is given to the events driving metastasis formation. Metastatic prostate cancer, in comparison to localized disease, has a much worse prognosis. In the work presented here, groups of genes that are common to prostate cancer metastatic cells from bones, lymph nodes, and liver and those that are site-specific were delineated. The purpose of the study was to dissect potential markers and targets of anticancer therapies considering the common characteristics and differences in transcriptional programs of metastatic cells from different secondary sites. To that end, a meta-analysis of gene expression data of prostate cancer datasets from the GEO database was conducted. Genes with differential expression in all metastatic sites analyzed belong to the class of filaments, focal adhesion, and androgen receptor signaling. Bone metastases undergo the largest transcriptional changes that are highly enriched for the term of the chemokine signaling pathway, while lymph node metastasis show perturbation in signaling cascades. Liver metastases change the expression of genes in a way that is reminiscent of processes that take place in the target organ. Survival analysis for the common hub genes revealed involvements in prostate cancer prognosis and suggested potential biomarkers.

Cancer: a mirrored room between tumor bulk and tumor microenvironment

It has been well documented that the tumor microenvironment (TME) plays a key role in the promotion of drug resistance, the support of tumor progression, invasiveness, metastasis, and even the maintenance of a cancer stem-like phenotype. Here, we reviewed TME formation presenting it as a reflection of a tumor’s own organization during the different stages of tumor development. Interestingly, functionally different groups of stromal cells seem to have specific spatial distributions within the TME that change as the tumor evolves into advanced stage progression which correlates with the fact that cancer stem-like cells (CSCs) are located in the edges of solid tumor masses in advanced tumors.

We also focus on the continuos feedback that is established between a tumor and its surroundings. The “talk” between tumor mass cells and TME stromal cells, marks the evolution of both interlocuting cell types. For instance, the metabolic and functional transformations that stromal cells undergo due to tumor corrupting activity.

Moreover, the molecular basis of metastatic spread is also approached, making special emphasis on the site-specific pre-metastatic niche formation as another reflection of the primary tumor molecular signature.

Finally, several therapeutic approaches targeting primary TME and pre-metastatic niche are suggested. For instance, a systematic analysis of the TME just adjacent to the tumor mass to establish the proportion of myofibroblasts-like cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) which may in turn correspond to stemness and metastases-promotion. Or the implementation of “re-education” therapies consisting of switching tumor-supportive stromal cells into tumor-suppressive ones. In summary, to improve our clinical management of cancer, it is crucial to understand and learn how to manage the close interaction between TME and metastasis.

Liver prometastatic reaction: Stimulating factors and responsive cancer phenotypes

Cancer is first a localized tissue disorder, whose soluble and exosomal molecules and invasive cells induce a host response providing the stromal components of the primary tumor microenvironment (TME). Once the TME is developed, cancer-derived molecules and cells can more efficiently spread out and a whole-body response takes place, whose pathophysiological changes may result in a paraneoplastic syndrome. Remote organ-specific prometastatic reactions may also occur at this time, facilitating metastatic activities of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) through premetastatic niche development at targeted organs. However, additional signaling factors from the inter-organ communication network involved in the pathophysiology and comorbidities of cancer patients may also regulate prometastatic reaction-stimulating effects of cancer and non-cancer tissue factors. This article provides a conceptual overview of our ongoing clinical research on the liver prometastatic reaction (LPR) of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC), their portal vein- and hepatic artery-driven LPR-Stimulating Factors (LPR-SF), and their resulting LPR-derived Metastasis-Stimulating Factors (LPR-MSF) acting on liver-invading CRC cells. In addition, we also provide new insights on the molecular subtyping of LPR-responsive cancer phenotypes in patients with CRC and melanoma; and on how to investigate and interpret the prometastatic infrastructure in the real pathophysiological context of patients with cancer undergoing surgical procedures and receiving pharmacological treatments with multiple side effects, including those affecting the LPR, its stimulating factors and responsive cancer phenotypes.