Understanding the unimodal distributions of cancer occurrence rates: it takes two factors for a cancer to occur

Elucidation of Factors Affecting the Age-Dependent Cancer Occurrence Rates

Cancer occurrence rates exhibit diverse age-related patterns, and understanding them may shed new and important light on the drivers of cancer evolution. This study systematically analyzes the age-dependent occurrence rates of 23 carcinoma types, focusing on their age-dependent distribution patterns, the determinants of peak occurrence ages, and the significant difference between the two genders. According to the SEER reports, these cancer types have two types of age-dependent occurrence rate (ADOR) distributions, with most having a unimodal distribution and a few having a bimodal distribution. Our modeling analyses have revealed that (1) the first type can be naturally and simply explained using two age-dependent parameters: the total number of stem cell divisions in an organ from birth to the current age and the availability levels of bloodborne growth factors specifically needed by the cancer (sub)type, and (2) for the second type, the first peak is due to viral infection, while the second peak can be explained as in (1) for each cancer type. Further analyses indicate that (i) the iron level in an organ makes the difference between the male and female cancer occurrence rates, and (ii) the levels of sex hormones are the key determinants in the onset age of multiple cancer types. This analysis deepens our understanding of the dynamics of cancer evolution shared by diverse cancer types and provides new insights that are useful for cancer prevention and therapeutic strategies, thereby addressing critical gaps in the current paradigm of oncological research.

HOXD12 defines an age-related aggressive subtype of oligodendroglioma

Oligodendroglioma, IDH-mutant and 1p/19q-codeleted has highly variable outcomes that are strongly influenced by patient age. The distribution of oligodendroglioma age is non-Gaussian and reportedly bimodal, which motivated our investigation of age-associated molecular alterations that may drive poorer outcomes. We found that elevated HOXD12 expression was associated with both older patient age and shorter survival in the TCGA (FDR < 0.01, FDR = 1e-5) and the CGGA (p = 0.03, p < 1e-3). HOXD12 gene body hypermethylation was associated with older age, higher WHO grade, and shorter survival in the TCGA (p < 1e-6, p < 0.001, p < 1e-3) and with older age and higher WHO grade in Capper et al. (p < 0.002, p = 0.014). In the TCGA, HOXD12 gene body hypermethylation and elevated expression were independently prognostic of NOTCH1 and PIK3CA mutations, loss of 15q, MYC activation, and standard histopathological features. Single-nucleus RNA and ATAC sequencing data showed that HOXD12 activity was elevated in neoplastic tissue, particularly within cycling and OPC-like cells, and was associated with a stem-like phenotype. A pan-HOX DNA methylation analysis revealed an age and survival-associated HOX-high signature that was tightly associated with HOXD12 gene body methylation. Overall, HOXD12 expression and gene body hypermethylation were associated with an older, atypically aggressive subtype of oligodendroglioma.

Diffuse tumors: Molecular determinants shared by different cancer types

Most cancer types have both diffuse and non-diffuse subtypes, which have rather distinct morphologies, namely scattered tiny tumors vs. one solid tumor, and different levels of aggressiveness. However, the causes for forming such distinct subtypes remain largely unknown. Using the diffuse and non-diffuse gastric cancers (GCs) as the illustrative example, we present a computational study based on the transcriptomic data from the TCGA and GEO databases, to address the following questions: (i) What are the key molecular determinants that give rise to the distinct morphologies between diffuse and non-diffuse cancers? (ii) What are the main reasons for diffuse cancers to be generally more aggressive than non-diffuse ones of the same cancer type? (iii) What are the reasons for their distinct immunoactivities? And (iv) why do diffuse cancers on average tend to take place in younger patients? The study is conducted using the framework we have previously developed for elucidation of general drivers cancer formation and development. Our main discoveries are: (a) the level of (poly-) sialic acids deployed on the surface of cancer cells is a significant factor contributing to questions (i) and (ii); (b) poly-sialic acids synthesized by ST8SIA4 are the key to question (iii); and (c) the circulating growth factors specifically needed by the diffuse subtype dictate the answer to question (iv). All these predictions are substantiated by published experimental studies. Our further analyses on breast, prostate, lung, liver, and thyroid cancers reveal that these discoveries generally apply to the diffuse subtypes of these cancer types, hence indicating the generality of our discoveries.

The remodel of the "central dogma": a metabolomics interaction perspective

BACKGROUND

In 1957, Francis Crick drew a linear diagram on a blackboard. This diagram is often called the "central dogma." Subsequently, the relationships between different steps of the "central dogma" have been shown to be considerably complex, mostly because of the emerging world of small molecules. It is noteworthy that metabolites can be generated from the diet through gut microbiome metabolism, serve as substrates for epigenetic modifications, destabilize DNA quadruplexes, and follow Lamarckian inheritance. Small molecules were once considered the missing link in the "central dogma"; however, recently they have acquired a central role, and their general perception as downstream products has become reductionist. Metabolomics is a large-scale analysis of metabolites, and this emerging field has been shown to be the closest omics associated with the phenotype and concomitantly, the basis for all omics.

AIM OF REVIEW

Herein, we propose a broad updated perspective for the flux of information diagram centered in metabolomics, including the influence of other factors, such as epigenomics, diet, nutrition, and the gut- microbiome.

KEY SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS OF REVIEW

Metabolites are the beginning and the end of the flux of information.