Stem Cell Theory of Cancer: Rude Awakening or Bad Dream from Cancer Dormancy?

Unveiling the role of cellular dormancy in cancer progression and recurrence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cellular dormancy is a major contributor to cancer progression and recurrence. This review explores recent findings on the molecular mechanisms implicated in cancer dormancy and investigates potential strategies to improve therapeutic interventions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research on cancer dormancy reveals a complex and multifaceted phenomenon. Providing a latent reservoir of tumor cells with reduced proliferation and enhanced drug-tolerance, dormant cancer cells emerge from a clonally diverse population after therapy or at metastatic sites. These cells exhibit distinct transcriptional and epigenetic profiles, involving the downregulation of Myc and mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathways, and the induction of autophagy. Senescence traits, under the control of factors such as p53, also contribute significantly. The tumor microenvironment can either promote or prevent dormancy establishment, notably through the involvement of T and NK cells within the dormant tumor niche. Strategies to combat dormancy-related relapse include direct elimination of dormant tumor cells, sustaining dormancy to prolong survival, or awakening dormant cells to re-sensitize them to antiproliferative drugs.

SUMMARY

Improving our understanding of cancer dormancy at primary and secondary sites provides valuable insights into patient care and relapse prevention.

Stem Cell Theory of Cancer: Clinical Implications for Cellular Metabolism and Anti-Cancer Metabolomics

Although Otto Warburg may be right about the role of glycolysis versus OXPHOS in cancer metabolism, it remains unclear whether an altered metabolism is causative or correlative and is the main driver or a mere passenger in the pathogenesis of cancer. Currently, most of our successful treatments are designed to eliminate non-cancer stem cells (non-CSCs) such as differentiated cancer cells. When the treatments also happen to control CSCs or the stem-ness niche, it is often unintended, unexpected, or undetected for lack of a pertinent theory about the origin of cancer that clarifies whether cancer is a metabolic, genetic, or stem cell disease. Perhaps cellular context matters. After all, metabolic activity may be different in different cell types and their respective microenvironments-whether it is in a normal progenitor stem cell vs. progeny differentiated cell and whether it is in a malignant CSC vs. non-CSC. In this perspective, we re-examine different types of cellular metabolism, e.g., glycolytic vs. mitochondrial, of glucose, glutamine, arginine, and fatty acids in CSCs and non-CSCs. We revisit the Warburg effect, an obesity epidemic, the aspartame story, and a ketogenic diet. We propose that a pertinent scientific theory about the origin of cancer and of cancer metabolism influences the direction of cancer research as well as the design of drug versus therapy development in cancer care.

Cancer cell cycle heterogeneity as a critical determinant of therapeutic resistance

Intra-tumor heterogeneity is now arguably one of the most-studied topics in tumor biology, as it represents a major obstacle to effective cancer treatment. Since tumor cells are highly diverse at genetic, epigenetic, and phenotypic levels, intra-tumor heterogeneity can be assumed as an important contributing factor to the nullification of chemotherapeutic effects, and recurrence of the tumor. Based on the role of heterogeneous subpopulations of cancer cells with varying cell-cycle dynamics and behavior during cancer progression and treatment; herein, we aim to establish a comprehensive definition for adaptation of neoplastic cells against therapy. We discuss two parallel and yet distinct subpopulations of tumor cells that play pivotal roles in reducing the effects of chemotherapy: "resistant" and "tolerant" populations. Furthermore, this review also highlights the impact of the quiescent phase of the cell cycle as a survival mechanism for cancer cells. Beyond understanding the mechanisms underlying the quiescence, it provides an insightful perspective on cancer stem cells (CSCs) and their dual and intertwined functions based on their cell cycle state in response to treatment. Moreover, CSCs, epithelial-mesenchymal transformed cells, circulating tumor cells (CTCs), and disseminated tumor cells (DTCs), which are mostly in a quiescent state of the cell cycle are proved to have multiple biological links and can be implicated in our viewpoint of cell cycle heterogeneity in tumors. Overall, increasing our knowledge of cell cycle heterogeneity is a key to identifying new therapeutic solutions, and this emerging concept may provide us with new opportunities to prevent the dreadful cancer recurrence.

Stem Cell Origin of Cancer: Implications of Oncogenesis Recapitulating Embryogenesis in Cancer Care

From this perspective, we wonder about the clinical implications of oncology recapturing ontogeny in the contexts of neoantigens, tumor biomarkers, and cancer targets. We ponder about the biological ramifications of finding remnants of mini-organs and residuals of tiny embryos in some tumors. We reminisce about classical experiments showing that the embryonic microenvironment possesses antitumorigenic properties. Ironically, a stem-ness niche-in the wrong place at the wrong time-is also an onco-niche. We marvel at the paradox of TGF-beta both as a tumor suppressor and a tumor promoter. We query about the dualism of EMT as a stem-ness trait engaged in both normal development and abnormal disease states, including various cancers. It is uncanny that during fetal development, proto-oncogenes wax, while tumor-suppressor genes wane. Similarly, during cancer development, proto-oncogenes awaken, while tumor-suppressor genes slumber. Importantly, targeting stem-like pathways has therapeutic implications because stem-ness may be the true driver, if not engine, of the malignant process. Furthermore, anti-stem-like activity elicits anti-cancer effects for a variety of cancers because stem-ness features may be a universal property of cancer. When a fetus survives and thrives despite immune surveillance and all the restraints of nature and the constraints of its niche, it is a perfect baby. Similarly, when a neoplasm survives and thrives in an otherwise healthy and immune-competent host, is it a perfect tumor? Therefore, a pertinent narrative of cancer depends on a proper perspective of cancer. If malignant cells are derived from stem cells, and both cells are intrinsically RB1 negative and TP53 null, do the absence of RB1 and loss of TP53 really matter in this whole narrative and an entirely different perspective of cancer?

Chondrosarcoma Resistance to Radiation Therapy: Origins and Potential Therapeutic Solutions

Chondrosarcoma is a malignant cartilaginous tumor that is particularly chemoresistant and radioresistant to X-rays. The first line of treatment is surgery, though this is almost impossible in some specific locations. Such resistances can be explained by the particular composition of the tumor, which develops within a dense cartilaginous matrix, producing a resistant area where the oxygen tension is very low. This microenvironment forces the cells to adapt and dedifferentiate into cancer stem cells, which are described to be more resistant to conventional treatments. One of the main avenues considered to treat this type of tumor is hadrontherapy, in particular for its ballistic properties but also its greater biological effectiveness against tumor cells. In this review, we describe the different forms of chondrosarcoma resistance and how hadrontherapy, combined with other treatments involving targeted inhibitors, could help to better treat high-grade chondrosarcoma.

Counteracting Immunosuppression in the Tumor Microenvironment by Oncolytic Newcastle Disease Virus and Cellular Immunotherapy

An apparent paradox exists between the evidence for spontaneous systemic T cell- mediated anti-tumor immune responses in cancer patients, observed particularly in their bone marrow, and local tumor growth in the periphery. This phenomenon, known as "concomitant immunity" suggests that the local tumor and its tumor microenvironment (TME) prevent systemic antitumor immunity to become effective. Oncolytic Newcastle disease virus (NDV), an agent with inherent anti-neoplastic and immune stimulatory properties, is capable of breaking therapy resistance and immunosuppression. This review updates latest information about immunosuppression by the TME and discusses mechanisms of how oncolytic viruses, in particular NDV, and cellular immunotherapy can counteract the immunosuppressive effect of the TME. With regard to cellular immunotherapy, the review presents pre-clinical studies of post-operative active-specific immunotherapy and of adoptive T cell-mediated therapy in immunocompetent mice. Memory T cell (MTC) transfer in tumor challenged T cell-deficient nu/nu mice demonstrates longevity and functionality of these cells. Graft-versus-leukemia (GvL) studies in mice demonstrate complete remission of late-stage disease including metastases and cachexia. T cell based immunotherapy studies with human cells in human tumor xenotransplanted NOD/SCID mice demonstrate superiority of bone marrow-derived as compared to blood-derived MTCs. Results from clinical studies presented include vaccination studies using two different types of NDV-modified cancer vaccine and a pilot adoptive T-cell mediated therapy study using re-activated bone marrow-derived cancer-reactive MTCs. As an example for what can be expected from clinical immunotherapy against tumors with an immunosuppressive TME, results from vaccination studies are presented from the aggressive brain tumor glioblastoma multiforme. The last decades of basic research in virology, oncology and immunology can be considered as a success story. Based on discoveries of these research areas, translational research and clinical studies have changed the way of treatment of cancer by introducing and including immunotherapy.

Stem Cell Theory of Cancer: Implications for Translational Research from Bedside to Bench

A stem cell theory of cancer considers genetic makeup in the proper cellular context. It is a unified theory of cancer that unites the genome with the epigenome, links the intracellular with the extracellular, and connects the cellular constituents and compartments with the microenvironment. Although it allies with genomic medicine, it is better aligned with integrated medicine. In this perspective, we focus on translational research in cancer care. We expose some intrinsic fallacies in translational research when it relates to the basic principles of the scientific method in the care of patients with genomic medicine versus integrated medicine. We postulate that genomic medicine may be at the root of many failed efforts in drug development and data reproducibility. We propose an alternate heuristic approach that may expedite the development of safe and effective treatments and minimize the generation of unproductive pharmaceutical products and nonreproducible experimental results. Importantly, a heuristic approach emphasizes the role of a pertinent scientific theory and distinguishes therapy development from drug development, such that we discover not only useful drugs but also better ways to use them in order to optimize patient care and maximize clinical outcomes.

Very Late Recurrence in Germ Cell Tumor of the Testis: Lessons and Implications

Background. Very late recurrence (LR), i.e., >5 years after initial presentation, occurs in about 1% of patients with germ cell tumors of the testis (TGCT) and is associated with poor prognosis. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center who developed LR > 5 years after their initial diagnosis of TGCT. Results. We identified 25 patients who developed LR between July 2007 and August 2020. The median age at the time of LR was 46 years (range, 29−61). Pathology of LR: somatic transformation to carcinoma or sarcoma—11, nonseminoma with yolk sac tumor or teratoma—11, nonseminoma without yolk sac tumor or teratoma—2, not available—1. With a median follow-up of 3.5 years, 68% of patients are alive 3 years after LR. Patients with prior post-chemotherapy consolidation surgery do not have statistically significant longer survival compared to patients who did not receive post-chemotherapy consolidation surgery, 83.3% vs. 60.8% at 3 years, respectively, p = 0.50. Conclusions. Patients with LR > 5 years tend to harbor nonseminoma (with yolk sac tumor and or teratoma). Among these patients, a majority who did not undergo surgery to remove residual disease after chemotherapy developed somatic transformation and succumbed to their LR.