The other side of the coin: the tumor-suppressive aspect of oncogenes and the oncogenic aspect of tumor-suppressive genes, such as those along the CCND-CDK4/6-RB axis

Characterization of tumor microenvironment infiltration and therapeutic responses of cell cycle-related genes' signature in breast cancer

BACKGROUND

It is unknown how the cell cycle plays a role in breast cancer (BC). This study aimed to establish a clinically applicable predictive model to predict the therapeutic responses and overall survival in BC patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cell cycle-related genes (CCGs) were identified within the Cancer Genome Atlas cohort (n is equal to 1001) and the Gene Expression Omnibus cohort (n is equal to 3265). An analysis of univariate and multivariate Cox was then conducted to develop a nomogram based on CCGs. After validating the nomogram, risk cohort stratification was established and the predictive value was examined. Finally, immune cell infiltration and therapeutic responses were analysed.

RESULTS

Based on 15 CCGs, 4 prognostic predictors were identified and entered into the nomogram. According to the curves of calibration, the estimated and observed value of the nomogram is in optimal agreement. Subsequently, stratification into two risk cohorts showed that the predictive value, immune cell infiltration and overall survival were better among patients with low risk. Immune checkpoint expression in patients with BC at higher risk was downregulated. Furthermore, the results of the study revealed that doxorubicin, paclitaxel, docetaxel, cisplatin and vinorelbine all had higher IC50 values in patients with high-risk BC.

CONCLUSION

The nomogram based on CCG could assess tumour immune micro-environment regulation and therapeutic responses of immunotherapy in BC. Moreover, it may provide novel information on the control of immune micro-environment infiltration in BC and aid in the development of targeted immunotherapy.

KIF14 affects cell cycle arrest and cell viability in cervical cancer by regulating the p27Kip1 pathway

Background

Cervical cancer is a kind of malignant gynecological tumor. The first choice for treating cervical cancer is still a combination of surgery and chemoradiotherapy, but the 5-year survival rate remains poor. Therefore, researchers are trying to find new ways to diagnose and treat cervical cancer early.

Methods

The expression level of KIF14 in cells and tissues was determined via qRT–PCR. The ability of the cells to proliferate, migrate, and invade was examined using CCK-8 assay kits, colony formation assays, and Transwell chambers. The expression levels of Cyclin D1, Cyclin B1, p21, and p27 were also detected using western blot assays.

Results

The results suggested that p27 is a key regulatory factor in the KIF14-mediated regulation of the cell cycle. In addition, KIF14 knockdown promotes malignancy in cervical cancer cells by inhibiting p27 degradation, resulting in cell cycle arrest.

Conclusions

KIF14 is an oncogene in cervical cancer, and knocking down KIF14 causes cell cycle arrest by inhibiting p27 degradation, thus affecting cell viability, proliferation, and migration. These results provide a potential therapeutic target for cervical cancer.

Expression of Genomic Instability-Related Molecules: Cyclin F, RRM2 and SPDL1 and Their Prognostic Significance in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

In the present study, we aimed to assess the selected components of cell cycle machinery, checkpoint, DNA repair, and synthesis, namely RRM2, cyclin F, and SPDL1 in pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PAC) by in-house immunohistochemistry (IHC) and bioinformatic analysis of public datasets, in terms of expression, correlation with clinicopathological parameters, and patient survival. Sixty eight patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) were included in our cohort study, and IHC was performed on tissue macroarrays. RNA-Seq-based transcriptome data for 177 PACs were retrieved from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). We found cyclin F, RRM2, and SPDL1 to be overexpressed at both protein and mRNA levels in tumor tissues compared to respective controls. Based on TCGA dataset, we have demonstrated that CCNF, RRM2, and SPDL1 are potent independent prognostic markers for poor overall survival, both by themselves and even more in combination with each other. Furthermore, high CCNF mRNA expression was associated with features of cancer progression. By contrast, overexpression of cyclin F or SPDL1 proteins denoted a good prognosis in PDAC patients; however, in the case of the former protein, the results did not reach statistical significance. Specifically, high levels of SPDL1 protein emerged as the most powerful independent prognostic factor associated with a better outcome. If validated, the CCNF/RRM2/SPDL1 three-gene panel developed in this study, as well as SPDL1 protein, may provide significant clinical implications for the prognosis prediction of PAC patients.

Combined RNA/tissue profiling identifies novel Cancer/testis genes

Cancer/Testis (CT) genes are induced in germ cells, repressed in somatic cells, and derepressed in somatic tumors, where these genes can contribute to cancer progression. CT gene identification requires data obtained using standardized protocols and technologies. This is a challenge because data for germ cells, gonads, normal somatic tissues, and a wide range of cancer samples stem from multiple sources and were generated over substantial periods of time. We carried out a GeneChip‐based RNA profiling analysis using our own data for testis and enriched germ cells, data for somatic cancers from the Expression Project for Oncology, and data for normal somatic tissues from the Gene Omnibus Repository. We identified 478 candidate loci that include known CT genes, numerous genes associated with oncogenic processes, and novel candidates that are not referenced in the Cancer/Testis Database (www.cta.lncc.br). We complemented RNA expression data at the protein level for SPESP1, GALNTL5, PDCL2, and C11orf42 using cancer tissue microarrays covering malignant tumors of breast, uterus, thyroid, and kidney, as well as published RNA profiling and immunohistochemical data provided by the Human Protein Atlas (www.proteinatlas.org). We report that combined RNA/tissue profiling identifies novel CT genes that may be of clinical interest as therapeutical targets or biomarkers. Our findings also highlight the challenges of detecting truly germ cell‐specific mRNAs and the proteins they encode in highly heterogenous testicular, somatic, and tumor tissues.

What deubiquitinating enzymes, oncogenes, and tumor suppressors actually do: Are current assumptions supported by patient outcomes?

Context can determine whether a given gene acts as an oncogene or a tumor suppressor. Deubiquitinating enzymes (DUBs) regulate the stability of many components of the pathways dictating cell fate so it would be expected that alterations in the levels or activity of these enzymes may have oncogenic or tumor suppressive consequences. In the current review we survey publications reporting that genes encoding DUBs are oncogenes or tumor suppressors. For many DUBs both claims have been made. For such "double agents," the effects of gain or loss of function will depend on the overall status of a complex of molecular signaling networks subject to extensive crosstalk. As the TGF-β paradox makes clear context is critical in cell fate decisions, and the disconnect between experimental findings and patient survival outcomes can in part be attributed to disparities between culture conditions and the microenvironment in vivo. Convincing claims for oncogene or tumor suppressor roles require the documentation of gene alterations in patient samples; survival curves are alone inadequate.

Functional genomics of AP-2α and AP-2γ in cancers: in silico study

BACKGROUND

Among all causes of death, cancer is the most prevalent and is only outpaced by cardiovascular diseases. Molecular theory of carcinogenesis states that apoptosis and proliferation are regulated by groups of tumor suppressors or oncogenes. Transcription factors are example of proteins comprising representatives of both cancer-related groups. Exemplary family of transcription factors which exhibits dualism of function is Activating enhancer-binding Protein 2 (AP-2). Scientific reports concerning their function in carcinogenesis depend on particular family member and/or tumor type which proves the issue to be unsolved. Therefore, the present study examines role of the best-described AP-2 representatives, AP-2α and AP-2γ, through ontological analysis of their target genes and investigation what processes are differentially regulated in 21 cancers using samples deposited in Genomic Data Analysis Center (GDAC) Firehose.

METHODS

Expression data with clinical annotation was collected from TCGA-dedicated repository GDAC Firehose. Transcription factor targets were obtained from Gene Transcription Regulation Database (GTRD), TRANScription FACtor database (TRANSFAC) and Transcriptional Regulatory Relationships Unraveled by Sentence-based Text mining (TRRUST). Monocle3 R package was used for global samples profiling while Protein ANalysis THrough Evolutionary Relationships (PANTHER) tool was used to perform gene ontology analysis.

RESULTS

With RNA-seq data and Monocle3 or PANTHER tools we outlined differences in many processes and signaling pathways, separating tumor from normal tissues or tumors from each other. Unexpectedly, a number of alterations in basal-like breast cancer were identified that distinguished it from other subtypes, which could bring future clinical benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that while the AP-2α/γ role remains ambiguous, their activity is based on processes that underlie the cancer hallmarks and their expression could have potential in diagnosis of selected tumors.

Double Agent: SPDEF Gene with Both Oncogenic and Tumor-Suppressor Functions in Breast Cancer

The dichotomy of cancer-regulatory genes into “oncogenes (OCGs)” and “tumor-suppressor genes (TSGs)” has greatly helped us in learning molecular details of tumor biology. SPDEF, known as the prostate-derived ETS factor, is reported to play a pivotal role in normal cell development and survival, which has also been endowed with dual characteristics in cancers. Breast cancer (BC) is a highly heterogeneous disease which becomes the leading reason for cancer-related fatality among women worldwide. The involvement of SPDEF in many aspects of BC has been postulated, whereas the mechanism governing the regulation of the pro- and anti-oncogenic activities of SPDEF in BC state remains poorly defined. In this review, we summarized SPDEF as the double agent involving in expression profiles, the regulatory mechanism in BC progression, as well as the role in diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of BC. The understanding of SPDEF duality has contributed to gain insight into the tumor biology and also add a new dimension to the new therapy targets for BC.

Evidence for immortality and autonomy in animal cancer models is often not provided, which causes confusion on key issues of cancer biology

Modern research into carcinogenesis has undergone three phases. Surgeons and pathologists started the first phase roughly 250 years ago, establishing morphological traits of tumors for pathologic diagnosis, and setting immortality and autonomy as indispensable criteria for neoplasms. A century ago, medical doctors, biologists and chemists started to enhance "experimental cancer research" by establishing many animal models of chemical-induced carcinogenesis for studies of cellular mechanisms. In this second phase, the two-hit theory and stepwise carcinogenesis of "initiation-promotion" or "initiation-promotion-progression" were established, with an illustrious finding that outgrowths induced in animals depend on the inducers, and thus are not authentically neoplastic, until late stages. The last 40 years are the third incarnation, molecular biologists have gradually dominated the carcinogenesis research fraternity and have established numerous genetically-modified animal models of carcinogenesis. However, evidence has not been provided for immortality and autonomy of the lesions from most of these models. Probably, many lesions had already been collected from animals for analyses of molecular mechanisms of "cancer" before the lesions became autonomous. We herein review the monumental work of many predecessors to reinforce that evidence for immortality and autonomy is essential for confirming a neoplastic nature. We extrapolate that immortality and autonomy are established early during sporadic human carcinogenesis, unlike the late establishment in most animal models. It is imperative to resume many forerunners' work by determining the genetic bases for initiation, promotion and progression, the genetic bases for immortality and autonomy, and which animal models are, in fact, good for identifying such genetic bases.

MicroRNA Assisted Gene Regulation in Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second-leading cause of cancer death and a major public health problem. Nearly 80% CRC cases are diagnosed after the disease have metastasized and are often too advanced for treatment. Small non-coding RNA guides argonaute protein to their specific target for regulation as the sole of RNA induced silencing complex for gene silencing. These non-coding RNA for example microRNA, are thought to play a key role in affecting the efficiency of gene regulation in cancer, especially CRC. Understanding the mechanism at the molecular level could lead to improved diagnosis, treatment, and management decisions for CRC. The study aimed to predict the molecular mechanism of gene regulation based microRNA-mRNA duplex as a lead in the silencing mechanism. Five candidate microRNAs were identified through the in silico approach. The MicroRNA target prediction and subsequent correlation, and prioritization were performed using miRTarBase, gbCRC and CoReCG, and DAVID databases respectively. Protein selection and preparation were carried out using PDB and Schrödinger suits. The molecular docking analysis was performed using PATCHDOCK webserver and visualized by discovery studio visualizer. The results of the study reveal that the candidate microRNAs have strong binding affinity towards their targets suggesting a crucial factor in the silencing mechanism. Furthermore, the molecular docking of the receptor to both the microRNA and microRNA-mRNA duplex were analyzed computationally to understand their interaction at the molecular level. Conclusively, the study provides an explanation for understanding the microRNAs-based gene regulation (silencing mechanism) in CRC.

Prognostic significance of mutated genes in megakaryocytic disorders

Megakaryopoiesis is a process during which platelets that play a major role in hemostasis are produced due to differentiation and maturation of megakaryocytic precursors. Several genes, including oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes, play a role in the regulation of this process. This study was conducted to investigate the oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes as well as their mutations during the megakaryopoiesis process, which can lead to megakaryocytic disorders. Relevant literature was identified by a PubMed search (1998-2019) of English language papers using the terms ‘Megakaryopoiesis’, ‘Mutation’, ‘oncogenes’, and ‘Tumor Suppressor’. According to investigations, several mutations occur in the genes implicated in megakaryopoiesis, which abnormally induce or inhibit megakaryocyte production, differentiation, and maturation, leading to platelet disorders. GATA-1 is one of the important genes in megakaryopoiesis and its mutations can be considered among the factors involved in the incidence of these disorders. Considering the essential role of these genes (such as GATA- 1) in megakaryopoiesis and the involvement of their mutations in platelet disorders, study and examination of these changes can be a positive step in the diagnosis and prognosis of these diseases.

The biological characteristics of transcription factors AP-2α and AP-2γ and their importance in various types of cancers

The Activator Protein 2 (AP-2) transcription factor (TF) family is vital for the regulation of gene expression during early development as well as carcinogenesis process. The review focusses on the AP-2α and AP-2γ proteins and their dualistic regulation of gene expression in the process of carcinogenesis. Both AP-2α and AP-2γ influence a wide range of physiological or pathological processes by regulating different pathways and interacting with diverse molecules, i.e. other proteins, long non-coding RNAs (lncRNA) or miRNAs. This review summarizes the newest information about the biology of two, AP-2α and AP-2γ, TFs in the carcinogenesis process. We emphasize that these two proteins could have either oncogenic or suppressive characteristics depending on the type of cancer tissue or their interaction with specific molecules. They have also been found to contribute to resistance and sensitivity to chemotherapy in oncological patients. A better understanding of molecular network of AP-2 factors and other molecules may clarify the atypical molecular mechanisms occurring during carcinogenesis, and may assist in the recognition of new diagnostic biomarkers.

Spontaneous Cancers, But Not Many Induced Ones in Animals, Resemble Semi-New Organisms that Possess a Unique Programmed Cell Death Mode Different from Apoptosis, Senescent Death, Necrosis and Stress-Induced Cell Death

There are four basic cell death modes in animals, i.e. physiological senescent death (SD) and apoptosis as well as pathological necrosis and stress-induced cell death (SICD). There have been numerous publications describing “apoptosis” in cancer, mostly focused on killing cancer cells using radio- or chemo-therapy, with few on exploring how cancer cells die naturally without such treatments. Spontaneous benign or malignant neoplasms are immortal and autonomous, but they still retain some allegiance to their parental tissue or organ and thus are still somewhat controlled by the patient's body. Because of these properties of immortality, semi-autonomy, and semi-allegiance to the patient's body, spontaneous tumors have no redundant cells and resemble “semi-new organisms” parasitizing the patients, becoming a unique tissue type possessing a hitherto unannotated cell death mode besides SD, apoptosis, necrosis and SICD. Particularly, apoptosis aims to expunge redundant cells, whereas this new mode does not. In contrast to spontaneous tumors, many histologically malignant tumors induced in experimental animals, before they reach an advanced stage, regress after withdrawal of the inducer. This mortal and non-autonomous nature disqualifies these animal lesions as authentic neoplasms and as semi-new organisms but makes them a good tissue type for apoptosis studies. Ruminating over cell death in spontaneous cancers and many inauthentic tumors induced in animals from these new slants makes us realize that “whether cancer cells undergo apoptosis” is not an easy question with a simple answer. Our answer is that cancer cells have an uncharacterized programmed cell death mode, which is not apoptosis.

Evaluating the Remote Control of Programmed Cell Death, with or without a Compensatory Cell Proliferation

Organisms and their different component levels, whether organelle, cellular or other, come by birth and go by death, and the deaths are often balanced by new births. Evolution on the one hand has built demise program(s) in cells of organisms but on the other hand has established external controls on the program(s). For instance, evolution has established death program(s) in animal cells so that the cells can, when it is needed, commit apoptosis or senescent death (SD) in physiological situations and stress-induced cell death (SICD) in pathological situations. However, these programmed cell deaths are not predominantly regulated by the cells that do the dying but, instead, are controlled externally and remotely by the cells' superior(s), i.e. their host tissue or organ or even the animal's body. Currently, it is still unclear whether a cell has only one death program or has several programs respectively controlling SD, apoptosis and SICD. In animals, apoptosis exterminates, in a physiological manner, healthy but no-longer needed cells to avoid cell redundancy, whereas suicidal SD and SICD, like homicidal necrosis, terminate ill but useful cells, which may be followed by regeneration of the live cells and by scar formation to heal the damaged organ or tissue. Therefore, “who dies” clearly differentiates apoptosis from SD, SICD and necrosis. In animals, apoptosis can occur only in those cell types that retain a lifelong ability of proliferation and never occurs in those cell types that can no longer replicate in adulthood. In cancer cells, SICD is strengthened, apoptosis is dramatically weakened while SD has been lost. Most published studies professed to be about apoptosis are actually about SICD, which has four basic and well-articulated pathways involving caspases or involving pathological alterations in the mitochondria, endoplasmic reticula, or lysosomes.

Integrated Oncogenomic Profiling of Copy Numbers and Gene Expression in Lung Adenocarcinomas without EGFR Mutations or ALK Fusion

Targeted therapies based on EGFR mutations or on the ALK fusion oncogene have become the standard treatment for certain patients with lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD). However, most LUAD patients have no EGFR mutation or ALK fusion, and their oncogenetic alterations remain to be characterized. Here we conducted an integrated analysis of public datasets to assess the genomic alterations of 23 highly lung cancer-associated genes. The copy numbers of these genes were measured in ten micro-dissected, paired tumors and normal lung tissues of LUAD patients without EGFR mutations or ALK fusion. The copy numbers of PTEN, RB1, HMGA2, and PTPRD were lower in tumors compared with those for normal tissues. Although there were reduced mRNA levels of PTEN and RB1 in tumors, there was a correlation between copy number and expression only for PTEN. In addition, analysis of the copy number alterations of these 23 genes revealed correlations between EMSY/CCND1, EMSY/PIK3CA, CCND1/CDKN2A, and CCND1/PIK3CA. Our exploration of integrated copy number and gene expression analysis gives priority to the PTEN-PIK3CA and RB1-CCND1 pathways in developing therapeutic strategies for LUAD patients without EGFR mutations or ALK fusion.

A mononucleotide repeat in PRRT2 is an important, frequent target of mismatch repair deficiency in cancer

The DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system corrects DNA replication mismatches thereby contributing to the maintenance of genomic stability. MMR deficiency has been observed in prostate cancer but its impact on the genomic landscape of these tumours is not known. In order to identify MMR associated mutations in prostate cancer we have performed whole genome sequencing of the MMR deficient PC346C prostate cancer cell line. We detected a total of 1196 mutations in PC346C which was 1.5-fold higher compared to a MMR proficient prostate cancer sample (G089). Of all different mutation classes, frameshifts in mononucleotide repeat (MNR) sequences were significantly enriched in the PC346C sample. As a result, a selection of genes with frameshift mutations in MNR was further assessed regarding its mutational status in a comprehensive panel of prostate, ovarian, endometrial and colorectal cancer cell lines. We identified PRRT2 and DAB2IP to be frequently mutated in MMR deficient cell lines, colorectal and endometrial cancer patient samples. Further characterization of PRRT2 revealed an important role of this gene in cancer biology. Both normal prostate cell lines and a colorectal cancer cell line showed increased proliferation, migration and invasion when expressing the mutated form of PRRT2 (ΔPRRT2). The wild-type PRRT2 (PRRT2^wt) had an inhibitory effect in proliferation, consistent with the low expression level of PRRT2 in cancer versus normal prostate samples.

There are only four basic modes of cell death, although there are many ad-hoc variants adapted to different situations

There have been enough cell death modes delineated in the biomedical literature to befuddle all cell death researchers. Mulling over cell death from the viewpoints of the host tissue or organ and of the host animal, we construe that there should be only two physiological cell death modes, i.e. apoptosis and senescent death (SD), as well as two pathological modes, i.e. necrosis and stress-induced cell death (SICD). Other death modes described in the literature are ad-hoc variants or coalescences of some of these four basic ones in different physiological or pathological situations. SD, SICD and necrosis kill useful cells and will thus trigger regeneration, wound healing and probably also scar formation. SICD and necrosis will likely instigate inflammation as well. Apoptosis occurs as a mechanism to purge no-longer useful cells from a tissue via phagocytosis by cells with phagocytic ability that are collectively tagged by us as scavengers, including macrophages; therefore apoptosis is not followed by regeneration and inflammation. The answer for the question of “who dies” clearly differentiates apoptosis from SD, SICD and necrosis, despite other similarities and disparities among the four demise modes. Apoptosis cannot occur in cell lines in vitro, because cell lines are immortalized by reprogramming the death program of the parental cells, because in culture there lack scavengers and complex communications among different cell types, and because culture condition is a stress to the cells. Several issues of cell death that remain enigmatic to us are also described for peers to deliberate and debate.

Transcriptional-Readthrough RNAs Reflect the Phenomenon of "A Gene Contains Gene(s)" or "Gene(s) within a Gene" in the Human Genome, and Thus Are Not Chimeric RNAs

Tens of thousands of chimeric RNAs, i.e., RNAs with sequences of two genes, have been identified in human cells. Most of them are formed by two neighboring genes on the same chromosome and are considered to be derived via transcriptional readthrough, but a true readthrough event still awaits more evidence and trans-splicing that joins two transcripts together remains as a possible mechanism. We regard those genomic loci that are transcriptionally read through as unannotated genes, because their transcriptional and posttranscriptional regulations are the same as those of already-annotated genes, including fusion genes formed due to genetic alterations. Therefore, readthrough RNAs and fusion-gene-derived RNAs are not chimeras. Only those two-gene RNAs formed at the RNA level, likely via trans-splicing, without corresponding genes as genomic parents, should be regarded as authentic chimeric RNAs. However, since in human cells, procedural and mechanistic details of trans-splicing have never been disclosed, we doubt the existence of trans-splicing. Therefore, there are probably no authentic chimeras in humans, after readthrough and fusion-gene derived RNAs are all put back into the group of ordinary RNAs. Therefore, it should be further determined whether in human cells all two-neighboring-gene RNAs are derived from transcriptional readthrough and whether trans-splicing truly exists.

Revisiting the hallmarks of cancer

The hallmarks of cancer described by Hanahan and Weinberg have proved seminal in our understanding of cancer's common traits and in rational drug design. Not free of critique and with understanding of different aspects of tumorigenesis coming into clearer focus in the recent years, we attempt to draw a more organized and updated picture of the cancer hallmarks. We define seven hallmarks of cancer: selective growth and proliferative advantage, altered stress response favoring overall survival, vascularization, invasion and metastasis, metabolic rewiring, an abetting microenvironment, and immune modulation, while highlighting some considerations for the future of the field.

Protein multiplicity can lead to misconduct in western blotting and misinterpretation of immunohistochemical staining results, creating much conflicting data

Western blotting (WB) and immunohistochemical staining (IHC) are common techniques for determining tissue protein expression. Both techniques require a primary antibody specific for the protein in question. WB data is band(s) on a membrane while IHC result is a staining on a tissue section. Most human genes are known to produce multiple protein isoforms; in agreement with that, multiple bands are often found on the WB membrane. However, a common but unspoken practice in WB is to cut away the extra band(s) and present for publication only the band of interest, which implies to the readers that only one form of protein is expressed and thus the data interpretation is straightforward. Similarly, few IHC studies discuss whether the antibody used is isoform-specific and whether the positive staining is derived from only one isoform. Currently, there is no reliable technique to determine the isoform-specificity of an antibody, especially for IHC. Therefore, cutting away extra band(s) on the membrane usually is a form of misconduct in WB, and a positive staining in IHC only indicates the presence of protein product(s) of the to-be-interrogated gene, and not necessarily the presence of the isoform of interest. We suggest that data of WB and IHC involving only one antibody should not be published and that relevant reports should discuss whether there may be protein multiplicity and whether the antibody used is isoform-specific. Hopefully, techniques will soon emerge that allow determination of not only the presence of protein products of genes but also the isoforms expressed.

The well-accepted notion that gene amplification contributes to increased expression still remains, after all these years, a reasonable but unproven assumption

“Gene amplification causes overexpression” is a longstanding and well-accepted concept in cancer genetics. However, raking the whole literature, we find only statistical analyses showing a positive correlation between gene copy number and expression level, but do not find convincing experimental corroboration for this notion, for most of the amplified oncogenes in cancers. Since an association does not need to be an actual causal relation, in our opinion, this widespread notion still remains a reasonable but unproven assumption awaiting experimental verification.

Paradoxical roles of cyclin D1 in DNA stability

Maintenance of DNA integrity is vital for all of the living organisms. Consequence of DNA damaging ranges from, introducing harmless synonymous mutations, to causing disease-associated mutations, genome instability, and cell death. A cell cycle protein cyclin D1 is an established cancer-driving protein. However, contribution of cyclin D1 to cancer formation and cancer survival is not entirely known. In cancer tissues, overexpression of cyclin D1 is associated with both cancer genome instability, and resistance to DNA-damaging cancer drugs. Emerging evidence indicated that cyclin D1 may play novel direct roles in regulating DNA repair. Here we provide an insight how cyclin D1 expression may contribute to DNA repair and chromosome instability, and how these functions may facilitate cancer formation, and drug resistance.

Learning about the Importance of Mutation Prevention from Curable Cancers and Benign Tumors

Some cancers can be cured by chemotherapy or radiotherapy, presumably because they are derived from those cell types that not only can die easily but also have already been equipped with mobility and adaptability, which would later allow the cancers to metastasize without the acquisition of additional mutations. From a viewpoint of biological dispersal, invasive and metastatic cells may, among other possibilities, have been initial losers in the competition for resources with other cancer cells in the same primary tumor and thus have had to look for new habitats in order to survive. If this is really the case, manipulation of their ecosystems, such as by slightly ameliorating their hardship, may prevent metastasis. Since new mutations may occur, especially during and after therapy, to drive progression of cancer cells to metastasis and therapy-resistance, preventing new mutations from occurring should be a key principle for the development of new anticancer drugs. Such new drugs should be able to kill cancer cells very quickly without leaving the surviving cells enough time to develop new mutations and select resistant or metastatic clones. This principle questions the traditional use and the future development of genotoxic drugs for cancer therapy.

METTL13 is downregulated in bladder carcinoma and suppresses cell proliferation, migration and invasion

The incidence of bladder cancer has increased in the last few decades, thus novel markers for early diagnosis and more efficacious treatment are urgently needed. It found that METTTL13 protein is aberrant expression in variety of human cancers and METTL13 was involved in oncogenic pathways. However, the role of METTL13 has been unexplored in bladder cancer to date. Here, expression of METTL13 was lower in bladder cancer tissue samples and cancer cell lines than in normal bladder tissue and cell lines. METTL13 was downregulated in the late stages of the disease and was maintained at low level throughout the tumor progression process based on tumor node metastasis (TNM) staging. Further research suggested that METTL13 negatively regulates cell proliferation in bladder cancer and reinstates G1/S checkpoint via the coordinated downregulation of CDK6, CDK4 and CCND1, decreased phosphorylation of Rb and subsequent delayed cell cycle progression. Moreover, METTL13-dependent inhibition of bladder cancer cell migration and invasion is mediated by downregulation of FAK (Focal adhesion kinase) phosphorylation, AKT (v-akt murine thymoma viral oncogene) phosphorylation, β-catenin expression and MMP-9 expression. These integrated efforts have identified METTL13 as a tumor suppressor and might provide promising approaches for bladder cancer treatment and prevention.

mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus and MEK1/2 inhibitor U0126 promote chromosomal instability and cell type-dependent phenotype changes of glioblastoma cells

The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) and the RAF/mitogen-activated and extracellular signal-regulated kinase kinase (MEK)/extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) signaling pathways are frequently deregulated in cancer. Temsirolimus (TEM) and its primary active metabolite rapamycin allosterically block mTOR complex 1 substrate recruitment. The context-/experimental setup-dependent opposite effects of rapamycin on the multiple centrosome formation, aneuploidy, DNA damage/repair, proliferation, and invasion were reported. Similarly, the context-dependent either tumor-promoting or suppressing effects of RAF-MEK-ERK pathway and its inhibitors were demonstrated. Drug treatment-mediated stress may promote chromosomal instability (CIN), accelerating changes in the genomic landscape and phenotype diversity. Here, we characterized the genomic and phenotypic changes of U251 and T98G glioblastoma cell lines long-term treated with TEM or U0126, an inhibitor of MEK1/2. TEM significantly increased clonal and non-clonal chromosome aberrations. Both TEM and U0126 affected copy number alterations (CNAs) pattern. A proliferation rate of U251TEM and U251U0126 cells was lower and higher, respectively, than control cells. Colony formation efficiency of U251TEM significantly decreased, whereas U251U0126 did not change. U251TEM and U251U0126 cells decreased migration. In contrast, T98GTEM and T98GU0126 cells did not change proliferation, colony formation efficiency, and migration. Changes in the sensitivity of inhibitor-treated cells to the reduction of the glucose concentration were observed. Our results suggest that CIN and adaptive reprogramming of signal transduction pathways may be responsible for the cell type-dependent phenotype changes of long-term TEM- or U0126-treated tumor cells.

To Know How a Gene Works, We Need to Redefine It First but then, More Importantly, to Let the Cell Itself Decide How to Transcribe and Process Its RNAs

Recent genomic and ribonomic research reveals that our genome produces a stupendous amount of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), including antisense RNAs, and that many genes contain other gene(s) in their introns. Since ncRNAs either regulate the transcription, translation or stability of mRNAs or directly exert cellular functions, they should be regarded as the fourth category of RNAs, after ribosomal, messenger and transfer RNAs. These and other research advances challenge the current concept of gene and raise a question as to how we should redefine gene. We can either consider each tiny part of the classically-defined gene, such as each mRNA variant, as a “gene”, or, alternatively and oppositely, regard a whole genomic locus as a “gene” that may contain intron-embedded genes and produce different types of RNAs and proteins. Each of the two ways to redefine gene not only has its strengths and weaknesses but also has its particular concern on the methodology for the determination of the gene's function: Ectopic expression of complementary DNA (cDNA) in cells has in the past decades provided us with great deal of detail about the functions of individual mRNA variants, and will make the data less conflicting with each other if just a small part of a classically-defined gene is considered as a “gene”. On the other hand, genomic DNA (gDNA) will better help us in understanding the collective function of a genomic locus. In our opinion, we need to be more cautious in the use of cDNA and in the explanation of data resulting from cDNA, and, instead, should make delivery of gDNA into cells routine in determination of genes' functions, although this demands some technology renovation.

Protecting the normal in order to better kill the cancer

Chemotherapy is the only option for oncologists when a cancer has widely spread to different body sites. However, almost all currently available chemotherapeutic drugs will eventually encounter resistance after their initial positive effect, mainly because cancer cells develop genetic alterations, collectively coined herein as mutations, to adapt to the therapy. Some patients may still respond to a second chemo drug, but few cases respond to a third one. Since it takes time for cancer cells to develop new mutations and then select those life-sustaining ones via clonal expansion, "run against time for mutations to emerge" should be a crucial principle for treatment of those currently incurable cancers. Since cancer cells constantly change to adapt to the therapy whereas normal cells are stable, it may be a better strategy to shift our focus from killing cancer cells per se to protecting normal cells from chemotherapeutic toxicity. This new strategy requires the development of new drugs that are nongenotoxic and can quickly, in just hours or days, kill cancer cells without leaving the still-alive cells with time to develop mutations, and that should have their toxicities confined to only one or few organs, so that specific protections can be developed and applied.

Just like the rest of evolution in Mother Nature, the evolution of cancers may be driven by natural selection, and not by haphazard mutations

Sporadic carcinogenesis starts from immortalization of a differentiated somatic cell or an organ-specific stem cell. The immortalized cell incepts a new or quasinew organism that lives like a parasite in the patient and usually proceeds to progressive simplification, constantly engendering intermediate organisms that are simpler than normal cells. Like organismal evolution in Mother Nature, this cellular simplification is a process of Darwinian selection of those mutations with growth- or survival-advantages, from numerous ones that occur randomly and stochastically. Therefore, functional gain of growth- or survival-sustaining oncogenes and functional loss of differentiation-sustaining tumor suppressor genes, which are hallmarks of cancer cells and contribute to phenotypes of greater malignancy, are not drivers of carcinogenesis but are results from natural selection of advantageous mutations. Besides this mutation-load dependent survival mechanism that is evolutionarily low and of an asexual nature, cancer cells may also use cell fusion for survival, which is an evolutionarily-higher mechanism and is of a sexual nature. Assigning oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes or their mutants as drivers to induce cancer in animals may somewhat coerce them to create man-made oncogenic pathways that may not really be a course of sporadic cancer formations in the human.

Necrosis, and then stress induced necrosis-like cell death, but not apoptosis, should be the preferred cell death mode for chemotherapy: clearance of a few misconceptions

Cell death overarches carcinogenesis and is a center of cancer researches, especially therapy studies. There have been many nomenclatures on cell death, but only three cell death modes are genuine, i.e. apoptosis, necrosis and stress-induced cell death (SICD). Like apoptosis, SICD is programmed. Like necrosis, SICD is a pathological event and may trigger regeneration and scar formation. Therefore, SICD has subtypes of stress-induced apoptosis-like cell death (SIaLCD) and stress-induced necrosis-like cell death (SInLCD). Whereas apoptosis removes redundant but healthy cells, SICD removes useful but ill or damaged cells. Many studies on cell death involve cancer tissues that resemble parasites in the host patients, which is a complicated system as it involves immune clearance of the alien cancer cells by the host. Cancer resembles an evolutionarily lower-level organism having a weaker apoptosis potential and poorer DNA repair mechanisms. Hence, targeting apoptosis for cancer therapy, i.e. killing via SIaLCD, will be less efficacious and more toxic. On the other hand, necrosis of cancer cells releases cellular debris and components to stimulate immune function, thus counteracting therapy-caused immune suppression and making necrosis better than SIaLCD for chemo drug development.