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

In vitro to in vivo extrapolation for predicting human equivalent dose of phenolic endocrine disrupting chemicals: PBTK model development, biological pathways, outcomes and performance

In vitro to in vivo (IVIVE) leverages in vitro high-throughput biological responses to predict the corresponding in vivo exposures and further estimate the human safe dose. However, for phenolic endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) linked with complicated biological pathways and adverse outcomes (AO), such as bisphenol A (BPA) and 4-nonylphenol (4-NP), plausible estimation of human equivalent doses (HED) by IVIVE approaches considering various biological pathways and endpoints is still challenging. To explore the capabilities and limitations of IVIVE, this study conducted physiologically based toxicokinetic (PBTK)-IVIVE approaches to derive pathway-specific HEDs using BPA and 4-NP as examples. In vitro HEDs of BPA and 4-NP varied in different adverse outcomes, pathways, and testing endpoints and ranged from 0.0013 to 1.0986 mg/kg bw/day and 0.0551 to 1.7483 mg/kg bw/day, respectively. In vitro HEDs associated with reproductive AOs initiated by PPARα activation and ER agonism were the most sensitive. Model verification suggested the potential of using effective in vitro data to determine reasonable approximation of in vivo HEDs for the same AO (fold differences of most AOs ranged in 0.14-2.74 and better predictions for apical endpoints). Furthermore, system-specific parameters of cardiac output and its fraction, body weight, as well as chemical-specific parameters of partition coefficient and liver metabolic were most sensitive for the PBTK simulations. The results indicated that the application of fit for-purpose PBTK-IVIVE approach could provide credible pathway-specific HEDs and contribute to high throughput prioritization of chemicals in a more realistic scenario.

Nanocarriers for photodynamic-gene therapy

The use of nanotechnology in medicine has important potential applications, including in anticancer strategies. Nanomedicine has made it possible to overcome the limitations of conventional monotherapies, in addition to improving therapeutic results by means of synergistic or cumulative effects. A highlight is the combination of gene therapy (GT) and photodynamic therapy (PDT), which are alternative anticancer approaches that have attracted attention in the last decade. In this review, strategies involving the combination of PDT and GT will be discussed, together with the role of nanocarriers (nonviral vectors) in this synergistic therapeutic approach, including aspects related to the design of nanomaterials, responsiveness, the interaction of the nanomaterial with the biological environment, and anticancer performance in studies in vitro and in vivo.

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.

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.

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.

While it is not deliberate, much of today's biomedical research contains logical and technical flaws, showing a need for corrective action

Biomedical research has advanced swiftly in recent decades, largely due to progress in biotechnology. However, this rapid spread of new, and not always-fully understood, technology has also created a lot of false or irreproducible data and artifacts, which sometimes have led to erroneous conclusions. When describing various scientific issues, scientists have developed a habit of saying "on one hand… but on the other hand…", because discrepant data and conclusions have become omnipresent. One reason for this problematic situation is that we are not always thoughtful enough in study design, and sometimes lack enough philosophical contemplation. Another major reason is that we are too rushed in introducing new technology into our research without assimilating technical details. In this essay, we provide examples in different research realms to justify our points. To help readers test their own weaknesses, we raise questions on technical details of RNA reverse transcription, polymerase chain reactions, western blotting and immunohistochemical staining, as these methods are basic and are the base for other modern biotechnologies. Hopefully, after contemplation and reflection on these questions, readers will agree that we indeed know too little about these basic techniques, especially about the artifacts they may create, and thus many conclusions drawn from the studies using those ever-more-sophisticated techniques may be even more problematic.

Survival rates of homozygotic Tp53 knockout rats as a tool for preclinical assessment of cancer prevention and treatment

Background

The gene that encodes tumor protein p53, Tp53, is mutated or silenced in most human cancers and is recognized as one of the most important cancer drivers. Homozygotic Tp53 knockout mice, which develop lethal cancers early in their lives, are already used in cancer prevention studies, and now Tp53 knockout rats have also been generated. This study assessed feasibility of using homozygous Tp53 knockout rats to evaluate the possible outcome of cancer chemoprevention.

Methods

A small colony of Tp53 knockout rats with a Wistar strain genetic background was initiated and maintained in the animal house at our institution. Tp53 heterozygotic females were bred with Tp53 homozygous knockout males to obtain a surplus of knockout homozygotes. To evaluate the reproducibility of their lifespan, 4 groups of Tp53 homozygous knockout male rats born during consecutive quarters of the year were kept behind a sanitary barrier in a controlled environment until they reached a moribund state. Their individual lifespan data were used to construct quarterly survival curves.

Results

The four consecutive quarterly survival curves were highly reproducible. They were combined into a single “master” curve for use as a reference in intervention studies. The average lifespan of untreated male Tp53 homozygous knockout rats was normally distributed, with a median of 133 days. Sample size vs. effect calculations revealed that confirming a 20% and 30% increase in the lifespan would respectively require a sample size of 18 and 9 animals (when assessed using the t-test with a power of 80% and alpha set at 0.05). As an example, the Tp53 homozygous knockout rat model was used to test the chemopreventive properties of carnosine, a dipeptide with suspected anticancer properties possibly involving modulation of the mTOR pathway. The result was negative.

Conclusion

Further evaluation of the Tp53 homozygous knockout male rat colony is required before it can be confirmed as a viable tool for assessing new methods of cancer prevention or treatment.

It Is Imperative to Establish a Pellucid Definition of Chimeric RNA and to Clear Up a Lot of Confusion in the Relevant Research

There have been tens of thousands of RNAs deposited in different databases that contain sequences of two genes and are coined chimeric RNAs, or chimeras. However, "chimeric RNA" has never been lucidly defined, partly because "gene" itself is still ill-defined and because the means of production for many RNAs is unclear. Since the number of putative chimeras is soaring, it is imperative to establish a pellucid definition for it, in order to differentiate chimeras from regular RNAs. Otherwise, not only will chimeric RNA studies be misled but also characterization of fusion genes and unannotated genes will be hindered. We propose that only those RNAs that are formed by joining two RNA transcripts together without a fusion gene as a genomic basis should be regarded as authentic chimeras, whereas those RNAs transcribed as, and cis-spliced from, single transcripts should not be deemed as chimeras. Many RNAs containing sequences of two neighboring genes may be transcribed via a readthrough mechanism, and thus are actually RNAs of unannotated genes or RNA variants of known genes, but not chimeras. In today's chimeric RNA research, there are still several key flaws, technical constraints and understudied tasks, which are also described in this perspective essay.

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.