Embryonic stem cell-specific signatures in cancer: insights into genomic regulatory networks and implications for medicine

Embryonic stem (ES) cells are of great interest as a model system for studying early developmental processes and because of their potential therapeutic applications in regenerative medicine. Obtaining a systematic understanding of the mechanisms that control the 'stemness' - self-renewal and pluripotency - of ES cells relies on high-throughput tools to define gene expression and regulatory networks at the genome level. Such recently developed systems biology approaches have revealed highly interconnected networks in which multiple regulatory factors act in combination. Interestingly, stem cells and cancer cells share some properties, notably self-renewal and a block in differentiation. Recently, several groups reported that expression signatures that are specific to ES cells are also found in many human cancers and in mouse cancer models, suggesting that these shared features might inform new approaches for cancer therapy. Here, we briefly summarize the key transcriptional regulators that contribute to the pluripotency of ES cells, the factors that account for the common gene expression patterns of ES and cancer cells, and the implications of these observations for future clinical applications.Institute for Cellular and Molecular [email protected]

MELK-a conserved kinase: functions, signaling, cancer, and controversy.

Maternal embryonic leucine zipper kinase (MELK) is a highly conserved serine/threonine kinase initially found to be expressed in a wide range of early embryonic cellular stages, and as a result has been implicated in embryogenesis and cell cycle control. Recent evidence has identified a broader spectrum of tissue expression pattern for this kinase than previously appreciated. MELK is expressed in several human cancers and stem cell populations. Unique spatial and temporal patterns of expression within these tissues suggest that MELK plays a prominent role in cell cycle control, cell proliferation, apoptosis, cell migration, cell renewal, embryogenesis, oncogenesis, and cancer treatment resistance and recurrence. These findings have important implications for our understanding of development, disease, and cancer therapeutics. Furthermore understanding MELK signaling may elucidate an added dimension of stem cell control

Broad targeting of resistance to apoptosis in cancer

Apoptosis or programmed cell death is natural way of removing aged cells from the body. Most of the anti-cancer therapies trigger apoptosis induction and related cell death networks to eliminate malignant cells. However, in cancer, de-regulated apoptotic signaling, particularly the activation of an anti-apoptotic systems, allows cancer cells to escape this program leading to uncontrolled proliferation resulting in tumor survival, therapeutic resistance and recurrence of cancer. This resistance is a complicated phenomenon that emanates from the interactions of various molecules and signaling pathways. In this comprehensive review we discuss the various factors contributing to apoptosis resistance in cancers. The key resistance targets that are discussed include (1) Bcl-2 and Mcl-1 proteins; (2) autophagy processes; (3) necrosis and necroptosis; (4) heat shock protein signaling; (5) the proteasome pathway; (6) epigenetic mechanisms; and (7) aberrant nuclear export signaling. The shortcomings of current therapeutic modalities are highlighted and a broad spectrum strategy using approaches including (a) gossypol; (b) epigallocatechin-3-gallate; (c) UMI-77 (d) triptolide and (e) selinexor that can be used to overcome cell death resistance is presented. This review provides a roadmap for the design of successful anti-cancer strategies that overcome resistance to apoptosis for better therapeutic outcome in patients with cancer

Advocating the need of a systems biology approach for personalised prognosis and treatment of B-CLL patients

The clinical course of B-CLL is heterogeneous. This heterogeneity leads to a clinical dilemma: can we identify those patients who will benefit from early treatment and predict the survival? In recent years, mathematical modelling has contributed significantly in understanding the complexity of diseases. In order to build a mathematical model for determining prognosis of B-CLL one has to identify, characterise and quantify key molecules involved in the disease. Here we discuss the need and role of mathematical modelling in predicting B-CLL disease pathogenesis and suggest a new systems biology approach for a personalised therapy of B-CLL patients

Evaluation of the current knowledge limitations in breast cancer research: a gap analysis

BACKGROUND A gap analysis was conducted to determine which areas of breast cancer research, if targeted by researchers and funding bodies, could produce the greatest impact on patients. METHODS Fifty-six Breast Cancer Campaign grant holders and prominent UK breast cancer researchers participated in a gap analysis of current breast cancer research. Before, during and following the meeting, groups in seven key research areas participated in cycles of presentation, literature review and discussion. Summary papers were prepared by each group and collated into this position paper highlighting the research gaps, with recommendations for action. RESULTS Gaps were identified in all seven themes. General barriers to progress were lack of financial and practical resources, and poor collaboration between disciplines. Critical gaps in each theme included: (1) genetics (knowledge of genetic changes, their effects and interactions); (2) initiation of breast cancer (how developmental signalling pathways cause ductal elongation and branching at the cellular level and influence stem cell dynamics, and how their disruption initiates tumour formation); (3) progression of breast cancer (deciphering the intracellular and extracellular regulators of early progression, tumour growth, angiogenesis and metastasis); (4) therapies and targets (understanding who develops advanced disease); (5) disease markers (incorporating intelligent trial design into all studies to ensure new treatments are tested in patient groups stratified using biomarkers); (6) prevention (strategies to prevent oestrogen-receptor negative tumours and the long-term effects of chemoprevention for oestrogen-receptor positive tumours); (7) psychosocial aspects of cancer (the use of appropriate psychosocial interventions, and the personal impact of all stages of the disease among patients from a range of ethnic and demographic backgrounds). CONCLUSION Through recommendations to address these gaps with future research, the long-term benefits to patients will include: better estimation of risk in families with breast cancer and strategies to reduce risk; better prediction of drug response and patient prognosis; improved tailoring of treatments to patient subgroups and development of new therapeutic approaches; earlier initiation of treatment; more effective use of resources for screening populations; and an enhanced experience for people with or at risk of breast cancer and their families. The challenge to funding bodies and researchers in all disciplines is to focus on these gaps and to drive advances in knowledge into improvements in patient care

Assessing the carcinogenic potential of low-dose exposures to chemical mixtures in the environment: the challenge ahead.

Lifestyle factors are responsible for a considerable portion of cancer incidence worldwide, but credible estimates from the World Health Organization and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) suggest that the fraction of cancers attributable to toxic environmental exposures is between 7% and 19%. To explore the hypothesis that low-dose exposures to mixtures of chemicals in the environment may be combining to contribute to environmental carcinogenesis, we reviewed 11 hallmark phenotypes of cancer, multiple priority target sites for disruption in each area and prototypical chemical disruptors for all targets, this included dose-response characterizations, evidence of low-dose effects and cross-hallmark effects for all targets and chemicals. In total, 85 examples of chemicals were reviewed for actions on key pathways/mechanisms related to carcinogenesis. Only 15% (13/85) were found to have evidence of a dose-response threshold, whereas 59% (50/85) exerted low-dose effects. No dose-response information was found for the remaining 26% (22/85). Our analysis suggests that the cumulative effects of individual (non-carcinogenic) chemicals acting on different pathways, and a variety of related systems, organs, tissues and cells could plausibly conspire to produce carcinogenic synergies. Additional basic research on carcinogenesis and research focused on low-dose effects of chemical mixtures needs to be rigorously pursued before the merits of this hypothesis can be further advanced. However, the structure of the World Health Organization International Programme on Chemical Safety 'Mode of Action' framework should be revisited as it has inherent weaknesses that are not fully aligned with our current understanding of cancer biology

Genomic instability in human cancer: molecular insights and opportunities for therapeutic attack and prevention through diet and nutrition

Genomic instability can initiate cancer, augment progression, and influence the overall prognosis of the affected patient. Genomic instability arises from many different pathways, such as telomere damage, centrosome amplification, epigenetic modifications, and DNA damage from endogenous and exogenous sources, and can be perpetuating, or limiting, through the induction of mutations or aneuploidy, both enabling and catastrophic. Many cancer treatments induce DNA damage to impair cell division on a global scale but it is accepted that personalized treatments, those that are tailored to the particular patient and type of cancer, must also be developed. In this review, we detail the mechanisms from which genomic instability arises and can lead to cancer, as well as treatments and measures that prevent genomic instability or take advantage of the cellular defects caused by genomic instability. In particular, we identify and discuss five priority targets against genomic instability: (1) prevention of DNA damage; (2) enhancement of DNA repair; (3) targeting deficient DNA repair; (4) impairing centrosome clustering; and, (5) inhibition of telomerase activity. Moreover, we highlight vitamin D and B, selenium, carotenoids, PARP inhibitors, resveratrol, and isothiocyanates as priority approaches against genomic instability. The prioritized target sites and approaches were cross validated to identify potential synergistic effects on a number of important areas of cancer biology