Mutant IDH1 Differently Affects Redox State and Metabolism in Glial Cells of Normal and Tumor Origin

IDH1R132H (isocitrate dehydrogenase 1) mutations play a key role in the development of low-grade gliomas. IDH1wt converts isocitrate to α-ketoglutarate while reducing nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADP+), whereas IDH1R132H uses α-ketoglutarate and NADPH to generate the oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG). While the effects of 2-HG have been the subject of intense research, the 2-HG independent effects of IDH1R132H are still ambiguous. The present study demonstrates that IDH1R132H expression but not 2-HG alone leads to significantly decreased tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle metabolites, reduced proliferation, and enhanced sensitivity to irradiation in both glioblastoma cells and astrocytes in vitro. Glioblastoma cells, but not astrocytes, showed decreased NADPH and NAD+ levels upon IDH1R132H transduction. However, in astrocytes IDH1R132H led to elevated expression of the NAD-synthesizing enzyme nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (NAMPT). These effects were not 2-HG mediated. This suggests that IDH1R132H cells utilize NAD+ to restore NADP pools, which only astrocytes could compensate via induction of NAMPT. We found that the expression of NAMPT is lower in patient-derived IDH1-mutant glioma cells and xenografts compared to IDH1-wildtype models. The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data analysis confirmed lower NAMPT expression in IDH1-mutant versus IDH1-wildtype gliomas. We show that the IDH1 mutation directly affects the energy homeostasis and redox state in a cell-type dependent manner. Targeting the impairments in metabolism and redox state might open up new avenues for treating IDH1-mutant gliomas.publishedVersio

2005- 2008 UNLV McNair Journal

Journal articles based on research conducted by undergraduate students in the McNair Scholars Program Table of Contents Biography of Dr. Ronald E. McNair Statements: Dr. Neal J. Smatresk, UNLV President Dr. Juanita P. Fain, Vice President of Student Affairs Dr. William W. Sullivan, Associate Vice President for Retention and Outreach Mr. Keith Rogers, Deputy Executive Director of the Center for Academic Enrichment and Outreach McNair Scholars Institute Staf

Diurnal Variation of Intravenous Thrombolysis Rates for Acute Ischemic Stroke and Associated Quality Performance Parameters

IntroductionBased on data from the Baden-Wuerttemberg stroke registry, we aimed to explore the diurnal variation of acute ischemic stroke (IS) care delivery.Materials and methods92,530 IS patients were included, of whom 37,471 (40%) presented within an onset-to-door time ≤4.5 h. Daytime was stratified in 3-h time intervals and working vs. non-working hours. Stroke onset and hospital admission time, rate of door-to-neurological examination time ≤30 min, onset-/door-to-imaging time IV thrombolysis (IVT) rates, and onset-/door-to-needle time were determined. Multivariable regression models were used stratified by stroke onset and hospital admission time to assess the relationship between IVT rates, quality performance parameters, and daytime. The time interval 0:00 h to 3:00 h and working hours, respectively, were taken as reference.ResultsThe IVT rate of the whole study population was strongly associated with the sleep–wake cycle. In patients presenting within the 4.5-h time window and potentially eligible for IVT stratification by hospital admission time identified two time intervals with lower IVT rates. First, between 3:01 h and 6:00 h (IVT rate 18%) and likely attributed to in-hospital delays with the lowest diurnal rate of door-to-neurological examination time ≤30 min and the longest door-to-needle time Second, between 6:01 h and 15:00 h (IVT rate 23–25%) compared to the late afternoon and evening hours (IVT rate 27–29%) due to a longer onset-to-imaging time and door-to-imaging time. No evidence for a compromised stroke service during non-working hours was observed.ConclusionThe analysis provides evidence that acute IS care is subject to diurnal variation which may affect stroke outcome. An optimization of IS care aiming at constantly high IVT rates over the course of the day therefore appears desirable

Transplant Physicians’ Attitudes on Candidacy for Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (HCT) in Older Patients: The Need for a Standardized Geriatric Assessment (GA) Tool

Background Despite improvements in conditioning regimens and supportive care having expanded the curative potential of HCT, underutilization of HCT in older adults persists (Bhatt VR et al, BMT 2017). Therefore, we conducted a survey of transplant physicians (TP) to determine their perceptions of the impact of older age (≥60 years) on HCT candidacy and utilization of tools to gauge candidacy. Methods We conducted a 23-item, online cross-sectional survey of adult physicians recruited from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research between May and July 2019. Results 175/770 (22.7%) TP completed the survey; majority of respondents were 41-60 years old, male, and practicing in a teaching hospital. Over 75% were at centers performing ≥50 HCT per year. When considering regimen intensity, most (96%, n=168) had an upper age limit (UAL) for using a myeloablative regimen (MAC), with only 29 physicians (17%) stating they would consider MAC for patients ≥70 years. In contrast, when considering a reduced intensity/non-myeloablative conditioning (RIC/NMA), 8%, (n=13), 54% (n=93), and 20% (n=35) stated that age 70, 75, and 80 years respectively would be the UAL to use this approach, with 18% (n=31) reporting no UAL. TP agreed that Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) could exclude older pts for HCT, with 39.1% (n=66), 42.6% (n=72), and 11.4% (n=20) requiring KPS of ≥70, 80, and 90, respectively. The majority (n=92, 52.5%) indicated an HCT-comorbidity index threshold for exclusion, mostly ranging from ≥3 to ≥ 5. Almost all (89.7%) endorsed the need for a better health assessment of pre-HCT vulnerabilities to guide candidacy for pts ≥60 with varied assessments being utilized beyond KPS (Figure 1). However, the majority of centers rarely (33.1%) or never (45.7%) utilize a dedicated geriatrician/geriatric-oncologist to assess alloHCT candidates ≥60 yrs. The largest barriers to performing GA included uncertainty about which tools to use, lack of knowledge and training, and lack of appropriate clinical support staff (Figure 2). Approximately half (n=78, 45%) endorsed GA now routinely influences candidacy. Conclusions The vast majority of TP will consider RIC/NMA alloHCT for patients ≥70 years. However, there is heterogeneity in assessing candidacy. Incorporation of GA into a standardized and easily applied health assessment tool for risk stratification is an unmet need. The recently opened BMT CTN 1704 may aid in addressing this gap