Related Articles

Type 2 immunity in allergic diseases

Significant advancements have been made in understanding the cellular and molecular mechanisms of type 2 immunity in allergic diseases such as asthma, allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), food and drug allergies, and atopic dermatitis (AD). Type 2 immunity has evolved to protect against parasitic diseases and toxins, plays a role in the expulsion of parasites and larvae from inner tissues to the lumen and outside the body, maintains microbe-rich skin and mucosal epithelial barriers and counterbalances the type 1 immune response and its destructive effects. During the development of a type 2 immune response, an innate immune response initiates starting from epithelial cells and innate lymphoid cells (ILCs), including dendritic cells and macrophages, and translates to adaptive T and B-cell immunity, particularly IgE antibody production. Eosinophils, mast cells and basophils have effects on effector functions. Cytokines from ILC2s and CD4+ helper type 2 (Th2) cells, CD8 + T cells, and NK-T cells, along with myeloid cells, including IL-4, IL-5, IL-9, and IL-13, initiate and sustain allergic inflammation via T cell cells, eosinophils, and ILC2s; promote IgE class switching; and open the epithelial barrier. Epithelial cell activation, alarmin release and barrier dysfunction are key in the development of not only allergic diseases but also many other systemic diseases. Recent biologics targeting the pathways and effector functions of IL4/IL13, IL-5, and IgE have shown promising results for almost all ages, although some patients with severe allergic diseases do not respond to these therapies, highlighting the unmet need for a more detailed and personalized approach.

Enhancer reprogramming: critical roles in cancer and promising therapeutic strategies

Transcriptional dysregulation is a hallmark of cancer initiation and progression, driven by genetic and epigenetic alterations. Enhancer reprogramming has emerged as a pivotal driver of carcinogenesis, with cancer cells often relying on aberrant transcriptional programs. The advent of high-throughput sequencing technologies has provided critical insights into enhancer reprogramming events and their role in malignancy. While targeting enhancers presents a promising therapeutic strategy, significant challenges remain. These include the off-target effects of enhancer-targeting technologies, the complexity and redundancy of enhancer networks, and the dynamic nature of enhancer reprogramming, which may contribute to therapeutic resistance. This review comprehensively encapsulates the structural attributes of enhancers, delineates the mechanisms underlying their dysregulation in malignant transformation, and evaluates the therapeutic opportunities and limitations associated with targeting enhancers in cancer.

Targeting of TAMs: can we be more clever than cancer cells?

With increasing incidence and geography, cancer is one of the leading causes of death, reduced quality of life and disability worldwide. Principal progress in the development of new anticancer therapies, in improving the efficiency of immunotherapeutic tools, and in the personification of conventional therapies needs to consider cancer-specific and patient-specific programming of innate immunity. Intratumoral TAMs and their precursors, resident macrophages and monocytes, are principal regulators of tumor progression and therapy resistance. Our review summarizes the accumulated evidence for the subpopulations of TAMs and their increasing number of biomarkers, indicating their predictive value for the clinical parameters of carcinogenesis and therapy resistance, with a focus on solid cancers of non-infectious etiology. We present the state-of-the-art knowledge about the tumor-supporting functions of TAMs at all stages of tumor progression and highlight biomarkers, recently identified by single-cell and spatial analytical methods, that discriminate between tumor-promoting and tumor-inhibiting TAMs, where both subtypes express a combination of prototype M1 and M2 genes. Our review focuses on novel mechanisms involved in the crosstalk among epigenetic, signaling, transcriptional and metabolic pathways in TAMs. Particular attention has been given to the recently identified link between cancer cell metabolism and the epigenetic programming of TAMs by histone lactylation, which can be responsible for the unlimited protumoral programming of TAMs. Finally, we explain how TAMs interfere with currently used anticancer therapeutics and summarize the most advanced data from clinical trials, which we divide into four categories: inhibition of TAM survival and differentiation, inhibition of monocyte/TAM recruitment into tumors, functional reprogramming of TAMs, and genetic enhancement of macrophages.

SREBF1-based metabolic reprogramming in prostate cancer promotes tumor ferroptosis resistance

Metabolic reprogramming in prostate cancer has been widely recognized as a promoter of tumor progression and treatment resistance. This study investigated its association with ferroptosis resistance in prostate cancer and explored its therapeutic potential. In this study, we identified differences in the epithelial characteristics between normal prostate tissue and tissues of various types of prostate cancer using single-cell sequencing. Through transcription factor regulatory network analysis, we focused on the candidate transcription factor, SREBF1. We identified the differences in SREBF1 transcriptional activity and its association with ferroptosis, and further verified this association using hdWGCNA. We constructed a risk score based on SREBF1 target genes associated with the biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer by combining bulk RNA analysis. Finally, we verified the effects of the SREBPs inhibitor Betulin on the treatment of prostate cancer and its chemosensitization effect. We observed characteristic differences in fatty acid and cholesterol metabolism between normal prostate tissue and prostate cancer tissue, identifying high transcriptional activity of SREBF1 in prostate cancer tissue. This indicates that SREBF1 is crucial for the metabolic reprogramming of prostate cancer, and that its mediated metabolic changes promoted ferroptosis resistance in prostate cancer in multiple ways. SREBF1 target genes are associated with biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer. Finally, our experiments verified that SREBF1 inhibitors can significantly promote an increase in ROS, the decrease in GSH, and the decrease in mitochondrial membrane potential in prostate cancer cells and confirmed their chemosensitization effect in vivo. Our findings highlighted a close association between SREBF1 and ferroptosis resistance in prostate cancer. SREBF1 significantly influences metabolic reprogramming in prostate cancer cells, leading to ferroptosis resistance. Importantly, our results demonstrated that SREBF1 inhibitors can significantly enhance the therapeutic effect and chemosensitization of prostate cancer, suggesting a promising therapeutic potential for the treatment of prostate cancer.

Targeting the splicing factor SNRPB inhibits endometrial cancer progression by retaining the POLD1 intron

Dysregulated alternative splicing has been closely linked to the initiation and progression of tumors. Nevertheless, the precise molecular mechanisms through which splicing factors regulate endometrial cancer progression are still not fully understood. This study demonstrated elevated expression of the splicing factor SNRPB in endometrial cancer samples. Furthermore, our findings indicate that high SNRPB expression is correlated with poor prognosis in patients with endometrial cancer. Functionally, SNRPB inhibition hindered the proliferative and metastatic capacities of endometrial cancer cells. Mechanistically, we revealed that SNRPB knockdown decreased POLD1 expression and that POLD1 intron 22 was retained after SNRPB silencing in endometrial cancer cells, as determined via RNA sequencing data analysis. The retained intron 22 of POLD1 created a premature termination codon, leading to the absence of amino acids 941–1,107 and the loss of the site of interaction with PCNA, which is essential for POLD1 enzyme activity. In addition, POLD1 depletion decreased the increase in the malignancy of endometrial cancer cells overexpressing SNRPB. Furthermore, miR-654-5p was found to bind directly to the 3′ untranslated region of SNRPB, resulting in SNRPB expression inhibition in endometrial cancer. Antisense oligonucleotide-mediated SNRPB inhibition led to a decrease in the growth capacity of a cell-derived xenograft model and a patient with endometrial cancer-derived xenograft model. Overall, SNRPB promotes the efficient splicing of POLD1 by regulating intron retention, ultimately contributing to high POLD1 expression in endometrial cancer. The oncogenic SNRPB–POLD1 axis is an interesting therapeutic target for endometrial cancer, and antisense oligonucleotide-mediated silencing of SNRPB may constitute a promising therapeutic approach for treating patients with endometrial cancer.

Responses

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *