Guilong Tanzhu

Cancer stem cells (CSCs), a small subset of cells in tumors that are characterized by self-renewal and continuous proliferation, lead to tumorigenesis, metastasis, and maintain tumor heterogeneity. Cancer continues to be a significant global disease burden. In the past, surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were the main cancer treatments. The technology of cancer treatments continues to develop and advance, and the emergence of targeted therapy, and immunotherapy provides more options for patients to a certain extent. However, the limitations of efficacy and treatment resistance are still inevitable. Our review begins with a brief introduction of the historical discoveries, original hypotheses, and pathways that regulate CSCs, such as WNT/β-Catenin, hedgehog, Notch, NF-κB, JAK/STAT, TGF-β, PI3K/AKT, PPAR pathway, and their crosstalk. We focus on the role of CSCs in various therapeutic outcomes and resistance, including how the treatments affect the content of CSCs and the alteration of related molecules, CSCs-mediated therapeutic resistance, and the clinical value of targeting CSCs in patients with refractory, progressed or advanced tumors. In summary, CSCs affect therapeutic efficacy, and the treatment method of targeting CSCs is still difficult to determine. Clarifying regulatory mechanisms and targeting biomarkers of CSCs is currently the mainstream idea.

Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) is a physical therapy that uses moderate frequency (100-300 kHz) and low-intensity (1-3 V/cm) alternating electric fields to inhibit tumors. Currently, the Food and Drug Administration approves TTFields for treating recurrent or newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM) and malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The classical mechanism of TTFields is mitotic inhibition by hindering the formation of tubulin and spindle. In addition, TTFields inhibits cell proliferation, invasion, migration and induces cell death, such as apoptosis, autophagy, pyroptosis, and cell cycle arrest. Meanwhile, it regulates immune function and changes the permeability of the nuclear membrane, cell membrane, and blood-brain barrier. Based on the current researches on TTFields in various tumors, this review comprehensively summarizes the in-vitro effects, changes in pathways and molecules corresponding to relevant parameters of TTFields (frequency, intensity, and duration). In addition, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are common tumor treatments. Thus, we also pay attention to the sequence and dose when TTFields combined with radiotherapy or chemotherapy. TTFields has inhibitory effects in a variety of tumors. The study of TTFields mechanism is conducive to subsequent research. How to combine common tumor therapy such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy to obtain the maximum benefit is also a problem that's worthy of our attention.

Radiotherapy (RT) stands as the primary treatment for tumors, but it inevitably causes damage to normal cells. Consequently, radiation injury is a crucial consideration for radiation oncologists during therapy planning. Cell death including apoptosis, autophagy, pyroptosis, ferroptosis, and necroptosis play significant roles in tumor treatment. While previous studies elucidated the induction of apoptosis and autophagy by ionizing radiation (IR), recent attention has shifted to pyroptosis, ferroptosis, and necroptosis, revealing their effects induced by IR. This review aims to summarize the strategies employed by IR, either alone or in combination therapy, to induce pyroptosis, ferroptosis, and necroptosis in radiation injury. Furthermore, we explore their effects and molecular pathways, shedding light on their roles in radiation injury. Finally, we summarize the regulative agents for these three types of cell death and their mechanisms. In summary, optimizing radiation dose, dose rate, and combined treatment plans to minimize radiation damage and enhance the killing effect of RT is a key focus.

The relationship between pyroptosis-related long non-coding RNAs (pyroptosis-related lncRNAs) and glioma prognosis have not been studied clearly. Basing on The Cancer Genome Atlas and The Chinese Glioma Genome Atlas datasets, we firstly identified 23 pyroptosis-related lncRNAs with Pearson coefficient |r| > 0.5 and p < 0.001. The survival probability was lower in cluster 1. 13 lncRNAs was included into signature and divided all the glioma patients into two groups, among which survival probability of the high-risk group was lower than that in low-risk group (P<0.001). The risk score was higher in the age>60, dead grade 3, cluster 1 and immune score high groups. Furthermore, subgroup analysis showed patients with different grades, IDH and 1p19ql state distinguished by the median of risk score had different survival probability. Risk score was one of independent factors for glioma prognosis, and 1-, 3-, 5-years survival were calculated in nomogram. Meanwhile, the same as the median risk score in TCGA cohort, the glioma patients from CGGA were categorized into two groups and validated the outcome mentioned above(P<0.01). GO and KEGG analysis revealed the immunity process of the targeted genes. Thus, the immune filtration we compared showed naive B cell, resting dendritic cells, activated NK cells, activated Mast cells, monocytes are higher in low-risk group. Moreover, level of the activated NK cells, M0-and M1 Macrophages was in positive relationship with the risk score. Besides, competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) network display interaction among microRNA, lncRNAs and their targeted genes. Pyroptosis-related lncRNAs could be a dependent prognosis factor and maybe linked to the immune response in glioma. This prognosis signature had potential value in estimate the survival of the patients with glioma.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies found that lung adenocarcinomas (LUAD) with EGFR-positive and ALK-positive were less responsive to immunotherapy, which may be associated with a suppressive tumor immune microenvironment (TIME). Given the discordance in the TIME between primary lung cancer and brain metastasis, it is urgent to explore the TIME in patients with EGFR/ALK-positive LUAD with brain metastases (BMs). METHODS: The transcriptome feature of formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded samples of BMs and paired primary LUAD from 70 patients with LUAD BMs was illustrated by RNA-sequencing. Six of them were available for paired sample analysis. Then, after excluding 3 co-occurring patients, we divided 67 BMs patients into 41 EGFR/ALK-positive and 26 EGFR/ALK-negative patients. The differences in immune profiling between the two groups were analyzed from three dimensions: TIME, T-cell receptor repertoire, and immunohistochemistry. Finally, the survival data of 55 patients were collected. RESULTS: Compared with primary LUAD, BMs present an immunosuppressed TIME, manifested as: inhibition of immune-related pathways; low expression of immune checkpoint; decreased infiltration of CD8+T cells and cytotoxic lymphocyte; increased proportion of suppressive M2 macrophages. In different subgroups based on EGFR/ALK gene variation status, both EGFR-positive and ALK-positive tumors present a relatively immunosuppressive microenvironment, but the heterogeneity of tumor microenvironment may undergo different mechanisms. EGFR-positive BMs showed decreased CD8+T cells and increased regulatory T cells (Treg) cells, while ALK-positive BMs showed decreased CD8+T cells and increased M2 macrophages. Moreover, in the TCGA-LUAD cohort, EGFR-positive tumors showed reduced CD8+T cell infiltrations (p<0.001) and borderline significantly higher Tregs than EGFR/ALK-negative (p=0.072). In parallel, ALK-positive tumors had higher median M2 macrophages infiltrations than EGFR/ALK-negative (p=0.175), although there was no statistical significance. Collectively, there was a similar immunosuppressive milieu between EGFR/ALK-positive primary LUAD and BMs. Moreover, survival analysis uncovered higher CD8A expression, cytotoxic lymphocyte infiltration, and immune scores were significantly associated with better prognosis in both EGFR/ALK-positive and EGFR/ALK-negative groups. CONCLUSION: This study found that LUAD-derived BMs exhibited an immunosuppressive TIME and revealed that EGFR-positive and ALK-positive BMs exhibited different immunosuppressive characteristics. Meanwhile, EGFR-negative BMs showed a potential benefit to immunotherapy. These findings boost molecular and clinical understanding of LUAD BMs.