4.8 Article

Circulating succinate-modifying metabolites accurately classify and reflect the status of fumarate hydratase- deficient renal cell carcinoma

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
Volume 133, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI165028

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Germline or somatic loss-of-function mutations of fumarate hydratase (FH) predispose patients to an aggressive form of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Noninvasive plasma biomarkers, succinyl-adenosine and succinic-cysteine, were identified as excellent plasma biomarkers for early diagnosis of FH-deficient RCC. These biomarkers can also be used for monitoring treatment efficacy and identifying recurrent or metastatic tumors.
Germline or somatic loss-of-function mutations of fumarate hydratase (FH) predispose patients to an aggressive form of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Since other than tumor resection there is no effective therapy for metastatic FH-deficient RCC, an accurate method for early diagnosis is needed. Although MRI or CT scans are offered, they cannot differentiate FH-deficient tumors from other RCCs. Therefore, finding noninvasive plasma biomarkers suitable for rapid diagnosis, screening, and surveillance would improve clinical outcomes. Taking advantage of the robust metabolic rewiring that occurs in FH-deficient cells, we performed plasma metabolomics analysis and identified 2 tumor-derived metabolites, succinyl-adenosine and succinic-cysteine, as excellent plasma biomarkers for early diagnosis. These 2 molecules reliably reflected the FH mutation status and tumor mass. We further identified the enzymatic cooperativity by which these biomarkers are produced within the tumor microenvironment. Longitudinal monitoring of patients demonstrated that these circulating biomarkers can be used for reporting on treatment efficacy and identifying recurrent or metastatic tumors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available