4.6 Article

Glycolysis and Fatty Acid Oxidation Inhibition Improves Survival in Glioblastoma

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2021.633210

关键词

glioblastoma; cancer metabolism; ranolazine; dichloroacetate; radiation; temozolomide

类别

资金

  1. Matt Callander Beanie for Brain Cancer Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI) Fellowship - Mark Hughes Foundation (MHF) [HMRI 780]
  2. MHF Innovation Grant [HMRI 1357]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Study found that dual targeting of glycolytic and FAO metabolic pathways is a potential treatment approach that can improve survival rates for GBM patients, warranting further research.
Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive adult glioma with a median survival of 14 months. While standard treatments (safe maximal resection, radiation, and temozolomide chemotherapy) have increased the median survival in favorable O(6)-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT)-methylated GBM (similar to 21 months), a large proportion of patients experience a highly debilitating and rapidly fatal disease. This study examined GBM cellular energetic pathways and blockade using repurposed drugs: the glycolytic inhibitor, namely dicholoroacetate (DCA), and the partial fatty acid oxidation (FAO) inhibitor, namely ranolazine (Rano). Gene expression data show that GBM subtypes have similar glucose and FAO pathways, and GBM tumors have significant upregulation of enzymes in both pathways, compared to normal brain tissue (p < 0.01). DCA and the DCA/Rano combination showed reduced colony-forming activity of GBM and increased oxidative stress, DNA damage, autophagy, and apoptosis in vitro. In the orthotopic Gl261 and CT2A syngeneic murine models of GBM, DCA, Rano, and DCA/Rano increased median survival and induced focal tumor necrosis and hemorrhage. In conclusion, dual targeting of glycolytic and FAO metabolic pathways provides a viable treatment that warrants further investigation concurrently or as an adjuvant to standard chemoradiation for GBM.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据