A computational study of the Warburg effect identifies metabolic targets inhibiting cancer migration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last decade, the field of cancer metabolism has mainly focused on studying the role of tumorigenic metabolic rewiring in supporting cancer proliferation. Here, we perform the first genome-scale computational study of the metabolic underpinnings of cancer migration. We build genome-scale metabolic models of the NCI-60 cell lines that capture the Warburg effect (aerobic glycolysis) typically occurring in cancer cells. The extent of the Warburg effect in each of these cell line models is quantified by the ratio of glycolytic to oxidative ATP flux (AFR), which is found to be highly positively associated with cancer cell migration. We hence predicted that targeting genes that mitigate the Warburg effect by reducing the AFR may specifically inhibit cancer migration. By testing the anti-migratory effects of silencing such 17 top predicted genes in four breast and lung cancer cell lines, we find that up to 13 of these novel predictions significantly attenuate cell migration either in all or one cell line only, while having almost no effect on cell proliferation. Furthermore, in accordance with the predictions, a significant reduction is observed in the ratio between experimentally measured ECAR and OCR levels following these perturbations. Inhibiting anti-migratory targets is a promising future avenue in treating cancer since it may decrease cytotoxic-related side effects that plague current anti-proliferative treatments. Furthermore, it may reduce cytotoxic-related clonal selection of more aggressive cancer cells and the likelihood of emerging resistance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".