MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386537608 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noad137.101

P02.16.B COMPENSATORY CROSS-TALK BETWEEN AUTOPHAGY AND GLYCOLYSIS REGULATES SENESCENCE AND STEMNESS IN HETEROGENEOUS GLIOBLASTOMA TUMOR SUBPOPULATIONS

2023· article· en· W4386537608 on OpenAlexaff
Harshal Senthil, Emma Martell, Helgi Kuzmychova, Esha Kaul, Chitra Venugopal, Sheila K. Singh, Tanveer Sharif

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGlycolysisCancer researchAutophagyStem cellSenescenceCancer stem cellDownregulation and upregulationCell biologyApoptosisBiochemistryMetabolism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Despite tremendous research efforts, the successful targeting of aberrant tumor metabolism in clinical practice has remained elusive. Tumor heterogeneity and metabolic plasticity may play a role in the clinical failure of metabolism-targeting interventions for treating cancer patients. Moreover, compensatory growth-related processes and adaptive responses exhibited by heterogeneous tumor subpopulations to metabolic inhibitors are poorly understood. Hence, a deeper understanding of the cellular adaptations in response to metabolic interventions is urgently required to develop more effective therapeutic options against deadly glioblastoma (GBM) brain tumors. MATERIAL AND METHODS Using clinically-relevant patient-derived GBM models, we discovered a cross-talk between glycolysis, autophagy, and senescence. Protein and mRNA expression of glycolytic enzymes and stemness markers were measured using western blot and bioinformatic analysis, respectively. We were able to measure senescence with the use of β-galactosidase staining and upregulation of cell cycle regulators, such as p21/CDKN1A and p16/CDKN2A. Autophagy flux and EGFP-MAP1LC3B+ puncta formation analysis was used to determine autophagy induction. RESULTS We found that stem cell-like GBM tumor subpopulations possessed higher basal levels of glycolytic activity and increased expression of several glycolysis-related enzymes including, GLUT1/SLC2A1, PFKP, ALDOA, GAPDH, ENO1, PKM2, and LDH, compared to their non-stem-like counterparts. Importantly, the mRNA expression of glycolytic enzymes positively correlates with stemness markers (CD133/PROM1 and SOX2) in patient GBM tumors. While treatment with glycolysis inhibitors induced senescence in stem cell-like GBM tumor subpopulations, these cells maintained their aggressive stemness features and failed to undergo apoptotic cell death. Moreover, we determined that inhibition of glycolysis led to the induction of autophagy in stem cell-like GBM tumor subpopulations, but not in their non-stem-like counterparts. Similarly, blocking autophagy in stem cell-like GBM tumor subpopulations induced senescence-associated growth arrest without hampering stemness capacity or triggering apoptosis while reciprocally upregulating glycolytic activity. Combinatorial treatment of stem cell-like GBM tumor subpopulations with autophagy and glycolysis inhibitors blocked the induction of senescence while drastically impairing their stemness capacity which drove cells towards apoptotic cell death. CONCLUSION These findings identify a novel and complex compensatory interplay between glycolysis, autophagy, and senescence that helps maintain stemness in heterogeneous GBM tumor subpopulations and provides a survival advantage during metabolic stress. This work was supported by the Cancer Research Society (CRS).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.276 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology→Same topicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism→French-language works237,207→