PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight key studies providing rationale for and utility in targeting glycolysis for the treatment of hematological malignancies. RECENT FINDINGS: Several therapeutic strategies are capitalizing on the diagnostic utility of 18fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography that relies on increased glycolysis and glucose utilization in tumor cells. Although aerobic glycolysis was initially proposed by Warburg to be due to mitochondrial impairment, recent studies have shown a preferential switch to glycolysis in tumor cells with functional mitochondria. Increased glucose consumption can be advantageous for a tumor cell through stimulation of cellular biosynthetic, energetic, and pro-survival pathways. We now have a greater appreciation for the utilization of glucose in specific metabolic pathways that in some aspects can be complemented with other nutrients such as glutamine. Targeting glucose consumption for the treatment of hematological malignancies seems to be a promising field that will require characterization of tumor cell specific targets to inhibit glucose uptake and/or glycolysis. It is imperative to further our understanding of the tumor cell metabolome to target cellular bioenergetics in the treatment of cancer. SUMMARY: Targeting the glycolytic pathway for the treatment of hematological malignancies has sufficient rationale given the utility of fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in diagnostic imaging. Further research is required in developing tumor cell specific therapeutics.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To highlight key studies providing rationale for and utility in targeting glycolysis for the treatment of hematological malignancies. RECENT FINDINGS: Several therapeutic strategies are capitalizing on the diagnostic utility of 18fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography that relies on increased glycolysis and glucose utilization in tumor cells. Although aerobic glycolysis was initially proposed by Warburg to be due to mitochondrial impairment, recent studies have shown a preferential switch to glycolysis in tumor cells with functional mitochondria. Increased glucose consumption can be advantageous for a tumor cell through stimulation of cellular biosynthetic, energetic, and pro-survival pathways. We now have a greater appreciation for the utilization of glucose in specific metabolic pathways that in some aspects can be complemented with other nutrients such as glutamine. Targeting glucose consumption for the treatment of hematological malignancies seems to be a promising field that will require characterization of tumor cell specific targets to inhibit glucose uptake and/or glycolysis. It is imperative to further our understanding of the tumor cell metabolome to target cellular bioenergetics in the treatment of cancer. SUMMARY: Targeting the glycolytic pathway for the treatment of hematological malignancies has sufficient rationale given the utility of fluoro-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in diagnostic imaging. Further research is required in developing tumor cell specific therapeutics.
Authors: Sébastien Bonnet; Stephen L Archer; Joan Allalunis-Turner; Alois Haromy; Christian Beaulieu; Richard Thompson; Christopher T Lee; Gary D Lopaschuk; Lakshmi Puttagunta; Sandra Bonnet; Gwyneth Harry; Kyoko Hashimoto; Christopher J Porter; Miguel A Andrade; Bernard Thebaud; Evangelos D Michelakis Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: J M Boag; A H Beesley; M J Firth; J R Freitas; J Ford; K Hoffmann; A J Cummings; N H de Klerk; U R Kees Journal: Leukemia Date: 2006-08-31 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Yuxing Zhao; Brian J Altman; Jonathan L Coloff; Catherine E Herman; Sarah R Jacobs; Heather L Wieman; Jessica A Wofford; Leah N Dimascio; Olga Ilkayeva; Ameeta Kelekar; Tannishtha Reya; Jeffrey C Rathmell Journal: Mol Cell Biol Date: 2007-03-19 Impact factor: 4.272
Authors: Ralph J DeBerardinis; Anthony Mancuso; Evgueni Daikhin; Ilana Nissim; Marc Yudkoff; Suzanne Wehrli; Craig B Thompson Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-11-21 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Heather R Christofk; Matthew G Vander Heiden; Marian H Harris; Arvind Ramanathan; Robert E Gerszten; Ru Wei; Mark D Fleming; Stuart L Schreiber; Lewis C Cantley Journal: Nature Date: 2008-03-13 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Viswam S Nair; Olivier Gevaert; Guido Davidzon; Sandy Napel; Edward E Graves; Chuong D Hoang; Joseph B Shrager; Andrew Quon; Daniel L Rubin; Sylvia K Plevritis Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2012-06-18 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Andrew J Robinson; Goitseone L Hopkins; Namrata Rastogi; Marie Hodges; Michelle Doyle; Sara Davies; Paul S Hole; Nader Omidvar; Richard L Darley; Alex Tonks Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2019-12-20 Impact factor: 12.701