BACKGROUND: Early detection of increased aggressiveness of brain tumors is a major challenge in the field of neuro-oncology because of the inability of traditional imaging to uncover it. Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant gliomas represent an ideal model system to study the molecular mechanisms associated with tumorigenicity because they appear indolent and non-glycolytic initially, but eventually a subset progresses toward secondary glioblastoma with a Warburg-like phenotype. The mechanisms and molecular features associated with this transformation are poorly understood. METHODS: We employed model systems for IDH1 mutant (IDH1mut) gliomas with different growth and proliferation rates in vivo and in vitro. We described the metabolome, transcriptome, and epigenome of these models in order to understand the link between their metabolism and the tumor biology. To verify whether this metabolic reprogramming occurs in the clinic, we analyzed data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. RESULTS: We reveal that the aggressive glioma models have lost DNA methylation in the promoters of glycolytic enzymes, especially lactate dehydrogenase A (LDHA), and have increased mRNA and metabolite levels compared with the indolent model. We find that the acquisition of the high glycolytic phenotype occurs at the glioma cytosine-phosphate-guanine island methylator phenotype (G-CIMP)-high molecular subtype in patients and is associated with the worst outcome. CONCLUSION: We propose very early monitoring of lactate levels as a biomarker of metabolic reprogramming and tumor aggressiveness.
BACKGROUND: Early detection of increased aggressiveness of brain tumors is a major challenge in the field of neuro-oncology because of the inability of traditional imaging to uncover it. Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH)-mutant gliomas represent an ideal model system to study the molecular mechanisms associated with tumorigenicity because they appear indolent and non-glycolytic initially, but eventually a subset progresses toward secondary glioblastoma with a Warburg-like phenotype. The mechanisms and molecular features associated with this transformation are poorly understood. METHODS: We employed model systems for IDH1 mutant (IDH1mut) gliomas with different growth and proliferation rates in vivo and in vitro. We described the metabolome, transcriptome, and epigenome of these models in order to understand the link between their metabolism and the tumor biology. To verify whether this metabolic reprogramming occurs in the clinic, we analyzed data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. RESULTS: We reveal that the aggressive glioma models have lost DNA methylation in the promoters of glycolytic enzymes, especially lactate dehydrogenase A (LDHA), and have increased mRNA and metabolite levels compared with the indolent model. We find that the acquisition of the high glycolytic phenotype occurs at the glioma cytosine-phosphate-guanine island methylator phenotype (G-CIMP)-high molecular subtype in patients and is associated with the worst outcome. CONCLUSION: We propose very early monitoring of lactate levels as a biomarker of metabolic reprogramming and tumor aggressiveness.
Authors: Rasheduzzaman Chowdhury; Kar Kheng Yeoh; Ya-Min Tian; Lars Hillringhaus; Eleanor A Bagg; Nathan R Rose; Ivanhoe K H Leung; Xuan S Li; Esther C Y Woon; Ming Yang; Michael A McDonough; Oliver N King; Ian J Clifton; Robert J Klose; Timothy D W Claridge; Peter J Ratcliffe; Christopher J Schofield; Akane Kawamura Journal: EMBO Rep Date: 2011-04-01 Impact factor: 8.807
Authors: Erwin G Van Meir; Costas G Hadjipanayis; Andrew D Norden; Hui-Kuo Shu; Patrick Y Wen; Jeffrey J Olson Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2010 May-Jun Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Charles Chesnelong; Myriam M Chaumeil; Michael D Blough; Mohammad Al-Najjar; Owen D Stechishin; Jennifer A Chan; Russell O Pieper; Sabrina M Ronen; Samuel Weiss; H Artee Luchman; J Gregory Cairncross Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2013-12-22 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Johanna Klughammer; Barbara Kiesel; Thomas Roetzer; Nikolaus Fortelny; Amelie Nemc; Karl-Heinz Nenning; Julia Furtner; Nathan C Sheffield; Paul Datlinger; Nadine Peter; Martha Nowosielski; Marco Augustin; Mario Mischkulnig; Thomas Ströbel; Donat Alpar; Bekir Ergüner; Martin Senekowitsch; Patrizia Moser; Christian F Freyschlag; Johannes Kerschbaumer; Claudius Thomé; Astrid E Grams; Günther Stockhammer; Melitta Kitzwoegerer; Stefan Oberndorfer; Franz Marhold; Serge Weis; Johannes Trenkler; Johanna Buchroithner; Josef Pichler; Johannes Haybaeck; Stefanie Krassnig; Kariem Mahdy Ali; Gord von Campe; Franz Payer; Camillo Sherif; Julius Preiser; Thomas Hauser; Peter A Winkler; Waltraud Kleindienst; Franz Würtz; Tanisa Brandner-Kokalj; Martin Stultschnig; Stefan Schweiger; Karin Dieckmann; Matthias Preusser; Georg Langs; Bernhard Baumann; Engelbert Knosp; Georg Widhalm; Christine Marosi; Johannes A Hainfellner; Adelheid Woehrer; Christoph Bock Journal: Nat Med Date: 2018-08-27 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Michael Lawrence; Wolfgang Huber; Hervé Pagès; Patrick Aboyoun; Marc Carlson; Robert Gentleman; Martin T Morgan; Vincent J Carey Journal: PLoS Comput Biol Date: 2013-08-08 Impact factor: 4.475
Authors: Philip Dao Trong; Gerhard Jungwirth; Tao Yu; Stefan Pusch; Andreas Unterberg; Christel Herold-Mende; Rolf Warta Journal: Cells Date: 2020-06-03 Impact factor: 6.600
Authors: Pavithra Viswanath; Georgios Batsios; Joydeep Mukherjee; Anne Marie Gillespie; Peder E Z Larson; H Artee Luchman; Joanna J Phillips; Joseph F Costello; Russell O Pieper; Sabrina M Ronen Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2021-01-04 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Victor Ruiz-Rodado; Jeffery R Brender; Murali K Cherukuri; Mark R Gilbert; Mioara Larion Journal: Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc Date: 2020-12-02 Impact factor: 9.795