Abstract

Glioblastoma is the most common and aggressive adult brain tumour, with poor median survival and limited treatment options. Following surgical resection and chemotherapy, recurrence of the disease is inevitable. Genomic studies have identified key drivers of glioblastoma development, including amplifications of receptor tyrosine kinases, which drive tumour growth. To improve treatment, it is crucial to understand survival response processes in glioblastoma that fuel cell proliferation and promote resistance to treatment. One such process is autophagy, a catabolic pathway that delivers cellular components sequestered into vesicles for lysosomal degradation. Autophagy plays an important role in maintaining cellular homeostasis and is upregulated during stress conditions, such as limited nutrient and oxygen availability, and in response to anti-cancer therapy. Autophagy can also regulate pro-growth signalling and metabolic rewiring of cancer cells in order to support tumour growth. In this review, we will discuss our current understanding of how autophagy is implicated in glioblastoma development and survival. When appropriate, we will refer to findings derived from the role of autophagy in other cancer models and predict the outcome of manipulating autophagy during glioblastoma treatment.

Highlights

  • Introduction to glioblastomaGlioblastoma, a grade IV astrocytoma, is the most common and aggressive type of primary brain tumour in adults

  • The classical subtype is distinguished by alterations causing hyperactivation of the receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) EGFR, with the most frequent variation being the expression of EGFRvIII, a truncated mutant that lacks the extracellular ligandbinding domain and signals constitutively in the absence of growth factors [3]

  • Pharmacological or genetic inhibition of autophagy in conjunction with suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) treatment promoted cell death in cultured glioblastoma cells [129,130]. This has been promisingly replicated in a mouse model where combining SAHA or temozolomide with the non-specific autophagy inhibitor CQ significantly reduced tumour volume of glioblastoma cells orthotopically engrafted in C57BL/6 mice [128]

Read more

Summary

Introduction to glioblastoma

Glioblastoma, a grade IV astrocytoma, is the most common and aggressive type of primary brain tumour in adults. Gene expression analyses of patient-derived tumour cells revealed three distinct glioblastoma subtypes, classical, proneural and mesenchymal, which are classified based on their molecular genotypes [1]. These molecular subtypes have been found to associate with different cellular states identified by transcriptomic analyses [2]. It is important to understand cellular survival mechanisms used by glioblastoma cells in order to develop new treatments that can effectively target the tumour. Autophagy is one such pathway that is upregulated in cancer cells in response to stress. We will first introduce the current models used to study glioblastoma and their drawbacks in order to better grasp the limitations of studying the role of autophagy in this aggressive cancer

Limitations of current models of glioblastoma
Cell culture models
Organoids
Mouse models
Proteins involved in the autophagy pathway
Monitoring autophagy and chemical modulators
Brief overview of the involvement of autophagy in cancer
Modelling the role of autophagy in glioblastoma development
Transcriptional evidence from glioblastoma patients
Evidence from mouse models
Autophagy in the tumour immune response
Autophagy and glioblastoma invasion
Autophagy proteins facilitate receptor tyrosine kinase signalling
Autophagy upregulation and resistance of glioblastoma cells to treatment
10. Manipulating autophagy to improve glioblastoma treatment
11. Conclusion and future perspectives
Bhaduri A et al 2020 Outer radial glia-like cancer
12. Zhou W et al 2015 Periostin secreted by
13. Bowman RL et al 2016 Macrophage ontogeny
15. Verhaak RG et al 2010 Integrated genomic analysis
18. Lee J et al 2006 Tumor stem cells derived from
49. Fletcher K et al 2018 The WD40 domain of
52. Mauthe M et al 2018 Chloroquine inhibits
85. Jutten B et al 2018 EGFRvIII expression triggers a
72. Mulcahy Levy JM et al 2017 Autophagy inhibition
73. Kinsey CG et al 2019 Protective autophagy elicited
59. Guo JY et al 2013 Autophagy suppresses
90. Yamamoto K et al 2020 Autophagy promotes
Findings
93. Schalper KA et al 2019 Neoadjuvant nivolumab

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.