Search

Cancer is a redox disease. Low levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) are beneficial for cells and have anti-cancer effects. ROS are produced in the mitochondria during ATP production by oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS). In the present review, we describe ATP production in primary brain tumors, glioblastoma, in relation to ROS production. Differentiated glioblastoma cells mainly use glycolysis for ATP production (aerobic glycolysis) without ROS production, whereas glioblastoma stem cells (GSCs) in hypoxic periarteriolar niches use OXPHOS for ATP and ROS production, which is modest because of the hypoxia and quiescence of GSCs. In a significant proportion of glioblastoma, isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) is mutated, causing metabolic rewiring, and all cancer cells use OXPHOS for ATP and ROS production. Systemic therapeutic inhibition of glycolysis is not an option as clinical trials have shown ineffectiveness or unwanted side effects. We argue that systemic therapeutic inhibition of OXPHOS is not an option either because the anti-cancer effects of ROS production in healthy cells is inhibited as well. Therefore, we advocate to remove GSCs out of their hypoxic niches by the inhibition of their binding to niches to enable their differentiation and thus increase their sensitivity to radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Among primary brain tumours, glioblastoma is the most aggressive. As early relapses are unavoidable despite standard-of-care treatment, the cannabinoids delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) alone or in combination have been suggested as a combined treatment strategy for glioblastomas. However, the known psychoactive effects of THC hamper its medical applications in these patients with potential cognitive impairment due to the progression of the disease. Therefore, nontoxic cannabigerol (CBG), being recently shown to exhibit anti-tumour properties in some carcinomas, is assayed here for the first time in glioblastoma with the aim to replace THC. We indeed found CBG to effectively impair the relevant hallmarks of glioblastoma progression, with comparable killing effects to THC and in addition inhibiting the invasion of glioblastoma cells. Moreover, CBG can destroy therapy-resistant glioblastoma stem cells, which are the root of cancer development and extremely resistant to various other treatments of this lethal cancer. CBG should present a new yet unexplored adjuvant treatment strategy of glioblastoma. Glioblastoma is the most aggressive cancer among primary brain tumours. As with other cancers, the incidence of glioblastoma is increasing; despite modern therapies, the overall mean survival of patients post-diagnosis averages around 16 months, a figure that has not changed in many years. Cannabigerol (CBG) has only recently been reported to prevent the progression of certain carcinomas and has not yet been studied in glioblastoma. Here, we have compared the cytotoxic, apoptotic, and anti-invasive effects of the purified natural cannabinoid CBG together with CBD and THC on established differentiated glioblastoma tumour cells and glioblastoma stem cells. CBG and THC reduced the viability of both types of cells to a similar extent, whereas combining CBD with CBG was more efficient than with THC. CBD and CBG, both alone and in combination, induced caspase-dependent cell apoptosis, and there was no additive THC effect. Of note, CBG inhibited glioblastoma invasion in a similar manner to CBD and the chemotherapeutic temozolomide. We have demonstrated that THC has little added value in combined-cannabinoid glioblastoma treatment, suggesting that this psychotropic cannabinoid should be replaced with CBG in future clinical studies of glioblastoma therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Glioblastoma is the most common brain malignant tumor in the adult population, and immunotherapy is playing an increasingly central role in the treatment of many cancers. Nevertheless, the search for effective immunotherapeutic approaches for glioblastoma patients continues. The goal of immunotherapy is to promote tumor eradication, boost the patient's innate and adaptive immune responses, and overcome tumor immune resistance. A range of new, promising immunotherapeutic strategies has been applied for glioblastoma, including vaccines, oncolytic viruses, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and adoptive cell transfer. However, the main challenges of immunotherapy for glioblastoma are the intracranial location and heterogeneity of the tumor as well as the unique, immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Owing to the lack of appropriate tumor models, there are discrepancies in the efficiency of various immunotherapeutic strategies between preclinical studies (with in vitro and animal models) on the one hand and clinical studies (on humans) on the other hand. In this review, we summarize the glioblastoma characteristics that drive tolerance to immunotherapy, the currently used immunotherapeutic approaches against glioblastoma, and the most suitable tumor models to mimic conditions in glioblastoma patients. These models are improving and can more precisely predict patients' responses to immunotherapeutic treatments, either alone or in combination with standard treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In genetic toxicology, there is a trend against the increased use of in vivo models as highlighted by the 3R strategy, thus encouraging the development and implementation of alternative models. Two-dimensional (2D) hepatic cell models, which are generally used for studying the adverse effects of chemicals and consumer products, are prone to giving misleading results. On the other hand, newly developed hepatic three-dimensional (3D) cell models provide an attractive alternative, which, due to improved cell interactions and a higher level of liver-specific functions, including metabolic enzymes, reflect in vivo conditions more accurately. We developed an in vitro 3D cell model from the human hepatocellular carcinoma (HepG2) cell line. The spheroids were cultured under static conditions and characterised by monitoring their growth, morphology, and cell viability during the time of cultivation. A time-dependent suppression of cell division was observed. Cell cycle analysis showed time-dependent accumulation of cells in the G0/G1 phase. Moreover, time-dependent downregulation of proliferation markers was shown at the mRNA level. Genes encoding hepatic markers, metabolic phase I/II enzymes, were time-dependently deregulated compared to monolayers. New knowledge on the characteristics of the 3D cell model is of great importance for its further development and application in the safety assessment of chemicals, food products, and complex mixtures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]