Translational control and the cancer cell response to stress

Protein biosynthesis, a target of sorafenib, interferes with the unfolded protein response (UPR) and ferroptosis in hepatocellular carcinoma cells

Sorafenib is the first line treatment for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We explored its impact on the proteostasis of cancer cells, i.e. the processes that regulate the synthesis, maturation and turn-over of cellular proteins. We observed that sorafenib inhibits the production of the tumour marker alpha-foetoprotein (AFP) in two different HCC cell lines, an effect that correlated with a radical inhibition of protein biosynthesis. This effect was observed at clinically relevant concentrations of sorafenib and was not related to the effect of sorafenib on the transport of amino acids across the plasma membrane or the induction of the unfolded protein response (UPR). Instead, we observed that sorafenib inhibits translation initiation and the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling cascade, as shown by the analysis of phosphorylation levels of the protein 4EBP1 (eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E binding protein 1). We explored the consequences of this inhibition in HCC cells. We observed that overall sorafenib is a weak inducer of the UPR that can paradoxically prevent the UPR induced by tunicamycin. We also found no direct synergistic anticancer effect between sorafenib and various strategies that inhibit the UPR. In agreement with the possibility that translation inhibition might be an adaptive stress response in HCC cells, we noted that it protects cancer cell from ferroptosis, a form of oxidative necrosis. Our findings point to the modulation of protein biosynthesis and mTOR signaling as being important, yet complex determinants of the response of HCC cells to sorafenib.

Embraced by eIF3: structural and functional insights into the roles of eIF3 across the translation cycle

Protein synthesis is mediated via numerous molecules including the ribosome, mRNA, tRNAs, as well as translation initiation, elongation and release factors. Some of these factors play several roles throughout the entire process to ensure proper assembly of the preinitiation complex on the right mRNA, accurate selection of the initiation codon, errorless production of the encoded polypeptide and its proper termination. Perhaps, the most intriguing of these multitasking factors is the eukaryotic initiation factor eIF3. Recent evidence strongly suggests that this factor, which coordinates the progress of most of the initiation steps, does not come off the initiation complex upon subunit joining, but instead it remains bound to 80S ribosomes and gradually falls off during the first few elongation cycles to: (1) promote resumption of scanning on the same mRNA molecule for reinitiation downstream—in case of translation of upstream ORFs short enough to preserve eIF3 bound; or (2) come back during termination on long ORFs to fine tune its fidelity or, if signaled, promote programmed stop codon readthrough. Here, we unite recent structural views of the eIF3–40S complex and discus all known eIF3 roles to provide a broad picture of the eIF3’s impact on translational control in eukaryotic cells.

Cancer as an ecomolecular disease and a neoplastic consortium

Current anticancer paradigms largely target driver mutations considered integral for cancer cell survival and tumor progression. Although initially successful, many of these strategies are unable to overcome the tremendous heterogeneity that characterizes advanced tumors, resulting in the emergence of resistant disease. Cancer is a rapidly evolving, multifactorial disease that accumulates numerous genetic and epigenetic alterations. This results in wide phenotypic and molecular heterogeneity within the tumor, the complexity of which is further amplified through specific interactions between cancer cells and the tumor microenvironment. In this context, cancer may be perceived as an "ecomolecular" disease that involves cooperation between several neoplastic clones and their interactions with immune cells, stromal fibroblasts, and other cell types present in the microenvironment. This collaboration is mediated by a variety of secreted factors. Cancer is therefore analogous to complex ecosystems such as microbial consortia. In the present article, we comment on the current paradigms and perspectives guiding the development of cancer diagnostics and therapeutics and the potential application of systems biology to untangle the complexity of neoplasia. In our opinion, conceptualization of neoplasia as an ecomolecular disease is warranted. Advances in knowledge pertinent to the complexity and dynamics of interactions within the cancer ecosystem are likely to improve understanding of tumor etiology, pathogenesis, and progression. This knowledge is anticipated to facilitate the design of new and more effective therapeutic approaches that target the tumor ecosystem in its entirety.