Mutation in SF3B1 gene promotes formation of polyploid giant cells in Leukemia cells

Polyploid Giant Cancer Cells: A Distinctive Feature in the Transformation of Epithelial Cells by High-Risk Oncogenic HCMV Strains

Human cytomegalovirus (HCMV) infection is common in tumor tissues across different types of cancer. While HCMV has not been recognized as a cancer-causing virus, numerous studies hint at its potential role in cancer development where its presence in various cancers corresponds with the hallmarks of cancer. Herein, we discuss and demonstrate that high-risk HCMV-DB and BL strains have the potential to trigger transformation in epithelial cells, including human mammary epithelial cells (HMECs), ovarian epithelial cells (OECs), and prostate epithelial cells (PECs), through the generation of polyploid giant cancer cells (PGCCs). A discussion is provided on how HCMV infection creates a cellular environment that promotes oncogenesis, supporting the continuous growth of CMV-transformed cells. The aforementioned transformed cells, named CTH, CTO, and CTP cells, underwent giant cell cycling with PGCC generation parallel to dedifferentiation, displaying stem-like characteristics and an epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) phenotype. Furthermore, we propose that giant cell cycling through PGCCs, increased EZH2 expression, EMT, and the acquisition of malignant traits represent a deleterious response to the cellular stress induced by high-risk oncogenic HCMV strains, the latter being the origin of the transformation process in epithelial cells upon HCMV infection and leading to adenocarcinoma of poor prognosis.

Dormant cancer cells and polyploid giant cancer cells: The roots of cancer recurrence and metastasis

Tumour cell dormancy is critical for metastasis and resistance to chemoradiotherapy. Polyploid giant cancer cells (PGCCs) with giant or multiple nuclei and high DNA content have the properties of cancer stem cell and single PGCCs can individually generate tumours in immunodeficient mice. PGCCs represent a dormant form of cancer cells that survive harsh tumour conditions and contribute to tumour recurrence. Hypoxic mimics, chemotherapeutics, radiation and cytotoxic traditional Chinese medicines can induce PGCCs formation through endoreduplication and/or cell fusion. After incubation, dormant PGCCs can recover from the treatment and produce daughter cells with strong proliferative, migratory and invasive abilities via asymmetric cell division. Additionally, PGCCs can resist hypoxia or chemical stress and have a distinct protein signature that involves chromatin remodelling and cell cycle regulation. Dormant PGCCs form the cellular basis for therapeutic resistance, metastatic cascade and disease recurrence. This review summarises regulatory mechanisms governing dormant cancer cells entry and exit of dormancy, which may be used by PGCCs, and potential therapeutic strategies for targeting PGCCs.

Perspectives and mechanisms for targeting mitotic catastrophe in cancer treatment

Mitotic catastrophe is distinct from other cell death modes due to unique nuclear alterations characterized as multi and/or micronucleation. Mitotic catastrophe is a common and virtually unavoidable consequence during cancer therapy. However, a comprehensive understanding of mitotic catastrophe remains lacking. Herein, we summarize the anticancer drugs that induce mitotic catastrophe, including microtubule-targeting agents, spindle assembly checkpoint kinase inhibitors, DNA damage agents and DNA damage response inhibitors. Based on the relationships between mitotic catastrophe and other cell death modes, we thoroughly evaluated the roles played by mitotic catastrophe in cancer treatment as well as its advantages and disadvantages. Some strategies for overcoming its shortcomings while fully utilizing its advantages are summarized and proposed in this review. We also review how mitotic catastrophe regulates cancer immunotherapy. These summarized findings suggest that the induction of mitotic catastrophe can serve as a promising new therapeutic approach for overcoming apoptosis resistance and strengthening cancer immunotherapy.

Polyploid Giant Cancer Cells Are Frequently Found in the Urine of Prostate Cancer Patients

Prostate cancer is the third cause of cancer-related deaths in men. Its early and reliable diagnosis is still a public health issue, generating many useless prostate biopsies. Prostate cancer cells detected in urine could be the target of a powerful test but they are considered too rare. By using an approach targeting rare cells, we have analyzed urine from 45 patients with prostate cancer and 43 healthy subjects under 50 y.o. We observed a relevant number of giant cells in patients with cancer. Giant cells, named Polyploid Giant Cancer Cells (PGCC), are thought to be involved in tumorigenesis and treatment resistance. We thus performed immune-morphological studies with cancer-related markers such as α-methylacyl-CoA racemase (AMACR), prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), and telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) to understand if the giant cells we found are PGCC or other urinary cells. We found PGCC in the urine of 22 patients, including those with early-stage prostate cancer, and one healthy subject. Although these results are preliminary, they provide, for the first time, clinical evidence that prostate cancers release PGCC into the urine. They are expected to stimulate further studies aimed at understanding the role of urinary PGCC and their possible use as a diagnostic tool and therapeutic target.

Circulating cancer giant cells with unique characteristics frequently found in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS)

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are incurable diseases characterized by dysplastic hematopoietic cells, cytopenias in the blood and an inherent tendency for transformation to secondary acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Since most therapies fail to prevent rapid clonal evolution and disease resistance, new and non-invasive predictive markers are needed to monitor patients and adapt the therapeutic strategy. By using ISET, a very sensitive approach to isolate cells larger than mature leukocytes from peripheral blood samples, we looked for cellular markers in 99 patients (158 samples) with MDS and 66 healthy individuals (76 samples) used as controls. We found a total of 680 Giant Cells, defined as cells having a size of 40 microns or larger in 46 MDS patients (80 samples) and 28 Giant Cells in 11 healthy individuals (11 samples). In order to understand if we had enriched from peripheral blood atypical cells of the megakaryocyte line, we studied the Giant Cells using immunolabeling with megakaryocytes and tumor-specific markers. We report that the Giant Cells we found in the peripheral blood of MDS patients primarily express tumor markers. Our results show that Polyploid Giant Cancer Cells (PGCC), similar to those described in solid tumors, are found in the peripheral blood of patients with MDS and suggest the working hypothesis that they could play a role in hematological malignancies.

Spatiotemporal view of malignant histogenesis and macroevolution via formation of polyploid giant cancer cells

To understand how malignant tumors develop, we tracked cell membrane, nuclear membrane, spindle, and cell cycle dynamics in polyploid giant cancer cells (PGCCs) during the formation of high-grade serous carcinoma organoids using long-term time-lapse imaging. Single cells underwent traditional mitosis to generate tissue with uniform nuclear size, while others formed PGCCs via asymmetric mitosis, endoreplication, multipolar endomitosis, nuclear fusion, and karyokinesis without cytokinesis. PGCCs underwent restitution multipolar endomitosis, nuclear fragmentation, and micronuclei formation to increase nuclear contents and heterogeneity. At the cellular level, the development of PGCCs was associated with forming transient intracellular cells, termed fecundity cells. The fecundity cells can be decellularized to facilitate nuclear fusion and synchronized with other nuclei for subsequent nuclear replication. PGCCs can undergo several rounds of entosis to form complex tissue structures, termed fecundity structures. The formation of PGCCs via multiple modes of nuclear replication in the absence of cytokinesis leads to an increase in the nuclear-to-cytoplasmic (N/C) ratio and intracellular cell reproduction, which is remarkably similar to the mode of nuclear division during pre-embryogenesis. Our data support that PGCCs may represent a central regulator in malignant histogenesis, intratumoral heterogeneity, immune escape, and macroevolution via the de-repression of suppressed pre-embryogenic program in somatic cells.

What Are the Reasons for Continuing Failures in Cancer Therapy? Are Misleading/Inappropriate Preclinical Assays to Be Blamed? Might Some Modern Therapies Cause More Harm than Benefit?

Over 50 years of cancer research has resulted in the generation of massive amounts of information, but relatively little progress has been made in the treatment of patients with solid tumors, except for extending their survival for a few months at best. Here, we will briefly discuss some of the reasons for this failure, focusing on the limitations and sometimes misunderstanding of the clinical relevance of preclinical assays that are widely used to identify novel anticancer drugs and treatment strategies (e.g., "synthetic lethality"). These include colony formation, apoptosis (e.g., caspase-3 activation), immunoblotting, and high-content multiwell plate cell-based assays, as well as tumor growth studies in animal models. A major limitation is that such assays are rarely designed to recapitulate the tumor repopulating properties associated with therapy-induced cancer cell dormancy (durable proliferation arrest) reflecting, for example, premature senescence, polyploidy and/or multinucleation. Furthermore, pro-survival properties of apoptotic cancer cells through phoenix rising, failed apoptosis, and/or anastasis (return from the brink of death), as well as cancer immunoediting and the impact of therapeutic agents on interactions between cancer and immune cells are often overlooked in preclinical studies. A brief review of the history of cancer research makes one wonder if modern strategies for treating patients with solid tumors may sometimes cause more harm than benefit.