Carcinogenesis in Down syndrome: What can be learned from trisomy 21?

Natural resistance to cancer: A window of hope

As healthcare systems are improving and thereby the life expectancy of human populations is increasing, cancer is representing itself as the second leading cause of death. Although cancer biologists have put enormous effort on cancer research so far, we still have a long way to go before being able to treat cancers efficiently. One interesting approach in cancer biology is to learn from natural resistance and/or predisposition to cancer. Cancer-resistant species and tissues are thought-provoking models whose study shed light on the inherent cancer resistance mechanisms that arose during the course of evolution. On the other hand, there are some syndromes and factors that increase the risk of cancer development, and revealing their underlying mechanisms will increase our knowledge about the process of cancer formation. Here, we review natural resistance and predisposition to cancer and the known mechanisms at play. Further insights from these natural phenomena will help design future cancer research and could ultimately lead to the development of novel cancer therapeutic strategies.

Paradoxical Behavior of Oncogenes Undermines the Somatic Mutation Theory

The currently accepted theory on the influence of DNA mutations on carcinogenesis (the Somatic Mutation Theory, SMT) is facing an increasing number of controversial results that undermine the explanatory power of mutated genes considered as "causative" factors. Intriguing results have demonstrated that several critical genes may act differently, as oncogenes or tumor suppressors, while phenotypic reversion of cancerous cells/tissues can be achieved by modifying the microenvironment, the mutations they are carrying notwithstanding. Furthermore, a high burden of mutations has been identified in many non-cancerous tissues without any apparent pathological consequence. All things considered, a relevant body of unexplained inconsistencies calls for an in depth rewiring of our theoretical models. Ignoring these paradoxes is no longer sustainable. By avoiding these conundrums, the scientific community will deprive itself of the opportunity to achieve real progress in this important biomedical field. To remedy this situation, we need to embrace new theoretical perspectives, taking the cell-microenvironment interplay as the privileged pathogenetic level of observation, and by assuming new explanatory models based on truly different premises. New theoretical frameworks dawned in the last two decades principally focus on the complex interaction between cells and their microenvironment, which is thought to be the critical level from which carcinogenesis arises. Indeed, both molecular and biophysical components of the stroma can dramatically drive cell fate commitment and cell outcome in opposite directions, even in the presence of the same stimulus. Therefore, such a novel approach can help in solving apparently inextricable paradoxes that are increasingly observed in cancer biology.

The Paradox of Myeloid Leukemia Associated with Down Syndrome

Children with Down syndrome constitute a distinct genetic population who has a greater risk of developing acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) compared to their non-Down syndrome counterparts. The risk for developing solid tumors is also distinct from the non-Down syndrome population. In the case of myeloid leukemias, the process of leukemogenesis in Trisomy 21 begins in early fetal life where genetic drivers including GATA1 mutations lead to the development of the preleukemic condition, transient abnormal myelopoiesis (TAM). Various other mutations in genes encoding cohesin, epigenetic regulators and RAS pathway can result in subsequent progression to Myeloid Leukemia associated with Down Syndrome (ML-DS). The striking paradoxical feature in the Down syndrome population is that even though there is a higher predisposition to developing AML, they are also very sensitive to chemotherapy agents, particularly cytarabine, thus accounting for the very high cure rates for ML-DS compared to AML in children without Down syndrome. Current clinical trials for ML-DS attempt to balance effective curative therapies while trying to reduce treatment-associated toxicities including infections by de-intensifying chemotherapy doses, if possible. The small proportion of patients with relapsed ML-DS have an extremely poor prognosis and require the development of new therapies.

Ten Reasons Why People With Down Syndrome are Protected From the Development of Most Solid Tumors -A Review

People with Down syndrome have unique characteristics as a result of the presence of an extra chromosome 21. Regarding cancer, they present a unique pattern of tumors, which has not been fully explained to date. Globally, people with Down syndrome have a similar lifetime risk of developing cancer compared to the general population. However, they have a very increased risk of developing certain tumors (e.g., acute leukemia, germ cell tumors, testicular tumors and retinoblastoma) and, on the contrary, there are some other tumors which appear only exceptionally in this syndrome (e.g., breast cancer, prostate cancer, medulloblastoma, neuroblastoma and Wilms tumor). Various hypotheses have been developed to explain this situation. The genetic imbalance secondary to the presence of an extra chromosome 21 has molecular consequences at several levels, not only in chromosome 21 but also throughout the genome. In this review, we discuss the different proposed mechanisms that protect individuals with trisomy 21 from developing solid tumors: genetic dosage effect, tumor suppressor genes overexpression, disturbed metabolism, impaired neurogenesis and angiogenesis, increased apoptosis, immune system dysregulation, epigenetic aberrations and the effect of different microRNAs, among others. More research into the molecular pathways involved in this unique pattern of malignancies is still needed.

Down syndrome iPSC model: endothelial perspective on tumor development

Trisomy 21 (T21), known as Down syndrome (DS), is a widely studied chromosomal abnormality. Previous studies have shown that DS individuals have a unique cancer profile. While exhibiting low solid tumor prevalence, DS patients are at risk for hematologic cancers, such as acute megakaryocytic leukemia and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. We speculated that endothelial cells are active players in this clinical background. To this end, we hypothesized that impaired DS endothelial development and functionality, impacted by genome-wide T21 alterations, potentially results in a suboptimal endothelial microenvironment with the capability to prevent solid tumor growth.

To test this hypothesis, we assessed molecular and phenotypic differences of endothelial cells differentiated from Down syndrome and euploid iPS cells. Microarray, RNA-Seq, and bioinformatic analyses revealed that most significantly expressed genes belong to angiogenic, cytoskeletal rearrangement, extracellular matrix remodeling, and inflammatory pathways. Interestingly, the majority of these genes are not located on Chromosome 21. To substantiate these findings, we carried out functional assays. The obtained phenotypic results correlated with the molecular data and showed that Down syndrome endothelial cells exhibit decreased proliferation, reduced migration, and a weak TNF-α inflammatory response. Based on this data, we provide a set of genes potentially associated with Down syndrome’s elevated leukemic incidence and its unfavorable solid tumor microenvironment—highlighting the potential use of these genes as therapeutic targets in translational cancer research.

SMT and TOFT: Why and How They are Opposite and Incompatible Paradigms

The Somatic Mutation Theory (SMT) has been challenged on its fundamentals by the Tissue Organization Field Theory of Carcinogenesis (TOFT). However, a recent publication has questioned whether TOFT could be a valid alternative theory of carcinogenesis to that presented by SMT. Herein we critically review arguments supporting the irreducible opposition between the two theoretical approaches by highlighting differences regarding the philosophical, methodological and experimental approaches on which they respectively rely. We conclude that SMT has not explained carcinogenesis due to severe epistemological and empirical shortcomings, while TOFT is gaining momentum. The main issue is actually to submit SMT to rigorous testing. This concern includes the imperatives to seek evidence for disproving one's hypothesis, and to consider the whole, and not just selective evidence.

Are GATA1 mutations occurring at random in Down syndrome transient leukemia?

The somatic mutation theory of cancer proposes that cancer begins with a somatic mutation occurring at random in a single cell that then passes the mutation to its progeny, generating a clone of premalignant cells. This clone leads to a full malignant tumor through additional mutations and selection processes. Strikingly, the best-documented human model of early oncogenesis, i.e., transient myeloproliferative disorder followed by acute megakaryoblastic leukemia (AMKL) in infants with Down syndrome (DS, or trisomy 21), exhibits important discrepancies with the SMT. Somatic mutations in megakaryocytic precursors occur at least 100,000 times more frequently in the GATA1 gene in fetuses with DS compared to the general population. Further, mutations are limited to GATA1 only; the general mutation rate does not significantly differ between individuals with DS and euploid individuals. Importantly, the mutations are also lineage-specific, occurring only in the megakaryocytic lineage, and proliferative anomalies of the megakaryocytic lineage are observed before the occurrence of GATA1 mutations. Thus, GATA1 mutations in fetuses with DS cannot be random events occurring in normal cells. Here, transcription-associated mutagenesis is proposed as the mechanism by which the earliest mutations of AMKL occur in DS. Transcription-associated mutagenesis is observed in non-dividing cells when a gene is over-expressed. The over-expression of GATA1 in the megakaryocytic lineage in DS fetal liver cells is proposed to be the cause of targeted GATA1 somatic mutations. As transcription-associated mutagenesis is a universal process, this mechanism may also apply to early oncogenesis in other situations, including after birth and following exposure to a carcinogenic agent. Thus, this hypothesis represents a new avenue for understanding and exploring oncogenesis in the context of DS and in other disease states.

[Trisomy 21 and cancers]

Patients with trisomy 21, still called Down's syndrome (DS), present a particular tumoral profile compared to the general population with an increased incidence of leukaemia in the childhood and a low risk of solid cancer in the adulthood. DS children indeed present a 50-fold risk of developing a leukaemia compared to age-matched non-trisomic children and most of them develop a specific myelodysplasic disorder called transient myelodysplasic disorder. In spite of the low incidence of solid tumors, some are very rare as breast cancer, nephroblastoma, neuroblastoma and medulloblastoma, whereas the others remain more frequent as retinoblastoma, lymphoma and gonadal and extragonadal germ cell tumours. In this review, we present possible mechanisms which can favour, or on the contrary repress the formation and progression of tumours in DS patients, which are related to gene effect dosage of oncogenes or tumour repressors on chromosome 21, tumour angiogenesis, apoptosis and epithelial cell-stroma interactions.

Purification and biochemical characterization of glutathione S-transferase from Down syndrome and normal children erythrocytes: a comparative study

Down syndrome (DS) is the phenotypic manifestation of trisomy 21. Our study was concerned with the characterization and purification of glutathione S-transferase enzyme (GST) from normal and Down syndrome (DS) erythrocytes to illustrate the difference in the role of this enzyme in the cell. Glutathione S-transferase and glutathione (GSH) was determined in ten DS and ten healthy children matched for age (3-10 years). DS group exhibited significantly lower GST value (2.7 units/gHb) as compared to controls (6.6 units/gHb) (40.9%). GST activity was significantly decreased to 40.9% in the DS group as compared to controls. Also GSH concentration was significantly decreased to 60.6% in the DS group compared to the controls. Glutathione transferase was purified from erythrocytes of normal and DS pooled blood samples by affinity chromatography with specific activity of 23.7% and 7.9%, respectively. The effect of freezing and thawing, storage time of freezing and GSH concentration on the stability of the enzyme were examined. Normal GST exhibited a pH optimum at pH 7 followed by sharp decrease, however DS GST exhibited pH optimum between pH 7.5 and 8. The Km values for 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (CDNB) and GSH were 0.205 mM and 0.786 mM, respectively, for normal GST, and 0.318 mM and 1.307 mM, respectively for DS GST. The activation energy (Ea) was calculated to be 2.25 and 4.25 cal/mol for normal GST and 3.8 cal/mol for DS GST. Normal and DS GST were inhibited by the same inhibitors (hematin, bromosulfophthalein and cibacron blue), but with different degree. On kinetic basis, the individuals with lower overall GST activity and slight differences in some kinetic characters are at greater risk from xenobiotic contamination as compared to those with higher overall GST activity observed in normal individuals.

Tongue carcinoma in an adult Down's syndrome patient: a case report

BACKGROUND

Cancer of the oral cavity is rare and unusual in Down's syndrome patient. The over all risk is similar to that in adult population.

CASE PRESENTATION

This case report describes a 27 years old male with Down's syndrome, non-smoker, who developed a poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue. The patient underwent a hemiglossectomy without neck dissection followed by a postoperative locoregional radiation therapy to a total tumor-bed dose of 56 Gy and 45 Gy to the neck. Three months later, the patient presented with local tongue recurrence and was treated by Docetaxel and Carboplatin chemotherapy with no significant response. The patient died one month later, 9 months after his initial diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first case of tongue carcinoma arising in a patient with Down's syndrome. This unique case might not be sufficient to make a significant conclusion on the prognosis and survival of these patients but will increase the awareness about this possibility and will help in the appropriate management of Down's syndrome patients.