Fructose Causes Liver Damage, Polyploidy, and Dysplasia in the Setting of Short Telomeres and p53 Loss

Hepatic macrophage mediated immune response in liver steatosis driven carcinogenesis

Obesity confers an independent risk for carcinogenesis. Classically viewed as a genetic disease, owing to the discovery of tumor suppressors and oncogenes, genetic events alone are not sufficient to explain the progression and development of cancers. Tumor development is often associated with metabolic and immunological changes. In particular, obesity is found to significantly increase the mortality rate of liver cancer. As its role is not defined, a fundamental question is whether and how metabolic changes drive the development of cancer. In this review, we will dissect the current literature demonstrating that liver lipid dysfunction is a critical component driving the progression of cancer. We will discuss the involvement of inflammation in lipid dysfunction driven liver cancer development with a focus on the involvement of liver macrophages. We will first discuss the association of steatosis with liver cancer. This will be followed with a literature summary demonstrating the importance of inflammation and particularly macrophages in the progression of liver steatosis and highlighting the evidence that macrophages and macrophage produced inflammatory mediators are critical for liver cancer development. We will then discuss the specific inflammatory mediators and their roles in steatosis driven liver cancer development. Finally, we will summarize the molecular pattern (PAMP and DAMP) as well as lipid particle signals that are involved in the activation, infiltration and reprogramming of liver macrophages. We will also discuss some of the therapies that may interfere with lipid metabolism and also affect liver cancer development.

Low Birth Weight Intensifies Changes in Markers of Hepatocarcinogenesis Induced by Fructose Consumption in Rats

Intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) due to fetal exposure to glucocorticoid excess results in metabolic inflexibility and hepatic steatosis upon nutritional stress during adulthood. We previously demonstrated that rats born to dexamethasone (DEX)-treated mothers developed hepatic steatosis when exposed to 10% fructose solution during adult life. Persistent triacylglyceride (TAG) accumulation in the liver, in turn, is a feature of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), which serves as a risk factor for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In the present study, we demonstrate that the combination of IUGR and fructose treatment during adulthood also results in increased hepatic myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity, AKT phosphorylation and serum aspartate transaminase. Growth-restricted rats also presented reduced hepatic TRIB3 and GADD45a after fructose treatment. Other markers of cell proliferation, such as Cyclin D, PCNA, Hgf and Hspa4/Hsp70 expression and the number of Ki-67 positive cells, were all increased in the liver of growth- restricted rats treated with fructose. On the other hand, the combination of IUGR and fructose treatment during adult life reduced the levels of IGF-1. In conclusion, our data indicate that after exposure to fructose, adult rats subjected to dexamethasone-induced IUGR display exacerbated molecular changes in markers of NASH and HCC.

Proteomic Analysis of Human Serum for Patients at Different Pathological Stages of Hepatic Fibrosis

Background

Hepatic fibrosis is a severe liver disease that has threatened human health for a long time. In order to undergo timely and adequate therapy, it is important for patients to obtain an accurate diagnosis of fibrosis. Laboratory inspection methods have been efficient in distinguishing between advanced hepatic fibrosis stages (F3, F4), but the identification of early stages of fibrosis has not been achieved. The development of proteomics may provide us with a new direction to identify the stages of fibrosis.

Methods

We established serum proteomic maps for patients with hepatic fibrosis at different stages and identified differential expression of proteins between fibrosis stages through ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry proteomic analysis.

Results

From the proteomic profiles of the serum of patients with different stages of liver fibrosis, a total of 1,338 proteins were identified. Among three early fibrosis stages (control, F1, and F2), 55 differential proteins were identified, but no proteins simultaneously exhibited differential expression between control, F1, and F2. Differential proteins were detected in the comparison between different fibrosis stages. Significant differences were found between advanced fibrosis stages (F2-vs.-F3 and F3-vs.-F4) through a series of statistical analysis, including hierarchical clustering, Gene Ontology (GO) functional annotation, Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathway, and protein-protein interaction network analysis. The differential proteins identified by GO annotation were associated with biological processes (mainly platelet degranulation and cell adhesion), molecular functions, and cellular components.

Conclusions

All potential biomarkers identified between the stages of fibrosis could be key points in determining the fibrosis staging. The differences between early stages may provide a useful reference in addressing the challenge of early fibrosis staging.