IRE1α overexpression in malignant cells limits tumor progression by inducing an anti-cancer immune response

IRE1α is one of the three ER transmembrane transducers of the Unfolded Protein Response (UPR) activated under endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress. IRE1α activation has a dual role in cancer as it may be either pro- or anti-tumoral depending on the studied models. Here, we describe the discovery that exogenous expression of IRE1α, resulting in IRE1α auto-activation, did not affect cancer cell proliferation in vitro but resulted in a tumor-suppressive phenotype in syngeneic immunocompetent mice. We found that exogenous expression of IRE1α in murine colorectal and Lewis lung carcinoma cells impaired tumor growth when syngeneic tumor cells were subcutaneously implanted in immunocompetent mice but not in immunodeficient mice. Mechanistically, the in vivo tumor-suppressive effect of overexpressing IRE1α in tumor cells was associated with IRE1α RNAse activity driving both XBP1 mRNA splicing and regulated IRE1-dependent decay of RNA (RIDD). We showed that the tumor-suppressive phenotype upon IRE1α overexpression was characterized by the induction of apoptosis in tumor cells along with an enhanced adaptive anti-cancer immunosurveillance. Hence, our work indicates that IRE1α overexpression and/or activation in tumor cells can limit tumor growth in immunocompetent mice. This finding might point toward the need of adjusting the use of IRE1α inhibitors in cancer treatments based on the predominant outcome of the RNAse activity of IRE1α.

Tumoral microenvironment prevents de novo asparagine biosynthesis in B cell lymphoma, regardless of ASNS expression

Depletion of circulating asparagine with l-asparaginase (ASNase) is a mainstay of leukemia treatment and is under investigation in many cancers. Expression levels of asparagine synthetase (ASNS), which catalyzes asparagine synthesis, were considered predictive of cancer cell sensitivity to ASNase treatment, a notion recently challenged. Using [U-¹³C₅]-l-glutamine in vitro and in vivo in a mouse model of B cell lymphomas (BCLs), we demonstrated that supraphysiological or physiological concentrations of asparagine prevent de novo asparagine biosynthesis, regardless of ASNS expression levels. Overexpressing ASNS in ASNase-sensitive BCL was insufficient to confer resistance to ASNase treatment in vivo. Moreover, we showed that ASNase's glutaminase activity enables its maximal anticancer effect. Together, our results indicate that baseline ASNS expression (low or high) cannot dictate BCL dependence on de novo asparagine biosynthesis and predict BCL sensitivity to dual ASNase activity. Thus, except for ASNS-deficient cancer cells, ASNase's glutaminase activity should be considered in the clinic.

Physiological impact of in vivo stable isotope tracing on cancer metabolism

Background

There is growing interest in the analysis of tumor metabolism to identify cancer-specific metabolic vulnerabilities and therapeutic targets. Finding of such candidate metabolic pathways mainly relies on the highly sensitive identification and quantitation of numerous metabolites and metabolic fluxes using metabolomics and isotope tracing analyses. However, nutritional requirements and metabolic routes used by cancer cells cultivated in vitro do not always reflect the metabolic demands of malignant cells within the tumor milieu. Therefore, to understand how the metabolism of tumor cells in its physiological environment differs from that of normal cells, these analyses must be performed in vivo.

Scope of Review

This review covers the physiological impact of the exogenous administration of a stable isotope tracer into cancer animal models. We discuss specific aspects of in vivo isotope tracing protocols based on discrete bolus injections of a labeled metabolite: the tracer administration per se and the fasting period prior to it. In addition, we illustrate the complex physiological scenarios that arise when studying tumor metabolism – by isotopic labeling in animal models fed with a specific amino acid restricted diet. Finally, we provide strategies to minimize these limitations.

Major Conclusions

There is growing evidence that metabolic dependencies in cancers are influenced by tissue environment, cancer lineage, and genetic events. An increasing number of studies describe discrepancies in tumor metabolic dependencies when studied in in vitro settings or in vivo models, including cancer patients. Therefore, in-depth in vivo profiling of tumor metabolic routes within the appropriate pathophysiological environment will be key to identify relevant alterations that contribute to cancer onset and progression.

•

In vivo isotope tracing is the state-of-the-art approach to study tumor metabolism.

•

In vivo tracer administration challenges the physiological metabolism of mice.

•

Interorgan conversion of the tracer might confound tumor labeling patterns.

•

Mouse fasting before in vivo tracing impacts on systemic and tumor metabolism.

•

Optimization is key to minimize physiological alterations linked to in vivo tracing.