Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   ^
Old Sun, Apr-06-14, 01:37
Demi's Avatar
Demi Demi is offline
Posts: 26,753
 
Plan: Muscle Centric
Stats: 238/153/160 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 109%
Location: UK
Default Melanoma cells found to be addicted to glucose, offering new treatment hope

Quote:
4 April, 2014

Sugar junkies: Melanoma cells found to be addicted to glucose, offering new treatment hope

Researchers at Melbourne’s Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre have revealed melanoma cells are dependent on glucose to grow and spread, opening the door to the development of new therapies focused on blocking glucose use.

In a paper published today in Cancer Discovery, the academic journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, the research team found that melanomas driven by mutations in the BRAF gene, comprising 40 per cent of all melanoma cases, rely on glucose as readily available fuel to drive their aggressive growth.

Professor Rod Hicks: Director, Centre for Cancer Imaging at Peter Mac says the laboratory research project, supported with a project grant from
Cancer Council Victoria, was prompted by clinical diagnostic PET/CT scans — used to monitor the metabolic activity of melanomas during treatment — which showed that, almost immediately after the start of treatment, melanoma cells stop drawing in glucose but don’t necessarily die.

‘Malignant melanoma cells are among the most intensely bright tumours when scanned with PET imaging, suggesting they have a strong appetite for glucose to support cell growth
.
‘We previously thought the reduction in glucose uptake by melanoma was a result of cell death caused by cancer treatments; we have now found most cells actually die as a result of being starved of glucose, while a small number manage to find a way to survive.

’Professor Grant McArthur: Chair, Melanoma and Skin Service and Head, Cancer Therapeutics Program at Peter Mac says research efforts will now concentrate on mechanisms of resistance; the genomic changes in melanoma that allow tumours to survive a ‘drought’ of blocked glucose use.

‘Targeted therapies in melanoma have provided months and, in some cases, years of high - quality life to people with advanced disease — which is generally around eight months if untreated — but these patients invariably relapse over time, as melanoma cells either find alternative fuels, or enter a “self-eating” phase, similar to the manner in which a person’s body breaks down fat and muscle to survive starvation, before finding ways to turn their fuel source back on.

‘This vulnerable stage, when melanoma cells are overcoming their sugar addiction, presents an attractive target for new treatments, and we’re investigating combination therapies to eradicate cancer cells that are managing to survive, even when their fuel source is cut off.
http://www.petermac.org/news/sugar-...-treatment-hope




Quote:
Response of BRAF-Mutant Melanoma to BRAF Inhibition Is Mediated by a Network of Transcriptional Regulators of Glycolysis

Abstract

Deregulated glucose metabolism fulfills the energetic and biosynthetic requirements for tumor growth driven by oncogenes. Because inhibition of oncogenic BRAF causes profound reductions in glucose uptake and a strong clinical benefit in BRAF-mutant melanoma, we examined the role of energy metabolism in responses to BRAF inhibition. We observed pronounced and consistent decreases in glycolytic activity in BRAF-mutant melanoma cells. Moreover, we identified a network of BRAF-regulated transcription factors that control glycolysis in melanoma cells. Remarkably, this network of transcription factors, including hypoxia-inducible factor-1α, MYC, and MONDOA (MLXIP), drives glycolysis downstream of BRAFV600, is critical for responses to BRAF inhibition, and is modulated by BRAF inhibition in clinical melanoma specimens. Furthermore, we show that concurrent inhibition of BRAF and glycolysis induces cell death in BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi)–resistant melanoma cells. Thus, we provide a proof-of-principle for treatment of melanoma with combinations of BRAFis and glycolysis inhibitors.

Significance: BRAFis suppress glycolysis and provide strong clinical benefit in BRAFV600 melanoma. We show that BRAF inhibition suppresses glycolysis via a network of transcription factors that are critical for complete BRAFi responses. Furthermore, we provide evidence for the clinical potential of therapies that combine BRAFis with glycolysis inhibitors. Cancer Discov; 4(4); 423–33.

http://cancerdiscovery.aacrjournals.../4/423.abstract
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2   ^
Old Mon, Apr-07-14, 03:01
LC FP LC FP is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,162
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 228/195/188 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 83%
Location: Erie PA
Default

Thanks for the link. BRAF is an oncogene that drives cells to increase glycolysis. This would be an early step in the development of melanoma. Inhibiting BRAF with a drug results in a marked decrease in glucose uptake and glycolysis in most melanoma cells, and basically causes death of those cells, and it causes a marked slowdown or stoppage of growth in the few cells remaining. But eventually the remaining cells develop a work-around and resume glycolysis, and as a result a recurrence of the tumor.

Part of the study reported here was to add another glycolysis inhibitor, our old friend DCA, to the mix, and they found that it killed off the surviving cells, possibly resulting in an extended remission or maybe a cure. They mention that DCA has been used in neuroblastoma and that in the dosages needed to be effective, toxicities were excessive. I guess that's why we haven't heard any updates from the University of Alberta doc who caused the big stir with DCA a few years back.

Apparently they're working on other glycolysis inhibitors that are less toxic, and no doubt a lot more expensive!
Reply With Quote
  #3   ^
Old Mon, Apr-07-14, 08:21
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,865
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Wow! Exciting stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #4   ^
Old Mon, Apr-07-14, 10:23
ojoj's Avatar
ojoj ojoj is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,184
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 210/126/127 Female 5ft 7in
BF:
Progress: 101%
Location: South of England
Default

Call me dumb, but isnt glycolysis the fuel if you eat carbs and opposite to ketogenic?????? In which case, do they need to make expensive inhibiting medications???? Cant they simply recommend a ketogenic diet??? - or am I being over simplistic?????

Jo xxx
Reply With Quote
  #5   ^
Old Mon, Apr-07-14, 10:27
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,865
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Your body still requires glucose and you'd die without the little bit it requires. Protein is easily converted to glucose. Fat is too, but not as easily.

The ketogenic diet for cancer is one that also restricts calories and protein. That diet lowers glucose which would also lower glycolysis (is a process of converting glucose to other stuff).
Reply With Quote
  #6   ^
Old Mon, Apr-07-14, 10:29
ojoj's Avatar
ojoj ojoj is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,184
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 210/126/127 Female 5ft 7in
BF:
Progress: 101%
Location: South of England
Default

Call me dumb, but isnt glycolysis the fuel if you eat carbs and opposite to ketogenic?????? In which case, do they need to make expensive inhibiting medications???? Cant they simply recommend a ketogenic diet??? - or am I being over simplistic?????

Jo xxx
Reply With Quote
  #7   ^
Old Mon, Apr-07-14, 15:36
Zei Zei is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,596
 
Plan: Carb reduction in general
Stats: 230/185/180 Female 5 ft 9 in
BF:
Progress: 90%
Location: Texas
Default

Even on a really low carb diet I still tend to run somewhat on the high side blood sugars, so my body seems to be manufacturing more glucose than I understand the need for. So I'm guessing while a ketogenic diet is really significant for cutting back the carbs, more treatment is needed or the body just may keep making enough carbs on its own to keep everybody happy, cancer cells and all.
Reply With Quote
  #8   ^
Old Mon, Apr-07-14, 20:08
LC FP LC FP is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,162
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 228/195/188 Male 72 inches
BF:
Progress: 83%
Location: Erie PA
Default

Right Zei your liver will always make enough glucose to keep your blood sugar levels in the normal range, which is just fine for cancer cells. So more treatment is needed. If cancer cells consume 20 times more glucose than normal cells, but only get 2 ATP per glucose used, then if you can slow down glycolysis by just a little, those cells would have to consume 30 or 40 times as much glucose, which maybe isn't possible. At that point they will have to switch to oxidative phosphorylation (through their mitochondria), which could be the switch that kills the cancer cell.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:46.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.