Succinate Anaplerosis Has an Onco-Driving Potential in Prostate Cancer Cells.

Tumor cells display metabolic alterations when compared to non-transformed cells. These characteristics are crucial for tumor development, maintenance and survival providing energy supplies and molecular precursors. Anaplerosis is the property of replenishing the TCA cycle, the hub of carbon metabolism, participating in the biosynthesis of precursors for building blocks or signaling molecules. In advanced prostate cancer, an upshift of succinate-driven oxidative phosphorylation via mitochondrial Complex II was reported. Here, using untargeted metabolomics, we found succinate accumulation mainly in malignant cells and an anaplerotic effect contributing to biosynthesis, amino acid, and carbon metabolism. Succinate also stimulated oxygen consumption. Malignant prostate cells displayed higher mitochondrial affinity for succinate when compared to non-malignant prostate cells and the succinate-driven accumulation of metabolites induced expression of mitochondrial complex subunits and their activities. Moreover, extracellular succinate stimulated migration, invasion, and colony formation. Several enzymes linked to accumulated metabolites in the malignant cells were found upregulated in tumor tissue datasets, particularly NME1 and SHMT2 mRNA expression. High expression of the two genes was associated with shorter disease-free survival in prostate cancer cohorts. Moreover, in-vitro expression of both genes was enhanced in prostate cancer cells upon succinate stimulation. In conclusion, the data indicate that uptake of succinate from the tumor environment has an anaplerotic effect that enhances the malignant potential of prostate cancer cells.

Constitutional mismatch repair deficiency is the diagnosis in 0.41% of pathogenic NF1/SPRED1 variant negative children suspected of sporadic neurofibromatosis type 1.

PURPOSE: Biallelic germline mismatch repair (MMR) gene pathogenic variants (PVs) cause constitutional MMR deficiency (CMMRD), a highly penetrant childhood cancer syndrome phenotypically overlapping with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). CMMRD testing in suspected NF1 children without NF1/SPRED1 PVs enables inclusion of CMMRD positives into monitoring programs prior to tumor onset. However, testing is associated with potential harms and the prevalence of CMMRD among these children is unknown. METHODS: Using a simple and scalable microsatellite instability (MSI) assay of non-neoplastic leukocyte DNA to detect CMMRD, we retrospectively screened >700 children suspected of sporadic NF1 but lacking NF1/SPRED1 PVs. RESULTS: For three of seven MSI-positive patients germline MMR gene PVs confirmed the diagnosis of CMMRD. Founder variants NM_000535.5(PMS2):c.736_741delinsTGTGTGTGAAG, prevalent in Europe and North America, and NM_000179.2(MSH6):c.10C>G, affecting 1:400 French Canadians, represented two of five PVs. The prevalence of CMMRD was 3/735 (0.41%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-1.19%). CONCLUSION: Our empirical data provide reliable numbers for genetic counseling and confirm previous prevalence estimations, on which Care for CMMRD consortium guidelines are based. These advocate CMMRD testing of preselected patients rather than offering reflex testing to all suspected sporadic NF1 children lacking NF1/SPRED1 PVs. The possibility of founder effects should be considered alongside these testing guidelines.