METTL1 promotes tumorigenesis through tRNA-derived fragment biogenesis in prostate cancer.

Newly growing evidence highlights the essential role that epitranscriptomic marks play in the development of many cancers; however, little is known about the role and implications of altered epitranscriptome deposition in prostate cancer. Here, we show that the transfer RNA N7-methylguanosine (m7G) transferase METTL1 is highly expressed in primary and advanced prostate tumours. Mechanistically, we find that METTL1 depletion causes the loss of m7G tRNA methylation and promotes the biogenesis of a novel class of small non-coding RNAs derived from 5'tRNA fragments. 5'tRNA-derived small RNAs steer translation control to favour the synthesis of key regulators of tumour growth suppression, interferon pathway, and immune effectors. Knockdown of Mettl1 in prostate cancer preclinical models increases intratumoural infiltration of pro-inflammatory immune cells and enhances responses to immunotherapy. Collectively, our findings reveal a therapeutically actionable role of METTL1-directed m7G tRNA methylation in cancer cell translation control and tumour biology.

The role of m6A, m5C and Ψ RNA modifications in cancer: Novel therapeutic opportunities.

RNA modifications have recently emerged as critical posttranscriptional regulators of gene expression programmes. Significant advances have been made in understanding the functional role of RNA modifications in regulating coding and non-coding RNA processing and function, which in turn thoroughly shape distinct gene expression programmes. They affect diverse biological processes, and the correct deposition of many of these modifications is required for normal development. Alterations of their deposition are implicated in several diseases, including cancer. In this Review, we focus on the occurrence of N6-methyladenosine (m6A), 5-methylcytosine (m5C) and pseudouridine (Ψ) in coding and non-coding RNAs and describe their physiopathological role in cancer. We will highlight the latest insights into the mechanisms of how these posttranscriptional modifications influence tumour development, maintenance, and progression. Finally, we will summarize the latest advances on the development of small molecule inhibitors that target specific writers or erasers to rewind the epitranscriptome of a cancer cell and their therapeutic potential.

Value of Early Circulating Tumor Cells Dynamics to Estimate Docetaxel Benefit in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) Patients.

Circulating tumor cell (CTC) enumeration and changes following treatment have been demonstrated to be superior to PSA response in determining mCRPC outcome in patients receiving AR signaling inhibitors but not taxanes. We carried out a pooled analysis of two prospective studies in mCRPC patients treated with docetaxel. CTCs were measured at baseline and 3-6 weeks post treatment initiation. Cox regression models were constructed to compare 6-month radiographical progression-free survival (rPFS), CTCs and PSA changes predicting outcome. Among the subjects, 80 and 52 patients had evaluable baseline and post-treatment CTC counts, respectively. A significant association of higher baseline CTC count with worse overall survival (OS), PFS and time to PSA progression (TTPP) was observed. While CTC response at 3-6 weeks (CTC conversion (from ≥5 to <5 CTCs), CTC30 (≥30% decline in CTC) or CTC0 (decline to 0 CTC)) and 6-month rPFS were significantly associated with OS (all p < 0.005), the association was not significant for PSA30 or PSA50 response. CTC and PSA response were discordant in over 50% of cases, with outcome driven by CTC response in these patients. The c-index values for OS were superior for early CTC changes compared to PSA response endpoints, and similar to 6-month rPFS. Early CTC declines were good predictors of improved outcomes in mCRPC patients treated with docetaxel in this small study, offering a superior and/or earlier estimation of docetaxel benefit in comparison to PSA or rPFS that merits further confirmation in larger studies.

BRCA2 and Other DDR Genes in Prostate Cancer.

Germline and somatic aberrations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes are more prevalent in prostate cancer than previously recognized, with BRCA2 as the most commonly altered gene. Germline mutations in BRCA2 have been linked to poor prognosis when patients are managed under the protocols currently approved for prostate cancer. The impact of germline mutations in other DDR genes beyond BRCA2 remain unclear. Importantly, a quarter of prostate cancer patients identified as germline mutation carriers lack a family history of cancer. The clinical implications of somatic DDR defects are yet to be elucidated. Poly ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and platinum-based chemotherapy have proven to be effective in the treatment of other tumor types linked to BRCA1 and BRCA2 alterations and several trials are currently evaluating their efficacy in prostate cancer. Here, we summarize the available evidence regarding the prevalence of somatic and germline DDR defects in prostate cancer; their association with clinical outcomes; the trials assessing the efficacy of new therapies that exploit DDR defects in prostate cancer and briefly discuss some uncertainties about the most appropriate management for these patients.

PROREPAIR-B: A Prospective Cohort Study of the Impact of Germline DNA Repair Mutations on the Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Germline mutations in DNA damage repair (DDR) genes are identified in a significant proportion of patients with metastatic prostate cancer, but the clinical implications of these genes remain unclear. This prospective multicenter cohort study evaluated the prevalence and effect of germline DDR (gDDR) mutations on metastatic castration-resistance prostate cancer (mCRPC) outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Unselected patients were enrolled at diagnosis of mCRPC and were screened for gDDR mutations in 107 genes. The primary aim was to assess the impact of ATM/BRCA1/BRCA2/ PALB2 germline mutations on cause-specific survival (CSS) from diagnosis of mCRPC. Secondary aims included the association of gDDR subgroups with response outcomes for mCRPC treatments. Combined progression-free survival from the first systemic therapy (PFS) until progression on the second systemic therapy (PFS2) was also explored. RESULTS: We identified 68 carriers (16.2%) of 419 eligible patients, including 14 with BRCA2, eight with ATM, four with BRCA1, and none with PALB2 mutations. The study did not reach its primary end point, because the difference in CSS between ATM/BRCA1/BRCA2/PALB2 carriers and noncarriers was not statistically significant (23.3 v 33.2 months; P = .264). CSS was halved in germline BRCA2 (g BRCA2) carriers (17.4 v 33.2 months; P = .027), and g BRCA2 mutations were identified as an independent prognostic factor for CCS (hazard ratio [HR], 2.11; P = .033). Significant interactions between g BRCA2 status and treatment type (androgen signaling inhibitor v taxane therapy) were observed (CSS adjusted P = .014; PFS2 adjusted P = .005). CSS (24.0 v 17.0 months) and PFS2 (18.9 v 8.6 months) were greater in g BRCA2 carriers treated in first line with abiraterone or enzalutamide compared with taxanes. Clinical outcomes did not differ by treatment type in noncarriers. CONCLUSION: g BRCA2 mutations have a deleterious impact on mCRPC outcomes that may be affected by the first line of treatment used. Determination of g BRCA2 status may be of assistance for the selection of the initial treatment in mCRPC. Nonetheless, confirmatory studies are required before these results can support a change in clinical practice.