Dataset Information

Metabolic therapy and bioenergetic analysis: The missing piece of the puzzle.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Aberrant metabolism is recognized as a hallmark of cancer, a pillar necessary for cellular proliferation. Regarding bioenergetics (ATP generation), most cancers display a preference not only toward aerobic glycolysis ("Warburg effect") and glutaminolysis (mitochondrial substrate level-phosphorylation) but also toward other metabolites such as lactate, pyruvate, and fat-derived sources. These secondary metabolites can assist in proliferation but cannot fully cover ATP demands.

Scope of review

The concept of a static metabolic profile is challenged by instances of heterogeneity and flexibility to meet fuel/anaplerotic demands. Although metabolic therapies are a promising tool to improve therapeutic outcomes, either via pharmacological targets or press-pulse interventions, metabolic plasticity is rarely considered. Lack of bioenergetic analysis in vitro and patient-derived models is hindering translational potential. Here, we review the bioenergetics of cancer and propose a simple analysis of major metabolic pathways, encompassing both affordable and advanced techniques. A comprehensive compendium of Seahorse XF bioenergetic measurements is presented for the first time.

Major conclusions

Standardization of principal readouts might help researchers to collect a complete metabolic picture of cancer using the most appropriate methods depending on the sample of interest.

SUBMITTER: Duraj T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8637646 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:The causes of the large and persistent Black-White disparity in preterm birth (PTB) are unknown. It is biologically plausible that chronic stress across a woman's life course could be a contributor. Prior research suggests that chronic worry about experiencing racial discrimination could affect PTB through neuroendocrine, vascular, or immune mechanisms involved in both responses to stress and the initiation of labor. This study aimed to examine the role of chronic worry about racial discrimination in Black-White disparities in PTB. METHODS:The data source was cross-sectional California statewide-representative surveys of 2,201 Black and 8,122 White, non-Latino, U.S.-born postpartum women with singleton live births during 2011-2014. Chronic worry about racial discrimination (chronic worry) was defined as responses of "very often" or "somewhat often" (vs. "not very often" or "never") to the question: "Overall during your life until now, how often have you worried that you might be treated or viewed unfairly because of your race or ethnic group?" Prevalence ratios (PRs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) were calculated from sequential logistic regression models, before and after adjustment for multiple social/demographic, behavioral, and medical factors, to estimate the magnitude of: (a) PTB risks associated with chronic worry among Black women and among White women; and (b) Black-White disparities in PTB, before and after adjustment for chronic worry. RESULTS:Among Black and White women respectively, 36.9 (95% CI 32.9-40.9) % and 5.5 (95% CI 4.5-6.5) % reported chronic worry about racial discrimination; rates were highest among Black women of higher income and education levels. Chronic worry was significantly associated with PTB among Black women before (PR 1.73, 95% CI 1.12-2.67) and after (PR 2.00, 95% CI 1.33-3.01) adjustment for covariates. The unadjusted Black-White disparity in PTB (PR 1.59, 95%CI 1.21-2.09) appeared attenuated and became non-significant after adjustment for chronic worry (PR 1.30, 95% CI 0.93-1.81); it appeared further attenuated after adding the covariates (PR 1.17, 95% CI 0.85-1.63). CONCLUSIONS:Chronic worry about racial discrimination may play an important role in Black-White disparities in PTB and may help explain the puzzling and repeatedly observed greater PTB disparities among more socioeconomically-advantaged women. Although the single measure of experiences of racial discrimination used in this study precluded examination of the role of other experiences of racial discrimination, such as overt incidents, it is likely that our findings reflect an association between one or more experiences of racial discrimination and PTB. Further research should examine a range of experiences of racial discrimination, including not only chronic worry but other psychological and emotional states and both subtle and overt incidents as well. These dramatic results from a large statewide-representative study add to a growing-but not widely known-literature linking racism-related stress with physical health in general, and shed light on the links between racism-related stress and PTB specifically. Without being causally definitive, this study's findings should stimulate further research and heighten awareness of the potential role of unmeasured social variables, such as diverse experiences of racial discrimination, in racial disparities in health.

Project description:BackgroundShortages of opioid analgesics are increasingly common, interfere with patient care and increase healthcare cost. This study characterized the incidence of shortages of opioid analgesics in the period 2015-2019 and evaluated potential predictors to forecast the risk of shortages.MethodsThis was an observational retrospective study using the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug shortages data. All FDA approved opioids were included in the study. Opioid analgesics were identified using the FDA National Drug Codes (NDC) and classified according to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) schedule. We conducted Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator logistic regression analysis to assess direction of the association between risk of shortage and potential predictors. We used multivariable penalized logistic regression analysis to model predictors of shortages. We split the dataset into training and validation sets to evaluate the performance of the model.FindingsThe FDA approved 8,207 unique NDCs for opioid analgesics; 3,017 (36.8%) were in the market as of April 30, 2019 and 91(3.0%) of them were listed as in shortage by the FDA. All NDCs in shortage were schedule II opioids; 86 (94.5%) were injectable and 84 (92.3%) generics. There were 418 companies with at least one opioid NDC listed by the FDA. Three companies accounted for more than 4 in 5 of the schedule II active injectable opioids. For each unit increase in the number of prior instances of shortages of a company, the likelihood of an NDC shortage for that company increased by 3.4%. For each unit increase in number of NDCs marketed by a company, the odds of an NDC shortage for that company decreased by 1%.ConclusionsIn the period 2015-2019, shortages of opioid analgesics disproportionally impacted schedule II and injectable opioids. The risk of shortage of opioid analgesics significantly increased with the incidence of previous instances of shortages of a manufacturing company and decreased with the number of NDCs marketed by a company. The characteristics of the manufacturing company, rather than the number of companies, might be the missing piece to the complex puzzle of drug shortages in the US.