Glioblastomas (GBMs) are resistant to current therapy protocols and identification of molecules that target these tumors is crucial. Interaction of secreted heat-shock protein 70 (Hsp70)-Hsp90-organizing protein (HOP) with cellular prion protein (PrP(C)) triggers a large number of trophic effects in the nervous system. We found that both PrP(C) and HOP are highly expressed in human GBM samples relative to non-tumoral tissue or astrocytoma grades I-III. High levels of PrP(C) and HOP were associated with greater GBM proliferation and lower patient survival. HOP-PrP(C) binding increased GBM proliferation in vitro via phosphatidylinositide 3-kinase and extracellular-signal-regulated kinase pathways, and a HOP peptide mimicking the PrP(C) binding site (HOP230-245) abrogates this effect. PrP(C) knockdown impaired tumor growth and increased survival of mice with tumors. In mice, intratumor delivery of HOP230-245 peptide impaired proliferation and promoted apoptosis of GBM cells. In addition, treatment with HOP230-245 peptide inhibited tumor growth, maintained cognitive performance and improved survival. Thus, together, the present results indicate that interfering with PrP(C)-HOP engagement is a promising approach for GBM therapy.

Stress-inducible phosphoprotein 1 (STI1), a cochaperone for Hsp90, has been shown to regulate multiple pathways in astrocytes, but its contributions to cellular stress responses are not fully understood. We show that in response to irradiation-mediated DNA damage stress STI1 accumulates in the nucleus of astrocytes. Also, STI1 haploinsufficiency decreases astrocyte survival after irradiation. Using yeast two-hybrid screenings we identified several nuclear proteins as STI1 interactors. Overexpression of one of these interactors, PIAS1, seems to be specifically involved in STI1 nuclear retention and in directing STI1 and Hsp90 to specific sub-nuclear regions. PIAS1 and STI1 co-immunoprecipitate and PIAS1 can function as an E3 SUMO ligase for STI. Using mass spectrometry we identified five SUMOylation sites in STI1. A STI1 mutant lacking these five sites is not SUMOylated, but still accumulates in the nucleus in response to increased expression of PIAS1, suggesting the possibility that a direct interaction with PIAS1 could be responsible for STI1 nuclear retention. To test this possibility, we mapped the interaction sites between PIAS1 and STI1 using yeast-two hybrid assays and surface plasmon resonance and found that a large domain in the N-terminal region of STI1 interacts with high affinity with amino acids 450-480 of PIAS1. Knockdown of PIAS1 in astrocytes impairs the accumulation of nuclear STI1 in response to irradiation. Moreover, a PIAS1 mutant lacking the STI1 binding site is unable to increase STI1 nuclear retention. Interestingly, in human glioblastoma multiforme PIAS1 expression is increased and we found a significant correlation between increased PIAS1 expression and STI1 nuclear localization. These experiments provide evidence that direct interaction between STI1 and PIAS1 is involved in the accumulation of nuclear STI1. This retention mechanism could facilitate nuclear chaperone activity.

BackgroundTo evaluate the local control of brain metastases (BM) in patients treated with stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), correlate the outcome with treatment parameters and lesion characteristics, and define its implications for clinical decisions.MethodsBetween 2007 and 2012, 305 BM in 141 consecutive patients were treated with SRS. After exclusions, 216 BM in 100 patients were analyzed. Doses were grouped as follows: ≤15 Gy, 16–20 Gy, and ≥21 Gy. Sizes were classified as ≤10 mm and >10 mm. Local control (LC) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Log-rank statistics were used to identify the prognostic factors affecting LC and OS. For multivariate analyses, a Cox proportional model was applied including all potentially significant variables reached on univariate analyses.ResultsMedian age was 54 years (18–80). Median radiological follow-up of the lesions was 7 months (1–66). Median LC and the LC at 1 year were 22.3 months and 69.7%, respectively. On univariate analysis, tumor size, SRS dose, and previous whole brain irradiation (WBRT) were significant factors for LC. Patients with lesions >10 and ≤10 mm had an LC at 1 year of 58.6% and 79.1%, respectively (p = 0.008). In lesions receiving ≤15 Gy, 16–20 Gy, and ≥21 Gy, the 1-year LC rates were 39.6%, 71.7%, and 92.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). When WBRT was done previously, LC at 1 year was 57.9% compared with 78.4% for those who did not undergo WBRT (p = 0.004). On multivariate analysis, dose remained the single most powerful prognostic factor for LC. Median OS for all patients was 17 months, with no difference among the groups.ConclusionsDose is the most important predictive factor for LC of BM. Doses below 16 Gy correlated with poor LC. The SRS dose as salvage treatment after previous WBRT should not be reduced unless there is a pressing reason to do so.

No abstract

The p90 ribosomal S6 kinase (RSK) family, a downstream target of Ras/extracellular signal-regulated kinase signaling, can mediate cross-talk with the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 pathway. As RSK connects two oncogenic pathways in gliomas, we investigated the protein levels of the RSK isoforms RSK1-4 in nontumoral brain (NB) and grade I-IV gliomas. When compared to NB or low-grade gliomas (LGG), a group of glioblastomas (GBMs) that excluded long-survivor cases expressed higher levels of RSK1 (RSK1 hi). No difference was observed in RSK2 median-expression levels among NB and gliomas; however, high levels of RSK2 in GBM (RSK2 hi) were associated with worse survival. RSK4 expression was not detected in any brain tissues, whereas RSK3 expression was very low, with GBM demonstrating the lowest RSK3 protein levels. RSK1 hi and, to a lesser extent, RSK2 hi GBMs showed higher levels of phosphorylated RSK, which reveals RSK activation. Transcriptome analysis indicated that most RSK1 hi GBMs belonged to the mesenchymal subtype, and RSK1 expression strongly correlated with gene expression signature of immune infiltrates, in particular of activated natural killer cells and M2 macrophages. In an independent cohort, we confirmed that RSK1 hi GBMs exclude long survivors, and RSK1 expression was associated with high protein levels of the mesenchymal subtype marker lysosomal protein transmembrane 5, as well as with high expression of CD68, which indicated the presence of infiltrating immune cells. An RSK1 signature was obtained based on differentially expressed mRNAs and validated in public glioma datasets. Enrichment of RSK1 signature followed glioma progression, recapitulating RSK1 protein expression, and was associated with worse survival not only in GBM but also in LGG. In conclusion, both RSK1 and RSK2 associate with glioma malignity, but displaying

Glioblastoma (GBM) is one of the most aggressive cancers, with median survival of less than 2 years. Despite of considerable advance in molecular classification of GBMs, no improvements in therapy have been described. The scenario is further complicated by tumor heterogeneity and the relationship among genetic, transcriptional and functional findings. Classically, gene expression has been evaluated by steady-state mRNA, however, this does not take translational control into consideration, which contributes considerably to the composition of the proteome. In this study, we evaluated the transcriptomic and translatomic signature of a GBM obtained from a single patient focusing in tumor heterogeneity. In a sampling of eight fragments, we investigated the translation rates, mTORC1 and ERK1/2 pathways and identified both total and polysome associated mRNAs. An increased translation rate was observed in fragments with high-grade histological features. High-grade histology was also associated with the expression of genes related to extracellular matrix (ECM) and angiogenesis, in both transcriptomes and translatomes. However, genes associated with epithelial to mesenchymal transition and stress response, were observed only in translatomes from high-grade fragments. Overall, our results demonstrate that isolation of translated mRNA can be used to identify biomarkers and reveal previously unrecognized determinants of heterogeneity in GBMs.

BackgroundBrain metastasis (BM) is a rare event in ovarian cancer patients. The current prognostic scores that have been used for other tumors do not account for specific characteristics of ovarian cancer, such as platinum sensitivity.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study examined patients with ovarian carcinoma and BM who were treated at a single institution from January 2007 to December 2017. Clinical data on the diagnosis of BM and follow-up were collected. Cox regression was used to evaluate prognostic factors for overall survival (OS).ResultsOf 560 patients, 26 presented with BM. Eight patients were treated with surgery, 15 with whole-brain radiotherapy (RT), and 5 with stereotactic RT, and 4 patients received systemic treatment at the diagnosis of BM. The median OS was 10.8 months. The following factors were associated with OS: platinum-sensitive recurrence (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12–0.99; p = 0.049), higher number of previous treatment lines (HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.12–2.19; p = 0.008), ECOG performance status (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.24–5.09; p = 0.010), and longer interval from initial diagnosis to BM (p = 0.025). Notably, the number of brain metastasis, the largest tumor size, and progression outside of the CNS were not related to survival. Platinum sensitivity was not associated with any of the classic prognostic factors in brain metastasis patients such as number or size of brain metastasis or disease progression outside the CNS strengthening the hypothesis of the importance of platinum sensitivity to the prognosis of ovarian cancer patients with BM.ConclusionsThe factors related to the biological behavior of the ovarian cancer such as platinum sensitivity at the time of BM diagnosis, fewer number of previous treatment lines and interval from initial diagnosis were associated with survival in ovarian cancer patients with BM, while factors that are usually related to survival in BM in other cancers were not associated with survival in this cohort of ovarian cancer patients. The small number of patients did not allow us to exclude the prognostic role of these former factors that were not associated with survival in the present cohort.

No abstract