Lifestyle factors are responsible for a considerable portion of cancer incidence worldwide, but credible estimates from the World Health Organization and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) suggest that the fraction of cancers attributable to toxic environmental exposures is between 7% and 19%. To explore the hypothesis that low-dose exposures to mixtures of chemicals in the environment may be combining to contribute to environmental carcinogenesis, we reviewed 11 hallmark phenotypes of cancer, multiple priority target sites for disruption in each area and prototypical chemical disruptors for all targets, this included dose-response characterizations, evidence of low-dose effects and cross-hallmark effects for all targets and chemicals. In total, 85 examples of chemicals were reviewed for actions on key pathways/mechanisms related to carcinogenesis. Only 15% (13/85) were found to have evidence of a dose-response threshold, whereas 59% (50/85) exerted low-dose effects. No dose-response information was found for the remaining 26% (22/85). Our analysis suggests that the cumulative effects of individual (non-carcinogenic) chemicals acting on different pathways, and a variety of related systems, organs, tissues and cells could plausibly conspire to produce carcinogenic synergies. Additional basic research on carcinogenesis and research focused on low-dose effects of chemical mixtures needs to be rigorously pursued before the merits of this hypothesis can be further advanced. However, the structure of the World Health Organization International Programme on Chemical Safety ‘Mode of Action’ framework should be revisited as it has inherent weaknesses that are not fully aligned with our current understanding of cancer biology.

CD10 is a remarkable member of the major class of widely expressed cell surface proteins, endopeptidases. First identified in leukemia as a tumor-specific antigen (common acute lymphoblastic leukemia antigen), CD10 has become largely used in cancer diagnosis. However, its function in oncogenesis remains unclear. We previously identified CD10 as a tool to access sphere-forming cells and showed its involvement in mammary stem cell (SC) regulation. We further illustrated that its enzymatic activity is involved, through signaling peptides, in SC maintenance. Therefore, CD10 is not only a cell surface marker in normal and malignant contexts but also affects the extracellular environment and plays a key role in regulation of a number of biological functions and likely in SC. In tumors, the “niche” favors the survival of sheltered cancer SC whose eradication has become the new challenge in oncology. This highlights the importance of understanding the role of CD10 in cancer SC. We will review the characteristics, main functions, and mechanism of action of CD10. Finally, we will review its clinical use and involvement in cancer.

Potentially carcinogenic compounds may cause cancer through direct DNA damage or through indirect cellular or physiological effects. To study possible carcinogens, the fields of endocrinology, genetics, epigenetics, medicine, environmental health, toxicology, pharmacology and oncology must be considered. Disruptive chemicals may also contribute to multiple stages of tumor development through effects on the tumor microenvironment. In turn, the tumor microenvironment consists of a complex interaction among blood vessels that feed the tumor, the extracellular matrix that provides structural and biochemical support, signaling molecules that send messages and soluble factors such as cytokines. The tumor microenvironment also consists of many host cellular effectors including multipotent stromal cells/mesenchymal stem cells, fibroblasts, endothelial cell precursors, antigen-presenting cells, lymphocytes and innate immune cells. Carcinogens can influence the tumor microenvironment through effects on epithelial cells, the most common origin of cancer, as well as on stromal cells, extracellular matrix components and immune cells. Here, we review how environmental exposures can perturb the tumor microenvironment. We suggest a role for disrupting chemicals such as nickel chloride, Bisphenol A, butyltins, methylmercury and paraquat as well as more traditional carcinogens, such as radiation, and pharmaceuticals, such as diabetes medications, in the disruption of the tumor microenvironment. Further studies interrogating the role of chemicals and their mixtures in dose-dependent effects on the tumor microenvironment could have important general mechanistic implications for the etiology and prevention of tumorigenesis.

Imatinib and second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) nilotinib and dasatinib have statistically significantly improved the life expectancy of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients; however, resistance to TKIs remains a major clinical challenge. Although ponatinib, a third-generation TKI, improves outcomes for patients with BCR-ABL-dependent mechanisms of resistance, including the T315I mutation, a proportion of patients may have or develop BCR-ABL-independent resistance and fail ponatinib treatment. By modeling ponatinib resistance and testing samples from these CML patients, it is hoped that an alternative drug target can be identified and inhibited with a novel compound. Two CML cell lines with acquired BCR-ABL-independent resistance were generated following culture in ponatinib. RNA sequencing and gene ontology (GO) enrichment were used to detect aberrant transcriptional response in ponatinib-resistant cells. A validated oncogene drug library was used to identify US Food and Drug Administration–approved drugs with activity against TKI-resistant cells. Validation was performed using bone marrow (BM)–derived cells from TKI-resistant patients (n = 4) and a human xenograft mouse model (n = 4–6 mice per group). All statistical tests were two-sided. We show that ponatinib-resistant CML cells can acquire BCR-ABL-independent resistance mediated through alternative activation of mTOR. Following transcriptomic analysis and drug screening, we highlight mTOR inhibition as an alternative therapeutic approach in TKI-resistant CML cells. Additionally, we show that catalytic mTOR inhibitors induce autophagy and demonstrate that genetic or pharmacological inhibition of autophagy sensitizes ponatinib-resistant CML cells to death induced by mTOR inhibition in vitro (% number of colonies of control[SD], NVP-BEZ235 vs NVP-BEZ235+HCQ: 45.0[17.9]% vs 24.0[8.4]%, P = .002) and in vivo (median survival of NVP-BEZ235- vs NVP-BEZ235+HCQ-treated mice: 38.5 days vs 47.0 days, P = .04). Combined mTOR and autophagy inhibition may provide an attractive approach to target BCR-ABL-independent mechanism of resistance.