Background: Although cells require nutrients to proliferate, most nutrient exchange rates of the NCI60 panel of cancer cell lines correlate poorly with their proliferation rate. Here, we provide evidence indicating that this inconsistency is rooted in the variability of cell size. Results: We integrate previously reported data characterizing genome copy number variations, gene expression, protein expression and exchange fluxes with our own measurements of cell size and protein content in the NCI60 panel of cell lines. We show that protein content, DNA content, and protein synthesis per cell are proportional to the cell volume, and that larger cells proliferate slower than smaller cells. We estimate the metabolic fluxes of these cell lines and show that their magnitudes are proportional to their protein synthesis rate and, after correcting for cell volume, to their proliferation rate. At the level of gene expression, we observe that genes expressed at higher levels in smaller cells are enriched for genes involved in cell cycle, while genes expressed at higher levels in large cells are enriched for genes expressed in mesenchymal cells. The latter finding is further corroborated by the induction of those same genes following treatment with TGFβ, and the high vimentin but low E-cadherin protein levels in the larger cells. We also find that aromatase inhibitors, statins and mTOR inhibitors preferentially inhibit the in vitro growth of cancer cells with high protein synthesis rates per cell. Conclusions: The NCI60 cell lines display various metabolic activities, and the type of metabolic activity that they possess correlates with their cell volume and protein content. In addition to cell proliferation, cell volume and/or biomarkers of protein synthesis may predict response to drugs targeting cancer metabolism.

Sixty years ago, 6-thioguanine (6-TG) was introduced into the clinic. We suggest its full potential in therapy may not have been reached. In this paper, we contrast 6-TG and the more widely used 6-mercaptopurine; discuss 6-TG metabolism, pharmacokinetics, dosage and schedule; and summarize many of the early studies that have shown infrequent but nevertheless positive results with 6-TG treatment of cancers. We also consider studies that suggest that combinations of 6-TG with other agents may enhance antitumor effects. Although not yet tested in man, 6-TG has recently been proposed to treat a wide variety of cancers with a high frequency of homozygous deletion of the gene for methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP), often codeleted with the adjacent tumor suppressor CDKN2A (p16). Among the cancers with a high frequency of MTAP deficiency are leukemias, lymphomas, mesothelioma, melanoma, biliary tract cancer, glioblastoma, osteosarcoma, soft tissue sarcoma, neuroendocrine tumors, and lung, pancreatic, and squamous cell carcinomas. The method involves pretreatment with the naturally occurring nucleoside methylthioadenosine (MTA), the substrate for the enzyme MTAP. MTA pretreatment protects normal host tissues, but not MTAP-deficient cancers, from 6-TG toxicity and permits administration of doses of 6-TG that are much higher than can now be safely administered. The combination of MTA/6-TG has produced substantial shrinkage or slowing of growth in two different xenograft human tumor models: lymphoblastic leukemia and metastatic prostate carcinoma with neuroendocrine features. Further development and a clinical trial of the proposed MTA/6-TG treatment of MTAP-deficient cancers seem warranted.

Actively proliferating cancer cells require sufficient amount of NADH and NADPH for biogenesis and to protect cells from the detrimental effect of reactive oxygen species. As both normal and cancer cells share the same NAD biosynthetic and metabolic pathways, selectively lowering levels of NAD(H) and NADPH would be a promising strategy for cancer treatment. Targeting nicotinamide phosphoribosyltransferase (NAMPT), a rate limiting enzyme of the NAD salvage pathway, affects the NAD and NADPH pool. Similarly, lowering NADPH by mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2 (IDH1/2) which produces D-2-hydroxyglutarate (D-2HG), an oncometabolite that downregulates nicotinate phosphoribosyltransferase (NAPRT) via hypermethylation on the promoter region, results in epigenetic regulation. NADPH is used to generate D-2HG, and is also needed to protect dihydrofolate reductase, the target for methotrexate, from degradation. NAD and NADPH pools in various cancer types are regulated by several metabolic enzymes, including methylenetetrahydrofolate dehydrogenase, serine hydroxymethyltransferase, and aldehyde dehydrogenase. Thus, targeting NAD and NADPH synthesis under special circumstances is a novel approach to treat some cancers. This article provides the rationale for targeting the key enzymes that maintain the NAD/NADPH pool, and reviews preclinical studies of targeting these enzymes in cancers.

NAD⁺ kinase (NADK) catalyzes the phosphorylation of nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD⁺) to nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADP⁺) using ATP as the phosphate donor. NADP⁺ is then reduced to NADPH by dehydrogenases, in particular glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase and the malic enzymes. NADPH functions as an important cofactor in a variety of metabolic and biosynthetic pathways. The demand for NADPH is particularly high in proliferating cancer cells, where it acts as a cofactor for the synthesis of nucleotides, proteins, and fatty acids. Moreover, NADPH is essential for the neutralization of the dangerously high levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated by increased metabolic activity. Given its key role in metabolism and regulation of ROS, it is not surprising that several recent studies, including in vitro and in vivo assays of tumor growth and querying of patient samples, have identified NADK as a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of cancer. In this review, we will discuss the experimental evidence justifying further exploration of NADK as a clinically relevant drug target and describe our studies with a lead compound, thionicotinamide, an NADK inhibitor prodrug. Clin Cancer Res; 22(21); 5189–95. ©2016 AACR.