You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
  • Review
  • Open Access

18 November 2024

Oxidative Stress and Cancer Therapy: Controlling Cancer Cells Using Reactive Oxygen Species

,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
and
1
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, School of Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Republic of Korea
2
Biomedical Science Institute, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Republic of Korea
3
Department of Biomedical Science, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02447, Republic of Korea
4
Department of Otorhinolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University Medical Center, Kyung Hee University, Seoul 02453, Republic of Korea
This article belongs to the Special Issue New Players in the Research of Oxidative Stress and Cancer

Abstract

Cancer is a multifaceted disease influenced by various mechanisms, including the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which have a paradoxical role in both promoting cancer progression and serving as targets for therapeutic interventions. At low concentrations, ROS serve as signaling agents that enhance cancer cell proliferation, migration, and resistance to drugs. However, at elevated levels, ROS induce oxidative stress, causing damage to biomolecules and leading to cell death. Cancer cells have developed mechanisms to manage ROS levels, including activating pathways such as NRF2, NF-κB, and PI3K/Akt. This review explores the relationship between ROS and cancer, focusing on cell death mechanisms like apoptosis, ferroptosis, and autophagy, highlighting the potential therapeutic strategies that exploit ROS to target cancer cells.

1. Introduction

Cancer is a multifaceted disease marked by the uncontrolled proliferation and division of cells within specific tissues of the body. Globally, it poses significant health challenges, particularly when not diagnosed at an early stage, leading to high mortality rates [1]. Various factors contribute to cancer proliferation and progression; among these, ROS play a dual role, acting both in the initiation and progression of cancer as well as in its suppression and treatment. Many research groups have demonstrated the association of ROS with multiple cancer types, including breast, colon, lung, hepatocellular, and cervical cancers [2]. Oxidative stress, primarily driven by ROS, plays a significant role in cancer development and progression and contributes to other pathological conditions, such as diabetes, metabolic disorders, and atherosclerosis, which amplify these harmful effects [3].
ROS are derived from various reactive oxygen species generated during metabolic processes, including mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) [4]. They are crucial to numerous biological processes [4]. ROS function in a dual capacity: they act as signaling molecules that activate proliferation, migration, invasion, angiogenesis, and drug resistance pathways in cancer cells. Conversely, elevated ROS levels cause oxidative damage to proteins, nucleic acids, lipids, cell membranes, and organelles, ultimately leading to cell death (Figure 1) [5]. In this review, we provide a comprehensive analysis of how cancer cells utilize the ROS pathway and discuss strategies for leveraging ROS for therapeutic intervention in cancer.
Figure 1. Functions dependent on ROS levels in cancer cells.

2. Cancer

Cancer cells favor glycolysis over oxidative phosphorylation, even when oxygen levels are normal [6]. This metabolic reprogramming is accompanied by the upregulation of glucose transporters, which compensates for glycolysis’s approximately 18-fold lower energy efficiency compared to OXPHOS [7]. However, it is inaccurate to generalize that all cancer cells rely solely on glycolysis in place of OXPHOS. Instead, the preference for glycolysis is modulated by a range of factors, including oncogene activation, the loss of tumor suppressor function, the hypoxic tumor microenvironment, mutations in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), and the genetic background of the cancer [8]. Cancer cells also frequently utilize the glutamine metabolism to fuel the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle, which is critical for maintaining cellular energy, biosynthesis, and proliferation [9].
Furthermore, the upregulation of the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP) and enhanced mitochondrial biosynthesis are observed in many cancer cells, helping to support ROS detoxification and maintain redox homeostasis within the cell [10,11,12].

3. ROS

3.1. ROS Generation, Types, and Regulation

Free radicals are molecules that contain unpaired electrons, which endows them with notable reactivity [13]. ROS are highly reactive molecules formed from oxygen (O2), water, and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). They actively participate in various chemical reactions and biological processes [14]. ROS are generally classified into two main categories: free radical species, which include the hydroxyl radical (•OH) and superoxide anion (O2•−), and non-radical molecules, such as H2O2 [15]. Among these, the hydroxyl radical is the most aggressive oxidant, typically generated through reactions involving superoxide anion and hydrogen peroxide [16]. ROS are produced as byproducts of several biochemical reactions occurring in cellular organelles like mitochondria, peroxisomes, the cytochrome P-450 system, NADPH oxidase, and other cellular components [17]. In addition to ROS, reactive nitrogen species (RNS) are formed during nitric oxide synthase (NOS)-catalyzed reactions, where L-arginine is converted to L-citrulline, producing nitric oxide (NO) as a byproduct. Although NO itself is not highly reactive, it can interact with other molecules, such as O2 and O2•−, as well as transition metals. These interactions lead to the formation of reactive intermediates like peroxynitrite (ONOO−), which are highly reactive and can inactivate proteins and damage other macromolecules (Table 1) [18]. ROS can also be induced by various external factors. For instance, cigarette smoke contains several oxidants, including free radicals, superoxide, and nitrogen monoxide, all contributing to ROS production. Exposure to ozone initiates lipid peroxidation and releases inflammatory mediators, thereby increasing oxidative stress [19].
At low to moderate concentrations, ROS facilitate essential cellular functions such as proliferation, migration, and invasion. However, at higher levels, ROS inflict damage upon biomolecules, leading to cellular injury and cell death [5]. To regulate ROS, cells utilize several antioxidant enzymes, including superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT), peroxiredoxin (PRDX), and glutathione peroxidase (GPX). These enzymes work in concert to neutralize highly reactive species like O2•− and other ROS, transforming them into less reactive molecules, such as H2O2, which is subsequently converted into water (Figure 2) [20]. ROS also activate multiple signaling pathways, notably the NRF2/KEAP1 pathway (nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2/Kelch-like ECH-associated protein 1), a critical mechanism for regulating ROS levels. When ROS modify KEAP1, they inhibit its ability to degrade NRF2, allowing NRF2 to translocate into the nucleus and promote the expression of cytoprotective genes. Additionally, other pathways such as nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB), phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT, and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) are activated. These pathways play key roles in inflammatory and immune responses and contribute to cell growth, survival, or apoptosis, depending on cellular context [21].
Table 1. Role in cancer by ROS type.
Table 1. Role in cancer by ROS type.
ROSRole in CancerReferences
Superoxide (O2−)Promotes tumor growth and metastasis by enhancing cell proliferation and migration. Can induce cell death at high levels.[22,23]
Hydroxyl radical (•OH)Causes severe DNA damage and mutations, promoting cancer progression. Excessive levels can trigger apoptosis, killing cancer cells.[24,25,26]
Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)It functions as a signaling molecule that supports the survival of cancer cells. However, at elevated concentrations, it causes oxidative stress, resulting in cell death.[26,27]
Peroxynitrite (ONOO)Facilitates tumor angiogenesis and inflammation. However, excessive oxidative stress can damage cancer cells and suppress tumor growth.[28,29]
Nitric oxide (NO)Low levels promote cancer growth, while high levels trigger apoptosis and inhibit tumor development.[30]
Figure 2. Antioxidant enzymes and their mechanisms.

3.2. Interaction Between ROS and Macromolecules

As a result of oxidative stress, macromolecules such as DNA, RNA, proteins, and lipids are major targets of ROS [31]. Oxidative stress develops when the body’s antioxidant mechanisms are outstripped by the excessive generation of free radicals, thereby failing to neutralize these reactive entities [32]. ROS can modify or degrade lipids with hydroxyl groups in their polar components, such as phospholipids, ceramides, diacylglycerols, and acylamides [33]. The cell membrane is composed of a substantial number of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), rendering it particularly susceptible to damage caused by ROS. This results in the peroxidation of cell membrane lipids, which affects the fluidity and deformability of the cell membrane [34]. Lipid peroxidation triggers a chain reaction that generates toxic byproducts, including lipid hydroperoxides and aldehydes, such as malondialdehyde, propionaldehyde, hexanal, and 4-hydroxynonenal, all of which are cytotoxic and mutagenic [35,36]. Protein oxidation due to ROS plays a significant role in aging and disease development [18]. ROS can oxidize amino acid residues, break peptide bonds, and cause protein aggregation [37]. In DNA, ROS-induced damage includes single- and double-strand breaks, nucleotide base modifications, deoxyribose sugar alterations, DNA cross-linking, and impaired DNA-binding abilities, all of which can lead to carcinogenesis [2,38]. Specifically, ROS oxidize guanine to produce 8-oxo-G, a mutagenic and carcinogenic lesion [38]. During DNA replication, 8-oxo-G can erroneously pair with adenine as well as cytosine, leading to G→T mutations commonly observed in oxidative stress-related cancers, including those of the lung, breast, ovary, stomach, and colon [39]. Approximately 90% of these oxidized bases are repaired via single nucleotide excision repair, with the remaining 10% corrected through long-patch base excision repair pathways [40]. mtDNA is more vulnerable to oxidative damage than nuclear DNA due to the lack of protective histones and the absence of certain DNA repair pathways, such as single nucleotide excision repair, that are present in the nucleus. This makes mtDNA particularly susceptible to ROS, establishing a connection between oxidative damage to mitochondrial DNA and carcinogenesis [40]. In prostate and primary breast cancer (the original tumor in breast tissue prior to metastasis), oxidative damage to mtDNA contributes to changes in gene expression and somatic mutations, linking mitochondrial dysfunction to cancer progression [41,42,43].

3.3. Signaling Associated with ROS

3.3.1. NRF2

NRF2 was initially regarded as a tumor suppressor gene, as early studies indicated that NRF2 deficiency increased cancer susceptibility in various types, such as colon cancer and melanoma [44,45,46]. However, recent findings suggest that NRF2 may also act as a tumor promoter in specific cancers, particularly lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) and lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) [47]. The activation of NRF2 triggers the transcription of numerous genes involved in the antioxidant response, offering cellular protection against oxidative stress [48]. As a redox-sensitive transcription factor, NRF2 plays critical roles in anti-apoptotic signaling, cell cycle regulation, cell proliferation, and protein homeostasis through mechanisms such as autophagy and proteasomal degradation. NRF2 also indirectly influences heme and iron metabolism and xenobiotic transport by regulating the expression of genes in these pathways, enhancing cellular resilience against oxidative stress and various other stressors [44]. This protective mechanism includes the upregulation of enzymes such as glutathione S-transferases and heme oxygenase-1, which detoxify ROS and mitigate cellular damage [49]. As such, NRF2’s protective functions may inadvertently support cancer cell survival, growth, transformation, metastasis, and chemotherapy resistance [50]. Studies further indicate that patients with high NRF2 levels in tumor tissues tend to have an increased risk of recurrence and a poorer prognosis [51]. Despite numerous studies and reviews on NRF2’s dual role in cancer biology, the development of effective NRF2 inhibitors remains a significant challenge in the field [50].

3.3.2. NF-κB

The transcription factor NF-κB is activated in various tumor types, where it functions as an essential regulator of genes involved in immune responses, cell growth, apoptosis, and inflammation [52]. NF-κB typically resides in the cytoplasm in an inactive form, but upon activation, it translocates to the nucleus, initiating the transcription of genes essential for these processes [52]. ROS can either activate or inhibit NF-κB signaling, and when activated by ROS, NF-κB helps to manage oxidative stress by reducing ROS accumulation, thereby promoting cell survival through anti-apoptotic mechanisms [53].
NF-κB has a multifaceted role, particularly in immune regulation and as an anti-apoptotic survival factor that enables immune cells to resist cell death during infections [54]. In acute inflammatory responses, NF-κB activation typically resolves without significant complications. However, in chronic inflammation, it can allow precancerous cells to evade immune detection and may support tumorigenesis [55]. In numerous cancers, NF-κB is constitutively active, generating signals that enhance cell survival and inhibit apoptosis [56,57]. The hyperactivation of the NF-κB pathway promotes cell proliferation by inducing the transcription of the cyclin D1 gene, critical for cell cycle progression from the G₁ to S phase [58]. Additionally, the NF-κB-driven transcription of inflammatory cytokines may act as growth factors for tumor cells, supporting angiogenesis and contributing to metastasis [59,60]. Furthermore, persistent NF-κB activation induces telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT) activity, which protects telomeres from shortening and grants cells extended replication potential, thus supporting tumor survival [61].
NF-κB activity is also modulated by glycogen synthase kinase-3 beta (GSK3β), which phosphorylates NF-κB essential modifier (NEMO), a key component for NF-κB activity [62]. The activation of GSK3β enhances NF-κB-driven transcription of inflammation and metastasis-related genes that are dysregulated in cancer [63]. A range of NF-κB inhibitors is currently in clinical use and demonstrate potential as anticancer agents [52]. These inhibitors include compounds that disrupt IKK activity, agents that bind to NF-κB to block nuclear translocation, and proteasome inhibitors that prevent NF-κB activation by halting the degradation of inhibitory proteins such as IκB [64,65,66,67,68].

3.3.3. PI3K/AKT

The PI3K/Akt signaling pathway is critical for multiple cellular functions, yet it frequently becomes dysregulated in cancer, promoting tumor growth and progression [69]. This pathway begins when phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate (PIP2) is phosphorylated by PI3K to produce phosphatidylinositol-3,4,5-trisphosphate (PIP3), which activates various oncogenic kinases, including Akt, a serine/threonine kinase. Once activated, Akt recruits several downstream signaling proteins involved in cell survival and growth [70].
ROS levels also influence PI3K/Akt signaling, as excessive ROS inhibit this pathway, leading to cell death and inflammation, whereas low to moderate ROS levels activate PI3K/Akt signaling to inhibit apoptosis and stimulate cell proliferation [71]. Upon activation, Akt phosphorylates multiple substrates that enhance cancer progression, particularly through the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR). In cancer cells, the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway is often aberrantly activated through various mutations [72,73]. For instance, activating mutations in the PIK3CA gene have been identified in a wide range of cancers, including breast, endometrial, cervical, colorectal, esophageal, gallbladder, non-small cell lung, ovarian, and gastric cancers [74]. The AKT1 E17K mutation is notably frequent in breast cancer, while AKT2 amplification or overexpression is common in breast, ovarian, and prostate cancers. Similarly, AKT3 amplification has been observed in cancers such as breast, endometrial, melanoma, ovarian epithelial tumors, cholangiocarcinoma, and non-small cell lung cancer [75,76,77,78]. The overexpression of mTOR has been reported in ovarian, urothelial, and skin cancers, while downregulation is noted in central nervous system tumors. Additionally, mTOR mutations are seen in meningeal, endometrial, and endometrioid cancers [79]. Approximately 70% of ovarian or breast cancers and up to 90% of LUAD show an abnormal activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway [79]. mTOR is a central regulator of biological processes such as tumor growth, cell survival, metabolism, and immunity. It exists in complexes, such as mTORC1 and mTORC2, which each play essential roles in these functions [80]. A related genetic disorder, tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), is characterized by hamartomas in various organs and results from mutations in the TSC1 and TSC2 tumor suppressor genes. The TSC1–TSC2 complex acts to inhibit p70 S6K1 (p70 ribosomal protein S6 kinase 1), thereby reducing mTORC1 activity, protein synthesis, and cell growth. Additionally, the TSC1–TSC2 complex activates 4E-BP1 (eukaryotic initiation factor 4E binding protein 1), further diminishing protein synthesis and restricting cell growth [81].
GSK3, a significant downstream target, has two isoforms: GSK3α and GSK3β, both involved in the insulin-regulated process of glycogen synthesis [82]. GSK3 is active in numerous biochemical processes and disease states [83]. It can function as either a tumor suppressor or a promoter of cell proliferation, depending on cellular context [84]. Specifically, GSK3β overexpression has been shown to induce the production of the anti-apoptotic protein BCL-XL, contributing to resistance against apoptosis initiated by tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) [85]. Elevated GSK3β levels are observed in several cancers, including ovarian, colorectal, and pancreatic cancers [86]. Since GSK3β is a known negative regulator of NRF2, its activity may increase ROS accumulation, thereby promoting oxidative stress [87]. In advanced papillomas and squamous cell carcinomas, phosphorylated GSK3β(Ser9)—an inactive form of GSK3β—is markedly elevated, while the active form, phosphorylated GSK3β(Tyr216), is significantly decreased in squamous cell carcinoma tissues compared to normal tissues [88]. Thus, cancer treatments targeting the activation of GSK3β could induce ROS accumulation, potentially leading to cancer cell death.

3.3.4. MAPK

The RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK (MAPK) signaling pathway can be activated by ROS [89]. ROS promote MAPK pathway activation by oxidizing and modifying key regulatory proteins, including MAP kinase kinase kinases (MAPKKKs). For instance, ROS can oxidize Apoptotic Signal-Regulating Kinase 1 (ASK1), resulting in its activation. Once activated, ASK1 phosphorylates MAP kinase kinases (MAPKKs) such as MKK4/7, which subsequently activate downstream MAP kinases [90].
The MAPK pathway is one of the most frequently dysregulated signaling pathways in human cancers, with mutations commonly affecting RAS and RAF genes [91]. Approximately 30% of all human tumors harbor mutations in one of the canonical RAS genes, particularly in cancers such as pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, colorectal cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, malignant melanoma, bladder cancer, thyroid cancer, and certain hematopoietic malignancies [92]. RAF mutations are prevalent in cancers including malignant melanoma, papillary thyroid cancer, colorectal cancer, and ovarian cancer [93]. As an integral component of cellular signaling, the RAS protein functions as a regulatory switch, binding to either guanosine triphosphate (GTP) or guanosine diphosphate (GDP). Upon activation, RAS binds GTP and subsequently activates RAF, which in turn phosphorylates MEK1 and MEK2 proteins. These MEK proteins then activate ERK1 and ERK2, propagating the MAPK signaling cascade [94]. This pathway plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of cancer by influencing cell proliferation, differentiation, migration, survival, and death [95,96]. Moreover, MAPKs such as JNK are instrumental in regulating transcription, cell proliferation, apoptosis, inflammation, metastasis, and angiogenesis—all processes that are critical for tumor progression [97]. Conversely, the MAPK pathway, particularly through the p38 MAPK axis, also supports tumor suppression by inhibiting cell proliferation, promoting oncogene-induced senescence, and initiating DNA damage responses, all of which contribute to an inflammatory response that can hinder tumor development [98]. Depending on the cellular context and type, MAPK pathways can have diverse effects, alternately contributing to cancer progression or suppression [97].
Elevated MAPK pathway activity is significantly associated with the progression of neoplastic growth [99]. Numerous pharmaceutical agents targeting the MAPK pathway have been developed for the treatment of cancers [100]. Thus, strategies that simultaneously inhibit MAPK activation and harness ROS-induced cell death offer promising avenues for the development of effective ROS-based cancer therapies.

5. Cancer and ROS

Cancer cells often exhibit higher levels of ROS compared to normal cells [231]. While elevated ROS levels can inflict cellular damage, potentially compromising cell survival, they can also drive cancer development by inducing DNA damage and promoting genomic instability [232]. Increased ROS levels have been observed across various cancer types and are associated with several key effects, including the activation of cancer-related signaling pathways, enhanced cell survival and proliferation, and heightened genetic instability [233].

5.1. Cancer Cell Survival, Growth

The transcription factor HIF-1α is crucial for enhancing glycolysis and promoting tumor growth in hypoxic environments [234]. Under normal conditions, prolyl hydroxylase (PHD) targets HIF-1α for degradation; however, reduced PHD activity in tumors stabilizes HIF-1α, resulting in its accumulation and the subsequent promotion of glycolysis to support tumor growth [235]. Additionally, HIF-2α induces the expression of pro-survival factors such as Nanog, Oct4, and c-MYC, further supporting tumor growth and survival under hypoxic conditions [236].
ROS also influences various signaling pathways that regulate cell growth by reversibly oxidizing proteins. This modulation affects protein tyrosine phosphatases, protein tyrosine kinases, receptor tyrosine kinases, and transcription factors. Additionally, ROS has been shown to activate key signaling pathways, including the MAPK/ERK cascade, PI3K/Akt signaling, and NF-κB pathways [237].
Although cancer cells generally display increased glucose uptake and glycolytic metabolism, certain areas within tumors experience glucose depletion due to rapid consumption and limited nutrient availability in the tumor microenvironment [238]. Glucose deprivation reduces ATP production and increases ROS levels. In response, AMPK, a critical cellular energy sensor, becomes activated to support cell survival under low-energy conditions [239].
The chronic secretion of elevated ROS levels, particularly in the context of persistent inflammation, can attract more immune cells to the tumor microenvironment, intensifying disease progression and potentially leading to a precancerous state [240]. Antioxidants such as GSH and thioredoxin influence cancer progression by reducing ROS levels and preventing cell death [241]. Moreover, mutations in NRF2, which commonly occur in squamous cell carcinomas, impair its interaction with Keap1, a protein that mediates NRF2 degradation. This leads to enhanced NRF2 activity, enabling cancer cells to better withstand oxidative stress [242]. RAC1, a GTPase that activates NOX at the cell membrane, is upregulated when the APC tumor suppressor gene is lost. The active form, RAC1B, is associated with cancers such as melanoma and lung cancer, where it promotes oncogenesis by increasing mitochondrial ROS (mtROS), contributing to oxidative stress, and facilitating tumor progression by enhancing cellular instability and survival pathways [20].

5.2. ROS in the Tumor Microenvironment (TME)

In immune cells, ROS play a vital role in processes such as phagocytosis, antigen processing and presentation, cell lysis, and phenotypic differentiation. However, ROS can also suppress the function of T cells and natural killer (NK) cells, contributing to the immunosuppressive environment commonly found in solid tumors. This immunosuppressive effect is especially prominent in the tumor microenvironment (TME), where it aids tumor growth by dampening immune responses against tumor cells [243]. The TME provides oxygen, nutrients, growth factors, and cytokines, all of which support tumor growth and simultaneously work to inhibit immune responses [244]. Antitumor immunity is initiated when dendritic cells capture tumor-associated antigens and present them to CD8+ T cells, which then become activated, migrate to the tumor site, and specifically target and destroy tumor cells [245]. ROS play a role in antigen processing and presentation by dendritic cells; NOX2-generated ROS aid in raising the pH within phagosomes, which is essential for antigen degradation and subsequent T cell presentation [246,247]. However, excessive ROS levels can trigger activation-induced cell death (AICD) in T cells, a regulatory process that causes T cell depletion upon antigen-driven activation, allowing tumors to evade immune detection [248]. ROS also promote the differentiation of regulatory T cells (Tregs), which act to prevent autoimmunity by suppressing T cell responses, thereby reducing tumor immunity [249]. Furthermore, ROS released by tumor cells influence macrophages to assume an M2 phenotype via PI3K signaling; M2 macrophages secrete growth factors and cytokines that support tumor cell proliferation [250]. Additionally, the stabilization of HIF-1α within tumors promotes the transcription of PD-L1, a common immune evasion strategy utilized by tumors [251]. Elevated ROS levels can also reduce CD16ζ expression in NK cells, which is crucial for their cytotoxic response and ability to recognize and destroy target cells. Therefore, high ROS levels may impair NK cell function by diminishing CD16ζ expression, limiting their effectiveness in targeting tumors [252].

5.3. ROS in EMT

Epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) describes a morphological change from epithelial to mesenchymal cell types, enhancing cell motility and invasiveness, thereby promoting tumor progression and drug resistance [98]. Beyond facilitating metastasis, EMT also induces cancer stem cell (CSC) characteristics, marked by the expression of stem cell markers, sphere-forming capability in vitro, tumorigenic potential, and resistance to treatment [253]. HIF-1α has been shown to play a critical role in driving EMT in both kidney cells and hepatocytes [254,255]. Mitochondrial ROS have been identified as a significant factor in hypoxia-induced EMT in alveolar epithelial cells, with further evidence the supporting role of ROS in promoting EMT in various cell types [256,257]. Increased ROS levels have been associated with the reduction in E-cadherin, an epithelial marker, through an ERK-dependent pathway [258]. Additionally, ROS stimulates the expression of transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β), which activates the SMAD protein complex. This complex, in turn, induces the expression of mesenchymal genes and transcription factors, such as Snail, Twist, Slug, and ZEB1, which drive the EMT process. Consequently, there is an upregulation of mesenchymal markers like vimentin and fibronectin and a concurrent downregulation of E-cadherin expression [2].

5.4. Cancer Treatment Using ROS

Therapeutic strategies targeting the high-ROS environment of cancer cells include the following: In one study, researchers designed a ROS-sensitive polymer to create nanoparticles (NP@ESCu) containing elesclomol (ES) and copper. These nanoparticles were administered to cancers with high ROS concentrations, inducing cuproptosis—a form of programmed cell death that relies on copper [259]. Radiation therapy, which generates ROS in cancer cells to induce DNA damage, can also harm normal tissues. To address this limitation, nanoparticles with a core–shell structure made from a metal–semiconductor (Au@AgBiS2) were developed to induce cell death processes more selectively within tumors [260]. In another study, melatonin, a hormone that regulates sleep, was found to promote mitochondrial reverse electron transport (RET), increase ROS production, and exert tumor-suppressing effects through apoptosis induction [261]. This suggests the potential for developing cancer treatments with reduced side effects using melatonin. The antidiabetic drug metformin inhibited the proliferation of breast cancer cells by increasing intracellular Fe2⁺ and lipid ROS levels, inducing ferroptosis through the destabilization of SLC7A11—a regulator of ferroptosis [262]. Artesunate, an antimalarial drug and promising candidate for colon cancer therapy, promotes autophagy by stimulating excessive ROS production [263]. These studies illustrate the potential for drug repurposing, which could contribute to developing cancer treatments with fewer side effects.
Conversely, targeting the antioxidant system in cancer cells may offer another therapeutic approach. The thioredoxin (Trx) antioxidant system, a major redox regulatory mechanism, is overexpressed in various tumors, and its inhibitors include 1-methylpropyl 2-imidazolyl disulfide (IV-2, also known as PX-12) and suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA) [264]. Given the complexity of endogenous antioxidant mechanisms in cancer cells, researchers initially believed that simply inhibiting individual antioxidant pathways might have limited efficacy. Thus, a versatile nanoparticle-based drug called PZB NP was developed, containing L-buthionine sulfoximine (BSO), a glutathione inhibitor, and zinc protoporphyrin (II) (ZnPP), an inhibitor of heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1). These components synergistically inhibit the innate antioxidant defenses of cancer cells, leading to cell death [265].
This multifaceted approach highlights both direct ROS-inducing agents and antioxidant system inhibitors as potential strategies for effective cancer therapies.

6. Conclusions and Further Direction

ROS are highly reactive molecules that play a complex, dual role in cancer biology [2,13]. On one hand, ROS function as signaling molecules that contribute to genomic instability, activate oncogenic pathways, and promote cancer cell proliferation, migration, invasion, angiogenesis, and drug resistance. Conversely, ROS can also trigger cell death pathways, such as apoptosis and autophagy, presenting a potential therapeutic avenue in cancer treatment [5]. ROS-induced DNA damage can lead to mutations and chromosomal abnormalities, which drive tumor formation [38]. Furthermore, ROS contribute to the activation of survival pathways, including NF-κB, PI3K/Akt, and NRF2, which enhance tumor cell survival, proliferation, and resistance to apoptosis [21]. Under specific conditions, ROS can also initiate programmed cell death pathways, such as apoptosis, autophagy, ferroptosis, and ER stress-induced apoptosis, which can suppress tumorigenesis [127,161,162,164].
By elucidating the conditions under which ROS either promote or inhibit cancer progression, researchers can develop targeted therapies that either reduce ROS levels to prevent cancer development or elevate ROS to induce cancer cell death. Therapeutic strategies harnessing ROS include ROS inducers, targeting antioxidant systems to sensitize cancer cells to ROS-induced damage and inhibiting survival pathways, such as NF-κB and PI3K/Akt, in synergy with ROS. These approaches demonstrate the potential for ROS-based cancer therapies. However, a balanced approach is essential to harness the dual roles of ROS effectively within cancer cells. In the context of personalized medicine, it is also essential to tailor ROS-modulating strategies based on the unique redox profiles of individual tumors. The development of reliable biomarkers to monitor ROS levels in real time could significantly enhance therapeutic precision.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, literature search, S.J., M.K.S., S.S.K., S.H. and J.R.; writing—original draft preparation, S.J.; figure preparation, S.J.; review and editing, S.J., M.K.S., S.H., J.R., J.H., W.C., K.-S.Y., S.G.Y. and S.S.K.; supervision, S.J., J.H., W.C., K.-S.Y., S.G.Y., I.K. and S.S.K.; project administration, I.K. and S.S.K.; funding acquisition, S.S.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grants funded by the Korean government (MEST) (grant NRF-2018R1A6A1A03025124).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All the references are cited in the manuscript; however, we apologize for the omission of any primary citations.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Siegel, R.L.; Miller, K.D.; Fuchs, H.E.; Jemal, A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2022, 72, 7–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Huang, R.; Chen, H.; Liang, J.; Li, Y.; Yang, J.; Luo, C.; Tang, Y.; Ding, Y.; Liu, X.; Yuan, Q.; et al. Dual Role of Reactive Oxygen Species and their Application in Cancer Therapy. J. Cancer 2021, 12, 5543–5561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Taniyama, Y.; Griendling, K.K. Reactive oxygen species in the vasculature: Molecular and cellular mechanisms. Hypertension 2003, 42, 1075–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sies, H.; Jones, D.P. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) as pleiotropic physiological signalling agents. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2020, 21, 363–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Nakamura, H.; Takada, K. Reactive oxygen species in cancer: Current findings and future directions. Cancer Sci. 2021, 112, 3945–3952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Liberti, M.V.; Locasale, J.W. The Warburg Effect: How Does it Benefit Cancer Cells? Trends Biochem. Sci. 2016, 41, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pliszka, M.; Szablewski, L. Glucose Transporters as a Target for Anticancer Therapy. Cancers 2021, 13, 4184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zheng, J. Energy metabolism of cancer: Glycolysis versus oxidative phosphorylation (Review). Oncol. Lett. 2012, 4, 1151–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Lukey, M.J.; Wilson, K.F.; Cerione, R.A. Therapeutic strategies impacting cancer cell glutamine metabolism. Future Med. Chem. 2013, 5, 1685–1700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Patra, K.C.; Hay, N. The pentose phosphate pathway and cancer. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2014, 39, 347–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lei, T.; Rui, Y.; Zhou, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, J. Mitochondria transcription and cancer. Cell Death Discov. 2024, 10, 168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Phan, L.M.; Yeung, S.C.; Lee, M.H. Cancer metabolic reprogramming: Importance, main features, and potentials for precise targeted anti-cancer therapies. Cancer Biol. Med. 2014, 11, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  13. Valko, M.; Leibfritz, D.; Moncol, J.; Cronin, M.T.D.; Mazur, M.; Telser, J. Free radicals and antioxidants in normal physiological functions and human disease. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 2007, 39, 44–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hayyan, M.; Hashim, M.A.; AlNashef, I.M. Superoxide Ion: Generation and Chemical Implications. Chem. Rev. 2016, 116, 3029–3085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Galadari, S.; Rahman, A.; Pallichankandy, S.; Thayyullathil, F. Reactive oxygen species and cancer paradox: To promote or to suppress? Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2017, 104, 144–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Zorov, D.B.; Juhaszova, M.; Sollott, S.J. Mitochondrial reactive oxygen species (ROS) and ROS-induced ROS release. Physiol. Rev. 2014, 94, 909–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Bedard, K.; Krause, K.H. The NOX family of ROS-generating NADPH oxidases: Physiology and pathophysiology. Physiol. Rev. 2007, 87, 245–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cecarini, V.; Gee, J.; Fioretti, E.; Amici, M.; Angeletti, M.; Eleuteri, A.M.; Keller, J.N. Protein oxidation and cellular homeostasis: Emphasis on metabolism. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2007, 1773, 93–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Birben, E.; Sahiner, U.M.; Sackesen, C.; Erzurum, S.; Kalayci, O. Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Defense. World Allergy Organ. J. 2012, 5, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Cheung, E.C.; Vousden, K.H. The role of ROS in tumour development and progression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2022, 22, 280–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Milkovic, L.; Cipak Gasparovic, A.; Cindric, M.; Mouthuy, P.A.; Zarkovic, N. Short Overview of ROS as Cell Function Regulators and Their Implications in Therapy Concepts. Cells 2019, 8, 793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Porporato, P.E.; Payen, V.L.; Pérez-Escuredo, J.; De Saedeleer, C.J.; Danhier, P.; Copetti, T.; Dhup, S.; Tardy, M.; Vazeille, T.; Bouzin, C.; et al. A Mitochondrial Switch Promotes Tumor Metastasis. Cell Rep. 2014, 8, 754–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Hileman, E.A.; Achanta, G.; Huang, P. Superoxide dismutase: An emerging target for cancer therapeutics. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 2001, 5, 697–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Kryston, T.B.; Georgiev, A.B.; Pissis, P.; Georgakilas, A.G. Role of oxidative stress and DNA damage in human carcinogenesis. Mutat. Res./Fundam. Mol. Mech. Mutagen. 2011, 711, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Olinski, R.; Gackowski, D.; Rozalski, R.; Foksinski, M.; Bialkowski, K. Oxidative DNA damage in cancer patients: A cause or a consequence of the disease development? Mutat. Res./Fundam. Mol. Mech. Mutagen. 2003, 531, 177–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhao, Y.; Ye, X.; Xiong, Z.; Ihsan, A.; Ares, I.; Martínez, M.; Lopez-Torres, B.; Martínez-Larrañaga, M.-R.; Anadón, A.; Wang, X.; et al. Cancer Metabolism: The Role of ROS in DNA Damage and Induction of Apoptosis in Cancer Cells. Metabolites 2023, 13, 796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Groeger, G.; Quiney, C.; Cotter, T.G. Hydrogen peroxide as a cell-survival signaling molecule. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2009, 11, 2655–2671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Platt, D.H.; Bartoli, M.; El-Remessy, A.B.; Al-Shabrawey, M.; Lemtalsi, T.; Fulton, D.; Caldwell, R.B. Peroxynitrite increases VEGF expression in vascular endothelial cells via STAT3. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2005, 39, 1353–1361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Li, K.; Deng, Z.; Lei, C.; Ding, X.; Li, J.; Wang, C. The Role of Oxidative Stress in Tumorigenesis and Progression. Cells 2024, 13, 441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Khan, F.H.; Dervan, E.; Bhattacharyya, D.D.; McAuliffe, J.D.; Miranda, K.M.; Glynn, S.A. The Role of Nitric Oxide in Cancer: Master Regulator or NOt? Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 9393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mittler, R. ROS Are Good. Trends Plant Sci. 2017, 22, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Frei, B. Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant vitamins: Mechanisms of action. Am. J. Med. 1994, 97 (Suppl. 1), S5–S13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Shadyro, O.; Lisovskaya, A. ROS-induced lipid transformations without oxygen participation. Chem. Phys. Lipids 2019, 221, 176–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Endale, H.T.; Tesfaye, W.; Mengstie, T.A. ROS induced lipid peroxidation and their role in ferroptosis. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2023, 11, 1226044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Volinsky, R.; Kinnunen, P.K. Oxidized phosphatidylcholines in membrane-level cellular signaling: From biophysics to physiology and molecular pathology. FEBS J. 2013, 280, 2806–2816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Pizzino, G.; Irrera, N.; Cucinotta, M.; Pallio, G.; Mannino, F.; Arcoraci, V.; Squadrito, F.; Altavilla, D.; Bitto, A. Oxidative Stress: Harms and Benefits for Human Health. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2017, 2017, 8416763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Juan, C.A.; Pérez de la Lastra, J.M.; Plou, F.J.; Pérez-Lebeña, E. The Chemistry of Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Revisited: Outlining Their Role in Biological Macromolecules (DNA, Lipids and Proteins) and Induced Pathologies. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 4642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Valko, M.; Rhodes, C.J.; Moncol, J.; Izakovic, M.; Mazur, M. Free radicals, metals and antioxidants in oxidative stress-induced cancer. Chem.-Biol. Interact. 2006, 160, 1–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Yoshihara, M.; Jiang, L.; Akatsuka, S.; Suyama, M.; Toyokuni, S. Genome-wide profiling of 8-oxoguanine reveals its association with spatial positioning in nucleus. DNA Res. 2014, 21, 603–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Kasai, H.; Crain, P.F.; Kuchino, Y.; Nishimura, S.; Ootsuyama, A.; Tanooka, H. Formation of 8-hydroxyguanine moiety in cellular DNA by agents producing oxygen radicals and evidence for its repair. Carcinogenesis 1986, 7, 1849–1851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Herrmann, P.C.; Gillespie, J.W.; Charboneau, L.; Bichsel, V.E.; Paweletz, C.P.; Calvert, V.S.; Kohn, E.C.; Emmert-Buck, M.R.; Liotta, L.A.; Petricoin, E.F., 3rd. Mitochondrial proteome: Altered cytochrome c oxidase subunit levels in prostate cancer. Proteomics 2003, 3, 1801–1810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Parrella, P.; Xiao, Y.; Fliss, M.; Sanchez-Cespedes, M.; Mazzarelli, P.; Rinaldi, M.; Nicol, T.; Gabrielson, E.; Cuomo, C.; Cohen, D.; et al. Detection of mitochondrial DNA mutations in primary breast cancer and fine-needle aspirates. Cancer Res. 2001, 61, 7623–7626. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  43. Chen, J.Z.; Gokden, N.; Greene, G.F.; Mukunyadzi, P.; Kadlubar, F.F. Extensive somatic mitochondrial mutations in primary prostate cancer using laser capture microdissection. Cancer Res. 2002, 62, 6470–6474. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  44. Sánchez-Ortega, M.; Carrera, A.C.; Garrido, A. Role of NRF2 in Lung Cancer. Cells 2021, 10, 1879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Zhu, H.; Jia, Z.; Trush, M.A.; Li, Y.R. Nrf2 Deficiency Promotes Melanoma Growth and Lung Metastasis. React. Oxyg. Species (Apex) 2016, 2, 308–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
  46. Hammad, A.; Zheng, Z.H.; Gao, Y.; Namani, A.; Shi, H.F.; Tang, X. Identification of novel Nrf2 target genes as prognostic biomarkers in colitis-associated colorectal cancer in Nrf2-deficient mice. Life Sci. 2019, 238, 116968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Menegon, S.; Columbano, A.; Giordano, S. The Dual Roles of NRF2 in Cancer. Trends Mol. Med. 2016, 22, 578–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Robertson, H.; Dinkova-Kostova, A.T.; Hayes, J.D. NRF2 and the Ambiguous Consequences of Its Activation during Initiation and the Subsequent Stages of Tumourigenesis. Cancers 2020, 12, 3609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. He, C.H.; Gong, P.; Hu, B.; Stewart, D.; Choi, M.E.; Choi, A.M.; Alam, J. Identification of activating transcription factor 4 (ATF4) as an Nrf2-interacting protein. Implication for heme oxygenase-1 gene regulation. J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276, 20858–20865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sivinski, J.; Zhang, D.D.; Chapman, E. Targeting NRF2 to treat cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2021, 76, 61–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kitamura, H.; Motohashi, H. NRF2 addiction in cancer cells. Cancer Sci. 2018, 109, 900–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Schlein, L.J.; Thamm, D.H. Review: NF-kB activation in canine cancer. Vet. Pathol. 2022, 59, 724–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Lingappan, K. NF-κB in Oxidative Stress. Curr. Opin. Toxicol. 2018, 7, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Strickland, I.; Ghosh, S. Use of cell permeable NBD peptides for suppression of inflammation. Ann. Rheum. Dis. 2006, 65 (Suppl. 3), iii75–iii82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Vilchis-Ordoñez, A.; Ramírez-Ramírez, D.; Pelayo, R. The triad inflammation-microenvironment-tumor initiating cells in leukemia progression. Curr. Opin. Physiol. 2021, 19, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Xia, Y.; Shen, S.; Verma, I.M. NF-κB, an active player in human cancers. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2014, 2, 823–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. D’Acquisto, F.; de Cristofaro, F.; Maiuri, M.C.; Tajana, G.; Carnuccio, R. Protective role of nuclear factor kappa B against nitric oxide-induced apoptosis in J774 macrophages. Cell Death Differ. 2001, 8, 144–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Karin, M.; Cao, Y.; Greten, F.R.; Li, Z.W. NF-kappaB in cancer: From innocent bystander to major culprit. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2002, 2, 301–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Aggarwal, B.B. Nuclear factor-κB: The enemy within. Cancer Cell 2004, 6, 203–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Huang, S.; Robinson, J.B.; Deguzman, A.; Bucana, C.D.; Fidler, I.J. Blockade of nuclear factor-kappaB signaling inhibits angiogenesis and tumorigenicity of human ovarian cancer cells by suppressing expression of vascular endothelial growth factor and interleukin 8. Cancer Res. 2000, 60, 5334–5339. [Google Scholar]
  61. Bajaj, S.; Kumar, M.S.; Peters, G.; Mayur, Y. Targeting telomerase for its advent in cancer therapeutics. Med. Res. Rev. 2020, 40, 1871–1919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Medunjanin, S.; Schleithoff, L.; Fiegehenn, C.; Weinert, S.; Zuschratter, W.; Braun-Dullaeus, R.C. GSK-3β controls NF-kappaB activity via IKKγ/NEMO. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 38553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Götschel, F.; Kern, C.; Lang, S.; Sparna, T.; Markmann, C.; Schwager, J.; McNelly, S.; von Weizsäcker, F.; Laufer, S.; Hecht, A.; et al. Inhibition of GSK3 differentially modulates NF-kappaB, CREB, AP-1 and beta-catenin signaling in hepatocytes, but fails to promote TNF-alpha-induced apoptosis. Exp. Cell Res. 2008, 314, 1351–1366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Ghantous, A.; Sinjab, A.; Herceg, Z.; Darwiche, N. Parthenolide: From plant shoots to cancer roots. Drug Discov. Today 2013, 18, 894–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Ghasemi, F.; Shafiee, M.; Banikazemi, Z.; Pourhanifeh, M.H.; Khanbabaei, H.; Shamshirian, A.; Amiri Moghadam, S.; ArefNezhad, R.; Sahebkar, A.; Avan, A.; et al. Curcumin inhibits NF-kB and Wnt/β-catenin pathways in cervical cancer cells. Pathol. Res. Pract. 2019, 215, 152556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Shimizu, K.; Konno, S.; Ozaki, M.; Umezawa, K.; Yamashita, K.; Todo, S.; Nishimura, M. Dehydroxymethylepoxyquinomicin (DHMEQ), a novel NF-kappaB inhibitor, inhibits allergic inflammation and airway remodelling in murine models of asthma. Clin. Exp. Allergy 2012, 42, 1273–1281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Taromi, S.; Lewens, F.; Arsenic, R.; Sedding, D.; Sänger, J.; Kunze, A.; Möbs, M.; Benecke, J.; Freitag, H.; Christen, F.; et al. Proteasome inhibitor bortezomib enhances the effect of standard chemotherapy in small cell lung cancer. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 97061–97078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Dolcet, X.; Llobet, D.; Pallares, J.; Matias-Guiu, X. NF-kB in development and progression of human cancer. Virchows Archiv 2005, 446, 475–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. He, Y.; Sun, M.M.; Zhang, G.G.; Yang, J.; Chen, K.S.; Xu, W.W.; Li, B. Targeting PI3K/Akt signal transduction for cancer therapy. Signal Transduct. Target Ther. 2021, 6, 425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Vanhaesebroeck, B.; Guillermet-Guibert, J.; Graupera, M.; Bilanges, B. The emerging mechanisms of isoform-specific PI3K signalling. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010, 11, 329–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Chen, K.; Li, Y.; Zhang, X.; Ullah, R.; Tong, J.; Shen, Y. The role of the PI3K/AKT signalling pathway in the corneal epithelium: Recent updates. Cell Death Dis. 2022, 13, 513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Thorpe, L.M.; Yuzugullu, H.; Zhao, J.J. PI3K in cancer: Divergent roles of isoforms, modes of activation and therapeutic targeting. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2015, 15, 7–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Hanker, A.B.; Kaklamani, V.; Arteaga, C.L. Challenges for the Clinical Development of PI3K Inhibitors: Strategies to Improve Their Impact in Solid Tumors. Cancer Discov. 2019, 9, 482–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Peng, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, C.; Mei, W.; Zeng, C. PI3K/Akt/mTOR Pathway and Its Role in Cancer Therapeutics: Are We Making Headway? Front. Oncol. 2022, 12, 819128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Rudolph, M.; Anzeneder, T.; Schulz, A.; Beckmann, G.; Byrne, A.T.; Jeffers, M.; Pena, C.; Politz, O.; Köchert, K.; Vonk, R.; et al. AKT1 (E17K) mutation profiling in breast cancer: Prevalence, concurrent oncogenic alterations, and blood-based detection. BMC Cancer 2016, 16, 622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Pereira, L.; Horta, S.; Mateus, R.; Videira, M.A. Implications of Akt2/Twist crosstalk on breast cancer metastatic outcome. Drug Discov. Today 2015, 20, 1152–1158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Zehir, A.; Benayed, R.; Shah, R.H.; Syed, A.; Middha, S.; Kim, H.R.; Srinivasan, P.; Gao, J.; Chakravarty, D.; Devlin, S.M.; et al. Mutational landscape of metastatic cancer revealed from prospective clinical sequencing of 10,000 patients. Nat. Med. 2017, 23, 703–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Robinson, D.R.; Wu, Y.M.; Lonigro, R.J.; Vats, P.; Cobain, E.; Everett, J.; Cao, X.; Rabban, E.; Kumar-Sinha, C.; Raymond, V.; et al. Integrative clinical genomics of metastatic cancer. Nature 2017, 548, 297–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Popova, N.V.; Jücker, M. The Role of mTOR Signaling as a Therapeutic Target in Cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Saxton, R.A.; Sabatini, D.M. mTOR Signaling in Growth, Metabolism, and Disease. Cell 2017, 168, 960–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Inoki, K.; Li, Y.; Zhu, T.; Wu, J.; Guan, K.L. TSC2 is phosphorylated and inhibited by Akt and suppresses mTOR signalling. Nat. Cell Biol. 2002, 4, 648–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Embi, N.; Rylatt, D.B.; Cohen, P. Glycogen synthase kinase-3 from rabbit skeletal muscle. Separation from cyclic-AMP-dependent protein kinase and phosphorylase kinase. Eur. J. Biochem. 1980, 107, 519–527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Duda, P.; Akula, S.M.; Abrams, S.L.; Steelman, L.S.; Martelli, A.M.; Cocco, L.; Ratti, S.; Candido, S.; Libra, M.; Montalto, G.; et al. Targeting GSK3 and Associated Signaling Pathways Involved in Cancer. Cells 2020, 9, 1110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Beurel, E.; Grieco, S.F.; Jope, R.S. Glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK3): Regulation, actions, and diseases. Pharmacol. Ther. 2015, 148, 114–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Zhang, J.S.; Herreros-Villanueva, M.; Koenig, A.; Deng, Z.; de Narvajas, A.A.; Gomez, T.S.; Meng, X.; Bujanda, L.; Ellenrieder, V.; Li, X.K.; et al. Differential activity of GSK-3 isoforms regulates NF-κB and TRAIL- or TNFα induced apoptosis in pancreatic cancer cells. Cell Death Dis. 2014, 5, e1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Ougolkov, A.V.; Billadeau, D.D. Targeting GSK-3: A promising approach for cancer therapy? Future Oncol. 2006, 2, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Culbreth, M.; Aschner, M. GSK-3β, a double-edged sword in Nrf2 regulation: Implications for neurological dysfunction and disease. F1000Res 2018, 7, 1043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Leis, H.; Segrelles, C.; Ruiz, S.; Santos, M.; Paramio, J.M. Expression, localization, and activity of glycogen synthase kinase 3beta during mouse skin tumorigenesis. Mol. Carcinog. 2002, 35, 180–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Son, Y.; Cheong, Y.K.; Kim, N.H.; Chung, H.T.; Kang, D.G.; Pae, H.O. Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinases and Reactive Oxygen Species: How Can ROS Activate MAPK Pathways? J. Signal Transduct. 2011, 2011, 792639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Hong, Y.; Boiti, A.; Vallone, D.; Foulkes, N.S. Reactive Oxygen Species Signaling and Oxidative Stress: Transcriptional Regulation and Evolution. Antioxidants 2024, 13, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Santarpia, L.; Lippman, S.M.; El-Naggar, A.K. Targeting the MAPK-RAS-RAF signaling pathway in cancer therapy. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 2012, 16, 103–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Fernández-Medarde, A.; Santos, E. Ras in cancer and developmental diseases. Genes Cancer 2011, 2, 344–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Garnett, M.J.; Marais, R. Guilty as charged: B-RAF is a human oncogene. Cancer Cell 2004, 6, 313–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Roskoski, R., Jr. Targeting oncogenic Raf protein-serine/threonine kinases in human cancers. Pharmacol. Res. 2018, 135, 239–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Bang, Y.J.; Kwon, J.H.; Kang, S.H.; Kim, J.W.; Yang, Y.C. Increased MAPK activity and MKP-1 overexpression in human gastric adenocarcinoma. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1998, 250, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Sun, Y.; Liu, W.Z.; Liu, T.; Feng, X.; Yang, N.; Zhou, H.F. Signaling pathway of MAPK/ERK in cell proliferation, differentiation, migration, senescence and apoptosis. J. Recept. Signal Transduct. Res. 2015, 35, 600–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Pua, L.J.W.; Mai, C.W.; Chung, F.F.; Khoo, A.S.; Leong, C.O.; Lim, W.M.; Hii, L.W. Functional Roles of JNK and p38 MAPK Signaling in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Chatterjee, R.; Chatterjee, J. ROS and oncogenesis with special reference to EMT and stemness. Eur. J. Cell Biol. 2020, 99, 151073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Maik-Rachline, G.; Hacohen-Lev-Ran, A.; Seger, R. Nuclear ERK: Mechanism of Translocation, Substrates, and Role in Cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Song, Y.; Bi, Z.; Liu, Y.; Qin, F.; Wei, Y.; Wei, X. Targeting RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK signaling pathway in human cancer: Current status in clinical trials. Genes Dis. 2023, 10, 76–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Li, X.; Luo, R.; Liang, X.; Wu, Q.; Gong, C. Recent advances in enhancing reactive oxygen species based chemodynamic therapy. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2022, 33, 2213–2230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Hassannia, B.; Vandenabeele, P.; Vanden Berghe, T. Targeting Ferroptosis to Iron Out Cancer. Cancer Cell 2019, 35, 830–849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Torti, S.V.; Manz, D.H.; Paul, B.T.; Blanchette-Farra, N.; Torti, F.M. Iron and Cancer. Annu. Rev. Nutr. 2018, 38, 97–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Lei, P.; Bai, T.; Sun, Y. Mechanisms of Ferroptosis and Relations With Regulated Cell Death: A Review. Front. Physiol. 2019, 10, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Brigelius-Flohé, R.; Maiorino, M. Glutathione peroxidases. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2013, 1830, 3289–3303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Yang, W.S.; Kim, K.J.; Gaschler, M.M.; Patel, M.; Shchepinov, M.S.; Stockwell, B.R. Peroxidation of polyunsaturated fatty acids by lipoxygenases drives ferroptosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, E4966–E4975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Zhou, C.; Yu, T.; Zhu, R.; Lu, J.; Ouyang, X.; Zhang, Z.; Chen, Q.; Li, J.; Cui, J.; Jiang, F.; et al. Timosaponin AIII promotes non-small-cell lung cancer ferroptosis through targeting and facilitating HSP90 mediated GPX4 ubiquitination and degradation. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2023, 19, 1471–1489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  108. Chen, Y.; Lin, B.; Yang, S.; Huang, J. IRF1 suppresses colon cancer proliferation by reducing SPI1-mediated transcriptional activation of GPX4 and promoting ferroptosis. Exp. Cell Res. 2023, 431, 113733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Dixon, S.J.; Lemberg, K.M.; Lamprecht, M.R.; Skouta, R.; Zaitsev, E.M.; Gleason, C.E.; Patel, D.N.; Bauer, A.J.; Cantley, A.M.; Yang, W.S.; et al. Ferroptosis: An iron-dependent form of nonapoptotic cell death. Cell 2012, 149, 1060–1072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Friedmann Angeli, J.P.; Schneider, M.; Proneth, B.; Tyurina, Y.Y.; Tyurin, V.A.; Hammond, V.J.; Herbach, N.; Aichler, M.; Walch, A.; Eggenhofer, E.; et al. Inactivation of the ferroptosis regulator Gpx4 triggers acute renal failure in mice. Nat. Cell Biol. 2014, 16, 1180–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Woo, J.H.; Shimoni, Y.; Yang, W.S.; Subramaniam, P.; Iyer, A.; Nicoletti, P.; Rodríguez Martínez, M.; López, G.; Mattioli, M.; Realubit, R.; et al. Elucidating Compound Mechanism of Action by Network Perturbation Analysis. Cell 2015, 162, 441–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Shimada, K.; Skouta, R.; Kaplan, A.; Yang, W.S.; Hayano, M.; Dixon, S.J.; Brown, L.M.; Valenzuela, C.A.; Wolpaw, A.J.; Stockwell, B.R. Global survey of cell death mechanisms reveals metabolic regulation of ferroptosis. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2016, 12, 497–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Abrams, R.P.; Carroll, W.L.; Woerpel, K.A. Five-Membered Ring Peroxide Selectively Initiates Ferroptosis in Cancer Cells. ACS Chem. Biol. 2016, 11, 1305–1312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Zhao, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhang, R.; Wang, F.; Wang, T.; Jiao, Y. The Role of Erastin in Ferroptosis and Its Prospects in Cancer Therapy. Onco Targets Ther. 2020, 13, 5429–5441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Zhou, B.; Liu, J.; Kang, R.; Klionsky, D.J.; Kroemer, G.; Tang, D. Ferroptosis is a type of autophagy-dependent cell death. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2020, 66, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Miller, D.R.; Thorburn, A. Autophagy and organelle homeostasis in cancer. Dev. Cell 2021, 56, 906–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Farrukh, M.R.; Nissar, U.A.; Afnan, Q.; Rafiq, R.A.; Sharma, L.; Amin, S.; Kaiser, P.; Sharma, P.R.; Tasduq, S.A. Oxidative stress mediated Ca(2+) release manifests endoplasmic reticulum stress leading to unfolded protein response in UV-B irradiated human skin cells. J. Dermatol. Sci. 2014, 75, 24–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Rasheva, V.I.; Domingos, P.M. Cellular responses to endoplasmic reticulum stress and apoptosis. Apoptosis 2009, 14, 996–1007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kim, G.; Lee, J.; Ha, J.; Kang, I.; Choe, W. Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress and Its Impact on Adipogenesis: Molecular Mechanisms Implicated. Nutrients 2023, 15, 5082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Sano, R.; Reed, J.C. ER stress-induced cell death mechanisms. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2013, 1833, 3460–3470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Grosskreutz, J.; Van Den Bosch, L.; Keller, B.U. Calcium dysregulation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Cell Calcium 2010, 47, 165–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Hu, H.; Tian, M.; Ding, C.; Yu, S. The C/EBP Homologous Protein (CHOP) Transcription Factor Functions in Endoplasmic Reticulum Stress-Induced Apoptosis and Microbial Infection. Front. Immunol. 2018, 9, 3083. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Kim, C.; Kim, B. Anti-Cancer Natural Products and Their Bioactive Compounds Inducing ER Stress-Mediated Apoptosis: A Review. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Yang, K.M.; Kim, B.M.; Park, J.B. ω-Hydroxyundec-9-enoic acid induces apoptosis through ROS-mediated endoplasmic reticulum stress in non-small cell lung cancer cells. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2014, 448, 267–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Wu, S.H.; Hang, L.W.; Yang, J.S.; Chen, H.Y.; Lin, H.Y.; Chiang, J.H.; Lu, C.C.; Yang, J.L.; Lai, T.Y.; Ko, Y.C.; et al. Curcumin induces apoptosis in human non-small cell lung cancer NCI-H460 cells through ER stress and caspase cascade- and mitochondria-dependent pathways. Anticancer Res. 2010, 30, 2125–2133. [Google Scholar]
  126. Hsia, T.C.; Yu, C.C.; Hsu, S.C.; Tang, N.Y.; Lu, H.F.; Huang, Y.P.; Wu, S.H.; Lin, J.G.; Chung, J.G. Cantharidin induces apoptosis of H460 human lung cancer cells through mitochondria-dependent pathways. Int. J. Oncol. 2014, 45, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  127. Simon, H.U.; Haj-Yehia, A.; Levi-Schaffer, F. Role of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in apoptosis induction. Apoptosis 2000, 5, 415–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Ow, Y.-L.P.; Green, D.R.; Hao, Z.; Mak, T.W. Cytochrome c: Functions beyond respiration. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008, 9, 532–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Orrenius, S.; Gogvadze, V.; Zhivotovsky, B. Calcium and mitochondria in the regulation of cell death. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2015, 460, 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Kroemer, G.; Galluzzi, L.; Brenner, C. Mitochondrial membrane permeabilization in cell death. Physiol. Rev. 2007, 87, 99–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Ghobrial, I.M.; Witzig, T.E.; Adjei, A.A. Targeting apoptosis pathways in cancer therapy. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2005, 55, 178–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Redza-Dutordoir, M.; Averill-Bates, D.A. Activation of apoptosis signalling pathways by reactive oxygen species. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA)-Mol. Cell Res. 2016, 1863, 2977–2992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Qian, S.; Wei, Z.; Yang, W.; Huang, J.; Yang, Y.; Wang, J. The role of BCL-2 family proteins in regulating apoptosis and cancer therapy. Front. Oncol. 2022, 12, 985363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Christidi, E.; Brunham, L.R. Regulated cell death pathways in doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity. Cell Death Dis. 2021, 12, 339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Thorn, C.F.; Oshiro, C.; Marsh, S.; Hernandez-Boussard, T.; McLeod, H.; Klein, T.E.; Altman, R.B. Doxorubicin pathways: Pharmacodynamics and adverse effects. Pharmacogenet. Genom. 2011, 21, 440–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Tsang, W.P.; Chau, S.P.; Kong, S.K.; Fung, K.P.; Kwok, T.T. Reactive oxygen species mediate doxorubicin induced p53-independent apoptosis. Life Sci. 2003, 73, 2047–2058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  137. Liebl, M.C.; Hofmann, T.G. The Role of p53 Signaling in Colorectal Cancer. Cancers 2021, 13, 2125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Böhlig, L.; Rother, K. One function--multiple mechanisms: The manifold activities of p53 as a transcriptional repressor. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2011, 2011, 464916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Liu, Y.; Gu, W. p53 in ferroptosis regulation: The new weapon for the old guardian. Cell Death Differ. 2022, 29, 895–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Jiang, L.; Kon, N.; Li, T.; Wang, S.J.; Su, T.; Hibshoosh, H.; Baer, R.; Gu, W. Ferroptosis as a p53-mediated activity during tumour suppression. Nature 2015, 520, 57–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Ou, Y.; Wang, S.J.; Li, D.; Chu, B.; Gu, W. Activation of SAT1 engages polyamine metabolism with p53-mediated ferroptotic responses. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, E6806–E6812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Ying, Y.; Padanilam, B.J. Regulation of necrotic cell death: p53, PARP1 and cyclophilin D-overlapping pathways of regulated necrosis? Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2016, 73, 2309–2324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Tu, H.C.; Ren, D.; Wang, G.X.; Chen, D.Y.; Westergard, T.D.; Kim, H.; Sasagawa, S.; Hsieh, J.J.; Cheng, E.H. The p53-cathepsin axis cooperates with ROS to activate programmed necrotic death upon DNA damage. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 1093–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Ruiz, L.M.; Libedinsky, A.; Elorza, A.A. Role of Copper on Mitochondrial Function and Metabolism. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2021, 8, 711227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Porporato, P.E.; Filigheddu, N.; Pedro, J.M.B.; Kroemer, G.; Galluzzi, L. Mitochondrial metabolism and cancer. Cell Res. 2018, 28, 265–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Tsvetkov, P.; Coy, S.; Petrova, B.; Dreishpoon, M.; Verma, A.; Abdusamad, M.; Rossen, J.; Joesch-Cohen, L.; Humeidi, R.; Spangler, R.D.; et al. Copper induces cell death by targeting lipoylated TCA cycle proteins. Science 2022, 375, 1254–1261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Ghosh, P.; Vidal, C.; Dey, S.; Zhang, L. Mitochondria Targeting as an Effective Strategy for Cancer Therapy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 3363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Nagai, M.; Vo, N.H.; Shin Ogawa, L.; Chimmanamada, D.; Inoue, T.; Chu, J.; Beaudette-Zlatanova, B.C.; Lu, R.; Blackman, R.K.; Barsoum, J.; et al. The oncology drug elesclomol selectively transports copper to the mitochondria to induce oxidative stress in cancer cells. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2012, 52, 2142–2150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Kirshner, J.R.; He, S.; Balasubramanyam, V.; Kepros, J.; Yang, C.Y.; Zhang, M.; Du, Z.; Barsoum, J.; Bertin, J. Elesclomol induces cancer cell apoptosis through oxidative stress. Mol. Cancer Ther. 2008, 7, 2319–2327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Guan, D.; Zhao, L.; Shi, X.; Ma, X.; Chen, Z. Copper in cancer: From pathogenesis to therapy. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2023, 163, 114791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Tsvetkov, P.; Detappe, A.; Cai, K.; Keys, H.R.; Brune, Z.; Ying, W.; Thiru, P.; Reidy, M.; Kugener, G.; Rossen, J.; et al. Mitochondrial metabolism promotes adaptation to proteotoxic stress. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2019, 15, 681–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Elmore, S. Apoptosis: A review of programmed cell death. Toxicol. Pathol. 2007, 35, 495–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Filomeni, G.; De Zio, D.; Cecconi, F. Oxidative stress and autophagy: The clash between damage and metabolic needs. Cell Death Differ. 2015, 22, 377–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Singh, M.K.; Han, S.; Kim, S.; Kang, I. Targeting Lipid Metabolism in Cancer Stem Cells for Anticancer Treatment. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 11185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Denton, D.; Kumar, S. Autophagy-dependent cell death. Cell Death Differ. 2019, 26, 605–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  156. Russell, R.C.; Tian, Y.; Yuan, H.; Park, H.W.; Chang, Y.Y.; Kim, J.; Kim, H.; Neufeld, T.P.; Dillin, A.; Guan, K.L. ULK1 induces autophagy by phosphorylating Beclin-1 and activating VPS34 lipid kinase. Nat. Cell Biol. 2013, 15, 741–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  157. Geng, J.; Klionsky, D.J. The Atg8 and Atg12 ubiquitin-like conjugation systems in macroautophagy. ‘Protein modifications: Beyond the usual suspects’ review series. EMBO Rep. 2008, 9, 859–864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Mizushima, N.; Noda, T.; Yoshimori, T.; Tanaka, Y.; Ishii, T.; George, M.D.; Klionsky, D.J.; Ohsumi, M.; Ohsumi, Y. A protein conjugation system essential for autophagy. Nature 1998, 395, 395–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Ohsumi, Y. Molecular dissection of autophagy: Two ubiquitin-like systems. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2001, 2, 211–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Kroemer, G.; Mariño, G.; Levine, B. Autophagy and the integrated stress response. Mol. Cell 2010, 40, 280–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Huang, J.; Canadien, V.; Lam, G.Y.; Steinberg, B.E.; Dinauer, M.C.; Magalhaes, M.A.; Glogauer, M.; Grinstein, S.; Brumell, J.H. Activation of antibacterial autophagy by NADPH oxidases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 6226–6231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Filomeni, G.; Desideri, E.; Cardaci, S.; Rotilio, G.; Ciriolo, M.R. Under the ROS…thiol network is the principal suspect for autophagy commitment. Autophagy 2010, 6, 999–1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  163. Chen, Y.; Azad, M.B.; Gibson, S.B. Superoxide is the major reactive oxygen species regulating autophagy. Cell Death Differ. 2009, 16, 1040–1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Scherz-Shouval, R.; Elazar, Z. Regulation of autophagy by ROS: Physiology and pathology. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2011, 36, 30–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Redza-Dutordoir, M.; Kassis, S.; Ve, H.; Grondin, M.; Averill-Bates, D.A. Inhibition of autophagy sensitises cells to hydrogen peroxide-induced apoptosis: Protective effect of mild thermotolerance acquired at 40 °C. Biochim. Biophys. Acta (BBA)-Mol. Cell Res. 2016, 1863, 3050–3064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Scherz-Shouval, R.; Shvets, E.; Fass, E.; Shorer, H.; Gil, L.; Elazar, Z. Reactive oxygen species are essential for autophagy and specifically regulate the activity of Atg4. EMBO J. 2007, 26, 1749–1760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Kubli, D.A.; Gustafsson, Å.B. Mitochondria and mitophagy: The yin and yang of cell death control. Circ. Res. 2012, 111, 1208–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Maiuri, M.C.; Galluzzi, L.; Morselli, E.; Kepp, O.; Malik, S.A.; Kroemer, G. Autophagy regulation by p53. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2010, 22, 181–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Khaminets, A.; Behl, C.; Dikic, I. Ubiquitin-Dependent And Independent Signals In Selective Autophagy. Trends Cell Biol. 2016, 26, 6–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Yun, C.W.; Lee, S.H. The Roles of Autophagy in Cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 3466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Morselli, E.; Galluzzi, L.; Kepp, O.; Mariño, G.; Michaud, M.; Vitale, I.; Maiuri, M.C.; Kroemer, G. Oncosuppressive functions of autophagy. Antioxid. Redox. Signal 2011, 14, 2251–2269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. White, E. The role for autophagy in cancer. J. Clin. Investig. 2015, 125, 42–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Guo, J.Y.; Xia, B.; White, E. Autophagy-mediated tumor promotion. Cell 2013, 155, 1216–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Debnath, J.; Gammoh, N.; Ryan, K.M. Autophagy and autophagy-related pathways in cancer. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2023, 24, 560–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Pickles, S.; Vigié, P.; Youle, R.J. Mitophagy and Quality Control Mechanisms in Mitochondrial Maintenance. Curr. Biol. 2018, 28, R170–R185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Li, L.; Tan, J.; Miao, Y.; Lei, P.; Zhang, Q. ROS and Autophagy: Interactions and Molecular Regulatory Mechanisms. Cell Mol. Neurobiol. 2015, 35, 615–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Hanna, R.A.; Quinsay, M.N.; Orogo, A.M.; Giang, K.; Rikka, S.; Gustafsson, Å.B. Microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 (LC3) interacts with Bnip3 protein to selectively remove endoplasmic reticulum and mitochondria via autophagy. J. Biol. Chem. 2012, 287, 19094–19104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Novak, I.; Kirkin, V.; McEwan, D.G.; Zhang, J.; Wild, P.; Rozenknop, A.; Rogov, V.; Löhr, F.; Popovic, D.; Occhipinti, A.; et al. Nix is a selective autophagy receptor for mitochondrial clearance. EMBO Rep. 2010, 11, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Liu, L.; Feng, D.; Chen, G.; Chen, M.; Zheng, Q.; Song, P.; Ma, Q.; Zhu, C.; Wang, R.; Qi, W.; et al. Mitochondrial outer-membrane protein FUNDC1 mediates hypoxia-induced mitophagy in mammalian cells. Nat. Cell Biol. 2012, 14, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Otsu, K.; Murakawa, T.; Yamaguchi, O. BCL2L13 is a mammalian homolog of the yeast mitophagy receptor Atg32. Autophagy 2015, 11, 1932–1933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Bhujabal, Z.; Birgisdottir, Å.B.; Sjøttem, E.; Brenne, H.B.; Øvervatn, A.; Habisov, S.; Kirkin, V.; Lamark, T.; Johansen, T. FKBP8 recruits LC3A to mediate Parkin-independent mitophagy. EMBO Rep. 2017, 18, 947–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  182. Wei, Y.; Chiang, W.C.; Sumpter, R., Jr.; Mishra, P.; Levine, B. Prohibitin 2 Is an Inner Mitochondrial Membrane Mitophagy Receptor. Cell 2017, 168, 224–238.e10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  183. Poole, L.P.; Macleod, K.F. Mitophagy in tumorigenesis and metastasis. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2021, 78, 3817–3851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Drake, L.E.; Springer, M.Z.; Poole, L.P.; Kim, C.J.; Macleod, K.F. Expanding perspectives on the significance of mitophagy in cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2017, 47, 110–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Zhang, C.; Lin, M.; Wu, R.; Wang, X.; Yang, B.; Levine, A.J.; Hu, W.; Feng, Z. Parkin, a p53 target gene, mediates the role of p53 in glucose metabolism and the Warburg effect. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 16259–16264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Liu, J.; Zhang, C.; Zhao, Y.; Yue, X.; Wu, H.; Huang, S.; Chen, J.; Tomsky, K.; Xie, H.; Khella, C.A.; et al. Parkin targets HIF-1α for ubiquitination and degradation to inhibit breast tumor progression. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 1823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Sarraf, S.A.; Sideris, D.P.; Giagtzoglou, N.; Ni, L.; Kankel, M.W.; Sen, A.; Bochicchio, L.E.; Huang, C.H.; Nussenzweig, S.C.; Worley, S.H.; et al. PINK1/Parkin Influences Cell Cycle by Sequestering TBK1 at Damaged Mitochondria, Inhibiting Mitosis. Cell Rep. 2019, 29, 225–235.e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Liu, K.; Lee, J.; Kim, J.Y.; Wang, L.; Tian, Y.; Chan, S.T.; Cho, C.; Machida, K.; Chen, D.; Ou, J.J. Mitophagy Controls the Activities of Tumor Suppressor p53 to Regulate Hepatic Cancer Stem Cells. Mol. Cell 2017, 68, 281–292.e5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Rodda, D.J.; Chew, J.-L.; Lim, L.-H.; Loh, Y.-H.; Wang, B.; Ng, H.-H.; Robson, P. Transcriptional Regulation of Nanog by OCT4 and SOX2*. J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 24731–24737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Vasefifar, P.; Motafakkerazad, R.; Maleki, L.A.; Najafi, S.; Ghrobaninezhad, F.; Najafzadeh, B.; Alemohammad, H.; Amini, M.; Baghbanzadeh, A.; Baradaran, B. Nanog, as a key cancer stem cell marker in tumor progression. Gene 2022, 827, 146448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Koop, E.A.; van Laar, T.; van Wichen, D.F.; de Weger, R.A.; Wall, E.; van Diest, P.J. Expression of BNIP3 in invasive breast cancer: Correlations with the hypoxic response and clinicopathological features. BMC Cancer 2009, 9, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  192. Chourasia, A.H.; Tracy, K.; Frankenberger, C.; Boland, M.L.; Sharifi, M.N.; Drake, L.E.; Sachleben, J.R.; Asara, J.M.; Locasale, J.W.; Karczmar, G.S.; et al. Mitophagy defects arising from BNip3 loss promote mammary tumor progression to metastasis. EMBO Rep. 2015, 16, 1145–1163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  193. Wu, W.; Tian, W.; Hu, Z.; Chen, G.; Huang, L.; Li, W.; Zhang, X.; Xue, P.; Zhou, C.; Liu, L.; et al. ULK1 translocates to mitochondria and phosphorylates FUNDC1 to regulate mitophagy. EMBO Rep. 2014, 15, 566–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  194. Wu, L.; Zhang, D.; Zhou, L.; Pei, Y.; Zhuang, Y.; Cui, W.; Chen, J. FUN14 domain-containing 1 promotes breast cancer proliferation and migration by activating calcium-NFATC1-BMI1 axis. EBioMedicine 2019, 41, 384–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Hui, L.; Wu, H.; Wang, T.W.; Yang, N.; Guo, X.; Jang, X.J. Hydrogen peroxide-induced mitophagy contributes to laryngeal cancer cells survival via the upregulation of FUNDC1. Clin. Transl. Oncol. 2019, 21, 596–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Islinger, M.; Voelkl, A.; Fahimi, H.D.; Schrader, M. The peroxisome: An update on mysteries 2.0. Histochem. Cell Biol. 2018, 150, 443–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Li, J.; Wang, W. Mechanisms and Functions of Pexophagy in Mammalian Cells. Cells 2021, 10, 1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Lee, J.N.; Dutta, R.K.; Maharjan, Y.; Liu, Z.-Q.; Lim, J.-Y.; Kim, S.-J.; Cho, D.-H.; So, H.-S.; Choe, S.-K.; Park, R. Catalase inhibition induces pexophagy through ROS accumulation. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2018, 501, 696–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Zhang, J.; Tripathi, D.N.; Jing, J.; Alexander, A.; Kim, J.; Powell, R.T.; Dere, R.; Tait-Mulder, J.; Lee, J.-H.; Paull, T.T.; et al. ATM functions at the peroxisome to induce pexophagy in response to ROS. Nat. Cell Biol. 2015, 17, 1259–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Wang, W.; Subramani, S. Role of PEX5 ubiquitination in maintaining peroxisome dynamics and homeostasis. Cell Cycle 2017, 16, 2037–2045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Franovic, A.; Holterman, C.E.; Payette, J.; Lee, S. Human cancers converge at the HIF-2alpha oncogenic axis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 21306–21311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Goncalves, M.D.; Lu, C.; Tutnauer, J.; Hartman, T.E.; Hwang, S.K.; Murphy, C.J.; Pauli, C.; Morris, R.; Taylor, S.; Bosch, K.; et al. High-fructose corn syrup enhances intestinal tumor growth in mice. Science 2019, 363, 1345–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Munir, R.; Lisec, J.; Swinnen, J.V.; Zaidi, N. Lipid metabolism in cancer cells under metabolic stress. Br. J. Cancer 2019, 120, 1090–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  204. Zhang, X.; Saarinen, A.M.; Hitosugi, T.; Wang, Z.; Wang, L.; Ho, T.H.; Liu, J. Inhibition of intracellular lipolysis promotes human cancer cell adaptation to hypoxia. eLife 2017, 6, e31132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  205. Mazumder, S.; Higgins, P.J.; Samarakoon, R. Downstream Targets of VHL/HIF-α Signaling in Renal Clear Cell Carcinoma Progression: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Relevance. Cancers 2023, 15, 1316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Lévy, E.; El Banna, N.; Baïlle, D.; Heneman-Masurel, A.; Truchet, S.; Rezaei, H.; Huang, M.E.; Béringue, V.; Martin, D.; Vernis, L. Causative Links between Protein Aggregation and Oxidative Stress: A Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 3896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  207. Hipp, M.S.; Kasturi, P.; Hartl, F.U. The proteostasis network and its decline in ageing. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2019, 20, 421–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Huang, X.; Chi, H.; Gou, S.; Guo, X.; Li, L.; Peng, G.; Zhang, J.; Xu, J.; Nian, S.; Yuan, Q. An Aggrephagy-Related LncRNA Signature for the Prognosis of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. Genes 2023, 14, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Bauer, B.; Martens, S.; Ferrari, L. Aggrephagy at a glance. J. Cell Sci. 2023, 136, jcs260888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Inoue, D.; Suzuki, T.; Mitsuishi, Y.; Miki, Y.; Suzuki, S.; Sugawara, S.; Watanabe, M.; Sakurada, A.; Endo, C.; Uruno, A.; et al. Accumulation of p62/SQSTM1 is associated with poor prognosis in patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer Sci. 2012, 103, 760–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Cerda-Troncoso, C.; Varas-Godoy, M.; Burgos, P.V. Pro-Tumoral Functions of Autophagy Receptors in the Modulation of Cancer Progression. Front. Oncol. 2020, 10, 619727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Xiao, W.; Xiong, Z.; Yuan, C.; Bao, L.; Liu, D.; Yang, X.; Li, W.; Tong, J.; Qu, Y.; Liu, L.; et al. Low neighbor of Brca1 gene expression predicts poor clinical outcome and resistance of sunitinib in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 94819–94833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  213. Janiszewska, M.; Primi, M.C.; Izard, T. Cell adhesion in cancer: Beyond the migration of single cells. J. Biol. Chem. 2020, 295, 2495–2505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  214. Nagano, M.; Hoshino, D.; Koshikawa, N.; Akizawa, T.; Seiki, M. Turnover of focal adhesions and cancer cell migration. Int. J. Cell Biol. 2012, 2012, 310616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  215. Kenific, C.M.; Stehbens, S.J.; Goldsmith, J.; Leidal, A.M.; Faure, N.; Ye, J.; Wittmann, T.; Debnath, J. NBR1 enables autophagy-dependent focal adhesion turnover. J. Cell Biol. 2016, 212, 577–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Yamamoto, K.; Venida, A.; Yano, J.; Biancur, D.E.; Kakiuchi, M.; Gupta, S.; Sohn, A.S.W.; Mukhopadhyay, S.; Lin, E.Y.; Parker, S.J.; et al. Autophagy promotes immune evasion of pancreatic cancer by degrading MHC-I. Nature 2020, 581, 100–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Perincheri, S. Tumor Microenvironment of Lymphomas and Plasma Cell Neoplasms: Broad Overview and Impact on Evaluation for Immune Based Therapies. Front. Oncol. 2021, 11, 719140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Pan, Y.; Wang, Y.; Hu, M.; Xu, S.; Jiang, F.; Han, Y.; Chen, F.; Liu, Z. Aggrephagy-related patterns in tumor microenvironment, prognosis, and immunotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia: A comprehensive single-cell RNA sequencing analysis. Front. Oncol. 2023, 13, 1195392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  219. Song, S.; Tan, J.; Miao, Y.; Zhang, Q. Crosstalk of ER stress-mediated autophagy and ER-phagy: Involvement of UPR and the core autophagy machinery. J. Cell Physiol. 2018, 233, 3867–3874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Stephani, M.; Picchianti, L.; Gajic, A.; Beveridge, R.; Skarwan, E.; Sanchez de Medina Hernandez, V.; Mohseni, A.; Clavel, M.; Zeng, Y.; Naumann, C.; et al. A cross-kingdom conserved ER-phagy receptor maintains endoplasmic reticulum homeostasis during stress. eLife 2020, 9, jcs260888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Tang, W.K.; Chui, C.H.; Fatima, S.; Kok, S.H.; Pak, K.C.; Ou, T.M.; Hui, K.S.; Wong, M.M.; Wong, J.; Law, S.; et al. Oncogenic properties of a novel gene JK-1 located in chromosome 5p and its overexpression in human esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Int. J. Mol. Med. 2007, 19, 915–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  222. Kasem, K.; Gopalan, V.; Salajegheh, A.; Lu, C.T.; Smith, R.A.; Lam, A.K. The roles of JK-1 (FAM134B) expressions in colorectal cancer. Exp. Cell Res. 2014, 326, 166–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  223. Luo, R.; Li, S.; Li, G.; Lu, S.; Zhang, W.; Liu, H.; Lei, J.; Ma, L.; Ke, W.; Liao, Z.; et al. FAM134B-Mediated ER-phagy Upregulation Attenuates AGEs-Induced Apoptosis and Senescence in Human Nucleus Pulposus Cells. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2021, 2021, 3843145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Wang, M.; Kaufman, R.J. The impact of the endoplasmic reticulum protein-folding environment on cancer development. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2014, 14, 581–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  225. Zhang, N.; Sheng, M.; Wu, M.; Zhang, X.; Ding, Y.; Lin, Y.; Yu, W.; Wang, S.; Du, H. Berberine protects steatotic donor undergoing liver transplantation via inhibiting endoplasmic reticulum stress-mediated reticulophagy. Exp. Biol. Med. (Maywood) 2019, 244, 1695–1704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Ammanathan, V.; Vats, S.; Abraham, I.M.; Manjithaya, R. Xenophagy in cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2020, 66, 163–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Chiramel, A.I.; Brady, N.R.; Bartenschlager, R. Divergent Roles of Autophagy in Virus Infection. Cells 2013, 2, 83–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Kudchodkar, S.B.; Levine, B. Viruses and autophagy. Rev. Med. Virol. 2009, 19, 359–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Sui, X.; Liang, X.; Chen, L.; Guo, C.; Han, W.; Pan, H.; Li, X. Bacterial xenophagy and its possible role in cancer: A potential antimicrobial strategy for cancer prevention and treatment. Autophagy 2017, 13, 237–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Lee, C.H.; Lin, S.T.; Liu, J.J.; Chang, W.W.; Hsieh, J.L.; Wang, W.K. Salmonella induce autophagy in melanoma by the downregulation of AKT/mTOR pathway. Gene Ther. 2014, 21, 309–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Barrera, G. Oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation products in cancer progression and therapy. ISRN Oncol. 2012, 2012, 137289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  232. Nieborowska-Skorska, M.; Kopinski, P.K.; Ray, R.; Hoser, G.; Ngaba, D.; Flis, S.; Cramer, K.; Reddy, M.M.; Koptyra, M.; Penserga, T.; et al. Rac2-MRC-cIII-generated ROS cause genomic instability in chronic myeloid leukemia stem cells and primitive progenitors. Blood 2012, 119, 4253–4263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  233. Moloney, J.N.; Cotter, T.G. ROS signalling in the biology of cancer. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2018, 80, 50–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Semenza, G.L. HIF-1 and tumor progression: Pathophysiology and therapeutics. Trends Mol. Med. 2002, 8 (Suppl. 4), S62–S67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  235. Ivan, M.; Kondo, K.; Yang, H.; Kim, W.; Valiando, J.; Ohh, M.; Salic, A.; Asara, J.M.; Lane, W.S.; Kaelin, W.G., Jr. HIFalpha targeted for VHL-mediated destruction by proline hydroxylation: Implications for O2 sensing. Science 2001, 292, 464–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Kovale, L.; Singh, M.K.; Kim, J.; Ha, J. Role of Autophagy and AMPK in Cancer Stem Cells: Therapeutic Opportunities and Obstacles in Cancer. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 8647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Liou, G.Y.; Storz, P. Reactive oxygen species in cancer. Free Radic. Res. 2010, 44, 479–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Shi, R.; Tang, Y.Q.; Miao, H. Metabolism in tumor microenvironment: Implications for cancer immunotherapy. MedComm 2020, 1, 47–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Zhao, Y.; Hu, X.; Liu, Y.; Dong, S.; Wen, Z.; He, W.; Zhang, S.; Huang, Q.; Shi, M. ROS signaling under metabolic stress: Cross-talk between AMPK and AKT pathway. Mol. Cancer 2017, 16, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Jelic, M.D.; Mandic, A.D.; Maricic, S.M.; Srdjenovic, B.U. Oxidative stress and its role in cancer. J. Cancer Res. Ther. 2021, 17, 22–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Harris, I.S.; Treloar, A.E.; Inoue, S.; Sasaki, M.; Gorrini, C.; Lee, K.C.; Yung, K.Y.; Brenner, D.; Knobbe-Thomsen, C.B.; Cox, M.A.; et al. Glutathione and thioredoxin antioxidant pathways synergize to drive cancer initiation and progression. Cancer Cell 2015, 27, 211–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Shibata, T.; Ohta, T.; Tong, K.I.; Kokubu, A.; Odogawa, R.; Tsuta, K.; Asamura, H.; Yamamoto, M.; Hirohashi, S. Cancer related mutations in NRF2 impair its recognition by Keap1-Cul3 E3 ligase and promote malignancy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 13568–13573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Kennel, K.B.; Greten, F.R. Immune cell—produced ROS and their impact on tumor growth and metastasis. Redox Biol. 2021, 42, 101891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  244. Quante, M.; Varga, J.; Wang, T.C.; Greten, F.R. The gastrointestinal tumor microenvironment. Gastroenterology 2013, 145, 63–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  245. Lu, T.; Gabrilovich, D.I. Molecular pathways: Tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells and reactive oxygen species in regulation of tumor microenvironment. Clin. Cancer Res. 2012, 18, 4877–4882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  246. Paardekooper, L.M.; Dingjan, I.; Linders, P.T.A.; Staal, A.H.J.; Cristescu, S.M.; Verberk, W.; van den Bogaart, G. Human Monocyte-Derived Dendritic Cells Produce Millimolar Concentrations of ROS in Phagosomes Per Second. Front. Immunol. 2019, 10, 1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  247. Savina, A.; Jancic, C.; Hugues, S.; Guermonprez, P.; Vargas, P.; Moura, I.C.; Lennon-Duménil, A.M.; Seabra, M.C.; Raposo, G.; Amigorena, S. NOX2 controls phagosomal pH to regulate antigen processing during crosspresentation by dendritic cells. Cell 2006, 126, 205–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Otano, I.; Alvarez, M.; Minute, L.; Ochoa, M.C.; Migueliz, I.; Molina, C.; Azpilikueta, A.; de Andrea, C.E.; Etxeberria, I.; Sanmamed, M.F.; et al. Human CD8 T cells are susceptible to TNF-mediated activation-induced cell death. Theranostics 2020, 10, 4481–4489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  249. Kraaij, M.D.; Savage, N.D.; van der Kooij, S.W.; Koekkoek, K.; Wang, J.; van den Berg, J.M.; Ottenhoff, T.H.; Kuijpers, T.W.; Holmdahl, R.; van Kooten, C.; et al. Induction of regulatory T cells by macrophages is dependent on production of reactive oxygen species. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 17686–17691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Zhang, J.; Li, H.; Wu, Q.; Chen, Y.; Deng, Y.; Yang, Z.; Zhang, L.; Liu, B. Tumoral NOX4 recruits M2 tumor-associated macrophages via ROS/PI3K signaling-dependent various cytokine production to promote NSCLC growth. Redox Biol. 2019, 22, 101116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  251. Ding, X.C.; Wang, L.L.; Zhang, X.D.; Xu, J.L.; Li, P.F.; Liang, H.; Zhang, X.B.; Xie, L.; Zhou, Z.H.; Yang, J.; et al. The relationship between expression of PD-L1 and HIF-1α in glioma cells under hypoxia. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2021, 14, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. Kono, K.; Salazar-Onfray, F.; Petersson, M.; Hansson, J.; Masucci, G.; Wasserman, K.; Nakazawa, T.; Anderson, P.; Kiessling, R. Hydrogen peroxide secreted by tumor-derived macrophages down-modulates signal-transducing zeta molecules and inhibits tumor-specific T cell-and natural killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity. Eur. J. Immunol. 1996, 26, 1308–1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  253. Jing, Y.; Han, Z.; Zhang, S.; Liu, Y.; Wei, L. Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in tumor microenvironment. Cell Biosci. 2011, 1, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  254. Higgins, D.F.; Kimura, K.; Bernhardt, W.M.; Shrimanker, N.; Akai, Y.; Hohenstein, B.; Saito, Y.; Johnson, R.S.; Kretzler, M.; Cohen, C.D.; et al. Hypoxia promotes fibrogenesis in vivo via HIF-1 stimulation of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition. J. Clin. Investig. 2007, 117, 3810–3820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  255. Copple, B.L. Hypoxia stimulates hepatocyte epithelial to mesenchymal transition by hypoxia-inducible factor and transforming growth factor-beta-dependent mechanisms. Liver Int. 2010, 30, 669–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  256. Zhou, G.; Dada, L.A.; Wu, M.; Kelly, A.; Trejo, H.; Zhou, Q.; Varga, J.; Sznajder, J.I. Hypoxia-induced alveolar epithelial-mesenchymal transition requires mitochondrial ROS and hypoxia-inducible factor 1. Am. J. Physiol. Lung Cell Mol. Physiol. 2009, 297, L1120–L1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Radisky, D.C.; Levy, D.D.; Littlepage, L.E.; Liu, H.; Nelson, C.M.; Fata, J.E.; Leake, D.; Godden, E.L.; Albertson, D.G.; Angela Nieto, M.; et al. Rac1b and reactive oxygen species mediate MMP-3-induced EMT and genomic instability. Nature 2005, 436, 123–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Varisli, L.; Tolan, V. Increased ROS alters E-/N-cadherin levels and promotes migration in prostate cancer cells. Bratisl. Lek. Listy 2022, 123, 752–757. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Guo, B.; Yang, F.; Zhang, L.; Zhao, Q.; Wang, W.; Yin, L.; Chen, D.; Wang, M.; Han, S.; Xiao, H.; et al. Cuproptosis Induced by ROS Responsive Nanoparticles with Elesclomol and Copper Combined with αPD-L1 for Enhanced Cancer Immunotherapy. Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, e2212267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  260. Xiao, L.; Chen, B.; Wang, W.; Tian, T.; Qian, H.; Li, X.; Yu, Y. Multifunctional Au@AgBiS2 Nanoparticles as High-Efficiency Radiosensitizers to Induce Pyroptosis for Cancer Radioimmunotherapy. Adv. Sci. 2023, 10, e2302141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  261. Florido, J.; Martinez-Ruiz, L.; Rodriguez-Santana, C.; López-Rodríguez, A.; Hidalgo-Gutiérrez, A.; Cottet-Rousselle, C.; Lamarche, F.; Schlattner, U.; Guerra-Librero, A.; Aranda-Martínez, P.; et al. Melatonin drives apoptosis in head and neck cancer by increasing mitochondrial ROS generated via reverse electron transport. J. Pineal Res. 2022, 73, e12824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Yang, J.; Zhou, Y.; Xie, S.; Wang, J.; Li, Z.; Chen, L.; Mao, M.; Chen, C.; Huang, A.; Chen, Y.; et al. Metformin induces Ferroptosis by inhibiting UFMylation of SLC7A11 in breast cancer. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2021, 40, 206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  263. Huang, Z.; Gan, S.; Zhuang, X.; Chen, Y.; Lu, L.; Wang, Y.; Qi, X.; Feng, Q.; Huang, Q.; Du, B.; et al. Artesunate Inhibits the Cell Growth in Colorectal Cancer by Promoting ROS-Dependent Cell Senescence and Autophagy. Cells 2022, 11, 2472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  264. Mohammadi, F.; Soltani, A.; Ghahremanloo, A.; Javid, H.; Hashemy, S.I. The thioredoxin system and cancer therapy: A review. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 2019, 84, 925–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Zhong, H.; Huang, P.Y.; Yan, P.; Chen, P.L.; Shi, Q.Y.; Zhao, Z.A.; Chen, J.X.; Shu, X.; Wang, P.; Yang, B.; et al. Versatile Nanodrugs Containing Glutathione and Heme Oxygenase 1 Inhibitors Enable Suppression of Antioxidant Defense System in a Two-Pronged Manner for Enhanced Photodynamic Therapy. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 2021, 10, e2100770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.