REVIEW

Open Access

Beyond regulations at DNA levels: A review of epigenetic therapeutics targeting cancer stem cells

Shunhao Zhang

State Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Disease, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Sichuan Province, Chengdu, China

Search for more papers by this author

Yanji Gong,

Yanji Gong

State Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Disease, Department of Temporomandibular Joint, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China

State Key Laboratory of Oral Disease, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Disease, Department of Head and Neck Oncology, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, China

Search for more papers by this author

Chunjie Li,

Chunjie Li

Search for more papers by this author

Wenbin Yang,

Corresponding Author

Wenbin Yang

[email protected]

orcid.org/0000-0001-5348-7906

Correspondence

Wenbin Yang, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No. 14, Section 3, South Renmin Road, Chengdu 610041, China.

Email: [email protected]

Longjiang Li, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, Department of Head and Neck Oncology, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No. 14, Section 3, South Renmin Road, Chengdu 610041, China.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

Longjiang Li,

Corresponding Author

Longjiang Li

[email protected]

Correspondence

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

Shunhao Zhang,

Shunhao Zhang

Search for more papers by this author

Yanji Gong,

Yanji Gong

Search for more papers by this author

Chunjie Li,

Chunjie Li

Search for more papers by this author

Wenbin Yang,

Corresponding Author

Wenbin Yang

[email protected]

orcid.org/0000-0001-5348-7906

Correspondence

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

Longjiang Li,

Corresponding Author

Longjiang Li

[email protected]

Correspondence

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 13 December 2020

https://doi.org/10.1111/cpr.12963

Citations: 13

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

In the past few years, the paramount role of cancer stem cells (CSCs), in terms of cancer initiation, proliferation, metastasis, invasion and chemoresistance, has been revealed by accumulating studies. However, this level of cellular plasticity cannot be entirely explained by genetic mutations. Research on epigenetic modifications as a complementary explanation for the properties of CSCs has been increasing over the past several years. Notably, therapeutic strategies are currently being developed in an effort to reverse aberrant epigenetic alterations using specific chemical inhibitors. In this review, we summarize the current understanding of CSCs and their role in cancer progression, and provide an overview of epigenetic alterations seen in CSCs. Importantly, we focus on primary cancer therapies that target the epigenetic modification of CSCs by the use of specific chemical inhibitors, such as histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors, DNA methyltransferase (DNMT) inhibitors and microRNA-based (miRNA-based) therapeutics.

1 INTRODUCTION

Cancer is one of the leading fatal diseases that severely threaten human life.^{1, 2} Approximately 18 million people are diagnosed with cancer every year and 9.6 million will ultimately die of cancer.³ However, traditional therapeutics are effective only for few malignant tumours⁴ due to metastasis, recurrence, heterogeneity, resistance to chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and escape from immunological surveillance,⁵ all of which might be explained by the properties of cancer stem cells (CSCs).⁶ Initial studies indicating that cancer cells may have similar stem-like characteristics were conducted in teratomas,⁷ which led to the first CSC hypothesis that tumours consist of malignant stem cells and their benign progeny,⁸ and eventually the identification of a small population of leukaemia stem cells initiating leukaemia in mice.⁹ CSCs, currently defined as initiating tumour cells, have been identified in various cancer types and are regarded as one of the most promising targets for cancer therapeutics because of their intrinsic potential to cause cancer initiation, relapse, metastasis, multidrug resistance and radiation resistance.¹⁰

However, this level of cellular plasticity cannot be entirely explained by irreversible genetic alterations. Thus, the significance of reversible epigenetic modifications has gradually been discerned in terms of the activation of specific transcriptional networks underlying the diverse cellular states of CSCs. Epigenetic changes are covalent modifications to DNA or histones without altering the DNA sequence, including DNA methylation, histone modification (methylation, acetylation, phosphorylation), and non-coding RNA (ncRNA) expression.¹¹ The main types of epigenetic modifications that have been targeted by cancer treatment in recent years are DNA methylation, histone acetylation and ncRNA expression. Moreover, the gene expression patterns triggered by exact epigenetic modulations are unique to CSCs. Therefore, selective epigenetic tumour therapeutics based on a deeper understanding of epigenetic alterations will definitely benefit the development of novel cancer treatments.

2 CSCs AND THEIR ROLE IN CANCER INITIATION AND PROGRESSION

Human cancer is a type of genetic disease that originates from a series of accumulating mutations or genomic alterations, some of which are only found in specific cancer types, such as c-KIT mutations in gastrointestinal stromal cancers, whereas mutations in TP53 occur in almost every type of cancer. These aberrant gene expressions eventually affect different pathways regulating cell signalling, cell growth, DNA repair and other cellular events leading to several changes in normal cells such as the acquisition of the ability to divide infinitely, aid angiogenesis, escape from growth-inhibitory signals, evade apoptosis, and promote invasion and metastasis.^12-14 The classical view of tumorigenesis argues that the majority of tumour cells are capable of proliferating extensively and initiating new cancer cells on their own. However, such points of view are unsatisfactory because they cannot explain the few colonies observed in vitro and the need for a large number of tumour cells to form new tumour cells in vivo.¹⁵ Given these unexplained properties of cancer cells, studies are continuously being conducted and a large body of work has deepened our knowledge regarding tumorigenesis. A more comprehensive understanding of cancer was obtained after consensus of the fact that tumour cells are heterogeneous, suggesting that only a limited subset of cells have the potential to fuel cancer initiation and progression, which was first proven in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML).^{9, 16} Furthermore, subsequent research identified a small number of malignant stem cells with the ability to initiate solid tumours in mammary cancers.¹⁷

These malignant cells are termed CSCs in accordance with their stemness or stem-like properties, including the capabilities of differentiation and self-renewal extensively shared with normal stem cells. In addition, the decisive difference between CSCs and normal stem cells is their potent tumour-initiation capacity, indicating the significance of eliminating all CSCs in order to achieve effective treatment.¹⁷ Apart from the shared stem-like properties, another common characteristic is the similar signalling pathways collectively utilized by these two kinds of stem cells, which highlights the importance of specific signalling pathways in the course of cancer initiation and progression.^{18, 19}

2.1 Cancer initiation

CSCs regularly serve as a small population of primary cells that fuel the initiation of diverse types of solid cancers.²⁰ Taking the initiation of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) as an example, this course can only be triggered by gene mutations, such as those that cause the overexpression of Kras and p53 or affect the Tgfb and Pten signalling pathways, in undifferentiated stem-like cells of the epithelium.^{21, 22} Likewise, the aberrant expression of oncogenes, such as Sox2 and Stat3, in undifferentiated basal cells leads to oesophageal SCC initiation; however, this does not affect differentiated cells.²³ In colon cancer, the downregulation of APC associated with Wnt signalling and subsequent activation of Ras and phosphoinositide 3-kinase signalling results in cancer development. The low rate of these mutations and the time needed for the process of cancer development are almost certainly due to the hallmarks of CSCs.^{24, 25} Although all of these studies collectively suggest that mutations in CSCs may lead to cancer initiation, it is noteworthy that differences in the cells that were originally mutated are likely to have a paramount impact on cancer type. For example, in breast tumour models established in mice, loss of p53 along with BRCA1 in basal stem cells resulted in the development of malignant adenomyoepitheliomas, which is a tumour type rarely seen in human breast cancer patients, whereas the same mutations in luminal progenitors led to adenocarcinomas.²⁶ In conclusion, both mutated genes and the original cells are decisive for tumour type.

2.2 Epithelial to mesenchymal transition, cancer metastasis and chemotherapy drug resistance

CSC and stem cell signals play important roles in cancer metastasis,²⁷ according to which CSCs undergo the process of epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) and obtain the capability to transfer from the primary site to distal tissues or organs. In general, EMT is a continuous process that reduces adhesion between cells at first and then decreases cell polarity and enhances cell motility, and finally provides CSCs with invasive mesenchymal properties.²⁸ The EMT process of CSCs is generally associated with intrinsic epigenetic changes in these cancer-initiating cells. For example, the chromatin of genes fuelling EMT is more reachable and active in SCC stem cells derived from hair follicle stem cells in comparison with the less metastatic, more differentiated cell populations of SCC arising from epidermal stem cells.²⁹ Moreover, studies have revealed that CSCs with EMT features are more resistant to chemotherapy drugs than other cancer cells.³⁰ Traditional chemotherapy drugs such as cisplatin, gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil are less effective in pancreatic tumour cell lines with an EMT-like phenotype.³¹ The increased chemotherapeutic drug resistance is mainly mediated by the overexpression of drug efflux transporters such as multidrug resistance protein 1 (MDR1), multidrug resistance-associated protein 1 (MRP1), and ATP-binding cassette sub-family G member 2 (ABCG2), whose function is to expel drugs from cells using ATP against concentration gradients.^{32, 33} The overexpression of these transporters is likely caused by various pathways and mechanisms encompassing epigenetic changes, which are attracting increasing attention. For instance, the downregulation of histone deacetylase 1 (HDAC1) or increased H3S10 phosphorylation, H3K4 tri-methylation and histone H3 acetylation can all lead to the activation of ABCG2 transcription, finally resulting in enhanced drug efflux capability,³⁴ suggesting that epigenetic alterations may be potential targets for cancer treatments.

3 EPIGENETIC REGULATION OF CSCS

There is no doubt that DNA encodes all the biological information essential to living creatures, whose mutations may lead to alterations in cellular differentiation and improper development. DNA inside the nucleus, packaged into chromatin, forms a compact nucleoprotein structure in which the nucleosome is the smallest functional unit, composed of 147 base pairs of DNA wrapped around a core of eight histone proteins.³⁵ This octamer consists of two copies each of the H2A, H2B, H3 and H4 proteins whose amino-terminal lysine-rich tails protrude out of the nucleosome and potentially provide targets for post-translational modifications. In addition, approximately 50 base pairs of linker DNA packaged by the linker histone protein H1 separates adjacent nucleosomes.³⁶ Thus, apart from regulations at the DNA level, there are diverse epigenetic modulations of gene expression that play a vital role in the initiation, proliferation, metastasis and invasion of CSCs. Epigenetics is traditionally defined as reversible and hereditable changes in the level of gene expression without affecting DNA sequence or associated factors, and the processes of which have an impact on different stages of gene expression such as transcription, post-transcription, translation and post-translation.³⁷ Here, we discuss normal epigenetic regulation in terms of three interrelated processes: chromatin modification mainly referring to histone acetylation, DNA methylation and regulation of ncRNA expression.

3.1 Histone acetylation

Playing an active role in the regulation of cellular processes such as cell differentiation, proliferation, angiogenesis and apoptosis, acetylation is the most common modification among these epigenetic changes. As a consequence, aberrant acetylation is believed to be relevant to various cellular events in cancer pathologies; notably, the global hypoacetylation of H4 is one of the most common hallmarks of cancer.³⁸

The level of histone acetylation is mainly regulated by HDACs and histone acetyltransferases (HATs). HATs can acetylate lysine residues in histone tails, while HDACs can remove an acetyl group from the ε-amino groups of lysine residues (Figure 1A). Therefore, the positive charge in the N-terminal region of histone cores increases, interactions with negatively charged DNA are consolidated, and the access of transcriptional machinery to the DNA template is blocked, resulting in gene silencing.³⁹ Based on sequence homologies, the HDACs identified to date can be divided into four classes. HDAC1, 2, 3 and 8 are class I. Class II HDACs can be further divided into two classes, including class IIa (HDAC4, 5, 7, and 9) and IIb (HDAC6 and 10). Class III HDACs are also known as sirtuins (sirt1-7), and HDAC11 is class IV.⁴⁰ Several abnormal cellular events such as dysfunction of the cell cycle, cell growth, chromatin decondensation, cell differentiation, apoptosis and angiogenesis have been observed in several cancer types after silencing or inhibiting HDACs.⁴¹ Meanwhile, it is widely acknowledged that HDACs are overexpressed in tumour cells.⁴² The upregulation of HDAC1 is observed in breast, colon, oesophageal, lung, gastric and prostate cancers. HDAC2 is upregulated in gastric, cervical and colorectal cancers; HDAC3 is upregulated in breast and colon cancers; and HDAC6 is upregulated in breast cancer.^42-45

Details are in the caption following the image — **FIGURE 1**
Open in figure viewer PowerPoint

(A) Nucleosomes encompass eight histone proteins including two each of H2A, H2B, H3 and H4. The lysine residues in the amino-terminal tails of histones protruding from the octamer can either be acetylated by HATs or be deacetylated by HDACs. (B) DNA can also be epigenetically modified by DNMT-based methylation. This process is mediated by several DNMTs such as DNMT1, DNMT3A and DNMT3B through catalysing a methyl group to CpG dinucleotides. K: lysine residues; AC: acetyl group; Me: methyl group

3.2 DNA methylation

As a result of abundant studies on DNA methylation, it is widely acknowledged that cancer origin and progression are closely associated with aberrant DNA methylation,⁴⁶ which is routinely mediated by DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) through the catalysis of a methyl group from S-adenosyl methionine (SAM) to the carbon-5 position of the cytosine ring, and finally producing S-adenosyl-l-homocysteine (SAH)⁴⁷ (Figure 1B). Studies regarding the DNMTs DNMT1, DNMT3A and DNMT3B are currently ongoing. Typically, DNMT1 almost certainly maintains DNA methylation during DNA replication,⁴⁸ whereas DNMT3A and DNMT3B are prone to de novo DNA methylation by catalysing the methylation of unmethylated DNA, with the assistance of the catalytically inactive DNMT3 L.^{49, 50} It is noteworthy that hypermethylated CpG islands are observed in or near promoter regions, whereas gene bodies become hypomethylated in tumours with abnormal methylation.⁵¹ Various types of mutations in DNMTs contribute to divergent routes of aberrant DNA methylation. Taking initiating mutations as an example, more than 20% of samples derived from patients suffering from AML had mutations in DNMT3A. In addition, more than half of the mutations occurred at amino acid R882,⁵² which were later confirmed to be dominant-negative, leading to decreased catalytic activity of DNMT3A and focal hypomethylation, whereas wild-type DNMT3A R882 showed a hypermethylation pattern in AML DNA.^{53, 54} DNMT3A with initiating mutations is capable of creating an ancestral or founder preleukaemic clone, establishing an environment suitable for additional mutations forming malignant clones.^{55, 56} Then, subclones of overt leukaemia arise, providing that oncogenes have undergone further mutation.^57-59 In addition, ancestral clones are consistently present both when patients are in remission or suffering from relapse.⁶⁰

3.3 Regulation of ncRNAs

NcRNAs, including microRNAs (miRNAs), long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) and circular RNAs (circRNAs), are a class of transcribed RNA molecules that do not encode proteins. However, they are involved in many biological processes by regulating gene expression and interacting with chromatin, proteins, and other coding and non-coding RNAs.

3.3.1 MiRNAs

MiRNAs, which consist of highly conserved, 18-24 nucleotide sequences,⁶¹ are a major subtype of ncRNA that are actively involved in central biological processes such as cell differentiation, proliferation and survival by sequence-specifically blocking mRNA translation, leading to translational degradation or inhibition.⁶² It is widely acknowledged that aberrant expression of miRNAs is closely related to various diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, hepatitis, and cancer. Generally, there are two main explanations for the dysregulation of miRNAs: (1) downregulation of enzymes such as argonaute 2 (AGO2), Dicer, exportin 5, and Drosha, which modulate miRNA biogenesis; and (2) genomic events such as mutations, deletion amplification or transcriptional changes^62-65 (Figure 2).

MiRNAs are regarded as imperative components of epigenetic processes, alongside DNA methylation and histone modification. Intriguingly, miRNAs are believed to regulate epigenetic modifiers such as HDACs and DNMTs, and are targeted by epigenetic modifications such as DNA methylation.^{66, 67} On the one hand, some miRNAs, known as epi-miRNAs, can directly or indirectly affect the expression of various epigenetic regulators. For instance, restoring the expression of the tumour suppressor miRNA-140, which is downregulated in osteosarcoma (OS), prevents tumour cells from proliferation via HDAC4.⁶⁸ In addition, the miRNA-29 family was shown to play a positive role in the re-expression of silenced tumour suppressor genes by complementing with the 3’-untranslated region (3’-UTR) of DNMT3A and DNMT3B.⁶⁷ On the other hand, the regulation of miRNA expression by DNA methylation, for example, increased levels of miRNA-370 and decreased levels of β-catenin downstream targets, which eventually led to inhibition of colony formation and cell proliferation ability, as observed after OS cells were treated with the DNMT inhibitor decitabine.⁶⁹ These results indicate that the expression of tumour suppressor miRNAs may be activated by DNA demethylation.

3.3.2 LncRNAs

LncRNAs are a subtype of ncRNA that lack an open reading frame and are longer than 200 base pairs.⁷⁰ Importantly, they can mediate chromatin and transcriptomic alterations in various cancer phenotypes. For instance, the poor prognosis and recurrence of prostate and breast tumours are associated with aberrant expression of lncRNA metastasis-associated lung adenocarcinoma transcript 1 (MALAT1).⁷¹ In addition, the lncRNA BORG (BMP/OP-responsive gene) can improve metastatic outgrowth of dormant breast-disseminated cancer cells by inhibiting transcription through the E3 SUMO ligase TRIM28.⁷² In brief, lncRNAs have functional significance in terms of driving cancer progression and recurrence.

3.3.3 CircRNAs

CircRNAs are a single-stranded closed circular RNAs that lack 5’-3’ ends and poly (A) tails.⁷³ In recent years, there have been an increasing number of reports that circRNAs might be related to the pathogenesis of silicosis,⁷⁴ diabetes,⁷⁵ osteoarthritis,⁷⁶ Alzheimer's disease,⁷⁷ cardiovascular diseases,⁷⁸ nervous system diseases ⁷⁹ and tumours.⁸⁰ In cancer, circRNAs are widely believed to be involved in cancer cell proliferation, metastasis, and stemness ⁸¹ through the following mechanisms: (1) acting as miRNA sponges and RNA-binding proteins sponges to regulate gene expression. For example, circRNA ciRS-7 can serve as a strong miRNA sponge for miRNA-7 with its 70 selectively conserved binding sites, resulting in reduced levels of miRNA-7 expression and increased miRNA-7-targeted gene activity.⁸² Additionally, circDOCK1,⁸³ mm9_circ_012559,⁸⁴ circ-SRY⁸⁵ and ZNF609⁸⁶ have similar functions. Furthermore, some circRNAs such as circ-Mbl,⁸⁷ circ-PABPN1⁸⁸ and circ-Foxo3⁸⁹ interact with RNA-binding proteins other than binding to or releasing miRNAs from their downstream target genes⁹⁰; (2) regulating transcription. For example, circ-PAIP2 and circ-EIF3J are reportedly combined with RNA polymerase II complex and translation-related proteins, resulting in the increased expression of EIF3J and PAIP2^{91, 92}; (3) translating proteins. Although most circRNAs are regarded as endogenous ncRNAs due to their unique structure,⁹² recent reports have suggested that at least four circRNAs can be translated into proteins. High expression levels of circ-FBXW7 ⁹³ and circ-SHPRH,⁹⁴ along with proteins programmed by them, are observed in normal human brains, while the expression levels of these proteins are relatively low in glioma. In murine myoblasts, circ-ZNF609 can also be translated into proteins.⁹⁵ Similar processes are likely to be observed for circ-Mbl⁹⁶; and (4) regulating epigenetic alterations. On the one hand, several circRNAs have been reported to regulate DNA methylation. CircFECR1, for example, was demonstrated to activate FLI1 by inducing massive CpG DNA demethylation in the promoter of FLI1. In addition, CircFECR1 was reported to decrease the expression of DNMT1 by binding to its promoter and eventually downregulating the level of DNA methylation. Meanwhile, CircFECR1 can also reverse DNA methylation by recruiting TET1 DNA demethylase to the FLI1 promoter in order to induce DNA demethylation.⁹⁷ On the other hand, some circRNAs have been found to regulate methyltransferase EZH2 by interacting with miRNA and subsequently regulating histone methylation indirectly.⁹⁸ For instance, hsa_circ_0020123 and circBCRC4 can promote the activity of EZH2 by sponging miRNA-144⁹⁹ and miRNA-101,¹⁰⁰ respectively.

4 THERAPIES TARGETING EPIGENETIC MODIFICATIONS OF CSCS

Given the significant role of epigenetic regulation, it is not surprising that HDAC and DNMT, which play a pivotal role in epigenetic erasers, and writer enzymes have attracted increasing attention and are continuously being studied in the search for cancer therapy.^101-104 In addition, the effects of ncRNAs in cancer are also receiving much attention. In this respect, it is natural to think about how we can interfere with the course of events mentioned above, using the corresponding chemical inhibitors.

In order to eradicate all cancer cells, targeting only the primary cancer cells is inadequate. Therefore, it is crucial to target a small population of CSCs. As mentioned above, epigenetic regulation mechanisms are indispensable in the progression of tumour cells and with a better understanding of the epigenome, which provides potential targets for the application of novel therapeutics against different tumour types, it has become increasingly important for us to target these using a variety of specific drugs and inhibitors to improve tumour therapy.

4.1 Targeting HDAC and DNMT

Several HDAC and DNMT inhibitors have shown promising effects in different stages of preclinical and clinical trials against diverse cancers. For instance, it is believed that DNMT inhibitors in combination with anti-TIGIT or anti-KLRG1 antibodies decrease metastatic potential in keratin-14⁺ breast cancer cells, which are vulnerable to NK cells.¹⁰⁵ The eradication of CSCs and the improvement of survival in patients with relapsed and refractory tumours are almost certainly due to the effect of HDAC and DNMT inhibitors.^{106, 107} Furthermore, dual inhibitors of DNMT1 and HDAC8 were introduced as novel potential candidates for epigenetic-based cancer therapeutics for the first time in a recent study.¹⁰⁸ In addition, trials using the combination of HDAC and DNMT inhibitors for metastatic and/or recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are currently enrolling patients. The effects of the HDAC inhibitor belinostat are being tested in ongoing trials on recurrent ovarian cancer, along with B-cell and T-cell lymphomas.¹⁰⁹ Furthermore, the effectiveness of HDAC and DNMT inhibitors has not only been shown in trials, but has also shown clinical benefit. DNMT inhibitors in combination with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have a good effect on recurrent and resistant breast, ovarian and urothelial cancers.^{110, 111} Similarly, prolonged progression-free survival in NSCLC is observed when using a combination of the DNMT inhibitor azacytidine and the HDAC inhibitor benzamidine.¹¹² Furthermore, the addition of the HDAC inhibitor panobinostat significantly contributes to better survival of patients with relapsed multiple myeloma who have a treatment regimen combining the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib and dexamethasone.¹¹³ Given the crucial role of HDAC and DNMT in epigenetic changes, there are accumulating studies focusing on identifying cell types that are sensitive to HDAC and DNMT inhibitors. A genome-scale network model and gene expression-based score have been established to predict how metabolic perturbations affect sensitivity to HDAC inhibitors, and the sensitivity of multiple myeloma cells to DNMT inhibitors, respectively.^{114, 115}

4.1.1 HDAC inhibitors

With the accumulating research on HDAC revealing its mechanisms and functions in tumorigenesis, the potential exploitation and development of HDAC inhibitors for tumour therapy appears promising. The classical pharmacophore of HDAC inhibitors consists of three parts, including a cap structure responsible for interaction with the edge of the entrance of the active pocket within HDACs, a zinc ion-binding group (ZBG), and a linker that connects the cap and the ZBG, as well as interacting with the hydrophobic tunnel of the active site.¹¹⁶ Additionally, the cap can adopt a wide range of structural variations, suggesting that it would be possible to design various HDAC inhibitors with different structures.

The first HDAC inhibitor, vorinostat or SAHA, approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in October, 2006 has been used to treat rare cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. In addition, three other HDAC inhibitors have been approved by the FDA, romidepsin, belinostat and panobinostat, which have primarily been used in multiple myeloma, peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma.¹¹⁷ In addition, China has recently approved the benzamide-based class I HDAC-selective inhibitor chidamide for the treatment of relapsed or refractory PTCL.¹¹⁷

Vorinostat, belinostat and panobinostat are categorized as pan-HDAC inhibitors that target class I, II, and IV HDACs. In addition, romidepsin inhibits class I HDACs, while class I and IIb HDACs are targeted by chidamide.¹¹⁸ Although the expression levels of different HDACs vary among different cancer types and HDAC inhibitors are class-specific, the effect of inhibitors is still limited. For instance, both romidepsin and vorinostat have been proven to provide efficacy and a lasting response in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma in Phase 2 multi-centre trials; however, few of the desired goals were achieved when these two drugs were utilized as single-agent drugs during the treatment of several solid tumours in clinical trials,^119-130 suggesting that haematological malignancies are more sensitive to HDAC inhibitors, and the combination of HDAC inhibitors and other anticancer drugs and/or radiotherapy may show promise in other cancer treatments.⁴⁴ Importantly, this kind of anticancer drug is associated with several adverse effects, not only those wide-ranging, easily controlled adverse effects, but also serious and life-threatening effects such as various cardiac effects, diarrhoea, and myelosuppression. Furthermore, extra caution is needed when such epigenetic modifiers are applied in children whose epigenetic profiles may be associated with their development. Apart from the very modest effect on solid tumours and serious adverse effects, another challenge in the development of novel HDAC inhibitors is that many patients develop resistance to HDAC inhibitors, which is also regularly observed for other types of anticancer drugs.

Recent research shows that HDAC3 is effective for the control of lung alveolar macrophage development and homeostasis, and further evidence indicates that the affected antigen-presenting function of cluster 3 and the immune-responsive function of cluster 4 are probably the consequences of loss of HDAC3, suggesting that HDAC3 may play a role in lung cancer.¹³¹ However, further studies are needed. Thankfully, next-generation HDAC inhibitors with high selectivity for specific HDAC isoforms are currently being developed ¹³² and include entinostat, a class I HDAC-selective inhibitor ¹³³; NBM-BMX (NCT03726294), which is specific for HDAC8; and ricolinostat, specific for HDAC6.¹³⁴ These developments expand the potential areas for application of inhibitor treatment by targeting dysregulated HDACs in dormant CSCs.¹³⁵

4.1.2 DNMT inhibitors

As mentioned above, DNMTs are considered promising targets for the epigenetic treatment of tumours; therefore, it is not surprising that DNMT inhibitors have aroused substantial attention in recent years with respect to the regulation of aberrant DNA methylation patterns. Generally, DNMT inhibitors function by inhibiting DNA methylation in order to decrease the level of promoter hypermethylation and enable abnormally silenced tumour suppressor genes such as P15 or CDKN2B, P16 or CDKN2A, MLH1, and RB to re-express.¹³⁶ There are two types of DNMT inhibitors: nucleoside DNMT inhibitors and non-nucleoside DNMT inhibitors.¹³⁷ The nucleoside analogues work by incorporating into the DNA and trapping DNMTs to DNA covalently, whereas the non-nucleoside analogues are capable of targeting the catalytic region of DNMTs to affect their activity.¹³⁷

4.1.2.1 Nucleoside DNMT inhibitors

To date, only two DNMT inhibitors, 5-azacytidine (azacytidine, Vidaza®, Celgene, Summit, NJ, USA) and 2-deoxy-5-azacytidine (decitabine, Dacogen®, MGI Pharma, Bloomington, MN, USA), both of which are nucleoside DNMT inhibitors, have been approved by the FDA to treat myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). In 2004, azacytidine, which was administered at a recommended dose of 75 mg/m², administered over a prolonged period of 7 days in a 4-week cycle, was first proven to be better than best supportive care (BSC) in MDS patients.¹³⁸ According to the data from clinical trials using azacytidine either in combinatorial therapies or as a single agent for a 15-year period, azacytidine demonstrated less toxicity, but similar or even better overall survival, compared with current AML treatments.¹³⁹ Thus, azacytidine is recommended for AML treatment, especially for elderly patients who cannot bear intensive chemotherapy regimens. Decitabine showed a prolonged median time to progression (TTP) to AML or death, while the overall survival was similar to BSC, and higher cytotoxicity was observed in clinical trials using decitabine either in combinatorial therapies or as a single agent for a 17-year period.¹³⁹ That being said, the development and approval of these two nucleoside DNMT analogues occurred well before the complexity of methylation patterns had been deciphered.^{140, 141} This type of inhibitor is prone to result in a genome-wide decline of DNA methylation levels and eventually induces the reactivation of genes randomly, including those with potentially deleterious effects. Moreover, nucleoside DNMT inhibitors lack single-agent efficacy in the treatment of solid tumours, probably because of hypoxia ¹⁴² and drug infiltration in solid tumours, and are cytotoxic to normal cycling cells. Concerns regarding the specificity and toxicity of nucleoside DNMT inhibitors relate to their intrinsic mechanisms, which hinder their clinical development.¹⁴³ There are currently only two other nucleoside DNMT inhibitors undergoing assessments in clinical trials at present: SGI-110 in Phase III and 5-F-CdR in Phase I.^{144, 145} An oligonucleotide antisense inhibitor of DNMT1, called MG98, is also in a Phase I study. Given the shortage of these agents, nucleoside DNMT inhibitors are usually used at low doses to reprogramme and sensitize tumour cells to diverse radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy regimens in clinical trials, some of which show good prospects.¹¹²

4.1.2.2 Non-nucleoside DNMT inhibitors

Owing to the boundedness of nucleoside DNMT analogues, accumulating research is concentrating on the design and development of non-nucleoside DNMT analogues. There are five main sources for obtaining novel non-nucleoside DNMT inhibitors, as follows: (1) repurposing traditional drugs such as procaine,¹⁴⁶ procainamide,¹⁴⁷ and hydralazine (currently in a Phase III trial)¹⁴⁸; (2) natural products such as laccaic acid A,¹⁴⁹ genistein,¹⁵⁰ nanaomycin A,¹⁵¹ and EGCG (in a Phase II trial at present)¹⁵²; (3) molecules discovered by virtual screening such as DC_05,¹⁵³ NSC137546,¹⁵⁴ and RG108¹⁵⁵; (4) molecules identified by experimental high-throughput screening such as SW155246,¹⁵⁶ diclone,¹⁵⁷ and 3-chloro-3-nitroflavanones ¹⁵⁸; and (5) synthesized molecules such as Δ²-Isoxazoline derivatives,¹⁵⁹ NSC compound analogues,^{160, 161} RG108 analogues^162-164 and SGI-1027 and its derivatives.^165-167 As for non-nucleoside DNMT inhibitors other than hydralazine and EGCG, the others are still in the preclinical stages.^{144, 168} Although the selectivity and efficacy of novel non-nucleoside DNMT analogues seem to have improved slightly according to their inhibitory activities (IC₅₀/EC₅₀), the main weakness in the majority of these agents is the poor DNA demethylation capability in cells and/or relatively low bioactivity at micromolar levels in comparison with the nucleoside DNMT analogues.^{153, 174}

4.2 Targeting ncRNAs

Enormous challenges exist for targeting ncRNAs to develop new drugs for treatment. On the one hand, though the functions and regulatory roles that lncRNAs and circRNAs play in cancer cells make them potential targets for tumour therapeutics, they are still far from being recommended for diagnosis and treatment. As for lncRNAs, there are no feasible or experimental therapies that directly target lncRNAs as yet due to their low expression and the lack of effective tools for adaptation to their particular features.^{175, 176} With respect to circRNAs, precise mechanisms related to cancer initiation and progression other than miRNA sponges remain to be elucidated, and more controlled and large-scale clinical studies are needed before cancer-specific circRNAs can be applied in clinical practice. That being said, on the other hand, tremendous progress has been made in terms of therapeutics targeting miRNAs, especially in the treatment of various solid tumour types using nanoparticle-conjugated miRNA mimetics.¹⁷⁷ In the following section, we focus on miRNA-based therapeutics.

MiRNAs, if carefully selected, are capable of targeting substantial mRNAs that are altered aberrantly in various cancers. Meanwhile, miRNA-based therapeutics are feasible owing to advances in technologies to deliver RNA molecules in vivo and provide the chemical modifications to the nucleotide backbone that increase stability and improve targeting to the disease site. MiRNAs can either act as therapeutics in the form of miRNA mimics or as targets of therapeutics in the form of antimiRs.^178-181 MiRNA mimics are synthetic double-stranded small RNA molecules that contain the corresponding miRNA sequence to functionally restore the decreased miRNA expression in cancers. In contrast, the first-generation antisense oligonucleotide-based antimiRs have only one strand, designed to target mRNAs or be modified by locked nucleic acids (LNAs). In addition, antimiRs modified with a 2ʹ-O-methoxyethyl are also called antagomiRs. These synthetic small RNA molecules have a sequence complementary to miRNAs that affects their function by strongly binding to them.

4.2.1 Replenishing tumour-suppressive miRNAs

In terms of replenishing tumour-suppressive miRNAs, miRNA-34 mimics currently being tested in a phase I clinical trial (NCT01829971) in various haematological and solid tumours are the leading miRNA-based therapeutics for cancer. In a mouse model of lung cancer, remarkable inhibition of proliferation was observed without adverse effects caused by carrier-mediated immune stimulation due to the effect of miRNA-34 mimics encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles.¹⁸² In addition, lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated miRNA-34 mimics also show promising prospects in mouse models of liver¹⁸³ and prostate¹⁸⁴ cancer. The potential of miRNA-34 as an anticancer therapeutic has also been demonstrated in other models in several preclinical studies. After miRNA-34 mimics encapsulated in liposomal carriers had been systemically delivered in an orthotopic model of pancreatic cancer using MiaPaca‑2 cells, tumour growth and CD44⁺ cell counts decreased while tumour cell apoptosis increased, suggesting a decline in metastatic cells.¹⁸⁵ In addition, in a prostate cancer mouse model, although only a slight reduction in tumour growth was achieved, neutral lipid emulsion-based strategies to deliver miRNA-34 mimics still showed promise in the aspect of reduction in metastatic spread to other tissues, as a result of which an increase in survival times was also observed.¹⁸⁴ In a therapeutically resistant (Kras^LSL-G12D/+; Trp53^LSL-R172H/+) mouse model of lung cancer, tumour formation and progression were inhibited when treated with miRNA-34 mimics in vivo.¹⁸⁶ Furthermore, a combination of miRNA-34 mimics, let‑7, and the epidermal growth factor (EGFR) inhibitor erlotinib demonstrated synergistic effects in inhibiting the growth of NSCLC cell lines in vitro.¹⁸⁷

4.2.2 Suppressing oncomiRs

Regarding anticancer strategies based on the suppression of oncomiRs by using antimiRs, several potential target miRNAs express aberrantly. For instance, miRNA-221 is one of the most remarkably upregulated miRNAs in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), leading to the downregulation of key tumour suppressors such as TIMP3, PTEN, and p27^KIP1.^{188, 189} In addition, as a result of the remarkable downregulation of miRNA-221, increased levels of target mRNA were observed after a cholesterol-modified form of antimiRNA-221 was delivered to HCC xenografts intravenously.¹⁹⁰ In terms of miRNA-10b, the combination of doxorubicin and miRNA-10b LNA showed promise in inhibiting metastasis in mouse models of breast cancer.¹⁹¹ A recent study has demonstrated that neferine (NEF) significantly suppressed cell proliferation, migration, and invasion, and induced apoptosis by deactivating the PTEN/PI3K/AKT and p38MAPK signal pathways via downregulating miRNA-10b in the human glioma cell line U251.¹⁹² MiRNA-155 is a crucial oncomiR in AML, and a natural product called silvestrol can inhibit colony formation and apoptosis in FLT3-ITD-positive (whose overexpression is relevant to poor outcome in AML) AML cell lines, which supports the clinical testing of sivestrol as a novel therapeutic approach for AML.¹⁹³ In addition, miRNA-630 is overexpressed due to hypoxia in the tumour microenvironment, and exceptional reduction in metastasis and proliferation was observed with the use of antimiR against miRNA‑630 in 1,2-dioleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphatidylcholine (DOPC) carriers in the orthotopic ovarian tumour model.¹⁹⁴

4.2.3 Challenges facing miRNA-based therapeutics and solutions

Although several miRNA-based therapeutics have shown clinical benefits and a bright future, studies on miRNAs in an effort to achieve a therapeutically effective response in patients are not without their problems. There are five major hurdles in the way of turning miRNAs into drugs: (1) retaining the stability and consistency of miRNAs that are rapidly degraded by RNases in circulation^{195, 196}; (2) successful delivery of charged nucleic acid analogues across hydrophobic cell membranes to the target tissue¹⁹⁷; (3) escape from endosomes¹⁹⁷; (4) preventing off-target effects and unwanted on-target effects; and (5) avoiding activation of immune responses.¹⁹⁸

Fortunately, some of these problems can be effectively solved by modifications. For example, the improved design of double-stranded miRNA mimic shows less off-target effects and better efficiency in comparison with single-stranded miRNA mimics.¹⁹⁹ In addition, chemical modifications in oligonucleotides such as adding a 2-OH group,²⁰⁰ conjugating a 3-cholesterol to the passenger strand,²⁰¹ or tagging non-nucleotide groups to the 3’ end of mimics can markedly increase the stability and activity of the miRNA in serum. Furthermore, in order to increase the amount of antitumour drug uptake by the target site in cancer treatment, the polysaccharide hyaluronic acid can be conjugated to the CD44 marker, which is upregulated in CSCs.^202-204

5 CONCLUSION

Despite that the early attempts of cancer therapeutics to target CSCs were disappointing, we have learned much about CSCs and have begun to translate this understanding into the clinic. In this well-defined clinical context, epigenetic therapies also provide evidence that this strategy against CSCs can be promising and effective. In addition, many potential druggable epigenetic targets remain to be revealed. However, epigenetic modifications are likely to be much more complex than our initial imaginations might suggest. For example, we must consider the existing histone milieu because the cross-talk between histone modifications has an impact on biological response and protein recruitment when using HDAC inhibitors. In addition, several enzymes thought to function epigenetically may act through non-epigenetic mechanisms, such as the methylation of cytosolic substrates.

Given this, a clear understanding of the hurdles that inhibit CSC-targeting epigenetic therapeutics will contribute to the development of better cancer treatments, and these are (1) the properties of many CSCs are not well identified in some cancer types ²⁰⁵; (2) the isolated CSCs used in most studies cannot simulate the complex biological microenvironment ^{206, 207}; and (3) whether CSCs should be activated or dormant in cancer therapy, which currently remains unclear.²⁰⁸ Therefore, the future of CSC-targeting epigenetic therapeutics requires further exploration and substantial effort.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was supported by grants from The Research and Development Foundation of West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University (RD-02-201907).

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

No potential conflicts of interest are disclosed.

AUTHORS' CONTRIBUTIONS

WBY, YJG and SHZ contributed to conception and design. SHZ contributed to manuscript writing and figures making. YJG revised the figures. CJL, WBY and LJL critically viewed, edited and approved the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Open Research

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

REFERENCES

1Khan H, Mirzaei HR, Amiri A, Kupeli Akkol E, Ashhad Halimi SM, Mirzaei H. Glyco-nanoparticles: New drug delivery systems in cancer therapy. Semin Cancer Biol. 2019.
10.1016/j.semcancer.2019.12.004
Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Mirzaei HR, Sahebkar A, Salehi R, et al. Boron neutron capture therapy: Moving toward targeted cancer therapy. J Cancer Res Ther. 2016; 12(2): 520-525.
10.4103/0973-1482.176167
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I, et al. Estimating the global cancer incidence and mortality in 2018: GLOBOCAN sources and methods. Int J Cancer. 2019; 144(8): 1941-1953.
10.1002/ijc.31937
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Sun Y. Translational horizons in the tumor microenvironment: Harnessing breakthroughs and targeting cures. Med Res Rev. 2015; 35(2): 408-436.
10.1002/med.21338
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
5Batlle E, Clevers H. Cancer stem cells revisited. Nat Med. 2017; 23(10): 1124-1134.
10.1038/nm.4409
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6Reya T, Morrison SJ, Clarke MF, et al. Stem cells, cancer, and cancer stem cells. Nature. 2001; 414(6859): 105-111.
10.1038/35102167
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Kleinsmith LJ, Pierce GJ. Multipotentiality of single embryonal carcinoma cells. Cancer Res. 1964; 24: 1544-1551.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Pierce GB, Speers WC. Tumors as caricatures of the process of tissue renewal: prospects for therapy by directing differentiation. Cancer Res. 1988; 48(8): 1996-2004.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
9Bonnet D, Dick JE. Human acute myeloid leukemia is organized as a hierarchy that originates from a primitive hematopoietic cell. Nat Med. 1997; 3(7): 730-737.
10.1038/nm0797-730
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
10Chen W, Dong J, Haiech J, Kilhoffer MC, Zeniou M. Cancer stem cell quiescence and plasticity as major challenges in cancer therapy. Stem Cells Int. 2016; 2016: 1740936.
10.1155/2016/1740936
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Campbell RM, Tummino PJ. Cancer epigenetics drug discovery and development: the challenge of hitting the mark. J Clin Invest. 2014; 124(1): 64-69.
10.1172/JCI71605
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12Nowell PC. Diagnostic and prognostic value of chromosome studies in cancer. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 1974; 4(4): 234-240.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW. Cancer genes and the pathways they control. Nat Med. 2004; 10(8): 789-799.
10.1038/nm1087
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell. 2011; 144(5): 646-674.
10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15Bruce WR, Van der gaag H. A quantitative assay for the number of murine lymphoma cells capable of proliferation in vivo.Nature. 1963; 199: 79-80.
10.1038/199079a0
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16Lapidot T, Sirard C, Vormoor J, et al. A cell initiating human acute myeloid leukaemia after transplantation into SCID mice. Nature. 1994; 367(6464): 645-648.
10.1038/367645a0
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17Al-Hajj M, Wicha MS, Benito-Hernandez A, et al. Prospective identification of tumorigenic breast cancer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100(7): 3983-3988.
10.1073/pnas.0530291100
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18Gentles AJ, Plevritis SK, Majeti R, Alizadeh AA. Association of a leukemic stem cell gene expression signature with clinical outcomes in acute myeloid leukemia. JAMA. 2010; 304(24): 2706-2715.
10.1001/jama.2010.1862
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Yan X, Ma L, Yi D, et al. A CD133-related gene expression signature identifies an aggressive glioblastoma subtype with excessive mutations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108(4): 1591-1596.
10.1073/pnas.1018696108
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Razi E, Radak M, Mahjoubin-Tehran M, et al. Cancer stem cells as therapeutic targets of pancreatic cancer. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 2020; 34(2): 202-212.
10.1111/fcp.12521
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Raimondi AR, Molinolo A, Gutkind JS. Rapamycin prevents early onset of tumorigenesis in an oral-specific K-ras and p53 two-hit carcinogenesis model. Cancer Res. 2009; 69(10): 4159-4166.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-4645
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Bian Y, Hall B, Sun ZJ, et al. Loss of TGF-beta signaling and PTEN promotes head and neck squamous cell carcinoma through cellular senescence evasion and cancer-related inflammation. Oncogene. 2012; 31(28): 3322-3332.
10.1038/onc.2011.494
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23Liu K, Jiang M, Lu Y, et al. Sox2 cooperates with inflammation-mediated Stat3 activation in the malignant transformation of foregut basal progenitor cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2013; 12(3): 304-315.
10.1016/j.stem.2013.01.007
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Vogelstein B, Fearon ER, Hamilton SR, et al. Genetic alterations during colorectal-tumor development. N Engl J Med. 1988; 319(9): 525-532.
10.1056/NEJM198809013190901
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25Tomasetti C, Li L, Vogelstein B. Stem cell divisions, somatic mutations, cancer etiology, and cancer prevention. Science. 2017; 355(6331): 1330-1334.
10.1126/science.aaf9011
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26Molyneux G, Geyer FC, Magnay F-A, et al. BRCA1 basal-like breast cancers originate from luminal epithelial progenitors and not from basal stem cells. Cell Stem Cell. 2010; 7(3): 403-417.
10.1016/j.stem.2010.07.010
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27Jang GB, Kim JY, Cho SD, et al. Blockade of Wnt/beta-catenin signaling suppresses breast cancer metastasis by inhibiting CSC-like phenotype. Sci Rep. 2015; 5: 12465.
10.1038/srep12465
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
28Heerboth S, Housman G, Leary M, et al. EMT and tumor metastasis. Clin Transl Med. 2015; 4: 6.
10.1186/s40169-015-0048-3
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
29Latil M, Nassar D, Beck B, et al. Cell-type-specific chromatin states differentially prime squamous cell carcinoma tumor-initiating cells for epithelial to mesenchymal transition. Cell Stem Cell. 2017; 20(2): 191-204.e5.
10.1016/j.stem.2016.10.018
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
30Shukla S, Meeran SM. Epigenetics of cancer stem cells: Pathways and therapeutics. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2014; 1840(12): 3494-3502.
10.1016/j.bbagen.2014.09.017
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
31Arumugam T, Ramachandran V, Fournier KF, et al. Epithelial to mesenchymal transition contributes to drug resistance in pancreatic cancer. Cancer Res. 2009; 69(14): 5820-5828.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2819
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
32Wang X, Low XC, Hou W, et al. Epirubicin-adsorbed nanodiamonds kill chemoresistant hepatic cancer stem cells. ACS Nano. 2014; 8(12): 12151-12166.
10.1021/nn503491e
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
33Wu CP, Calcagno AM, Ambudkar SV. Reversal of ABC drug transporter-mediated multidrug resistance in cancer cells: evaluation of current strategies. Curr Mol Pharmacol. 2008; 1(2): 93-105.
10.2174/1874467210801020093
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
34To KK, Polgar O, Huff LM, et al. Histone modifications at the ABCG2 promoter following treatment with histone deacetylase inhibitor mirror those in multidrug-resistant cells. Mol Cancer Res. 2008; 6(1): 151-164.
10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-07-0175
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
35Luger K, Mäder AW, Richmond RK, et al. Crystal structure of the nucleosome core particle at 2.8 A resolution. Nature. 1997; 389(6648): 251-260.
10.1038/38444
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
36Luger K. Structure and dynamic behavior of nucleosomes. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2003; 13(2): 127-135.
10.1016/S0959-437X(03)00026-1
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
37Feinberg AP, Tycko B. The history of cancer epigenetics. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004; 4(2): 143-153.
10.1038/nrc1279
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
38Luan Y, Li J, Bernatchez JA, et al. Kinase and histone deacetylase hybrid inhibitors for cancer therapy. J Med Chem. 2019; 62(7): 3171-3183.
10.1021/acs.jmedchem.8b00189
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
39Ropero S, Esteller M. The role of histone deacetylases (HDACs) in human cancer. Mol Oncol. 2007; 1(1): 19-25.
10.1016/j.molonc.2007.01.001
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
40Zhang L, Han Y, Jiang Q, et al. Trend of histone deacetylase inhibitors in cancer therapy: isoform selectivity or multitargeted strategy. Med Res Rev. 2015; 35(1): 63-84.
10.1002/med.21320
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
41Paris M, Porcelloni M, Binaschi M, Fattori D. Histone deacetylase inhibitors: from bench to clinic. J Med Chem. 2008; 51(6): 1505-1529.
10.1021/jm7011408
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
42West AC, Johnstone RW. New and emerging HDAC inhibitors for cancer treatment. J Clin Invest. 2014; 124(1): 30-39.
10.1172/JCI69738
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
43Ceccacci E, Minucci S. Inhibition of histone deacetylases in cancer therapy: lessons from leukaemia. Br J Cancer. 2016; 114(6): 605-611.
10.1038/bjc.2016.36
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
44Eckschlager T, et al. Histone deacetylase inhibitors as anticancer drugs. Int J Mol Sci. 2017; 18(7).
10.3390/ijms18071414
Web of Science® Google Scholar
45Lernoux M, Schnekenburger M, Dicato M, Diederich M. Anti-cancer effects of naturally derived compounds targeting histone deacetylase 6-related pathways. Pharmacol Res. 2018; 129: 337-356.
10.1016/j.phrs.2017.11.004
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
46Esteller M. Epigenetics in cancer. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358(11): 1148-1159.
10.1056/NEJMra072067
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
47Jurkowska RZ, Jurkowski TP, Jeltsch A. Structure and function of mammalian DNA methyltransferases. ChemBioChem. 2011; 12(2): 206-222.
10.1002/cbic.201000195
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
48Goll MG, Bestor TH. Eukaryotic cytosine methyltransferases. Annu Rev Biochem. 2005; 74: 481-514.
10.1146/annurev.biochem.74.010904.153721
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
49Okano M, Bell DW, Haber DA, Li E. DNA methyltransferases Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b are essential for de novo methylation and mammalian development. Cell. 1999; 99(3): 247-257.
10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81656-6
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
50Jia DA, Jurkowska RZ, Zhang X, et al. Structure of Dnmt3a bound to Dnmt3L suggests a model for de novo DNA methylation. Nature. 2007; 449(7159): 248-251.
10.1038/nature06146
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
51Fernandez AF, Assenov Y, Martin-Subero JI, et al. A DNA methylation fingerprint of 1628 human samples. Genome Res. 2012; 22(2): 407-419.
10.1101/gr.119867.110
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
52Ley TJ, Ding L, Walter MJ, et al. DNMT3A mutations in acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363(25): 2424-2433.
10.1056/NEJMoa1005143
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
53Russler-Germain D, Spencer D, Young M, et al. The R882H DNMT3A mutation associated with AML dominantly inhibits wild-type DNMT3A by blocking its ability to form active tetramers. Cancer Cell. 2014; 25(4): 442-454.
10.1016/j.ccr.2014.02.010
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
54Spencer DH, Russler-Germain DA, Ketkar S, et al. CpG island hypermethylation mediated by DNMT3A is a consequence of AML progression. Cell. 2017; 168(5): 801-816.e13.
10.1016/j.cell.2017.01.021
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
55Welch J, Ley T, Link D, et al. The origin and evolution of mutations in acute myeloid leukemia. Cell. 2012; 150(2): 264-278.
10.1016/j.cell.2012.06.023
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
56Valent P, Akin C, Arock M, et al. Proposed terminology and classification of pre-malignant neoplastic conditions: A consensus proposal. EBioMedicine. 2017; 26: 17-24.
10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.11.024
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
57Ley TJ, Miller C, Ding L, et al. Genomic and epigenomic landscapes of adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2013; 368(22): 2059-2074.
10.1056/NEJMoa1301689
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
58Shlush LI, Zandi S, Mitchell A, et al. Identification of pre-leukaemic haematopoietic stem cells in acute leukaemia. Nature. 2014; 506(7488): 328-333.
10.1038/nature13038
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
59Griffith M, Miller C, Griffith O, et al. Optimizing cancer genome sequencing and analysis. Cell Syst. 2015; 1(3): 210-223.
10.1016/j.cels.2015.08.015
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
60Ploen GG, Nederby L, Guldberg P, et al. Persistence of DNMT3A mutations at long-term remission in adult patients with AML. Br J Haematol. 2014; 167(4): 478-486.
10.1111/bjh.13062
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
61Pourhanifeh MH, Darvish M, Tabatabaeian J, et al. Autophagy-related microRNAs: Possible regulatory roles and therapeutic potential in and gastrointestinal cancers. Pharmacol Res. 2020; 161: 105133.
10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105133
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
62Bartel DP. MicroRNAs: Genomics, biogenesis, mechanism, and function. Cell. 2004; 116(2): 281-297.
10.1016/S0092-8674(04)00045-5
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
63Ha M, Kim VN. Regulation of microRNA biogenesis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2014; 15(8): 509-524.
10.1038/nrm3838
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
64Lin S, Gregory RI. MicroRNA biogenesis pathways in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2015; 15(6): 321-333.
10.1038/nrc3932
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
65Rupaimoole R, Calin GA, Lopez-Berestein G, et al. miRNA Deregulation in Cancer Cells and the Tumor Microenvironment. Cancer Discov. 2016; 6(3): 235-246.
10.1158/2159-8290.CD-15-0893
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
66Poddar S, Kesharwani D, Datta M. Interplay between the miRNome and the epigenetic machinery: Implications in health and disease. J Cell Physiol. 2017; 232(11): 2938-2945.
10.1002/jcp.25819
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
67Ghaffari S, Bashash D (2015) Reciprocal interconnection of miRNome-Epigenome in cancer pathogenesis and its therapeutic potential. In: P Mehdipour, eds. Epigenetics Territory and Cancer. Springer, Dordrecht. 2015, doi: 10.1007/978-94-017-9639-2_4.
10.1007/978-94-017-9639-2_4
Google Scholar
68Xiao Q, Huang LU, Zhang Z, et al. Overexpression of miR-140 inhibits proliferation of osteosarcoma cells via suppression of histone deacetylase 4. Oncol Res. 2017; 25(2): 267-275.
10.3727/096504016X14732510786564
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
69Zhang W, Duan N, Zhang Q, et al. DNA methylation mediated down-regulation of miR-370 regulates cell growth through activation of the wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathway in human osteosarcoma cells. Int J Biol Sci. 2017; 13(5): 561-573.
10.7150/ijbs.19032
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
70Hashemian SM, Pourhanifeh MH, Fadaei S, et al. Non-coding RNAs and exosomes: their role in the pathogenesis of sepsis. Mol Ther Nucleic Acids. 2020; 21: 51-74.
10.1016/j.omtn.2020.05.012
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
71Huang N-S, Chi Y-Y, Xue J-Y, et al. Long non-coding RNA metastasis associated in lung adenocarcinoma transcript 1 (MALAT1) interacts with estrogen receptor and predicted poor survival in breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2016; 7(25): 37957-37965.
10.18632/oncotarget.9364
PubMed Google Scholar
72Gooding AJ, Parker KA, Valadkhan S, Schiemann WP. The IncRNA BORG: A novel inducer of TNBC metastasis, chemoresistance, and disease recurrence. J Cancer Metastasis Treat. 2019; 5: 41–54.
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
73Chen LL, Yang L. Regulation of circRNA biogenesis. RNA Biol. 2015; 12(4): 381-388.
10.1080/15476286.2015.1020271
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
74Zhou Z, Jiang R, Yang X, et al. circRNA mediates silica-induced macrophage activation Via HECTD1/ZC3H12A-dependent ubiquitination. Theranostics. 2018; 8(2): 575-592.
10.7150/thno.21648
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
75Zhao Z, Li X, Jian D, et al. Hsa_circ_0054633 in peripheral blood can be used as a diagnostic biomarker of pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Acta Diabetol. 2017; 54(3): 237-245.
10.1007/s00592-016-0943-0
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
76Liu Q, Zhang X, Hu X, et al. Circular RNA related to the chondrocyte ECM regulates MMP13 expression by functioning as a MiR-136 'Sponge' in human cartilage degradation. Sci Rep. 2016; 6: 22572.
10.1038/srep22572
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
77Zhao Y, Alexandrov P, Jaber V, et al. Deficiency in the ubiquitin conjugating enzyme UBE2A in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is linked to deficits in a natural circular miRNA-7 sponge (circRNA; ciRS-7). Genes (Basel). 2016; 7(12): 116.
10.3390/genes7120116
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
78Holdt LM, Stahringer A, Sass K, et al. Circular non-coding RNA ANRIL modulates ribosomal RNA maturation and atherosclerosis in humans. Nat Commun. 2016; 7: 12429.
10.1038/ncomms12429
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
79Bai Y, Zhang Y, Han B, et al. Circular RNA DLGAP4 ameliorates ischemic stroke outcomes by targeting miR-143 to regulate endothelial-mesenchymal transition associated with blood-brain barrier integrity. J Neurosci. 2018; 38(1): 32-50.
10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1348-17.2017
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
80Geng Y, Jiang J, Wu C. Function and clinical significance of circRNAs in solid tumors. J Hematol Oncol. 2018; 11(1): 98.
10.1186/s13045-018-0643-z
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
81Guarnerio J, Bezzi M, Jeong J, et al. Oncogenic role of fusion-circRNAs derived from cancer-associated chromosomal translocations. Cell. 2016; 165(2): 289-302.
10.1016/j.cell.2016.03.020
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
82Hansen TB, Kjems J, Damgaard CK. Circular RNA and miR-7 in cancer. Cancer Res. 2013; 73(18): 5609-5612.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-1568
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
83Wang L, Wei Y, Yan Y, et al. CircDOCK1 suppresses cell apoptosis via inhibition of miR196a5p by targeting BIRC3 in OSCC. Oncol Rep. 2018; 39(3): 951-966.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
84Wang K, Long BO, Liu F, et al. A circular RNA protects the heart from pathological hypertrophy and heart failure by targeting miR-223. Eur Heart J. 2016; 37(33): 2602-2611.
10.1093/eurheartj/ehv713
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
85You X, Vlatkovic I, Babic A, et al. Neural circular RNAs are derived from synaptic genes and regulated by development and plasticity. Nat Neurosci. 2015; 18(4): 603-610.
10.1038/nn.3975
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
86Peng L, Chen G, Zhu Z, et al. Circular RNA ZNF609 functions as a competitive endogenous RNA to regulate AKT3 expression by sponging miR-150-5p in Hirschsprung's disease. Oncotarget. 2017; 8(1): 808-818.
10.18632/oncotarget.13656
PubMed Google Scholar
87Ashwal-Fluss R, Meyer M, Pamudurti N, et al. circRNA biogenesis competes with pre-mRNA splicing. Mol Cell. 2014; 56(1): 55-66.
10.1016/j.molcel.2014.08.019
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
88Abdelmohsen K, Panda AC, Munk R, et al. Identification of HuR target circular RNAs uncovers suppression of PABPN1 translation by CircPABPN1. RNA Biol. 2017; 14(3): 361-369.
10.1080/15476286.2017.1279788
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
89Du WW, Yang W, Liu E, et al. Foxo3 circular RNA retards cell cycle progression via forming ternary complexes with p21 and CDK2. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016; 44(6): 2846-2858.
10.1093/nar/gkw027
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
90Zhong Y, Du Y, Yang X, et al. Circular RNAs function as ceRNAs to regulate and control human cancer progression. Mol Cancer. 2018; 17(1): 79.
10.1186/s12943-018-0827-8
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
91Chen LL. The biogenesis and emerging roles of circular RNAs. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2016; 17(4): 205-211.
10.1038/nrm.2015.32
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
92Li Z, Huang C, Bao C, et al. Exon-intron circular RNAs regulate transcription in the nucleus. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2015; 22(3): 256-264.
10.1038/nsmb.2959
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
93Yang Y, Gai X, Zhang M, et al. Novel role of FBXW7 circular RNA in repressing glioma tumorigenesis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018; 110(3): 304–315.
10.1093/jnci/djx166
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
94Zhang M, Huang N, Yang X, et al. A novel protein encoded by the circular form of the SHPRH gene suppresses glioma tumorigenesis. Oncogene. 2018; 37(13): 1805-1814.
10.1038/s41388-017-0019-9
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
95Legnini I, Timoteo GD, Rossi F, et al. Circ-ZNF609 is a circular RNA that can be translated and functions in myogenesis. Mol Cell. 2017; 66(1): 22-37.e9.
10.1016/j.molcel.2017.02.017
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
96Pamudurti NR, Bartok O, Jens M, et al. Translation of CircRNAs. Mol Cell. 2017; 66(1): 9-21.e7.
10.1016/j.molcel.2017.02.021
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
97Chen N, Zhao G, Yang X, et al. A novel FLI1 exonic circular RNA promotes metastasis in breast cancer by coordinately regulating TET1 and DNMT1. Genome Biol. 2018; 19(1): 218.
10.1186/s13059-018-1594-y
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
98Su M, Xiao Y, Tang J, et al. Role of lncRNA and EZH2 interaction/regulatory network in lung cancer. J Cancer. 2018; 9(22): 4156-4165.
10.7150/jca.27098
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
99Qu D, Yan B, Xin R, Ma T, et al. A novel circular RNA hsa_circ_0020123 exerts oncogenic properties through suppression of miR-144 in non-small cell lung cancer. Am J Cancer Res. 2018; 8(8): 1387-1402.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
100Li B, Xie F, Zheng F, Jiang G, Zeng F, Xiao X. Overexpression of CircRNA BCRC4 regulates cell apoptosis and MicroRNA-101/EZH2 signaling in bladder cancer. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2017; 37(6): 886-890.
CAS PubMed Google Scholar
101Tarakhovsky A. Tools and landscapes of epigenetics. Nat Immunol. 2010; 11(7): 565-568.
10.1038/ni0710-565
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
102Ahuja N, Easwaran H, Baylin SB. Harnessing the potential of epigenetic therapy to target solid tumors. J Clin Invest. 2014; 124(1): 56-63.
10.1172/JCI69736
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
103O'Connor OA, Bhagat G, Ganapathi K, et al. Changing the paradigms of treatment in peripheral T-cell lymphoma: from biology to clinical practice. Clin Cancer Res. 2014; 20(20): 5240-5254.
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2020
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
104Plass C, Pfister SM, Lindroth AM, Bogatyrova O, Claus R, Lichter P. Mutations in regulators of the epigenome and their connections to global chromatin patterns in cancer. Nat Rev Genet. 2013; 14(11): 765-780.
10.1038/nrg3554
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
105Chan IS, Knútsdóttir H, Ramakrishnan G, et al. Cancer cells educate natural killer cells to a metastasis-promoting cell state. J Cell Biol. 2020; 219(9).
10.1083/jcb.202001134
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
106Itzykson R, Thépot S, Berthon C, et al. Azacitidine for the treatment of relapsed and refractory AML in older patients. Leuk Res. 2015; 39(2): 124-130.
10.1016/j.leukres.2014.11.009
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
107Tsai HC, Li H, Neste LV, et al. Transient low doses of DNA-demethylating agents exert durable antitumor effects on hematological and epithelial tumor cells. Cancer Cell. 2012; 21(3): 430-446.
10.1016/j.ccr.2011.12.029
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
108Hassanzadeh M, Mahernia S, Caprini G, et al. Epigenetic-based cancer therapeutics: new potential HDAC8 inhibitors. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 2020; 4 1-15.
10.1080/07391102.2020.1813203
Web of Science® Google Scholar
109Campbell P, Thomas CM. Belinostat for the treatment of relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2017; 23(2): 143-147.
10.1177/1078155216634178
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
110Criscuolo D, Morra F, Giannella R, Visconti R, Cerrato A, Celetti A, et al. New combinatorial strategies to improve the PARP inhibitors efficacy in the urothelial bladder Cancer treatment. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2019; 38(1): 91.
10.1186/s13046-019-1089-z
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
111Pulliam N, Fang F, Ozes AR, et al. An effective epigenetic-PARP inhibitor combination therapy for breast and ovarian cancers independent of BRCA mutations. Clin Cancer Res. 2018; 24(13): 3163-3175.
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0204
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
112Juergens RA, Wrangle J, Vendetti FP, et al. Combination epigenetic therapy has efficacy in patients with refractory advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 2011; 1(7): 598-607.
10.1158/2159-8290.CD-11-0214
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
113Greig SL. Panobinostat: A review in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Target Oncol. 2016; 11(1): 107-114.
10.1007/s11523-015-0413-6
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
114Shen F, Boccuto L, Pauly R, Srikanth S, Chandrasekaran S. Genome-scale network model of metabolism and histone acetylation reveals metabolic dependencies of histone deacetylase inhibitors. Genome Biol. 2019; 20(1): 49.
10.1186/s13059-019-1661-z
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
115Moreaux J, Rème T, Leonard W, et al. Development of gene expression-based score to predict sensitivity of multiple myeloma cells to DNA methylation inhibitors. Mol Cancer Ther. 2012; 11(12): 2685-2692.
10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-12-0721
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
116Marson CM. Histone deacetylase inhibitors: Design, structure-activity relationships and therapeutic implications for cancer. Anticancer Agents Med Chem. 2009; 9(6): 661-692.
10.2174/187152009788679976
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
117Stenzel K, Hamacher A, Hansen FK, et al. Alkoxyurea-based histone deacetylase inhibitors increase cisplatin potency in chemoresistant cancer cell lines. J Med Chem. 2017; 60(13): 5334-5348.
10.1021/acs.jmedchem.6b01538
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
118Moskowitz AJ, Horwitz SM. Targeting histone deacetylases in T-cell lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2017; 58(6): 1306-1319.
10.1080/10428194.2016.1247956
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
119Vansteenkiste J, Cutsem EV, Dumez H, et al. Early phase II trial of oral vorinostat in relapsed or refractory breast, colorectal, or non-small cell lung cancer. Invest New Drugs. 2008; 26(5): 483-488.
10.1007/s10637-008-9131-6
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
120Luu TH, Morgan RJ, Leong L, et al. A phase II trial of vorinostat (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid) in metastatic breast cancer: A California Cancer Consortium study. Clin Cancer Res. 2008; 14(21): 7138-7142.
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0122
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
121Modesitt SC, Sill M, Hoffman JS, Bender DP. A phase II study of vorinostat in the treatment of persistent or recurrent epithelial ovarian or primary peritoneal carcinoma: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Gynecol Oncol. 2008; 109(2): 182-186.
10.1016/j.ygyno.2008.01.009
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
122Konsoula R, Jung M. In vitro plasma stability, permeability and solubility of mercaptoacetamide histone deacetylase inhibitors. Int J Pharm. 2008; 361(1–2): 19-25.
10.1016/j.ijpharm.2008.05.001
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
123Schrump DS, Fischette MR, Nguyen DM, et al. Clinical and molecular responses in lung cancer patients receiving Romidepsin. Clin Cancer Res. 2008; 14(1): 188-198.
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-0135
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
124Woyach JA, Kloos RT, Ringel MD, et al. Lack of therapeutic effect of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat in patients with metastatic radioiodine-refractory thyroid carcinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009; 94(1): 164-170.
10.1210/jc.2008-1631
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
125Traynor AM, Dubey S, Eickhoff JC, et al. Vorinostat (NSC# 701852) in patients with relapsed non-small cell lung cancer: A Wisconsin Oncology Network phase II study. J Thorac Oncol. 2009; 4(4): 522-526.
10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181952478
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
126Galanis E, Jaeckle KA, Maurer MJ, et al. Phase II trial of vorinostat in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: a north central cancer treatment group study. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(12): 2052-2058.
10.1200/JCO.2008.19.0694
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
127Whitehead RP, Rankin C, Hoff P, et al. Phase II trial of romidepsin (NSC-630176) in previously treated colorectal cancer patients with advanced disease: A Southwest Oncology Group study (S0336). Invest New Drugs. 2009; 27(5): 469-475.
10.1007/s10637-008-9190-8
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
128Otterson GA, Hodgson L, Pang H, Vokes EE. Phase II study of the histone deacetylase inhibitor Romidepsin in relapsed small cell lung cancer (Cancer and Leukemia Group B 30304). J Thorac Oncol. 2010; 5(10): 1644-1648.
10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ec1713
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
129Molife LR, Attard G, Fong PC, et al. Phase II, two-stage, single-arm trial of the histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi) romidepsin in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Ann Oncol. 2010; 21(1): 109-113.
10.1093/annonc/mdp270
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
130Iwamoto FM, Lamborn KR, Kuhn JG, et al. A phase I/II trial of the histone deacetylase inhibitor romidepsin for adults with recurrent malignant glioma: North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study 03–03. Neuro Oncol. 2011; 13(5): 509-516.
10.1093/neuonc/nor017
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
131Yao YI, Liu Q, Adrianto I, et al. Histone deacetylase 3 controls lung alveolar macrophage development and homeostasis. Nat Commun. 2020; 11(1): 3822.
10.1038/s41467-020-17630-6
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
132Bradner JE, West N, Grachan ML, et al. Chemical phylogenetics of histone deacetylases. Nat Chem Biol. 2010; 6(3): 238-243.
10.1038/nchembio.313
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
133Yardley DA, Ismail-Khan RR, Melichar B, et al. Randomized phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of exemestane with or without entinostat in postmenopausal women with locally recurrent or metastatic estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer progressing on treatment with a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor. J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31(17): 2128-2135.
10.1200/JCO.2012.43.7251
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
134Yee AJ, Bensinger WI, Supko JG, et al. Ricolinostat plus lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: a multicentre phase 1b trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016; 17(11): 1569-1578.
10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30375-8
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
135Roche J, Bertrand P. Inside HDACs with more selective HDAC inhibitors. Eur J Med Chem. 2016; 121: 451-483.
10.1016/j.ejmech.2016.05.047
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
136Yoo CB, Jones PA. Epigenetic therapy of cancer: past, present and future. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2006; 5(1): 37-50.
10.1038/nrd1930
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
137Brueckner B, Garcia Boy R, Siedlecki P, et al. Epigenetic reactivation of tumor suppressor genes by a novel small-molecule inhibitor of human DNA methyltransferases. Cancer Res. 2005; 65(14): 6305-6311.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-2957
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
138Silverman LR, Demakos EP, Peterson BL, et al. Randomized controlled trial of azacitidine in patients with the myelodysplastic syndrome: A study of the cancer and leukemia group B. J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20(10): 2429-2440.
10.1200/JCO.2002.04.117
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
139Agrawal K, Das V, Vyas P, et al. Nucleosidic DNA demethylating epigenetic drugs - A comprehensive review from discovery to clinic. Pharmacol Ther. 2018; 188: 45-79.
10.1016/j.pharmthera.2018.02.006
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
140Langer F, Dingemann J, Kreipe H, Lehmann U. Up-regulation of DNA methyltransferases DNMT1, 3A, and 3B in myelodysplastic syndrome. Leuk Res. 2005; 29(3): 325-329.
10.1016/j.leukres.2004.08.004
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
141Mizuno S, Chijiwa T, Okamura T, et al. Expression of DNA methyltransferases DNMT1, 3A, and 3B in normal hematopoiesis and in acute and chronic myelogenous leukemia. Blood. 2001; 97(5): 1172-1179.
10.1182/blood.V97.5.1172
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
142Ramachandran S, Lent J, Göttgens EL, Krieg AJ, Hammond EM. Epigenetic therapy for solid tumors: Highlighting the impact of tumor hypoxia. Genes (Basel). 2015; 6(4): 935-956.
10.3390/genes6040935
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
143Castillo-Aguilera O, Depreux P, Halby L, Arimondo PB, Goossens L. DNA methylation targeting: The DNMT/HMT crosstalk challenge. Biomolecules. 2017; 7(3).
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
144Pechalrieu D, Etievant C, Arimondo PB. DNA methyltransferase inhibitors in cancer: From pharmacology to translational studies. Biochem Pharmacol. 2017; 129: 1-13.
10.1016/j.bcp.2016.12.004
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
145Pan Y, Liu G, Zhou F, Su B, Li Y. DNA methylation profiles in cancer diagnosis and therapeutics. Clin Exp Med. 2018; 18(1): 1-14.
10.1007/s10238-017-0467-0
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
146Villar-Garea A, Fraga MF, Espada J, Esteller M. Procaine is a DNA-demethylating agent with growth-inhibitory effects in human cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2003; 63(16): 4984-4989.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
147Lee BH, Yegnasubramanian S, Lin X, Nelson WG. Procainamide is a specific inhibitor of DNA methyltransferase 1. J Biol Chem. 2005; 280(49): 40749-40756.
10.1074/jbc.M505593200
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
148Cornacchia E, Golbus J, Maybaum J, Strahler J, Hanash S, Richardson B. Hydralazine and procainamide inhibit T cell DNA methylation and induce autoreactivity. J Immunol. 1988; 140(7): 2197-2200.
10.4049/jimmunol.140.7.2197
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
149Fagan RL, Cryderman DE, Kopelovich L, et al. Laccaic acid A is a direct, DNA-competitive inhibitor of DNA methyltransferase 1. J Biol Chem. 2013; 288(33): 23858-23867.
10.1074/jbc.M113.480517
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
150Fang MZ, Chen D, Sun Y, Jin Z, Christman JK, Yang CS. Reversal of hypermethylation and reactivation of p16INK4a, RARbeta, and MGMT genes by genistein and other isoflavones from soy. Clin Cancer Res. 2005; 11(19 Pt 1): 7033-7041.
10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0406
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
151Kuck D, Caulfield T, Lyko F, et al. Nanaomycin A selectively inhibits DNMT3B and reactivates silenced tumor suppressor genes in human cancer cells. Mol Cancer Ther. 2010; 9(11): 3015-3023.
10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-10-0609
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
152Fang MZ, Wang Y, Ai N, et al. Tea polyphenol (-)-epigallocatechin-3-gallate inhibits DNA methyltransferase and reactivates methylation-silenced genes in cancer cell lines. Cancer Res. 2003; 63(22): 7563-7570.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
153Chen S, Wang Y, Zhou W, et al. Identifying novel selective non-nucleoside DNA methyltransferase 1 inhibitors through docking-based virtual screening. J Med Chem. 2014; 57(21): 9028-9041.
10.1021/jm501134e
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
154Kuck D, Singh N, Lyko F, et al. Novel and selective DNA methyltransferase inhibitors: Docking-based virtual screening and experimental evaluation. Bioorg Med Chem. 2010; 18(2): 822-829.
10.1016/j.bmc.2009.11.050
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
155Siedlecki P, Boy RG, Musch T, et al. Discovery of two novel, small-molecule inhibitors of DNA methylation. J Med Chem. 2006; 49(2): 678-683.
10.1021/jm050844z
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
156Kilgore JA, Du X, Melito L, et al. Identification of DNMT1 selective antagonists using a novel scintillation proximity assay. J Biol Chem. 2013; 288(27): 19673-19684.
10.1074/jbc.M112.443895
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
157Ceccaldi A, Rajavelu A, Ragozin S, et al. Identification of novel inhibitors of DNA methylation by screening of a chemical library. ACS Chem Biol. 2013; 8(3): 543-548.
10.1021/cb300565z
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
158Ceccaldi A, Rajavelu A, Champion C, et al. C5-DNA methyltransferase inhibitors: from screening to effects on zebrafish embryo development. ChemBioChem. 2011; 12(9): 1337-1345.
10.1002/cbic.201100130
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
159Castellano S, Kuck D, Viviano M, et al. Synthesis and biochemical evaluation of delta(2)-isoxazoline derivatives as DNA methyltransferase 1 inhibitors. J Med Chem. 2011; 54(21): 7663-7677.
10.1021/jm2010404
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
160Garella D, Atlante S, Borretto E, et al. Design and synthesis of N-benzoyl amino acid derivatives as DNA methylation inhibitors. Chem Biol Drug Des. 2016; 88(5): 664-676.
10.1111/cbdd.12794
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
161Kabro A, Lachance H, Marcoux-Archambault I, et al. Preparation of phenylethylbenzamide derivatives as modulators of DNMT3 activity. MEDCHEMCOMM. 2013; 4(12): 1562-1570.
10.1039/c3md00214d
CAS Web of Science® Google Scholar
162Suzuki T, Tanaka R, Hamada S, et al. Design, synthesis, inhibitory activity, and binding mode study of novel DNA methyltransferase 1 inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2010; 20(3): 1124-1127.
10.1016/j.bmcl.2009.12.016
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
163Asgatay S, Champion C, Marloie G, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of analogues of N-phthaloyl-l-tryptophan (RG108) as inhibitors of DNA methyltransferase 1. J Med Chem. 2014; 57(2): 421-434.
10.1021/jm401419p
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
164Rondelet G, Fleury L, Faux C, et al. Inhibition studies of DNA methyltransferases by maleimide derivatives of RG108 as non-nucleoside inhibitors. Future Med Chem. 2017; 9(13): 1465-1481.
10.4155/fmc-2017-0074
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
165Valente S, Liu Y, Schnekenburger M, et al. Selective non-nucleoside inhibitors of human DNA methyltransferases active in cancer including in cancer stem cells. J Med Chem. 2014; 57(3): 701-713.
10.1021/jm4012627
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
166Rilova E, Erdmann A, Gros C, et al. Design, synthesis and biological evaluation of 4-amino-N- (4-aminophenyl)benzamide analogues of quinoline-based SGI-1027 as inhibitors of DNA methylation. ChemMedChem. 2014; 9(3): 590-601.
10.1002/cmdc.201300420
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
167Datta J, Ghoshal K, Denny WA, et al. A new class of quinoline-based DNA hypomethylating agents reactivates tumor suppressor genes by blocking DNA methyltransferase 1 activity and inducing its degradation. Cancer Res. 2009; 69(10): 4277-4285.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-3669
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
168Pan Y, Liu G, Zhou F, et al. DNA methylation profiles in cancer diagnosis and therapeutics. Clin Exp Med. 2018; 18(1): 1-14.
10.1007/s10238-017-0467-0
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
169Rotili D, Tarantino D, Marrocco B, et al. Properly substituted analogues of BIX-01294 lose inhibition of G9a histone methyltransferase and gain selective anti-DNA methyltransferase 3A activity. PLoS One. 2014; 9(5):e96941.
10.1371/journal.pone.0096941
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
170Gros C, Fleury L, Nahoum V, et al. New insights on the mechanism of quinoline-based DNA Methyltransferase inhibitors. J Biol Chem. 2015; 290(10): 6293-6302.
10.1074/jbc.M114.594671
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
171Erdmann A, Menon Y, Gros C, et al. Identification and optimization of hydrazone-gallate derivatives as specific inhibitors of DNA methyltransferase 3A. Future Med Chem. 2016; 8(4): 373-380.
10.4155/fmc.15.192
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
172San JE, Agirre X, Rabal O, et al. Discovery of first-in-class reversible dual small molecule inhibitors against G9a and DNMTs in hematological malignancies. Nat Commun. 2017; 8: 15424.
10.1038/ncomms15424
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
173Halby L, Menon Y, Rilova E, et al. Rational design of bisubstrate-type analogues as inhibitors of dna methyltransferases in cancer cells. J Med Chem. 2017; 60(11): 4665-4679.
10.1021/acs.jmedchem.7b00176
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
174Leroy M, Mélin L, LaPlante SR, Medina-Franco JL, Gagnon A. Synthesis of NSC 106084 and NSC 14778 and evaluation of their DNMT inhibitory activity. Bioorg Med Chem Lett. 2019; 29(6): 826-831.
10.1016/j.bmcl.2019.01.022
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
175Blokhin I, Khorkova O, Hsiao J, Wahlestedt C, et al. Developments in lncRNA drug discovery: Where are we heading? Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2018; 13(9): 837-849.
10.1080/17460441.2018.1501024
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
176Fort V, Khelifi G, Hussein S. Long non-coding RNAs and transposable elements: A functional relationship. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Res. 2020; 1868(1): 118837.
10.1016/j.bbamcr.2020.118837
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
177Rupaimoole R, Slack FJ. MicroRNA therapeutics: towards a new era for the management of cancer and other diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2017; 16(3): 203-222.
10.1038/nrd.2016.246
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
178Iorio MV, Croce CM. MicroRNA dysregulation in cancer: diagnostics, monitoring and therapeutics. A comprehensive review. EMBO Mol Med. 2012; 4(3): 143-159.
10.1002/emmm.201100209
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
179Bader AG. miR-34 - a microRNA replacement therapy is headed to the clinic. Front Genet. 2012; 3: 120.
10.3389/fgene.2012.00120
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
180Li Z, Rana TM. Therapeutic targeting of microRNAs: Current status and future challenges. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2014; 13(8): 622-638.
10.1038/nrd4359
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
181Rupaimoole R, Calin GA, Lopez-Berestein G, et al. miRNA deregulation in cancer cells and the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Discov. 2016; 6(3): 235-246.
10.1158/2159-8290.CD-15-0893
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
182Trang P, Wiggins JF, Daige CL, et al. Systemic delivery of tumor suppressor microRNA mimics using a neutral lipid emulsion inhibits lung tumors in mice. Mol Ther. 2011; 19(6): 1116-1122.
10.1038/mt.2011.48
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
183Wiggins JF, Ruffino L, Kelnar K, et al. Development of a lung cancer therapeutic based on the tumor suppressor microRNA-34. Cancer Res. 2010; 70(14): 5923-5930.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-0655
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
184Liu C, Kelnar K, Liu B, et al. The microRNA miR-34a inhibits prostate cancer stem cells and metastasis by directly repressing CD44. Nat Med. 2011; 17(2): 211-215.
10.1038/nm.2284
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
185Pramanik D, Campbell NR, Karikari C, et al. Restitution of tumor suppressor microRNAs using a systemic nanovector inhibits pancreatic cancer growth in mice. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011; 10(8): 1470-1480.
10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-11-0152
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
186Kasinski AL, Slack FJ. miRNA-34 prevents cancer initiation and progression in a therapeutically resistant K-ras and p53-induced mouse model of lung adenocarcinoma. Cancer Res. 2012; 72(21): 5576-5587.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-2001
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
187Stahlhut C, Slack FJ. Combinatorial action of MicroRNAs let-7 and miR-34 effectively synergizes with erlotinib to suppress non-small cell lung cancer cell proliferation. Cell Cycle. 2015; 14(13): 2171-2180.
10.1080/15384101.2014.1003008
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
188le Sage C, Nagel R, Egan DA, et al. Regulation of the p27(Kip1) tumor suppressor by miR-221 and miR-222 promotes cancer cell proliferation. EMBO J. 2007; 26(15): 3699-3708.
10.1038/sj.emboj.7601790
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
189Garofalo M, Leva GD, Romano G, et al. miR-221&222 regulate TRAIL resistance and enhance tumorigenicity through PTEN and TIMP3 downregulation. Cancer Cell. 2009; 16(6): 498-509.
10.1016/j.ccr.2009.10.014
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
190Park JK, Kogure T, Nuovo GJ, et al. miR-221 silencing blocks hepatocellular carcinoma and promotes survival. Cancer Res. 2011; 71(24): 7608-7616.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1144
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
191Yoo B, Kavishwar A, Ross A, et al. Combining miR-10b-targeted nanotherapy with low-dose doxorubicin elicits durable regressions of metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2015; 75(20): 4407-4415.
10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-0888
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
192Liang HX, Sun LB, Liu NJ. Neferine inhibits proliferation, migration and invasion of U251 glioma cells by down-regulation of miR-10b. Biomed Pharmacother. 2019; 109: 1032-1040.
10.1016/j.biopha.2018.10.122
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
193Alachkar H, Santhanam R, Harb JG, et al. Silvestrol exhibits significant in vivo and in vitro antileukemic activities and inhibits FLT3 and miR-155 expressions in acute myeloid leukemia. J Hematol Oncol. 2013; 6: 21.
10.1186/1756-8722-6-21
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
194Rupaimoole R, Ivan C, Yang D, et al. Hypoxia-upregulated microRNA-630 targets Dicer, leading to increased tumor progression. Oncogene. 2016; 35(33): 4312-4320.
10.1038/onc.2015.492
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
195Zhang Z, Qin Y, Brewer G, Jing Q. MicroRNA degradation and turnover: regulating the regulators. Wiley Interdiscip Rev RNA. 2012; 3(4): 593-600.
10.1002/wrna.1114
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
196Stepanov G, Zhuravlev E, Shender V, et al. Nucleotide modifications decrease innate immune response induced by synthetic analogs of snRNAs and snoRNAs. Genes (Basel). 2018; 9(531).
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
197Paliwal SR, Paliwal R, Vyas SP. A review of mechanistic insight and application of pH-sensitive liposomes in drug delivery. Drug Deliv. 2015; 22(3): 231-242.
10.3109/10717544.2014.882469
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
198Meng Z, Lu M. RNA interference-induced innate immunity, Off-target effect, or immune adjuvant? Front Immunol. 2017; 8: 331–337.
10.3389/fimmu.2017.00331
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
199Garzon R, Marcucci G, Croce CM. Targeting microRNAs in cancer: Rationale, strategies and challenges. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2010; 9(10): 775-789.
10.1038/nrd3179
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
200Behlke MA. Chemical modification of siRNAs for in vivo use. Oligonucleotides. 2008; 18(4): 305-319.
10.1089/oli.2008.0164
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
201Kitade Y, Akao Y. MicroRNAs and their therapeutic potential for human diseases: microRNAs, miR-143 and -145, function as anti-oncomirs and the application of chemically modified miR-143 as an anti-cancer drug. J Pharmacol Sci. 2010; 114(3): 276-280.
10.1254/jphs.10R12FM
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
202Zhao X, Pan F, Holt CM, Lewis AL, Lu JR. Controlled delivery of antisense oligonucleotides: a brief review of current strategies. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2009; 6(7): 673-686.
10.1517/17425240902992894
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
203Orian-Rousseau V. CD44, a therapeutic target for metastasising tumours. Eur J Cancer. 2010; 46(7): 1271-1277.
10.1016/j.ejca.2010.02.024
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
204Choi KY, Yoon HY, Kim JH, et al. Smart nanocarrier based on PEGylated hyaluronic acid for cancer therapy. ACS Nano. 2011; 5(11): 8591-8599.
10.1021/nn202070n
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
205Bao B, Ahmad A, Azmi AS, Ali S, Sarkar FH. Overview of cancer stem cells (CSCs) and mechanisms of their regulation: implications for cancer therapy. Curr Protoc Pharmacol. 2013; Chapter 14: p. Unit 14.25.
PubMed Google Scholar
206Shultz LD, Brehm MA, Garcia-Martinez JV, Greiner DL. Humanized mice for immune system investigation: Progress, promise and challenges. Nat Rev Immunol. 2012; 12(11): 786-798.
10.1038/nri3311
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
207Plaks V, Kong N, Werb Z. The cancer stem cell niche: How essential is the niche in regulating stemness of tumor cells? Cell Stem Cell. 2015; 16(3): 225-238.
10.1016/j.stem.2015.02.015
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
208Takeishi S, Nakayama KI. To wake up cancer stem cells, or to let them sleep, that is the question. Cancer Sci. 2016; 107(7): 875-881.
10.1111/cas.12958
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume54, Issue2

February 2021

e12963

Beyond regulations at DNA levels: A review of epigenetic therapeutics targeting cancer stem cells

Abstract

1 INTRODUCTION