Abstract
Background
In most regions, cancer ranks the second most frequent cause of death following cardiovascular disorders.
Aim
In this article, we review the various aspects of glycolysis with a focus on types of MCTs and the importance of lactate in cancer cells.
Results and Discussion
Metabolic changes are one of the first and most important alterations in cancer cells. Cancer cells use different pathways to survive, energy generation, growth, and proliferation compared to normal cells. The increase in glycolysis, which produces substances such as lactate and pyruvate, has an important role in metastases and invasion of cancer cells. Two important cellular proteins that play a role in the production and transport of lactate include lactate dehydrogenase and monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs). These molecules by their various isoforms and different tissue distribution help to escape the immune system and expansion of cancer cells under different conditions.
Keywords: cancer metabolism, lactate, monocarboxylate transporters
1. INTRODUCTION
There is a significant increase in the incidence and prevalence of noncommunicable diseases, despite many successful advances in controlling and preventing contagious diseases in recent decades. 1 , 2 , 3 Meanwhile, cancer is the second leading cause of mortality after cardiovascular diseases in some countries 4 , 5 and is one of the principal causes of death throughout the world, which is heterogeneous from the aspect of genetically. Despite different genetic variations, the common feature of all cancer types is their excessive growth. 6 , 7 One of the most remarkable changes of cancer cells is altering their metabolism, which has recently been considered as an important and effective factor in the progression of cancer. 8 , 9 Previous studies have shown that we can inhibit the tumor cells growth and survival throughout halting or reducing their cellular metabolism. 10 , 11 Changing lactate metabolism as an anaerobic glycolysis by‐product that mainly produced in the absence of oxygen in the body is one of the adaptive proceedings of tumor cells for survival and further progression. 8 Tumor early development and growth occur in the low vascular regions. There are two different cell types in the tumor lesions included aerobic region and hypoxic regions. Aerobic region included the cells that reside near blood vessels and their energy demands provided through oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS), while hypoxic regions are cells that reside far from blood vessels and their energy demands provided through the anaerobic metabolism of glucose. The metabolism of cancer cells has considered equivalent to aerobic glycolysis for a long time. After a while, this theory has been considered imperfect by biologists. The cancer cells metabolic signatures not only do not result in passive response to mitochondrial damage but also because of the reprogramming of the metabolism of cancer cells arose from oncogenes activity needed for anabolic growth. 12 Progresses in cancer metabolism studies over the last year have improved our knowledge of how aerobic glycolysis and other metabolic changes detected in cancer cells provide the anabolic needs related two cell proliferation and development. Understanding the mechanisms employed by cancer cell to metabolism and survival can lead to the development of new strategies in fighting cancers and increase our understanding on the behavior of cancer cells. In this article, we review the various aspects of glycolysis with a focus on types of monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) and the importance of lactate in cancer cells.
2. METHODOLOGY
In this study, data on various aspects of glycolysis with a focus on types of MCTs and lactate in cancer cells were found using PubMed, Scopus, and the Google Scholar database. The Internet searches were done to find published manuscripts with the keywords Cancer metabolism, Monocarboxylate transporters, lactate. All English language articles were found and read independently by two individuals. Literature search strategy for data in tables including inclusion/exclusion criteria and results was provided in Supporting Information: Figure S1.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1. Advantages of aerobic glycolysis pathway for tumor growth
Even in the presence of ample oxygen, cancer cells demonstrate a distinctive form of cellular metabolism characterized by high levels of glucose uptake and increased conversion of glucose to lactose via the glycolytic pathway (fermentation). This phenomenon called the Warburg effect and known anaerobic glycolysis, has been recognized for many years. Warburg metabolism is not cancer‐specific, but instead is a general property of growing cells that is exploited by cancer cells. Aerobic glycolysis provides rapidly dividing tumor cells with metabolic intermediates that are needed for the synthesis of cellular components, whereas mitochondrial OXPHOS does not.
The aerobic glycolysis pathway provides several advantages for tumor cells growth as below. Using aerobic glycolysis, the cancerous cell can survive in variable levels of oxygen pressure (due to unstable hemodynamics of blood vessels) and produce ATP (this condition is associated with risk of death for OXPHOS‐dependent cells). 13
Tumor cells produce bicarbonate and lactate. These acids make the microenvironment suitable for invasive tumor cells and suppress the immune system. 14 , 15 , 16 Lactate produced by tumor cells can be uptake by stromal cells (by Monocarboxylate transporter 1 [MCT1] and MCT2) and used to pyruvate produce. 15
The most important advantage is using the glycolysis‐pathway mediators for anabolic reactions (e.g., use of glucose 6‐phosphate for the synthesis of glycogen and ribose 5‐ phosphate and nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate [NADPH], dihydroxyacetone phosphate for the synthesis of triglycerides and phospholipid, pyruvate for the synthesis of alanine and malate). 17 The exploitation of the pentose phosphate pathway (PPP) as one of the glycolysis branching commonly increases in tumorgenesis. Moreover, some of the major enzymes of this pathway, such as transketolase 1 and transaldolase, have shown increased expression in many cancers. 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 Also, one of the reasons for reducing the use of the Krebs cycle is some of the products of this cycle, such as nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide hydrogen (NADH) and adenosine triphosphate (ATP), which are the main inhibitors of glucose metabolism. 22
3.2. Metabolic changes in cancer cells
3.2.1. Absorption of glucose and amino acids (increased demand for nitrogen)
Glucose and glutamine (unnecessary amino acid with two reduced nitrogen atoms) are the most important and essential precursors for the biosynthesis of cellular materials). Due to increased carbon consumption in biosynthetic pathways and growth signals, the cell's need for nitrogen increases. Transcription factors such as C‐MYC and E2F increase glutamine uptake. 22 Lack of glutamine leads to cell cycle arrest in the S‐phase in some cells. 23 , 24 Embryonic stem cells, luminal cells of breast cancer, 25 , 26 and human glioblastoma tumors continue their growth and proliferation, even in the absence of glutamine in their microenvironment, which represents the glutamine production by these cells de novo. 27 It also has been seen an increase in the expression of glutamine synthase (GS) enzyme in some cancers. 28
3.2.2. Opportunity to absorb nutrients
The Ras or c‐Src mutation enables cells to uptake released amino acids by the lysosomal degradation of extracellular proteins. 29 Macropinocytosis is also stimulated by Ras‐ and c‐Src‐driven actin cytoskeleton remodeling. 22 Moreover, soluble extracellular proteins and free amino acids can be absorbed into cancer cells by entosis or phagocytosis. 30 , 31
Cancer cells, in addition to the absorption of fatty acids from plasma, can induce the release of stored lipids in adjacent normal cells. 22 Furthermore, increased expression of monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL) and lipoprotein lipase in some of the cancer cells has been related with the invasion of them. 32 , 33 At the surface of the metastatic ovarian cancer cells, the expression changes of fatty acid binding protein 4 (FABP4) enable these cells to absorb fatty acids from the omental fat adipocytes. 34 However, fatty acid de novo biosynthesis in normal cells is very low (except lipogenic tissues such as the liver, adipose tissue, and mammary epithelium during lactation). 35 , 36
3.2.3. Metabolic interactions with the environment
The increase in reactive oxygen species (ROS) production (due to OXPHOS pathway and excessive ATP production, cellular degradation, cellular overgrowth, and oncogene‐induced senescence [OIS]), 22 inhibit protein phosphatases such as phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN), protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B) and activators of family kinases of Src and mitogen‐activated protein kinase (MAPK). 37 , 38 , 39 Other effects of enhancement of ROS are facilitating the activation of hypoxia‐inducible factor 1‐alpha (HIF1‐α) and nuclear factor erythroid 2‐related factor 2 (NRF2). 40 , 41 In hypoxia conditions, induced overexpression of mitochondrial SHMT2 (serine hydroxyl methyl transferase 2) protects cells against the toxic effects of oxidative stress. 42
The increase in lactate production in cancer cells has several effects on the other host tissue and cells. Many studies highlighted the effects of lactate in suppressing on the immune cells such as activation of dendritic cell and T cell, migration of monocytes, and stimulation of M2 macrophage. M2 macrophages play an important role in the inhibition of the immune system and wound healing. 14 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 Several other effects have been described for lactate on the host body cells such as induction of angiogenesis, 47 induction of HIF1a stability, 48 activating of nuclear factor kappa‐light‐chain‐enhancer of activated B cells and PI‐3k signaling pathways, 49 triggering the secretion of angiogenesis factors such as vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGFs) 47 , 50 , 51 , 52 stimulate and stimulating the production of acid hyaluronic by fibroblasts (may play a role in cellular invasiveness). 53 Some important factors involved in tumor cell metabolism and their effects listed in Table 1 and Figure 1.
Table 1.
Some factors involved in the metabolism of tumor cells and their effects
| Factor | Effect | References | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SREBP |
|
[143, 144, 145, 146] | ||
| FBI‐1 (Pokemon/ZBTB7A) |
|
[143] | ||
| MYC (Figure 1) |
|
[147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154] | ||
| mTORC1 |
|
[155, 156, 157] | ||
| HIF1 (Figure 1) |
|
[7, 158] | ||
| PI3K |
|
[159] | ||
| Akt (Figure 1) |
|
[160] | ||
| ErbB2 (Her2) |
|
[161] | ||
| PD‐L1 |
|
[162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172] | ||
| CAV1/caveolin 1 |
|
[173, 174] | ||
| CD147 (Figure 1) |
|
[175, 176] | ||
| Ecdysoneless |
|
[177] | ||
| FAK |
|
[178] | ||
| GRP78 |
|
[179] | ||
| KSHV |
|
[180] | ||
| LMP1 |
|
[181] | ||
| P2X7R |
|
[182] | ||
| Skp2 |
|
[183] | ||
| BIRC5/Survivin |
|
[184] | ||
| Wnt/β‐catenin |
|
[152] | ||
| p53 (Figure 1) |
|
[185, 186, 187, 188] | ||
| Fumarate hydratase (fumarase) |
|
[189] | ||
| abhd5 (other name: CGI‐58) |
|
[190] | ||
| GRIM‐19 |
|
[191] | ||
| HSP40 |
|
[192] | ||
| KLF4 |
|
[193] | ||
| TRAP1 |
|
[194] | ||
| FBI‐1 (also known as Pokemon, ZBTB7A) |
|
[143, 195] | ||
Abbreviations: abhd5, α/β‐hydrolase domain‐containing 5; Ang‐1, angiopoietin 1; Ang‐2, angiopoietin 2; EMT, epithelial‐mesenchymal transition; FAK, focal adhesion kinase; FAS, fatty acid synthetase; FBI‐1, factor that binds to the inducer of short transcripts of human immunodeficiency virus‐1; FGFR1, fibroblast growth factor receptor 1; G3PDH. glyceraldehyde 3‐phosphate dehydrogenase; GRIM‐19, gene associated with retinoid‐interferon‐induced mortality‐19; GRP78, glucose‐regulated protein 78; HIF, hypoxia‐inducible factor; HSP40, heat shock protein 40; IGF2, insulin‐like growth factor 2; ITGB4, integrin β 4; KLF4, Krüppel‐like factor 4; KSHV, Kaposi's‐sarcoma‐associated herpesvirus; LDHA, lactate dehydrogenase A; LMP1, latent membrane protein 1; MAPK, mitogen‐activated protein kinase; MCT1, monocarboxylate transporter 1; P2X7R, P2X7 receptor; PDHA, pyruvate dehydrogenase A; PDHB, pyruvate dehydrogenase B; PDHK1, pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase 1; PI3K, Phosphoinositide 3‐kinase; PKB, protein kinase B; PFK, phosphofructokinase; PKM2, pyruvate kinase M2; ROS, reactive oxygen species; SIRT, selective internal radiation therapy; Sp1, specificity protein 1; SRE, sterol‐responsive element; SREBP, SRE‐binding protein 1; TRAP1, TNF receptor‐associated protein; VEGF, vascular endothelial growth factor.
Figure 1.

The metabolic changes in the malignant cells. After conversion of glucose to pyruvate and entrance into the oxidative phosphorylation pathway, pyruvate converts to acetyl CoA. Acetyl CoA by entering the mitochondria (Krebs cycle) generates energy. In most of the malignant cells, after pyruvate generation, these cells use the aerobic glycolysis pathway (Warburg effect (pyruvate by lactate dehydrogenase, LDH, enzymes convert into lactate and proton)). Produced lactate has been sent out of the cell by monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) and has been shown that play important role in increases the angiogenesis, migration, and metastasis of cells, escape from the immune system, extracellular acidosis, reduction of the monocytes migration, secretion of cytokines and activation of T lymphocytes. Moreover, with the help of these monocarboxylates transporter, lactate can reenter to the cell and again converts to pyruvate by the LDH and generates energy. With the increase in glycolysis, proton production also increases, and these excess protons through proton pumps such as MCT, H/Na exchanger, ATP synthase, pepT, V‐ATPase are transmitted into extracellular space and causes acidosis in the microenvironment of the cancer cells. Activation of oncogenes, such as MYC, HIF, RAS, and Akt, and interaction of them with different molecules in the cell, is also the major cause of the biogenic changes in tumor cells.
3.3. Glycolysis pathway and cancer cells
The result of the anaerobic metabolism of glucose in cancer cells that reside far from vessels is lactate production, which releases from these cells and entered into the intercellular spaces. This metabolite is entered to near vasculature cancer cells from intercellular space and provides their energy supply. 9
The glycolysis pathway in cancer cells allows them to consume most of the cell glucose storage and convert it to lactate. Lactate stimulates and enhances cancer cell growth and proliferation. Therefore, it is imperative to recognize and survey the genes involved in this pathway, especially the genes that their product plays an important role in lactate metabolism. 54 For example, some cancer cells such as cells in glioblastoma use aerobic glycolysis pathway for energy production even in the presence of oxygen (Warburg effect) (Figure 1). 55
As noted earlier, a large quantity of lactate and proton is produced due to the increasing glycolysis. This extra proton led to an acidic space inside the cell, which can induce normal cell apoptosis under normal conditions. 56 However, this extra proton is sent out or used by cancer cells through different mechanisms 57 such as using the family of MCTs, 58 H/Na exchanger (NHE), 59 V‐ATPase pump, 60 , 61 carbonate anhydrase enzyme, 16 and the conversion of glutamate to gamma aminobutyrate. 62 Since this acidity increases the cancer cells invasion potentials as well as drug resistance; therefore, these molecules are overexpressed in cancerous cells than normal cells. 55 Moreover, not only lactate acts as a signal to stimulate angiogenesis but also is an immunosuppressive agent. 63
There are two main checkpoints for regulating the production and transport of lactate in the cell included lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and the family of MCTs. LDH has an important role in the conversion of pyruvate to lactate, and MCTs are involved in the transport of lactate into and out of the cells. 8 These monocarboxcylates, like lactate, can be transferred to other cancer cells, or use for OXPHOS.
3.3.1. LDH
LDH is produced in normal cells such as the brain, heart, liver, kidney, skeletal muscle, red blood cells, and lungs. 64 , 65 However, LDH is overexpressed in some conditions such as hypothyroidism, anemia, meningitis, myocardial infarction, acute pancreatitis, acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), liver/pulmonary disease, as well as in most of cancerous cells. Therefore, it can be used as a cancer cell marker or as a therapeutic option for cancer. 66
This enzyme is found in different organisms. LDH converts pyruvate to lactate when oxygen is absent or trace and it performs the reverse reaction in the Cori cycle in the liver. 64 Therefore, LDH is an enzyme with two forward and reverse functions. Structurally, this enzyme is a tetrameric enzyme composed of two major subunits (A, B), which are encoded by two the Lactate dehydrogenase A (LDHA) (11p15) and LDHB (12p12) genes. These two subunits produce five isoenzymes. 65 , 67 Peroxisome proliferator‐activated receptor‐γ coactivator 1α (PGC‐1α) by reducing the mRNA transcriptions of the LDHA and MYC genes and increasing the mRNA transcriptions of the LDHB and MCT1 genes regulate the conversion of pyruvate to lactate gene 68 (Figure 1).
3.3.2. MCTs
Monocarboxylate is referred to the compounds such as lactate, pyruvate, ketone bodies, and thyroid hormones that play an important role in the energy metabolism of different tissues (i.e., skeletal muscle, heart, brain, and blood cells). 69 , 70 Among monocarboxylates, lactate is considered as one of the most important glycolysis products. MCTs facilitate the transport of lactate and other monocarboxylates, thus have an important role in cellular metabolism. 71
This family of monocarboxylic transporters (MCTs) is considered as one component of the SLC16 family. These soluble carriers structurally consist of 12 transmembranes domain with a cytoplasmic C‐terminal and N‐terminus and one intracellular loop between domain 6 and 7. 72 , 73 MCTs in their transmembrane domains have the most conservative sequence, especially in the transmembrane one and five domains. However, in N and C terminal regions more diversity was seen. 74 This family constitutes of 14 members that are identified by similar conserved amino acid sequence and often they are different in the type of substrate and their tissue distribution (Table 2). The first four members of this family (MCT1‐4) are proton‐linked transporter that facilitate transporting of short‐chain monocarboxylates such as lactate, pyruvate, butyrate, and ketone bodies, and another this family members are involved in the transport of sodium‐coupled monocarboxylic (SMCT) such as thyroid hormones. 71 More precisely, MCT1, 2, 4 is involved in the transport of lactate, pyruvate, butyrate, acetate, and beta‐hydroxybutyrate. MCT3 plays a role in the transport of lactate. 73 , 75 MCT5‐14 transfer certain substances, 76 for example, MCT9 in the transfer of carnitine and hemostasis of urate, 76 , 77 MCT8‐10 in the transfer of thyroid hormones, 73 and MCT 10 in the transfer of aromatic amino acids, 78 , 79 MCT 12 in the transfer of creatine, 80 and guanidine acetate homeostasis, 76 and MCT6 in the transfer of xenobiotic compounds such as bumetanide, nateglinide, and probenecid have an important role. 76
Table 2.
MCT types and their features
| Protein | Gene name and locus | Subcategories | Properties | Tissue distribution | References | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MCT‐1 | SLC16A1 1p13.2 |
MOT1 MEV MCT1D HHF7 |
Specific substrates
Inhibitors CHC analogues, sodium sulfonate, (DIDS), (DBDS), (pCMBS), AR‐C155858, amphiphilic compounds include bioflavonoids (e.g., quercetin and fluortine), anion transport inhibitors such as 5‐nitro‐2 benzoate and niflumic acid, AZD3965 Expression enhancing agents
|
Most tissues except pancreatic β cells | [72, 75, 119, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203] | ||
| MCT‐2 | SLC16A7 12q14 | MOT2 |
|
Liver, kidney, spleen, heart, brain, testis, pancreas | [72, 75, 119, 197, 199, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208] | ||
| MCT‐3 | SLC16A8 22q13 | REMP |
|
Eye | [74, 197] | ||
| MCT‐4 | SLC16A3 17q25.3 | MCT3 |
|
Heart, brain, skeletal muscle, lung, placenta, kidney, leukocyte, chondrocytes, testis | [72, 73, 75, 119, 197, 203, 209] | ||
| MCT‐5 | SLC16A4 1p13.3 | MCT4 |
|
Placenta, heart, egg, liver, muscle, brain, kidney | [74, 75, 119, 197] | ||
| MCT‐6 | SLC16A5 17q25.1 | MCT5 |
|
Lung, intestine, prostate, muscle, kidney, spleen, heart, brain, pancreas | [73, 74, 75, 119] | ||
| MCT‐7 | SLC16A6 17q24.2 | MCT6 |
|
Brain, muscle, pancreas | [74, 75, 119] | ||
| MCT‐8 | SLC16A2 Xq13.2 | MCT7, MRX22DXS128, AHDXPCT |
|
Most tissues | [73, 75, 119, 197, 210, 211, 212] | ||
| MCT‐9 | SLC16A9 10q21.2 | YKW1, OXlT‐2C10orf36 | Orphan transporter | Testis, ovule, brain, kidney, adrenal, eye, breast | [75, 119] | ||
| MCT‐10 (TAT1) | SLC16A10 6q21‐q22 | TAT1PRO0813 |
|
Skeletal muscle, heart, kidney, placenta, liver, intestine | [73, 75, 78, 119] | ||
| MCT‐11 | SLC16A11 17p13 | ‐ |
|
Eye, kidney, lung, skin, breast, ovary | [75, 119] | ||
| MCT‐12 | SLC16A12 10q23.3 | CJMGCRT2CTRCT47 |
|
Kidney, testis, eye | [75, 119] | ||
| MCT‐13 | SLC16A13 17p13.1 | ‐ |
|
Breast, ovary, brain, heart | [75, 119] | ||
| MCT‐14 | SLC16A14 2q36.3 | ‐ |
|
Eye, pancreas, lung, breast, brain | [75, 119] | ||
Abbreviations: AICAR, Aminoylamidazole carboxymide‐ribonuclease; AMPK, active protein kinase AMP; CHC, a‐cyano‐4‐hydroxycinnamate; DBDS , 4,4′‐dibenzamidostilbene‐2,2′‐disulphonate; DIDS, 4′‐diisothiocyanostilbene‐2,2′‐disulphonate; pCMBS, p‐chloromercuribenzene sulfonate.
The MCTs have numerous physiological functions. They are often expressed in different tissues and involved in regulating of activities such as gluconeogenesis, lymphocyte activation, spermatogenesis, thyroid hormones metabolism, beta‐pancreatic cells activity, and drug delivery. 63 In the tumor tissue, the process of transporting and exchanging of lactate among different tumor cells is also carried out MCTs. 8 The export of lactate from cancer cells is an important factor in maintaining the acidic phenotype and survival of these cells, with considering this assumption, studies showed repression of the MCT‐4 gene reduces tumor growth. 81 , 82 Several factors affect the regulation of MCTs expression, for example, it has been shown that hypoxia increases the expression of MCTs. 83
In patients with (rs1049434) polymorphism, a reduction of 35%–40% in lactate transmission in erythrocytes has been observed. 84 Two polymorphisms (rs10506398 and rs10506399) in MCT2 have been associated with reduced sperm count and infertility in men. 76 , 85 Polymorphism (rs2242206) in MCT‐9 causes lysine to be transformed into threonine at position 258, which is associated with renal overload gout. 86 A nonsense mutation in the MCT‐12 gene, which causes Q215X amino acid mutation, has been observed in patients with cataract and increased levels of urinary glucose. 87 In Figure 1, MCT molecules and the effect of them on the process and intracellular molecules in one malignant cell are shown.
The proper expression of MCTs often requires an ancillary protein that for MCT1, 3, and 4 is CD147 (other names are EMMPRIN, OX‐47, HT7, and Basigin) which is MCT chaperone. Ancillary protein for MCT‐2 is Embigin or gp70. These ancillary proteins are a multipurpose glycoprotein of the immunoglobulins family. 8 , 88 Upregulation of CD147 has been reported in metastatic breast cancer cells and in partnership with MCT‐4, plays an important role in the invasion of the cancer cells. 89 CD147 is a highly glycosylated membrane protein belonging to the immunoglobulin family, which in human located at 19p13.3. 90 The human gene has 10 exons 91 and encoded 269 amino acids that consist of four types: CD147‐1, CD147‐2, CD147‐3, and CD147‐4. Among these isoforms, CD147‐2 has the most expression and distribution. 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 This molecule plays a role in regulating of lymphocyte response, cancer metastasis, inducing of MCT, inflammatory reaction, and spermatogenesis. 96 Interactive proteins with CD147 and their functions have been shown in Table 3.
Table 3.
Interactive proteins with CD147 and their functions
| Protein | Functions | References |
|---|---|---|
| Integrins | Adherence, proliferation, migration signal transmission | [97] |
| CD98 | Cell aggregation, skeletal structure | [98, 99] |
| MCT1, 3, 4 | Glycosylation and removal of lactate | [100] |
| Cavolin‐1 | Inhibition of CD147 dimerization and activity, CD147 glycosylation increasing | [101, 102] |
| S100A | Cell migration | [99] |
| E‐selectin | Neutrophilic Infiltration and adherence | [103] |
| CyPB | Cell migration | [104] |
| yPA | Cell migration, adherence, chemotaxis, Induction of metalloproteinase matrix, Increasing the regulation of metalloproteinase matrix 9, NF‐κB pathway activation | [105, 106, 107] |
| CD147 | Adherence, induction of metalloproteinase matrix, NF‐κB pathway activation | [99, 108] |
Abbreviations: CyPA, cyclosporine B; CyPA, cyclosporine A; NF‐κB, nuclear factor kappa‐light‐chain‐enhancer of activated B cells.
Hyaluronan is another protein that interacts with MCTs. 109 Hyaluronan is an extracellular polysaccharide that is present in most tissues and has an instructive, cell signaling function in addition to its structural role. 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 The concentration of hyaluronan is more in malignant cells than in normal tissues. 109 , 114 , 115 Hyaluronan binds to various cell surface receptors such as CD44, Rhamm, TLR1/4, Hare and LYVE‐1. 110 , 111 , 112 , 113 Among these receptors, CD44 is the most known. The binding of this receptor to hyaluronan regulates signaling pathways such as apoptosis and drug resistance to anticancer agents. 109 Emmprin as an essential ancillary protein for MCTs by stimulating the production of hyaluronan plays an important role in the invasion and division of cancer cells. 112 , 116 , 117 Studies have shown that lactate produced in the glycolysis pathway stimulates the production of hyaluronan and the expression of CD44 in fibroblasts and melanoma cells. 53 , 118 The interaction of Emmprin‐CD44 is one of the main causes of malignancy and drug resistance in cancer cells. 109 Several studies have been conducted on the MCTs that the history of major studies and their results from 1999 to 2018 is shown in Table 4.
Table 4.
The expression of different MCTs in cancer cells
| Year | Gene | Result | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | MCT1‐4 |
|
[119] |
| 2005 | MCT3 |
|
[120] |
| 2010 | MCT3 |
|
[121] |
| 2012 | MCT1, 2, and 4 |
|
[122] |
| 2013 | MCT8 |
|
[123] |
| 2014 | MCT1‐4 |
|
[124] |
| 2007 and 2014 | MCT9 |
|
[125, 126] |
| 2014 | MCT4 |
|
[127] |
| 2016 | MCT1 |
|
[55] |
| 2017 | MCT1 and 4 |
|
[128] |
| 2017 | MCT8 |
|
[129] |
| 2018 | LDH and MCT1 | In ovarian cancer cells, knockdown of SATB1significantly
|
[130] |
| 2018 | LDH‐A and MCT1 | miR‐124:
|
[131] |
Abbreviation: HIF, hypoxia‐inducible factor.
3.4. Diagnostic and therapeutic applications of metabolic changes in the cancer cells
Cancer is a disease that is known to alter cellular metabolism; therefore, metabolomics can play a major role in the early detection and diagnosis of cancer and in the evaluation of medical interventions and therapies to cancer. 132 It has been established that aerobic glycolysis increases in cancer and this is known as the “Warburg effect.” 133 The ultimate goal of most metabolomics cancer studies is to discover cancer‐specific diagnostic, prognostic, or predictive biomarkers for a patient. Metabolomics research is being used to discover diagnostic cancer biomarkers in the clinic, to better understand its complex heterogeneous nature, to discover pathways involved in cancer that could be used for new targets and to monitor metabolic biomarkers during therapeutic intervention. 134 These metabolomics approaches may also provide clues to personalized cancer treatments by providing useful information to the clinician about the cancer patient's response to medical interventions. Therapeutics in oncology is touching toward the use of medications that specifically target abnormal pathways involved in growth, proliferation, and metastases. Biomarkers are being increasingly applied in the early clinical development of such agents to identify, validate, and optimize therapeutic targets and agents; determine and confirm the mechanism of medications action, as a pharmacodynamic endpoint; and in predicting or monitoring responsiveness to treatment, toxicity, and resistance. 135 Current examples of using metabolomics in developmental therapeutics are with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, proapoptotic agents, and heat shock protein inhibitors. 136 , 137 , 138 Numerous metabolic inhibitors have been reported for cancer treatment both in preclinical studies and in clinical trials, included amino acid metabolisms inhibitor, lipid metabolisms inhibitor, glutamines inhibitor, coenzyme/nucleotide inhibitor, mitochondrial inhibitors, and transporter inhibitors. The development of metabolic inhibitors has been well addressed in a recently published review paper. 139
AZD3965 (Figure 2) is a first‐in‐class, strong (K1 = 1.6 nM), orally bioavailable, MCT‐1 selective inhibitor. As cancer cells exhibit an elevated dependence on glycolysis lead to lactic acid formation, they up‐regulate MCTs as a protective system to transport lactate and inhibit its intracellular accumulation. 140 Significant antiproliferative effects of AZD3965 have been reported in some lymphoma cell lines as well as small‐cell lung tumor systems. 141 A pharmacodynamics indicator investigation has been shown that AZD3965 therapy lead to reduced lipid metabolisms including reduced choline concentration. Decreased choline levels has been attributed to reduced choline kinase A because of elevated intracellular levels of lactate in cancer cells. 141 AZD3965‐treated cancers show an increased frequency of dendritic cells and natural killer cells. 142 Currently, AZD3965 is being evaluated in a phase I dose‐ranging study. 139
Figure 2.

Structures of AZD3965; selective inhibitor of MCT‐1, currently under clinical investigation
4. CONCLUSION
Changed energy metabolism is emerged as one of the very important cancer biochemical fingerprint which could be introduced as a cancer hallmark. These metabolic events are characterized by preferential dependence on glycolysis for the production of energy in an oxygen‐independent condition. Glycolysis is one of the major underlying energy‐related processes, which play critical roles in the initiation, and progression of all malignancies. Pyruvate and lactate are the main products of glycolysis. Given that, some cellular proteins (i.e., LDH and MCTs) involved in the production and transport of lactate. Considering the vital role of LDH and MCTs in the metabolism of cancer cells, these molecules can be investigated as a target for treatment or as markers in cancer diagnosis in future studies. Mounting evidence confirmed that these molecules could contribute to escape cancer cells from the immune system and promote the expansion of tumor cells under distinct conditions.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Hamed Hatami: Investigation; methodology; software; validation; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Atefe Sajedi: Data curation; investigation; writing – original draft. Seyed Mostafa Mir: Conceptualization; investigation; methodology; software; supervision; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Mohammad Yousef Memar: Conceptualization; methodology; software; supervision; validation; writing – review and editing.
TRANSPARENCY STATEMENT
The lead author Seyed Mostafa Mir, Mohammad Yousef Memar affirms that this manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; that no important aspects of the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.
Supporting information
Supplementary information.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author is grateful to Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran, for providing all kinds of facilities to prepare this manuscript.
Hatami H, Sajedi A, Mir SM, Memar MY. Importance of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) in cancer cells. Health Sci Rep. 2022;6:e996. 10.1002/hsr2.996
Contributor Information
Seyed Mostafa Mir, Email: mostafamir1987@gmail.com.
Mohammad Yousef Memar, Email: y.memar@yahoo.com.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Seyed Mostafa Mir and Mohammad Yousef Memar had full access to all the data in this study and takes complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
REFERENCES
- 1. Alizadeh N, Seyyed Mousavi MN, Hajibonabi F, et al. Microbes involving in carcinogenesis; growing state of the art. Microb Pathog. 2018;125:1‐6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Khodadadi E, Mir SM, Memar MY, et al. Shelterin complex at telomeres: roles in cancers. Gene Reports. 2021;23:101174. [Google Scholar]
- 3. Mohammadi E, Aliarab A, Babaei G, et al. MicroRNAs in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: application in prognosis, diagnosis, and drug delivery. Pathol Res Pract. 2022;240:154196. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Alsayyad J, Hamadehb R. Cancer incidence among the Bahraini population: a five‐year (1998–2002) experience. Hematol Oncol Stem Cell Res. 2008;1:175‐182. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. del Pilar Díaz M, Osella AR, Aballay LR, et al. Cancer incidence pattern in Cordoba, Argentina. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2009;18:259‐266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer. 2010;127:2893‐2917. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Jahani M, Modaressi MH, Mansouri K. Hypoxia inducible factor; it's role in angiogenesis and tumor. TUMJ. 2016;73:757‐766. [Google Scholar]
- 8. Draoui N, Feron O. Lactate shuttles at a glance: from physiological paradigms to anti‐cancer treatments. Dis Model Mech. 2011;4:727‐732. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Sonveaux P, Végran F, Schroeder T, et al. Targeting lactate‐fueled respiration selectively kills hypoxic tumor cells in mice. J Clin Invest. 2008;118:3930‐3942. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Denko NC. Hypoxia, HIF1 and glucose metabolism in the solid tumour. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008;8:705‐713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Zhao Y, Butler EB, Tan M. Targeting cellular metabolism to improve cancer therapeutics. Cell Death Dis. 2013;4:532. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Ward PS, Thompson CB. Metabolic reprogramming: a cancer hallmark even warburg did not anticipate. Cancer Cell. 2012;21:297‐308. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Pouysségur J, Dayan F, Mazure NM. Hypoxia signalling in cancer and approaches to enforce tumour regression. Nature. 2006;441:437‐443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Fischer K, Hoffmann P, Voelkl S, et al. Inhibitory effect of tumor cell–derived lactic acid on human T cells. Blood. 2007;109:3812‐3819. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Koukourakis MI, Giatromanolaki A, Harris AL, Sivridis E. Comparison of metabolic pathways between cancer cells and stromal cells in colorectal carcinomas: a metabolic survival role for tumor‐associated stroma. Cancer Res. 2006;66:632‐637. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Swietach P, Vaughan‐Jones RD, Harris AL. Regulation of tumor pH and the role of carbonic anhydrase 9. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2007;26:299‐310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Gatenby RA, Gillies RJ. Why do cancers have high aerobic glycolysis? Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:891‐899. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Földi M, Stickeler E, Bau L, et al. Transketolase protein TKTL1 overexpression: a potential biomarker and therapeutic target in breast cancer. Oncol Rep. 2007;17:841‐845. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Langbein S, Zerilli M, Zur Hausen A, et al. Expression of transketolase TKTL1 predicts colon and urothelial cancer patient survival: warburg effect reinterpreted. Br J Cancer. 2006;94:578‐585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Wang C, Guo K, Gao D, et al. Identification of transaldolase as a novel serum biomarker for hepatocellular carcinoma metastasis using xenografted mouse model and clinic samples. Cancer Lett. 2011;313:154‐166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Xu X, Zur Hausen A, Coy JF, Löchelt M. Transketolase‐like protein 1 (TKTL1) is required for rapid cell growth and full viability of human tumor cells. Int J Cancer. 2009;124:1330‐1337. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Pavlova NN, Thompson CB. The emerging hallmarks of cancer metabolism. Cell Metab. 2016;23:27‐47. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Fontenelle LJ, Henderson JF. Sources of nitrogen as rate‐limiting factors for purine biosynthesis de novo in Ehrlich ascites tumor cells. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1969;177:88‐93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Gaglio D, Soldati C, Vanoni M, Alberghina L, Chiaradonna F. Glutamine deprivation induces abortive s‐phase rescued by deoxyribonucleotides in k‐ras transformed fibroblasts. PLoS One. 2009;4:4715. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Carey BW, Finley LW, Cross JR, Allis CD, Thompson CB. Intracellular α‐ketoglutarate maintains the pluripotency of embryonic stem cells. Nature. 2015;518:413‐416. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Kung H‐N, Marks JR, Chi J‐T. Glutamine synthetase is a genetic determinant of cell type–specific glutamine independence in breast epithelia. PLoS Genet. 2011;7:e1002229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Marin‐Valencia I, Yang C, Mashimo T, et al. Analysis of tumor metabolism reveals mitochondrial glucose oxidation in genetically diverse human glioblastomas in the mouse brain in vivo. Cell Metab. 2012;15:827‐837. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Osada T, Nagashima I, Tsuno NH, Kitayama J, Nagawa H. Prognostic significance of glutamine synthetase expression in unifocal advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol. 2000;33:247‐253. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Commisso C, Davidson SM, Soydaner‐Azeloglu RG, et al. Macropinocytosis of protein is an amino acid supply route in Ras‐transformed cells. Nature. 2013;497:633‐637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Krajcovic M, Krishna S, Akkari L, Joyce JA, Overholtzer M. mTOR regulates phagosome and entotic vacuole fission. Mol Biol Cell. 2013;24:3736‐3745. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Stolzing A, Grune T. Neuronal apoptotic bodies: phagocytosis and degradation by primary microglial cells. FASEB J. 2004;18:743‐745. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Kuemmerle NB, Rysman E, Lombardo PS, et al. Lipoprotein lipase links dietary fat to solid tumor cell proliferation. Mol Cancer Ther. 2011;10(3):427‐436. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Nomura DK, Long JZ, Niessen S, Hoover HS, Ng S‐W, Cravatt BF. Monoacylglycerol lipase regulates a fatty acid network that promotes cancer pathogenesis. Cell. 2010;140:49‐61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Nieman KM, Kenny HA, Penicka CV, et al. Adipocytes promote ovarian cancer metastasis and provide energy for rapid tumor growth. Nature Med. 2011;17:1498‐1503. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Li J, Cheng J‐X. Direct visualization of de novo lipogenesis in single living cells. Sci Rep. 2014;4:6807. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Menendez JA, Lupu R. Fatty acid synthase and the lipogenic phenotype in cancer pathogenesis. Nat Rev Cancer. 2007;7:763‐777. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Denu JM, Tanner KG. Specific and reversible inactivation of protein tyrosine phosphatases by hydrogen peroxide: evidence for a sulfenic acid intermediate and implications for redox regulation. Biochemistry. 1998;37:5633‐5642. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Kamata H, Honda S, Maeda S, Chang L, Hirata H, Karin M. Reactive oxygen species promote TNFα‐induced death and sustained JNK activation by inhibiting MAP kinase phosphatases. Cell. 2005;120:649‐661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Lee S‐R, Yang K‐S, Kwon J, Lee C, Jeong W, Rhee SG. Reversible inactivation of the tumor suppressor PTEN by H2O2 . J Biol Chem. 2002;277:20336‐20342. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Bertout JA, Patel SA, Simon MC. The impact of O2 availability on human cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008;8:967‐975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41. Sporn MB, Liby KT. NRF2 and cancer: the good, the bad and the importance of context. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012;12:564‐571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Ye J, Fan J, Venneti S, et al. Serine catabolism regulates mitochondrial redox control during hypoxia. Cancer Discov. 2014;4(12):1406‐1417. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43. Carmona‐Fontaine C, Bucci V, Akkari L, Deforet M, Joyce JA, Xavier JB. Emergence of spatial structure in the tumor microenvironment due to the Warburg effect. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:19402‐19407. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44. Colegio OR, Chu N‐Q, Szabo AL, et al. Functional polarization of tumour‐associated macrophages by tumour‐derived lactic acid. Nature. 2014;513:559‐563. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Goetze K, Walenta S, Ksiazkiewicz M, Kunz‐Schughart LA, Mueller‐Klieser W. Lactate enhances motility of tumor cells and inhibits monocyte migration and cytokine release. Int J Oncol. 2011;39:453‐463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Gottfried E, Kunz‐Schughart LA, Ebner S, et al. Tumor‐derived lactic acid modulates dendritic cell activation and antigen expression. Blood. 2006;107:2013‐2021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47. Sonveaux P, Copetti T, De Saedeleer CJ, et al. Targeting the lactate transporter MCT1 in endothelial cells inhibits lactate‐induced HIF‐1 activation and tumor angiogenesis. PLoS One. 2012;7:e33418. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48. Jantsch J, Wiese M, Schödel J, et al. Toll‐like receptor activation and hypoxia use distinct signaling pathways to stabilize hypoxia‐inducible factor 1α (HIF1A) and result in differential HIF1A‐dependent gene expression. J Leukoc Biol. 2011;90:551‐562. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49. Manosalva C, Quiroga J, Teuber S, et al. D‐Lactate increases cytokine production in bovine fibroblast‐like synoviocytes via MCT1 uptake and the MAPK, PI3K/Akt, and NFκB pathways. Animals. 2020;10:2105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50. Constant JS, Feng JJ, Zabel DD, et al. Lactate elicits vascular endothelial growth factor from macrophages: a possible alternative to hypoxia. Wound Repair Regen. 2000;8:353‐360. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51. Schmid SA, Gaumann A, Wondrak M, et al. Lactate adversely affects the in vitro formation of endothelial cell tubular structures through the action of TGF‐beta1. Exp Cell Res. 2007;313:2531‐2549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52. Végran F, Boidot R, Michiels C, Sonveaux P, Feron O. Lactate influx through the endothelial cell monocarboxylate transporter MCT1 supports an NF‐kappaB/IL‐8 pathway that drives tumor angiogenesis. Cancer Res. 2011;2828:2010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53. Stern R, Shuster S, Neudecker BA, Formby B. Lactate stimulates fibroblast expression of hyaluronan and CD44: the Warburg effect revisited. Exp Cell Res. 2002;276:24‐31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Irani K, Xia Y, Zweier JL, et al. Mitogenic signaling mediated by oxidants in Ras‐transformed fibroblasts. Science. 1997;275:1649‐1652. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Takada T, Takata K, Ashihara E. Inhibition of monocarboxylate transporter 1 suppresses the proliferation of glioblastoma stem cells. J Physiol Sci. 2016;66:387‐396. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56. Graham RM, Frazier DP, Thompson JW, et al. A unique pathway of cardiac myocyte death caused by hypoxia–acidosis. J Exp Biol. 2004;207:3189‐3200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57. Xu K, Mao X, Mehta M, et al. Elucidation of how cancer cells avoid acidosis through comparative transcriptomic data analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8:e71177. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Feron O. Pyruvate into lactate and back: from the Warburg effect to symbiotic energy fuel exchange in cancer cells. Radiother Oncol. 2009;92:329‐333. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59. Donowitz M, Li X. Regulatory binding partners and complexes of NHE3. Physiol Rev. 2007;87:825‐872. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. Pérez‐Sayáns M, Somoza‐Martín JM, Barros‐Angueira F, Rey JM, García‐García A. V‐ATPase inhibitors and implication in cancer treatment. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009;35:707‐713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61. Sennoune SR, Bakunts K, Martínez GM, et al. Vacuolar H+‐ATPase in human breast cancer cells with distinct metastatic potential: distribution and functional activity. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol. 2004;286:C1443‐C1452. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. Cotter PD, Hill C. Surviving the acid test: responses of gram‐positive bacteria to low pH. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 2003;67:429‐453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 63. Pérez‐Escuredo J, Van Hée VF, Sboarina M, et al. Monocarboxylate transporters in the brain and in cancer. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2016;1863:2481‐2497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Butt AA, Michaels S, Greer D, Clark R, Kissinger P, Martin DH. Serum LDH level as a clue to the diagnosis of histoplasmosis. AIDS Read. 2002;12:317‐321. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Oguntoye S, Adefule A, Popoola O, Akinyemi R, Huthman I. Effects of mishenland anti‐diabetic herb on the kidney of streptozotocin‐induced diabetic adult Wistar rats. Diabetes. 2014;6:7. [Google Scholar]
- 66. Devi L, Kirthika P, Ali M. Plasma diagnostic enzyme profile of Assam hilly goats reared in Mizoram, India. World J Pharm Res. 2015;4:2034‐2038. [Google Scholar]
- 67. Dong T, Liu Z, Xuan Q, Wang Z, Ma W, Zhang Q. Tumor LDH‐A expression and serum LDH status are two metabolic predictors for triple negative breast cancer brain metastasis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:6069. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 68. Summermatter S, Santos G, Pérez‐Schindler J, Handschin C. Skeletal muscle PGC‐1α controls whole‐body lactate homeostasis through estrogen‐related receptor α‐dependent activation of LDH B and repression of LDH A. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:8738‐8743. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. Juel C. Lactate‐proton cotransport in skeletal muscle. Physiol Rev. 1997;77:321‐358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 70. Poole RC, Halestrap AP. Transport of lactate and other monocarboxylates across mammalian plasma membranes. Am J Physiol. 1993;264:C761‐C782. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Vijay N, Morris ME. Role of monocarboxylate transporters in drug delivery to the brain. Curr Pharm Des. 2014;20:1487‐1498. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 72. Halestrap AP. The monocarboxylate transporter family—structure and functional characterization. IUBMB Life. 2012;64:1‐9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Halestrap AP, Meredith D. The SLC16 gene family—from monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) to aromatic amino acid transporters and beyond. Pflugers Arch. 2004;447:619‐628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 74. Price NT, Jackson VN, Halestrap AP. Cloning and sequencing of four new mammalian monocarboxylate transporter (MCT) homologues confirms the existence of a transporter family with an ancient past. Biochem J. 1998;329(Pt 2):321‐328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 75. Halestrap AP. The SLC16 gene family–structure, role and regulation in health and disease. Mol Aspects Med. 2013;34:337‐349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 76. Jones RS, Morris ME. Monocarboxylate transporters: therapeutic targets and prognostic factors in disease. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2016;100:454‐463. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 77. Suhre K, Shin S‐Y, Petersen A‐K, et al. Human metabolic individuality in biomedical and pharmaceutical research. Nature. 2011;477:54‐60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 78. Kim DK, Kanai Y, Chairoungdua A, Matsuo H, Cha SH, Endou H. Expression cloning of a Na+‐independent aromatic amino acid transporter with structural similarity to H+/monocarboxylate transporters. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:17221‐17228. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 79. Ramadan T, Camargo SMR, Summa V, et al. Basolateral aromatic amino acid transporter TAT1 (Slc16a10) functions as an efflux pathway. J Cell Physiol. 2006;206:771‐779. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 80. Abplanalp J, Laczko E, Philp NJ, et al. The cataract and glucosuria associated monocarboxylate transporter MCT12 is a new creatine transporter. Hum Mol Gen. 2013;22:3218‐3226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Gallagher SM, Castorino JJ, Wang D, Philp NJ. Monocarboxylate transporter 4 regulates maturation and trafficking of CD147 to the plasma membrane in the metastatic breast cancer cell line MDA‐MB‐231. Cancer Res. 2007;67:4182‐4189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 82. Le Floch R, Chiche J, Marchiq I, et al. CD147 subunit of lactate/H+ symporters MCT1 and hypoxia‐inducible MCT4 is critical for energetics and growth of glycolytic tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:16663‐16668. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Pérez de Heredia F, Wood IS, Trayhurn P. Hypoxia stimulates lactate release and modulates monocarboxylate transporter (MCT1, MCT2, and MCT4) expression in human adipocytes. Pflugers Arch. 2010;459:509‐518. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. Merezhinskaya N, Fishbein WN, Davis JI, Foellmer JW. Mutations in MCT1 cDNA in patients with symptomatic deficiency in lactate transport. Muscle Nerve. 2000;23:90‐97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Lee J, Lee DR, Lee S. The genetic variation in monocarboxylic acid transporter 2 (MCT2) has functional and clinical relevance with male infertility. Asian J Androl. 2014;16:694‐697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Nakayama A, Matsuo H, Shimizu T, et al. A common missense variant of monocarboxylate transporter 9 (MCT9/SLC16A9) gene is associated with renal overload gout, but not with all gout susceptibility. Hum Cell. 2013;26:133‐136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Kloeckener‐Gruissem B, Vandekerckhove K, Nürnberg G, et al. Mutation of solute carrier SLC16A12 associates with a syndrome combining juvenile cataract with microcornea and renal glucosuria. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;82:772‐779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Hao JL, Cozzi PJ, Khatri A, Power CA, Li Y. CD147/EMMPRIN and CD44 are potential therapeutic targets for metastatic prostate cancer. Curr Cancer Drug Targets. 2010;10:287‐306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Hussien R, Brooks GA. Mitochondrial and plasma membrane lactate transporter and lactate dehydrogenase isoform expression in breast cancer cell lines. Physiol Genomics. 2011;43:255‐264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 90. Nakamura K, Kodama J, Hongo A, Hiramatsu Y. Role of emmprin in endometrial cancer. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Grass GD, Dai L, Qin Z, Parsons C, Toole BP. CD147: regulator of hyaluronan signaling in invasiveness and chemoresistance. Adv Cancer Res. 2014;123:351‐373. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Agrawal SM, Silva C, Wang J, Tong JP‐W, Yong VW. A novel anti‐EMMPRIN function‐blocking antibody reduces T cell proliferation and neurotoxicity: relevance to multiple sclerosis. J Neuroinflammation. 2012;9:64. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. DeCastro R, Zhang Y, Guo H, et al. Human keratinocytes express EMMPRIN, an extracellular matrix metalloproteinase inducer. J Invest Dermatol. 1996;106:1260‐1265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 94. Fossum R, Mallett S, Neil Barclay A. The MRC OX‐47 antigen is a member of the immunoglobulin superfamily with an unusual transmembrane sequence. Eur J Immunol. 1991;21:671‐679. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Nehme CL, Fayos BE, Bartles JR. Distribution of the integral plasma membrane glycoprotein CE9 (MRC OX‐47) among rat tissues and its induction by diverse stimuli of metabolic activation. Biochem J. 1995;310:693‐698. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Yurchenko V, Constant S, Eisenmesser E, Bukrinsky M. Cyclophilin–CD147 interactions: a new target for anti‐inflammatory therapeutics. Clin Exp Immunol. 2010;160:305‐317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Berditchevski F, Chang S, Bodorova J, Hemler ME. Generation of monoclonal antibodies to integrin‐associated proteins. Evidence that alpha3beta1 complexes with EMMPRIN/basigin/OX47/M6. J Biol Chem. 1997;272:29174‐29180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Cho JY, Fox DA, Horejsi V, et al. The functional interactions between CD98, β1‐integrins, and CD147 in the induction of U937 homotypic aggregation. Blood. 2001;98:374‐382. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 99. Wang CH, Dai JY, Wang L, et al. Expression of CD147 (EMMPRIN) on neutrophils in rheumatoid arthritis enhances chemotaxis, matrix metalloproteinase production and invasiveness of synoviocytes. J Cell Mol Med. 2011b;15:850‐860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 100. Philp NJ, Ochrietor JD, Rudoy C, Muramatsu T, Linser PJ. Loss of MCT1, MCT3, and MCT4 expression in the retinal pigment epithelium and neural retina of the 5A11/basigin‐null mouse. Invest Ophthalmol Visual Sci. 2003;44:1305‐1311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 101. Agrawal SM, Yong VW. The many faces of EMMPRIN—roles in neuroinflammation. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2011;1812:213‐219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. Jia L, Wang S, Zhou H, Cao J, Hu Y, Zhang J. Caveolin‐1 up‐regulates CD147 glycosylation and the invasive capability of murine hepatocarcinoma cell lines. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2006;38:1584‐1593. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103. Kato N, Yuzawa Y, Kosugi T, et al. The E‐selectin ligand basigin/CD147 is responsible for neutrophil recruitment in renal ischemia/reperfusion. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2009;20:1565‐1576. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Qu X, Wang C, Zhang J, Qie G, Zhou J. The roles of CD147 and/or cyclophilin A in kidney diseases. Mediators Inflamm. 2014;2014:728673. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Kim J‐Y, Kim W‐J, Kim H, Suk K, Lee W‐H. The stimulation of CD147 induces MMP‐9 expression through ERK and NF‐kappaB in macrophages: implication for atherosclerosis. Immune Netw. 2009;9:90‐97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 106. Li M, Zhai Q, Bharadwaj U, et al. Cyclophilin A is overexpressed in human pancreatic cancer cells and stimulates cell proliferation through CD147. Cancer. 2006;106:2284‐2294. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 107. Song F, Zhang X, Ren X‐B, et al. Cyclophilin A (CyPA) induces chemotaxis independent of its peptidylprolyl cis‐trans isomerase activity. J Biol Chem. 2011;286:8197‐8203. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Zhang D‐W, Zhao Y‐X, Wei D, et al. HAb18G/CD147 promotes activation of hepatic stellate cells and is a target for antibody therapy of liver fibrosis. J Hepatol. 2012;57:1283‐1291. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 109. Toole BP, Slomiany MG. Hyaluronan, CD44 and Emmprin: partners in cancer cell chemoresistance. Drug Resist Updates. 2008;11:110‐121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 110. Jiang D, Liang J, Noble PW. Hyaluronan in tissue injury and repair. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 2007;23:435‐461. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 111. Slevin M, Krupinski J, Gaffney J, et al. Hyaluronan‐mediated angiogenesis in vascular disease: uncovering RHAMM and CD44 receptor signaling pathways. Matrix Biol. 2007;26:58‐68. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 112. Toole BP. Hyaluronan: from extracellular glue to pericellular cue. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:528‐539. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 113. Turley EA, Noble PW, Bourguignon LY. Signaling properties of hyaluronan receptors. J Biol Chem. 2001;277(7):4589‐4592. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 114. Toole B, Whelan J. The role and regulation of tumor associated hyaluronan. In: David E, Julie W, eds. Biology of Hyaluronan. 2007:150‐169. [Google Scholar]
- 115. Toole BP, Wight TN, Tammi MI. Hyaluronan‐cell interactions in cancer and vascular disease. J Biol Chem. 2002;277:4593‐4596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116. Ahrens T, Sleeman JP, Schempp CM, et al. Soluble CD44 inhibits melanoma tumor growth by blocking cell surface CD44 binding to hyaluronic acid. Oncogene. 2001;20:3399‐3408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 117. Marieb EA, Zoltan‐Jones A, Li R, et al. Emmprin promotes anchorage‐independent growth in human mammary carcinoma cells by stimulating hyaluronan production. Cancer Res. 2004;64:1229‐1232. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Rudrabhatla SR, Mahaffey CL, Mummert ME. Tumor microenvironment modulates hyaluronan expression: the lactate effect. J Invest Dermatol. 2006;126:1378‐1387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 119. Halestrap AP, Price NT. The proton‐linked monocarboxylate transporter (MCT) family: structure, function and regulation. Biochem J. 1999;343:281‐299. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 120. Zhu S, Goldschmidt‐Clermont PJ, Dong C. Inactivation of monocarboxylate transporter MCT3 by DNA methylation in atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2005;112:1353‐1361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121. Weidle UH, Scheuer W, Eggle D, Klostermann S, Stockinger H. Cancer‐related issues of CD147. Cancer Genom Proteom. 2010;7:157‐169. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122. Pinheiro C, Longatto‐Filho A, Azevedo‐Silva J, Casal M, Schmitt FC, Baltazar F. Role of monocarboxylate transporters in human cancers: state of the art. J Bioenerg Biomembr. 2012;44:127‐139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123. Chan SY, Hancox LA, Martín‐Santos A, et al. MCT8 in human fetal cerebral cortex is reduced in severe intrauterine growth restriction. J Endocrinol. 2014;220:85‐95. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 124. Eilertsen M, Andersen S, Al‐Saad S, et al. Monocarboxylate transporters 1–4 in NSCLC: MCT1 is an independent prognostic marker for survival. PLoS One. 2014;9:e105038. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 125. El‐Ashmawy NE, Khalil RM. A review on the role of L‐carnitine in the management of tamoxifen side effects in treated women with breast cancer. Tumor Biol. 2014;35:2845‐2855. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126. Erbas H, Aydogdu N, Usta U, Erten O. Protective role of carnitine in breast cancer via decreasing arginase activity and increasing nitric oxide. Cell Biol Int. 2007;31:1414‐1419. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 127. Doyen J, Trastour C, Ettore F, et al. Expression of the hypoxia‐inducible monocarboxylate transporter MCT4 is increased in triple negative breast cancer and correlates independently with clinical outcome. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2014;451:54‐61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 128. Luz M, Perez M, Azzalis L, et al. Evaluation of MCT1, MCT4 and CD147 genes in peripheral blood cells of breast cancer patients and their potential use as diagnostic and prognostic markers. Int J Mol Sci. 2017;18:170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 129. Badziong J, Ting S, Synoracki S, et al. Differential regulation of monocarboxylate transporter 8 expression in thyroid cancer and hyperthyroidism. Eur J Endocrinol. 2017;177:243‐250. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130. Xiang J, Zhou L, Zhuang Y, et al. Lactate dehydrogenase is correlated with clinical stage and grade and is downregulated by si‑SAΤB1 in ovarian cancer. Oncol Rep. 2018;40:2788‐2797. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 131. Wu D‐H, Liang H, Lu S‐N, et al. miR‐124 suppresses pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma growth by regulating monocarboxylate transporter 1‐mediated cancer lactate metabolism. Cell Physiol Biochem. 2018;50:924‐935. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 132. Kaddurah‐Daouk R, Kristal BS, Weinshilboum RM. Metabolomics: a global biochemical approach to drug response and disease. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2008;48:653‐683. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133. Warburg O. On the origin of cancer cells. Science. 1956;123:309‐314. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 134. Beger R. A review of applications of metabolomics in cancer. Metabolites. 2013;3:552‐574. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135. Park JW, Kerbel RS, Kelloff GJ, et al. Rationale for biomarkers and surrogate end points in mechanism‐driven oncology drug development. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:3885‐3896. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 136. Gottschalk S, Anderson N, Hainz C, Eckhardt SG, Serkova NJ. Imatinib (STI571)‐mediated changes in glucose metabolism in human leukemia BCR‐ABL‐positive cells. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:6661‐6668. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 137. Lyng H, Sitter B, Bathen TF, et al. Metabolic mapping by use of high‐resolution magic angle spinning 1H MR spectroscopy for assessment of apoptosis in cervical carcinomas. BMC Cancer. 2007;7:11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138. Serkova N, Boros G. Detection of resistance to imatinib by metabolic profiling. Am J Pharmacogenomics. 2005;5:293‐302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 139. Lemberg KM, Gori SS, Tsukamoto T, Rais R, Slusher BS. Clinical development of metabolic inhibitors for oncology. J Clin Invest. 2022;132(1):e148550. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140. Curtis NJ, Mooney L, Hopcroft L, et al. Pre‐clinical pharmacology of AZD3965, a selective inhibitor of MCT1: DLBCL, NHL and Burkitt's lymphoma anti‐tumor activity. Oncotarget. 2017;8:69219‐69236. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 141. Polański R, Hodgkinson CL, Fusi A, et al. Activity of the monocarboxylate transporter 1 inhibitor AZD3965 in small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:926‐937. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 142. Lamb R, Harrison H, Hulit J, Smith DL, Lisanti MP, Sotgia F. Mitochondria as new therapeutic targets for eradicating cancer stem cells: quantitative proteomics and functional validation via MCT1/2 inhibition. Oncotarget. 2014;5:11029‐11037. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 143. Choi W‐I, Jeon B‐N, Park H, et al. Proto‐oncogene FBI‐1 (Pokemon) and SREBP‐1 synergistically activate transcription of fatty acid synthase gene (FASN). J Biol Chem. 2008;283:29341‐29354. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 144. Eberlé D, Hegarty B, Bossard P, Ferré P, Foufelle F. SREBP transcription factors: master regulators of lipid homeostasis. Biochimie. 2004;86:839‐848. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 145. Peterson TR, Sengupta SS, Harris TE, et al. mTOR complex 1 regulates lipin 1 localization to control the SREBP pathway. Cell. 2011;146:408‐420. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 146. Porstmann T, Griffiths B, Chung Y‐L, et al. PKB/Akt induces transcription of enzymes involved in cholesterol and fatty acid biosynthesis via activation of SREBP. Oncogene. 2005;24:6465‐6481. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 147. Cairns RA, Harris IS, Mak TW. Regulation of cancer cell metabolism. Nat Rev Cancer. 2011;11:85‐95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 148. Coller HA. MYC sets a tumour‐stroma metabolic loop. Nature Cell Biol. 2018;20:506‐507. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 149. Gao P, Tchernyshyov I, Chang T‐C, et al. c‐Myc suppression of miR‐23a/b enhances mitochondrial glutaminase expression and glutamine metabolism. Nature. 2009;458:762. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 150. Gordan JD, Thompson CB, Simon MC. HIF and c‐Myc: sibling rivals for control of cancer cell metabolism and proliferation. Cancer Cell. 2007;12:108‐113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 151. Li F, Wang Y, Zeller KI, et al. Myc stimulates nuclearly encoded mitochondrial genes and mitochondrial biogenesis. Mol Cell Biol. 2005;25:6225‐6234. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 152. Pate KT, Stringari C, Sprowl‐Tanio S, et al. Wnt signaling directs a metabolic program of glycolysis and angiogenesis in colon cancer. EMBO J. 2014;33:1454‐1473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 153. Wahlström T, Arsenian Henriksson M. Impact of MYC in regulation of tumor cell metabolism. Biochim Biophys Acta. 2015;1849:563‐569. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 154. Yuneva M, Zamboni N, Oefner P, Sachidanandam R, Lazebnik Y. Deficiency in glutamine but not glucose induces MYC‐dependent apoptosis in human cells. J Cell Biol. 2007;178:93‐105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 155. Hay N, Sonenberg N. Upstream and downstream of mTOR. Genes Dev. 2004;18:1926‐1945. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 156. Papandreou I, Cairns RA, Fontana L, Lim AL, Denko NC. HIF‐1 mediates adaptation to hypoxia by actively downregulating mitochondrial oxygen consumption. Cell Metab. 2006;3:187‐197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 157. Ramanathan A, Schreiber SL. Direct control of mitochondrial function by mTOR. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:22229‐22232. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 158. Kim J, Tchernyshyov I, Semenza GL, Dang CV. HIF‐1‐mediated expression of pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase: a metabolic switch required for cellular adaptation to hypoxia. Cell Metab. 2006;3:177‐185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 159. DeBerardinis RJ, Lum JJ, Thompson CB. Phosphatidylinositol 3‐kinase‐dependent modulation of carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1A expression regulates lipid metabolism during hematopoietic cell growth. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:37372‐37380. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 160. Wang HQ, Altomare DA, Skele KL, et al. Positive feedback regulation between AKT activation and fatty acid synthase expression in ovarian carcinoma cells. Oncogene. 2005;24:3574‐3582. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 161. Yoon S, Lee M‐Y, Park SW, et al. Up‐regulation of acetyl‐CoA carboxylase alpha and fatty acid synthase by human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 at the translational level in breast cancer cells. J Biol Chem. 2007;282:26122‐26131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 162. Casey SC, Tong L, Li Y, et al. MYC regulates the antitumor immune response through CD47 and PD‐L1. Science. 2016;352:227‐231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 163. Chen M‐F, Chen P‐T, Chen W‐C, Lu M‐S, Lin P‐Y, Lee K‐D. The role of PD‐L1 in the radiation response and prognosis for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma related to IL‐6 and T‐cell immunosuppression. Oncotarget. 2016;7:7913‐7924. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 164. Chowdhury S, Veyhl J, Jessa F, et al. Programmed death‐ligand 1 overexpression is a prognostic marker for aggressive papillary thyroid cancer and its variants. Oncotarget. 2016;7:32318‐32328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 165. Clark CA, Gupta H, Sareddy GR, et al. Tumor‐intrinsic PD‐L1 signals regulate cell growth, pathogenesis and autophagy in ovarian cancer and melanoma. Cancer Res. 2016;76(23):6964‐6974. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 166. Dong H, Zhu G, Tamada K, Chen L. B7‐H1, a third member of the B7 family, co‐stimulates T‐cell proliferation and interleukin‐10 secretion. Nature Med. 1999;5:1365‐1369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 167. Gao Q, Wang X‐Y, Qiu S‐J, et al. Overexpression of PD‐L1 significantly associates with tumor aggressiveness and postoperative recurrence in human hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2009;15:971‐979. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 168. Keir ME, Butte MJ, Freeman GJ, Sharpe AH. PD‐1 and its ligands in tolerance and immunity. Annu Rev Immunol. 2008;26:677‐704. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 169. Noman MZ, Desantis G, Janji B, et al. PD‐L1 is a novel direct target of HIF‐1α, and its blockade under hypoxia enhanced MDSC‐mediated T cell activation. J Exp Med. 2014;211:781‐790. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 170. Qin T, Zeng Y‐d, Qin G, et al. High PD‐L1 expression was associated with poor prognosis in 870 Chinese patients with breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2015;6:33972‐33981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 171. Wang S, Li J, Xie J, et al. Programmed death ligand 1 promotes lymph node metastasis and glucose metabolism in cervical cancer by activating integrin β4/SNAI1/SIRT3 signaling pathway. Oncogene. 2018;37:4164‐4180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 172. Wu P, Wu D, Li L, Chai Y, Huang J. PD‐L1 and survival in solid tumors: a meta‐analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0131403. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 173. Ha T‐K, Chi S‐G. CAV1/caveolin 1 enhances aerobic glycolysis in colon cancer cells via activation of SLC2A3/GLUT3 transcription. Autophagy. 2012;8:1684‐1685. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 174. Tahir SA, Yang G, Goltsov A, et al. Caveolin‐1–LRP6 signaling module stimulates aerobic glycolysis in prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 2013;73(6):1900‐1911. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 175. Huang P, Chang S, Jiang X, et al. RNA interference targeting CD147 inhibits the proliferation, invasiveness, and metastatic activity of thyroid carcinoma cells by down‐regulating glycolysis. Int J Clin Exp Pathol. 2015;8:309‐318. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 176. Ke X, Fei F, Chen Y, et al. Hypoxia upregulates CD147 through a combined effect of HIF‐1α and Sp1 to promote glycolysis and tumor progression in epithelial solid tumors. Carcinogenesis. 2012;33:1598‐1607. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 177. Dey P, Rachagani S, Chakraborty S, et al. Overexpression of ecdysoneless in pancreatic cancer and its role in oncogenesis by regulating glycolysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:6188‐6198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 178. Zhang J, Gao Q, Zhou Y, Dier U, Hempel N, Hochwald SN. Focal adhesion kinase‐promoted tumor glucose metabolism is associated with a shift of mitochondrial respiration to glycolysis. Oncogene. 2016;35:1926‐1942. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 179. Li Z, Wang Y, Newton IP, Zhang L, Ji P, Li Z. GRP78 is implicated in the modulation of tumor aerobic glycolysis by promoting autophagic degradation of IKKβ. Cell Signal. 2015;27:1237‐1245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 180. Ma T, Patel H, Babapoor‐Farrokhran S, et al. KSHV induces aerobic glycolysis and angiogenesis through HIF‐1‐dependent upregulation of pyruvate kinase 2 in Kaposi's sarcoma. Angiogenesis. 2015;18:477‐488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 181. Lo AKF, Dawson CW, Young LS, Ko CW, Hau PM, Lo KW. Activation of the FGFR1 signalling pathway by the Epstein–Barr virus‐encoded LMP1 promotes aerobic glycolysis and transformation of human nasopharyngeal epithelial cells. J Pathol. 2015;237:238‐248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 182. Amoroso F, Falzoni S, Adinolfi E, Ferrari D, Di Virgilio F. The P2X7 receptor is a key modulator of aerobic glycolysis. Cell Death Dis. 2012;3:370. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 183. Chan C‐H, Li C‐F, Yang W‐L, et al. The Skp2‐SCF E3 ligase regulates Akt ubiquitination, glycolysis, herceptin sensitivity, and tumorigenesis. Cell. 2012;149:1098‐1111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 184. Hagenbuchner J, Kuznetsov AV, Obexer P, Ausserlechner MJ. BIRC5/Survivin enhances aerobic glycolysis and drug resistance by altered regulation of the mitochondrial fusion/fission machinery. Oncogene. 2013;32:4748‐4757. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 185. Bensaad K, Tsuruta A, Selak MA, et al. TIGAR, a p53‐inducible regulator of glycolysis and apoptosis. Cell. 2006;126:107‐120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 186. Kondoh H, Lleonart ME, Gil J, et al. Glycolytic enzymes can modulate cellular life span. Cancer Res. 2005;65:177‐185. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 187. Matoba S, Kang J‐G, Patino WD, et al. p53 regulates mitochondrial respiration. Science. 2006;312:1650‐1653. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 188. Vousden KH, Ryan KM. p53 and metabolism. Nat Rev Cancer. 2009;9:691‐700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 189. Gottlieb E, Tomlinson IPM. Mitochondrial tumour suppressors: a genetic and biochemical update. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5:857‐866. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 190. Ou J, Miao H, Ma Y, et al. Loss of abhd5 promotes colorectal tumor development and progression by inducing aerobic glycolysis and epithelial‐mesenchymal transition. Cell Rep. 2014;9:1798‐1811. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 191. Zhang X‐Y, Li M, Sun K, et al. Decreased expression of GRIM‐19 by DNA hypermethylation promotes aerobic glycolysis and cell proliferation in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Oncotarget. 2015;6:101‐115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 192. Huang L, Yu Z, Zhang T, Zhao X, Huang G. HSP40 interacts with pyruvate kinase M2 and regulates glycolysis and cell proliferation in tumor cells. PLoS One. 2014;9:e92949. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 193. Shi M, Cui J, Du J, et al. A novel KLF4/LDHA signaling pathway regulates aerobic glycolysis in and progression of pancreatic cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;0186:2014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 194. Yoshida S, Tsutsumi S, Muhlebach G, et al. Molecular chaperone TRAP1 regulates a metabolic switch between mitochondrial respiration and aerobic glycolysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:201220659. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 195. Liu X‐S, Haines JE, Mehanna EK, et al. ZBTB7A acts as a tumor suppressor through the transcriptional repression of glycolysis. Genes Dev. 2014;28:1917‐1928. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 196. Halestrap AP, Denton RM. Specific inhibition of pyruvate transport in rat liver mitochondria and human erythrocytes by α‐cyano‐4‐hydroxycinnamate. Biochem J. 1974;138:313‐316. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 197. Halestrap AP, Wilson MC. The monocarboxylate transporter family—role and regulation. IUBMB Life. 2012;64:109‐119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 198. Jóhannsson E, Lunde PK, Heddle C, et al. Upregulation of the cardiac monocarboxylate transporter MCT1 in a rat model of congestive heart failure. Circulation. 2001;104:729‐734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 199. Matsuyama S, Ohkura S, Iwata K, et al. Food deprivation induces monocarboxylate transporter 2 expression in the brainstem of female rat. J Reprod Dev. 2009;55:256‐261. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 200. McCullagh KJ, Poole RC, Halestrap AP, O'Brien M, Bonen A. Role of the lactate transporter (MCT1) in skeletal muscles. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 1996;271:E143‐E150. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 201. Murray CM, Hutchinson R, Bantick JR, et al. Monocarboxylate transporter MCT1 is a target for immunosuppression. Nat Chem Biol. 2005;1:371‐376. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 202. Ovens MJ, Manoharan C, Wilson MC, Murray CM, Halestrap AP. The inhibition of monocarboxylate transporter 2 (MCT2) by AR‐C155858 is modulated by the associated ancillary protein. Biochem J. 2010;431:217‐225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 203. Pierre K, Pellerin L. Monocarboxylate transporters in the central nervous system: distribution, regulation and function. J Neurochem. 2005;94:1‐14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 204. Garcia CK, Brown MS, Pathak RK, Goldstein JL. cDNA cloning of MCT2, a second monocarboxylate transporter expressed in different cells than MCT1. J Biol Chem. 1995;270:1843‐1849. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 205. Moreira TJ, Pierre K, Maekawa F, et al. Enhanced cerebral expression of MCT1 and MCT2 in a rat ischemia model occurs in activated microglial cells. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2009;29:1273‐1283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 206. Pierre K, Parent A, Jayet PY, Halestrap AP, Scherrer U, Pellerin L. Enhanced expression of three monocarboxylate transporter isoforms in the brain of obese mice. J Physiol. 2007;583:469‐486. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 207. Robinet C, Pellerin L. Brain‐derived neurotrophic factor enhances the expression of the monocarboxylate transporter 2 through translational activation in mouse cultured cortical neurons. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2010;30:286‐298. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 208. Ullah MS, Davies AJ, Halestrap AP. The plasma membrane lactate transporter MCT4, but not MCT1, is up‐regulated by hypoxia through a HIF‐1α‐dependent mechanism. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:9030‐9037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 209. Thomas C, Bishop D, Moore‐Morris T, Mercier J. Effects of high‐intensity training on MCT1, MCT4, and NBC expressions in rat skeletal muscles: influence of chronic metabolic alkalosis. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2007;293:E916‐E922. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 210. Friesema EC, Grueters A, Biebermann H, et al. Association between mutations in a thyroid hormone transporter and severe X‐linked psychomotor retardation. Lancet. 2004;364:1435‐1437. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 211. Lafrenière RG, Carrel L, Willard HF. A novel transmembrane transporter encoded by the XPCT gene in Xq13.2. Hum Mol Gen. 1994;3:1133‐1139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 212. Visser WE, Friesema ECH, Visser TJ. Minireview: thyroid hormone transporters: the knowns and the unknowns. Mol Endocrinol. 2011;25:1‐14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Supplementary information.
Data Availability Statement
Seyed Mostafa Mir and Mohammad Yousef Memar had full access to all the data in this study and takes complete responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
