Mol. Cells 2023; 46(3): 176-186
Published online March 22, 2023
https://doi.org/10.14348/molcells.2023.2191
© The Korean Society for Molecular and Cellular Biology
Correspondence to : libykare@msu.edu
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/.
The oxidative balance of a cell is maintained by the Kelch-like ECH-associated protein 1 (KEAP1)/nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (NRF2) pathway. This cytoprotective pathway detoxifies reactive oxygen species and xenobiotics. The role of the KEAP1/NRF2 pathway as pro-tumorigenic or anti-tumorigenic throughout stages of carcinogenesis (including initiation, promotion, progression, and metastasis) is complex. This mini review focuses on key studies describing how the KEAP1/NRF2 pathway affects cancer at different phases. The data compiled suggest that the roles of KEAP1/NRF2 in cancer are highly dependent on context; specifically, the model used (carcinogen-induced vs genetic), the tumor type, and the stage of cancer. Moreover, emerging data suggests that KEAP1/NRF2 is also important for regulating the tumor microenvironment and how its effects are amplified either by epigenetics or in response to co-occurring mutations. Further elucidation of the complexity of this pathway is needed in order to develop novel pharmacological tools and drugs to improve patient outcomes.
Keywords cancer, initiation, metastasis, NRF2, promotion, transformation
Carcinogenesis is an intricate and heterogeneous process that depends on cooperation among key oncogenic proteins. The mechanisms orchestrating initiation, promotion, and progression vary by the tumor type. Tumor initiation has been heavily investigated (Evans et al., 2019; Grizzi et al., 2006), as has the molecular biology of carcinogenesis (Bouvard et al., 2009; el Ghissassi et al., 2009; Grosse et al., 2009; Straif et al., 2009) and pathways of chemotherapy resistance (Alfarouk et al., 2015; Gupta et al., 2019) that contribute to cancer fitness (McCreery and Balmain, 2017). Extensive tumor heterogeneity permits the selection of distinct phylogenetic clones and consequent treatment failure (Aktipis et al., 2011; Greaves and Maley, 2012; Nowell, 1976; Worsley et al., 2016). Predictably, the heterogeneity of cancer can explain the context-dependent roles for molecules like NFE2-related factor 2 (NRF2) and Kelch-like ECH-associated protein 1 (KEAP1). As a master regulator of antioxidant responses and cellular metabolism, tumors faced with high oxidative stress and metabolic disorders benefit from constitutive NRF2 pathway activation (Wu et al., 2019). Nonetheless, the role of NRF2 throughout multi-stage carcinogenesis is complex.
Despite significant advances in the NRF2 field over the past decade (Pillai et al., 2022; Robledinos-Antón et al., 2019; Rojo de la Vega et al., 2018; Sporn and Liby, 2012; Wu et al., 2019; Zimta et al., 2019), a consensus on the precise role for NRF2 throughout carcinogenesis remains elusive. Abundant evidence confirms that NRF2 activation protects healthy cells from damaging electrophilic and oxidative stress, thus limiting genomic mutations (Gacesa et al., 2016; Loboda et al., 2016; Mukaigasa et al., 2012) and other cellular damage. This beneficial cytoprotection in normal cells supports the use of pharmacological activators of the NRF2 pathway for cancer prevention. However, these same cytoprotective mechanisms can also enhance survival of transformed cells. Indeed, a tumor-promoting role for NRF2 in cancer initiation has been reported, attributed to protection against redox stress in cells that have acquired mutations in
Because NRF2 activation can prevent or promote cancer depending on the phase of carcinogenesis, we will discuss implications of NRF2 activation during each of the following stages: Transformation and Initiation, Promotion and Progression, and Metastasis.
-
-
Taken from Weinberg (2014).
As a master regulator of the oxidative stress response (Gacesa et al., 2016; Loboda et al., 2016; Mukaigasa et al., 2012), the NRF2 pathway is highly conserved in multicellular animals throughout evolution (Fuse and Kobayashi, 2017; Gacesa et al., 2016; Toyokuni et al., 2020) to defend against one of the most potent and prevalent cellular insults: oxygen. Oxidative imbalance leads to the formation of free radicals which can cause DNA damage and disruption of cellular homeostasis, leading to transformation (Klaunig et al., 1998; Toyokuni et al., 2020; Valko et al., 2006). Reactive oxygen species (ROS) can contribute to carcinogenesis directly by inducing mutations in proto-oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes and indirectly by activating kinases that induce growth-promoting cellular functions (Cerutti, 1985; Son et al., 2013; Waris and Ahsan, 2006). Activation of the NRF2 pathway induces the transcription of genes encoding antioxidant and detoxification enzymes that counteract dangerous accumulation of ROS (Kwak et al., 2003; Lee et al., 2003) and protects cells from transformation (Hao et al., 2020; Schaue et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2022b; Zhang and Gordon, 2004). Several of these protective genes include
Although the antioxidant activities that follow NRF2 activation largely protect against transformation, the metabolic consequences of the NRF2-mediated transcription program can have pro-cancer effects. For example, 3-nitrobenzanthrone, a compound in diesel exhaust, is metabolized to a product which forms DNA adducts and promotes mutagenicity (Enya et al., 1997). Phase II metabolic genes under transcriptional control by NRF2, including
Chronic inflammation is known to promote transformation and tumor initiation (Hanahan, 2022) and is driven by multiple signaling pathways. Uncontrolled activation of the NF-κB pathway can result in inflammatory cell damage which can lead to transformation (Naugler and Karin, 2008; Rial et al., 2012), and one way this pathway can be regulated is through NRF2/KEAP1 (Wardyn et al., 2015). The E3 ligase component KEAP1 directly suppresses NF-κB activity through ubiquitination-mediated degradation of the NF-κB activator IKKβ (Kim et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2009); NF-κB signaling is increased after NRF2 depletion (Pan et al., 2012). This negative regulation of the NF-κB pathway is complemented by other anti-inflammatory regulatory roles of NRF2 which culminate in protection from aberrant inflammation (Chi et al., 2015; Ryan et al., 2022; Suzuki et al., 2017; Thimmulappa et al., 2006). Additionally, the tumor suppressor
There is conflicting data as to whether NRF2 promotes or inhibits tumor initiation. To our knowledge, no study has demonstrated that NRF2-activating mutations alone are sufficient to initiate cancer. Attempts to create mice for assessing effects of whole-body constitutive NRF2 activity have been unsuccessful, as homozygous knockouts of
Carcinogen-induced models such as benzo[
NRF2 activation in genetic models has also been shown to prevent tumor development. Overexpression of the
Despite numerous studies showing that NRF2 activation prevents tumor formation, a considerable body of literature reports the opposite result. In agreement with the
The complexity of the story continues since many models of NRF2-mediated malignancy require co-mutation of other oncogenic drivers and/or tumor suppressors, but different combinations yield disparate results. There was no increase in tumor incidence in small cell lung cancer initiated by inhaled Cre-adenovirus in
In addition to metabolic advantages afforded by constitutive NRF2 activation, NRF2 can cause enhancer remodeling of oncogenic drivers to promote tumor initiation. This remodeling can partially explain how NRF2 switches from an anti-cancer to a pro-tumorigenic phenotype (Okazaki et al., 2020). NRF2 activation also impacts cancer cell differentiation. In melanoma cells, NRF2 activation led to de-differentiation and promoted tumor formation through COX2-mediated immune evasion (Jessen et al., 2020). Increased IL-11 expression in NRF2-activated tumorigenic fibroblasts promotes cancer development, possibly through regulation of the immune system (Kitamura et al., 2017). Taken altogether, the dual roles of NRF2 in promoting or preventing the initiation of cancer remains a complex topic [see (Robertson et al., 2020) for an excellent review on NRF2 and cancer initiation] that requires carefully designed studies and prudent interpretation of data.
-
-
Taken from Weinberg (2014).
Cytoprotective mechanisms enable cancer cells to survive their harsh environments, and NRF2 is activated after cells undergo transformation (Wu et al., 2019). Some cancer subtypes develop mutations within the NRF2 pathway, which lead to constitutive pathway activation (Taguchi and Yamamoto, 2017). Most notably, the hypoxic nature of tumors creates ROS within cancer cells that activates NRF2, regardless of mutational status (Toth and Warfel, 2017). While NRF2 activation alone is not sufficient for the initiation of cancer, it can facilitate proliferation of existing cancer cells initiated by other carcinogenic processes (Vartanian et al., 2019). Activation of oncogenes including
Activation of NRF2 by direct mutation or increased oxidative stress modulates a variety of other processes facilitating progression. The direct gene targets of oncogene-mediated NRF2 activation include not only an extensive array of antioxidant genes (Kavian et al., 2018) but also genes encoding metabolic enzymes (He et al., 2020) and drug efflux pumps (Jeddi et al., 2018; del Vecchio et al., 2014) which collaborate in tumor-promoting effects ranging from increased cancer cell survival to drug resistance. Tumor cells can escape autophagy inhibition by switching to macropinocytosis, a process that is dependent on NRF2 (Su et al., 2021; Towers et al., 2019). NRF2 activation also protects cells from ferroptosis (Fiore et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2020; Nishizawa et al., 2022) and apoptosis (Niture and Jaiswal, 2012; Xie et al., 2020), allowing cancer cells to escape death. Cellular stress induced by anti-cancer drugs and radiation is alleviated by NRF2 activation, leading to therapeutic resistance (Kamble et al., 2021; Noh et al., 2021; Silva et al., 2019). However, the cancer-promoting activation of NRF2 occurs mainly as a response to the high-stress environment within tumors and therefore should be characterized as an enabler, rather than an active driver of cancer progression. For a more comprehensive evaluation of NRF2 and cancer progression, please see (Schmidlin et al., 2021) or (He et al., 2020).
-
Taken from Weinberg (2014).
In addition to promoting cancer cell survival and progression, the ratio of
Additional evidence for the involvement of NRF2 in metastasis can be found in the promotion of the epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT). In glioblastoma multiforme, NRF2 acts in conjunction with p62 to activate EMT and subsequently increases tumor invasiveness (Pölönen et al., 2019). This effect was also observed in hepatocellular carcinoma with MCUR1-induced mitochondrial calcium uptake that induced NRF2/NOTCH-mediated EMT (Jin et al., 2019). Additionally, NRF2 works in conjunction with NOTCH/EMT signaling in breast cancer. NRF2 promotes the upregulation of G6PD/HIF-1α, and in turn, activates NOTCH-mediated EMT of breast cancer cells (Zhang et al., 2019). Further, in non-small cell lung cancer NRF2 activates the RhoA-ROCK1 signaling pathway that increases expression of mesenchymal-type markers and increases cell motility, which was prevented by NRF2 inhibition (Ko et al., 2021).
In combination with increased cancer cell motility through EMT, angiogenesis, a critical feature that enhances dissemination of metastatic cancer cells, is increased by NRF2 (Huang et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2021; Shahcheraghi et al., 2022). This increased angiogenesis has been attributed to NRF2-mediated stabilization of HIF-1α and activation of its transcriptional program (Ji et al., 2014; Zheng et al., 2023). Finally, there is a connection between mitochondrial stress and NRF2. Tumor cells interact with the extracellular matrix to induce intra-tumoral mechanical signaling that increases mitochondrial ROS, which in turn increases oxidative stress, and thus NRF2-mediated cytoprotection (Romani et al., 2022). Romani et al. (2022) discovered that soft extracellular metastatic niches promote NRF2-mediated chemoresistance through increased mitochondrial ROS. Activation of NRF2 is permissive for cancer cell tolerance to oxidative insults in both the invading primary tumor cells and those disseminated to distant metastatic niches.
Knowledge gaps persist in defining the precise function of NRF2 in cancer transformation, initiation, promotion, and metastasis (Fig. 1). Moreover, the lack of definitive conclusions is compounded by the disparate effects observed at different stages of carcinogenesis and in the different cancer models used (genetic versus carcinogen-induced and immune competent versus immunodeficient). These observations, detailed above, lead to a primary conclusion that the functions of NRF2 are highly context dependent. Context encompasses the stage of cancer, the experimental models, and the type of cancer.
The prevalence of high NRF2 expression (increased transcription and translocation to the nucleus) and activation (downstream effectors) is relevant in cancers that arise in organs with high exposure to environmental insults or that function in detoxification, such as the lung, digestive system, pancreas, and liver (Gao et al., 2015; Liby et al., 2008; Pillai et al., 2022). As such, it is likely that pharmacological interventions will be first used in cancers of these organs. However, whether NRF2 activators or inhibitors are appropriate is still under investigation due to the dual roles of NRF2 in promoting and inhibiting cancer. The use of either type of pharmacological agent will likely be stage- and cancer-dependent. Currently there are 4 clinical trials targeting tumors with either
The development of direct pharmacological inhibitors of the NRF2 protein has been hampered primarily due to the lack of a druggable binding pocket (Karunatilleke et al., 2021). NRF2 has been considered an undruggable protein, in the same category as KRAS, one of the most prevalent oncogenes in solid tumors. Development of pharmacological inhibitors or activators of NRF2 is still in its infancy, although recent advances in medicinal chemistry have led to the development of small molecules targeting NRF2 and related proteins (Bar-Peled et al., 2017). Other approaches have been developed to target NRF2-mediated transcription and DNA binding of NRF2/MAFG complexes (Simov et al., 2021). Biological insights into how the NRF2 pathway promotes or inhibits different stages of carcinogenesis provide new opportunities for drug development (Hou et al., 2023; Pouremamali et al., 2022; Robledinos-Antón et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2021). Additionally, with distinct functions evident in different cancers, precision medicine can be used to specifically target vulnerabilities based on mutations or upregulation within the NRF2 pathway. Combination therapies, either with chemotherapy or immunotherapy, are other possible avenues to augment the effects of small molecule inhibitors of the NRF2 pathway.
Despite advances in our knowledge of the NRF2 pathway in recent years, the indirect effects of
This minireview is dedicated in memory of Michael B. Sporn, the “Father of Chemoprevention.” The work was supported by NIH R01CA226690, MTRAC for Life Sciences Innovation Hub-Mi-Kickstart Award, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the MSU Discretionary Funding Initiative (all to K.T.L.). Additional funding was provided by the Barnett Rosenberg Endowed Research Assistantship (J.A.M.), Aitch Foundation (J.A.M.), Integrative Pharmacological Sciences Training Program 5T32GM142521 (C.J.O.), and DOD Career Development Award LC210240 (A.S.L.).
C.J.O. and J.A.M. surveyed the literature and wrote the main body of the manuscript. A.S.L. wrote the abstract, conclusions, and future directions. K.A.G. edited the manuscript and assisted in preparation for submission. K.T.L. provided overall direction and edited the manuscript.
K.T.L. is a named inventor on patents issued and filed for synthetic triterpenoids and NRF2 pathway inhibitors. Other authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Areas requiring further investigation
- Characterization of NRF2-activated tumor microenvironments |
- Epigenetics of NRF2-activated tumors |
- Implications of tumor origin and location on NRF2-mediated tumor biology |
- Clarification on pharmacologic intervention for tumor prevention and treatment |
Mol. Cells 2023; 46(3): 176-186
Published online March 31, 2023 https://doi.org/10.14348/molcells.2023.2191
Copyright © The Korean Society for Molecular and Cellular Biology.
Christopher J. Occhiuto1,2 , Jessica A. Moerland1,3
, Ana S. Leal1,3
, Kathleen A. Gallo4
, and Karen T. Liby1,3,*
1Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA, 2College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA, 3College of Osteopathic Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA, 4Department of Physiology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA
Correspondence to:libykare@msu.edu
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/.
The oxidative balance of a cell is maintained by the Kelch-like ECH-associated protein 1 (KEAP1)/nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (NRF2) pathway. This cytoprotective pathway detoxifies reactive oxygen species and xenobiotics. The role of the KEAP1/NRF2 pathway as pro-tumorigenic or anti-tumorigenic throughout stages of carcinogenesis (including initiation, promotion, progression, and metastasis) is complex. This mini review focuses on key studies describing how the KEAP1/NRF2 pathway affects cancer at different phases. The data compiled suggest that the roles of KEAP1/NRF2 in cancer are highly dependent on context; specifically, the model used (carcinogen-induced vs genetic), the tumor type, and the stage of cancer. Moreover, emerging data suggests that KEAP1/NRF2 is also important for regulating the tumor microenvironment and how its effects are amplified either by epigenetics or in response to co-occurring mutations. Further elucidation of the complexity of this pathway is needed in order to develop novel pharmacological tools and drugs to improve patient outcomes.
Keywords: cancer, initiation, metastasis, NRF2, promotion, transformation
Carcinogenesis is an intricate and heterogeneous process that depends on cooperation among key oncogenic proteins. The mechanisms orchestrating initiation, promotion, and progression vary by the tumor type. Tumor initiation has been heavily investigated (Evans et al., 2019; Grizzi et al., 2006), as has the molecular biology of carcinogenesis (Bouvard et al., 2009; el Ghissassi et al., 2009; Grosse et al., 2009; Straif et al., 2009) and pathways of chemotherapy resistance (Alfarouk et al., 2015; Gupta et al., 2019) that contribute to cancer fitness (McCreery and Balmain, 2017). Extensive tumor heterogeneity permits the selection of distinct phylogenetic clones and consequent treatment failure (Aktipis et al., 2011; Greaves and Maley, 2012; Nowell, 1976; Worsley et al., 2016). Predictably, the heterogeneity of cancer can explain the context-dependent roles for molecules like NFE2-related factor 2 (NRF2) and Kelch-like ECH-associated protein 1 (KEAP1). As a master regulator of antioxidant responses and cellular metabolism, tumors faced with high oxidative stress and metabolic disorders benefit from constitutive NRF2 pathway activation (Wu et al., 2019). Nonetheless, the role of NRF2 throughout multi-stage carcinogenesis is complex.
Despite significant advances in the NRF2 field over the past decade (Pillai et al., 2022; Robledinos-Antón et al., 2019; Rojo de la Vega et al., 2018; Sporn and Liby, 2012; Wu et al., 2019; Zimta et al., 2019), a consensus on the precise role for NRF2 throughout carcinogenesis remains elusive. Abundant evidence confirms that NRF2 activation protects healthy cells from damaging electrophilic and oxidative stress, thus limiting genomic mutations (Gacesa et al., 2016; Loboda et al., 2016; Mukaigasa et al., 2012) and other cellular damage. This beneficial cytoprotection in normal cells supports the use of pharmacological activators of the NRF2 pathway for cancer prevention. However, these same cytoprotective mechanisms can also enhance survival of transformed cells. Indeed, a tumor-promoting role for NRF2 in cancer initiation has been reported, attributed to protection against redox stress in cells that have acquired mutations in
Because NRF2 activation can prevent or promote cancer depending on the phase of carcinogenesis, we will discuss implications of NRF2 activation during each of the following stages: Transformation and Initiation, Promotion and Progression, and Metastasis.
-
-
Taken from Weinberg (2014).
As a master regulator of the oxidative stress response (Gacesa et al., 2016; Loboda et al., 2016; Mukaigasa et al., 2012), the NRF2 pathway is highly conserved in multicellular animals throughout evolution (Fuse and Kobayashi, 2017; Gacesa et al., 2016; Toyokuni et al., 2020) to defend against one of the most potent and prevalent cellular insults: oxygen. Oxidative imbalance leads to the formation of free radicals which can cause DNA damage and disruption of cellular homeostasis, leading to transformation (Klaunig et al., 1998; Toyokuni et al., 2020; Valko et al., 2006). Reactive oxygen species (ROS) can contribute to carcinogenesis directly by inducing mutations in proto-oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes and indirectly by activating kinases that induce growth-promoting cellular functions (Cerutti, 1985; Son et al., 2013; Waris and Ahsan, 2006). Activation of the NRF2 pathway induces the transcription of genes encoding antioxidant and detoxification enzymes that counteract dangerous accumulation of ROS (Kwak et al., 2003; Lee et al., 2003) and protects cells from transformation (Hao et al., 2020; Schaue et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2022b; Zhang and Gordon, 2004). Several of these protective genes include
Although the antioxidant activities that follow NRF2 activation largely protect against transformation, the metabolic consequences of the NRF2-mediated transcription program can have pro-cancer effects. For example, 3-nitrobenzanthrone, a compound in diesel exhaust, is metabolized to a product which forms DNA adducts and promotes mutagenicity (Enya et al., 1997). Phase II metabolic genes under transcriptional control by NRF2, including
Chronic inflammation is known to promote transformation and tumor initiation (Hanahan, 2022) and is driven by multiple signaling pathways. Uncontrolled activation of the NF-κB pathway can result in inflammatory cell damage which can lead to transformation (Naugler and Karin, 2008; Rial et al., 2012), and one way this pathway can be regulated is through NRF2/KEAP1 (Wardyn et al., 2015). The E3 ligase component KEAP1 directly suppresses NF-κB activity through ubiquitination-mediated degradation of the NF-κB activator IKKβ (Kim et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2009); NF-κB signaling is increased after NRF2 depletion (Pan et al., 2012). This negative regulation of the NF-κB pathway is complemented by other anti-inflammatory regulatory roles of NRF2 which culminate in protection from aberrant inflammation (Chi et al., 2015; Ryan et al., 2022; Suzuki et al., 2017; Thimmulappa et al., 2006). Additionally, the tumor suppressor
There is conflicting data as to whether NRF2 promotes or inhibits tumor initiation. To our knowledge, no study has demonstrated that NRF2-activating mutations alone are sufficient to initiate cancer. Attempts to create mice for assessing effects of whole-body constitutive NRF2 activity have been unsuccessful, as homozygous knockouts of
Carcinogen-induced models such as benzo[
NRF2 activation in genetic models has also been shown to prevent tumor development. Overexpression of the
Despite numerous studies showing that NRF2 activation prevents tumor formation, a considerable body of literature reports the opposite result. In agreement with the
The complexity of the story continues since many models of NRF2-mediated malignancy require co-mutation of other oncogenic drivers and/or tumor suppressors, but different combinations yield disparate results. There was no increase in tumor incidence in small cell lung cancer initiated by inhaled Cre-adenovirus in
In addition to metabolic advantages afforded by constitutive NRF2 activation, NRF2 can cause enhancer remodeling of oncogenic drivers to promote tumor initiation. This remodeling can partially explain how NRF2 switches from an anti-cancer to a pro-tumorigenic phenotype (Okazaki et al., 2020). NRF2 activation also impacts cancer cell differentiation. In melanoma cells, NRF2 activation led to de-differentiation and promoted tumor formation through COX2-mediated immune evasion (Jessen et al., 2020). Increased IL-11 expression in NRF2-activated tumorigenic fibroblasts promotes cancer development, possibly through regulation of the immune system (Kitamura et al., 2017). Taken altogether, the dual roles of NRF2 in promoting or preventing the initiation of cancer remains a complex topic [see (Robertson et al., 2020) for an excellent review on NRF2 and cancer initiation] that requires carefully designed studies and prudent interpretation of data.
-
-
Taken from Weinberg (2014).
Cytoprotective mechanisms enable cancer cells to survive their harsh environments, and NRF2 is activated after cells undergo transformation (Wu et al., 2019). Some cancer subtypes develop mutations within the NRF2 pathway, which lead to constitutive pathway activation (Taguchi and Yamamoto, 2017). Most notably, the hypoxic nature of tumors creates ROS within cancer cells that activates NRF2, regardless of mutational status (Toth and Warfel, 2017). While NRF2 activation alone is not sufficient for the initiation of cancer, it can facilitate proliferation of existing cancer cells initiated by other carcinogenic processes (Vartanian et al., 2019). Activation of oncogenes including
Activation of NRF2 by direct mutation or increased oxidative stress modulates a variety of other processes facilitating progression. The direct gene targets of oncogene-mediated NRF2 activation include not only an extensive array of antioxidant genes (Kavian et al., 2018) but also genes encoding metabolic enzymes (He et al., 2020) and drug efflux pumps (Jeddi et al., 2018; del Vecchio et al., 2014) which collaborate in tumor-promoting effects ranging from increased cancer cell survival to drug resistance. Tumor cells can escape autophagy inhibition by switching to macropinocytosis, a process that is dependent on NRF2 (Su et al., 2021; Towers et al., 2019). NRF2 activation also protects cells from ferroptosis (Fiore et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2020; Nishizawa et al., 2022) and apoptosis (Niture and Jaiswal, 2012; Xie et al., 2020), allowing cancer cells to escape death. Cellular stress induced by anti-cancer drugs and radiation is alleviated by NRF2 activation, leading to therapeutic resistance (Kamble et al., 2021; Noh et al., 2021; Silva et al., 2019). However, the cancer-promoting activation of NRF2 occurs mainly as a response to the high-stress environment within tumors and therefore should be characterized as an enabler, rather than an active driver of cancer progression. For a more comprehensive evaluation of NRF2 and cancer progression, please see (Schmidlin et al., 2021) or (He et al., 2020).
-
Taken from Weinberg (2014).
In addition to promoting cancer cell survival and progression, the ratio of
Additional evidence for the involvement of NRF2 in metastasis can be found in the promotion of the epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT). In glioblastoma multiforme, NRF2 acts in conjunction with p62 to activate EMT and subsequently increases tumor invasiveness (Pölönen et al., 2019). This effect was also observed in hepatocellular carcinoma with MCUR1-induced mitochondrial calcium uptake that induced NRF2/NOTCH-mediated EMT (Jin et al., 2019). Additionally, NRF2 works in conjunction with NOTCH/EMT signaling in breast cancer. NRF2 promotes the upregulation of G6PD/HIF-1α, and in turn, activates NOTCH-mediated EMT of breast cancer cells (Zhang et al., 2019). Further, in non-small cell lung cancer NRF2 activates the RhoA-ROCK1 signaling pathway that increases expression of mesenchymal-type markers and increases cell motility, which was prevented by NRF2 inhibition (Ko et al., 2021).
In combination with increased cancer cell motility through EMT, angiogenesis, a critical feature that enhances dissemination of metastatic cancer cells, is increased by NRF2 (Huang et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2021; Shahcheraghi et al., 2022). This increased angiogenesis has been attributed to NRF2-mediated stabilization of HIF-1α and activation of its transcriptional program (Ji et al., 2014; Zheng et al., 2023). Finally, there is a connection between mitochondrial stress and NRF2. Tumor cells interact with the extracellular matrix to induce intra-tumoral mechanical signaling that increases mitochondrial ROS, which in turn increases oxidative stress, and thus NRF2-mediated cytoprotection (Romani et al., 2022). Romani et al. (2022) discovered that soft extracellular metastatic niches promote NRF2-mediated chemoresistance through increased mitochondrial ROS. Activation of NRF2 is permissive for cancer cell tolerance to oxidative insults in both the invading primary tumor cells and those disseminated to distant metastatic niches.
Knowledge gaps persist in defining the precise function of NRF2 in cancer transformation, initiation, promotion, and metastasis (Fig. 1). Moreover, the lack of definitive conclusions is compounded by the disparate effects observed at different stages of carcinogenesis and in the different cancer models used (genetic versus carcinogen-induced and immune competent versus immunodeficient). These observations, detailed above, lead to a primary conclusion that the functions of NRF2 are highly context dependent. Context encompasses the stage of cancer, the experimental models, and the type of cancer.
The prevalence of high NRF2 expression (increased transcription and translocation to the nucleus) and activation (downstream effectors) is relevant in cancers that arise in organs with high exposure to environmental insults or that function in detoxification, such as the lung, digestive system, pancreas, and liver (Gao et al., 2015; Liby et al., 2008; Pillai et al., 2022). As such, it is likely that pharmacological interventions will be first used in cancers of these organs. However, whether NRF2 activators or inhibitors are appropriate is still under investigation due to the dual roles of NRF2 in promoting and inhibiting cancer. The use of either type of pharmacological agent will likely be stage- and cancer-dependent. Currently there are 4 clinical trials targeting tumors with either
The development of direct pharmacological inhibitors of the NRF2 protein has been hampered primarily due to the lack of a druggable binding pocket (Karunatilleke et al., 2021). NRF2 has been considered an undruggable protein, in the same category as KRAS, one of the most prevalent oncogenes in solid tumors. Development of pharmacological inhibitors or activators of NRF2 is still in its infancy, although recent advances in medicinal chemistry have led to the development of small molecules targeting NRF2 and related proteins (Bar-Peled et al., 2017). Other approaches have been developed to target NRF2-mediated transcription and DNA binding of NRF2/MAFG complexes (Simov et al., 2021). Biological insights into how the NRF2 pathway promotes or inhibits different stages of carcinogenesis provide new opportunities for drug development (Hou et al., 2023; Pouremamali et al., 2022; Robledinos-Antón et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2021). Additionally, with distinct functions evident in different cancers, precision medicine can be used to specifically target vulnerabilities based on mutations or upregulation within the NRF2 pathway. Combination therapies, either with chemotherapy or immunotherapy, are other possible avenues to augment the effects of small molecule inhibitors of the NRF2 pathway.
Despite advances in our knowledge of the NRF2 pathway in recent years, the indirect effects of
This minireview is dedicated in memory of Michael B. Sporn, the “Father of Chemoprevention.” The work was supported by NIH R01CA226690, MTRAC for Life Sciences Innovation Hub-Mi-Kickstart Award, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the MSU Discretionary Funding Initiative (all to K.T.L.). Additional funding was provided by the Barnett Rosenberg Endowed Research Assistantship (J.A.M.), Aitch Foundation (J.A.M.), Integrative Pharmacological Sciences Training Program 5T32GM142521 (C.J.O.), and DOD Career Development Award LC210240 (A.S.L.).
C.J.O. and J.A.M. surveyed the literature and wrote the main body of the manuscript. A.S.L. wrote the abstract, conclusions, and future directions. K.A.G. edited the manuscript and assisted in preparation for submission. K.T.L. provided overall direction and edited the manuscript.
K.T.L. is a named inventor on patents issued and filed for synthetic triterpenoids and NRF2 pathway inhibitors. Other authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Areas requiring further investigation
- Characterization of NRF2-activated tumor microenvironments |
- Epigenetics of NRF2-activated tumors |
- Implications of tumor origin and location on NRF2-mediated tumor biology |
- Clarification on pharmacologic intervention for tumor prevention and treatment |
. Areas requiring further investigation.
- Characterization of NRF2-activated tumor microenvironments |
- Epigenetics of NRF2-activated tumors |
- Implications of tumor origin and location on NRF2-mediated tumor biology |
- Clarification on pharmacologic intervention for tumor prevention and treatment |
Key Sun Park, Kee Kwang Kim, Zheng-Hao Piao, Mi Kyung Kim, Hyun Jean Lee, Yong Chan Kim, Ki Sung Lee, Jeung-Hoon Lee, and Kyoon Eon Kim*
Mol. Cells 2012; 34(6): 555-561 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10059-012-0251-7Aryatara Shakya, Nicholas W. McKee, Matthew Dodson, Eli Chapman, and Donna D. Zhang
Mol. Cells 2023; 46(3): 165-175 https://doi.org/10.14348/molcells.2023.0005Takafumi Suzuki, Jun Takahashi, and Masayuki Yamamoto
Mol. Cells 2023; 46(3): 133-141 https://doi.org/10.14348/molcells.2023.0028