During tumor evolution, cancer cells use the tumor‐stroma crosstalk to reorganize the microenvironment for maximum robustness of the tumor. The success of immune checkpoint therapy foretells a new cancer therapy paradigm: an effective cancer treatment should not aim to influence the individual components of super complex intracellular interactomes (molecular targeting), but try to disrupt the intercellular interactions between cancer and stromal cells, thus breaking the tumor as a whole. Arguments are provided in favor of a hypothesis that such interactions include (...) formation of synapse‐like structures (interfaces) where the interacting cells are located at a distance of ∼10–15 nm. Within these interfaces, molecules initiating and strengthening the interaction are organized, and allow optimum cross‐signaling; a very confined intercellular space facilitates the concentration of secreted cytokines, enhancing the paracrine cross‐communication. These features of tumors form a druggable cancer hallmark the tumor‐stroma symbiotic crosstalk—which represents a new target for efficient cancer drug discovery. (shrink)

Bacteria use trans‐translation to rescue stalled ribosomes and target incomplete proteins for proteolysis. Despite similarities between tRNAs and transfer‐messenger RNA (tmRNA), the key molecule for trans‐translation, new structural and biochemical data show important differences between translation and trans‐translation at most steps of the pathways. tmRNA and its binding partner, SmpB, bind in the A site of the ribosome but do not trigger the same movements of nucleotides in the rRNA that are required for codon recognition by tRNA. tmRNA‐SmpB moves from (...) the A site to the P site of the ribosome without subunit rotation to generate hybrid states, and moves from the P site to a site outside the ribosome instead of to the E site. During catalysis, transpeptidation to tmRNA appears to require the ribosomal protein bL27, which is dispensable for translation, suggesting that this protein may be conserved in bacteria due to trans‐translation. These differences provide insights into the fundamental nature of trans‐translation, and provide targets for new antibiotics that may have decrease cross‐reactivity with eukaryotic ribosomes. (shrink)

Since the dawn of molecular biology, cancer therapy has focused on druggable targets. Despite some remarkable successes, cell‐level evolution remains a potent antagonist to this approach. We suggest that a deeper understanding of the breakdown of cooperation can synergize the evolutionary and druggable‐targets approaches. Complexity requires cooperation, whether between cells of different species (symbiosis) or between cells of the same organism (multicellularity). Both forms of cooperation may be associated with nutrient scarcity, which in turn may be associated with a chemiosmotic (...) metabolism. A variety of examples from modern organisms supports these generalities. Indeed, mammalian cancers—unicellular, glycolytic, and fast‐replicating—parallel these examples. Nutrient scarcity, chemiosmosis, and associated signaling may favor cooperation, while under conditions of nutrient abundance a fermentative metabolism may signal the breakdown of cooperation. Manipulating this metabolic milieu may potentiate the effects of targeted therapeutics. Specific opportunities are discussed in this regard, including avicins, a novel plant product. (shrink)

A new high‐resolution structure of a pain‐sensing ion channel, TRPA1, provides a molecular scaffold to understand channel function. Unexpected structural features include a TRP‐domain helix similar to TRPV1, a novel ligand‐binding site, and an unusual C‐terminal coiled coil stabilized by inositol hexakisphosphate (IP6). TRP‐domain helices, which structurally act as a nexus for communication between the channel gates and its other domains, may thus be a feature conserved across the entire TRP family and, possibly, other allosterically‐gated channels. Similarly, the TRPA1 antagonist‐binding (...) site could also represent a druggable location in other ion channels. Combined with known TRPA1 functional properties, the structural role for IP6 leads us to propose that polyphosphate unbinding could act as a molecular kill switch for TRPA1 inactivation. Finally, although packing of the TRPA1 membrane‐proximal region hints at a mechanism for electrophile sensing, the details of how TRPA1 responds to noxious reactive electrophiles and temperature await future studies.Also watch the Video Abstract. (shrink)

Cancer drugs are broadly classified into two categories: cytotoxic chemotherapies and targeted therapies that specifically modulate the activity of one or more proteins involved in cancer. Major advances have been achieved in targeted cancer therapies in the past few decades, which is ascribed to the increasing understanding of molecular mechanisms for cancer initiation and progression. Consequently, monoclonal antibodies and small molecules have been developed to interfere with a specific molecular oncogenic target. Targeting gain‐of‐function mutations, in general, has been productive. However, (...) it has been a major challenge to use standard pharmacologic approaches to target loss‐of‐function mutations of tumor suppressor genes. Novel approaches, including synthetic lethality and collateral vulnerability screens, are now being developed to target gene defects in p53, PTEN, and BRCA1/2. Here, we review and summarize the recent findings in cancer genomics, drug development, and molecular cancer biology, which show promise in targeting tumor suppressors in cancer therapeutics. (shrink)