For over a century, cancer’s metabolic hallmark has been clear: high glycolytic rates even in the presence of oxygen. Otto Warburg identified this paradox, which we now understand as a powerful adaptive mechanism, not a flaw.
👇Here’s a summary of how lactate lies at the center of cancer metabolism, signaling, and therapy 🧵
1/7 The Warburg Effect is more than an anomaly or a curiosity. It reflects a fundamental reprogramming of cancer cell bioenergetics. Cancer cells downregulate mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and rely primarily on cytosolic glycolysis, funneling glucose into pyruvate and converting it into lactate, even when oxygen is abundant.
2/7 We call this process Lactagenesis. It is not metabolic overflow. It is a regulated shift that supports proliferation, survival, and invasion. Lactate is not waste product. It is a central player in tumor biology.
3/7 Lactate acts as a signaling molecule. Our research and others have shown that lactate upregulates key genes that drive multiple processes in carcinogenesis including exacerbated growth and proliferation, angiogenesis, immune escape and metastasis.
4/7 Accumulated lactate also is a key player in the tumor microenvironment, enhancing immune evasion, angiogenesis, extracellular matrix remodeling and metastatic potential. Lactate does not only reflects cancer metabolism, it sculpts the tumor ecosystem.
5/7 This presents an enormous opportunity. Targeting lactate metabolism may transform cancer therapy. Potential strategies include:
• Inhibiting lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Not just A but all isoforms.
• Blocking monocarboxylate transporters (MCT1, MCT4)
• Buffering extracellular acidity
• Promoting mitochondrial reactivation and oxidative bioenergetics.
6/7 Instead of focusing solely on killing cancer cells, we should consider metabolic interventions on its phenotype. Interrupting lactagenesis may reestablish mitochondrial function, decrease oncogenic signaling, increase apoptosis, and make tumors more visible to the immune system.
7/7 Cancer may be biphasic disease where genetic dysregulation could be the 1st phase followed by a cellular metabolic and bioenergetic distinction where Mitochondria are more than powerhouses as they are gatekeepers of cell fate.
While science in general hasn’t been able to cure cancer, targeting cancer metabolism could finally corner cancer. For that, it is time we stop calling lactate a waste product. It is the language of cancer. And now, we are learning to silence it.
Muscle acidosis is real and it decreases performance significantly. However, Lactate is NOTthe reason for muscle acidosis.
Free thread depicting the role of lactate during hgh intensity exercise: 🧵😉 👇
During high-intensity exercise, skeletal muscle experiences a significant increase in protons (H⁺) concentration, leading to a decrease in intracellular pH and therefore increasing skeletal muscle acidosis. These protons come mainly from:
1) ATP hydrolysis is the primary source of H⁺during exercise. H⁺build up in the cytosol leading to decreased in muscle pH.
ATP + H₂O → ADP + HPO₄²⁻+ H⁺
2) Lactate formation from pyruvate receives ("buffers") one H⁺ from the oxidation of NADH to NAD+ during glycolysis. This step is the only possible step for the regeneration of NAD+ so that glycolysis can continue and REDOX status can be maintained. Hence, Lactate DOES NOT cause acidosis as it is NOT a source of protons (H⁺). The “acid” simply doesn’t exist.
🧵Thread: They role of Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) mutations in cancer🧵
Some thoughts I tried to put together...
1) Although in 1923 Otto Warburg already suggested that mitochondrial function was key for cancer development. In the last decade, the Warburg effect has finally re-emerged in a very strong manner after being buried for many decades. Nowadays, it is a mainstream concept...
2) While it is great that finally the Warburg Effect is viewed by the scientific community as a key piece of the cancer puzzle, it has brought some significant misunderstanding and misinformation to the general population. Such as intellectually cheap and lazy concepts like “sugar causes cancer” (a very wrong way to understand the Warburg Effect) or that Cancer is purely a Metabolic Disease.
3) All diseases ultimately succumb to cellular metabolic and bioenergetics dysfunction. Hence, one could argue that all diseases are metabolic diseases because of this condition. However, we know that this is not right for many diseases.
In the case of cancer there is absolutely no doubt that genetic mutations play a significant role, although at the same time, metabolic dysfunction and reprogramming are also hallmarks of cancer. Hence, in the field of cancer, both genetics and cellular metabolism are intertwined, although it is very possible that we cannot affirm that cancer is neither solely a genetic nor a metabolic disease, but both. Until we don’t elucidate this transcendental question in cancer, we won’t be able to corner Cancer.
1/5 Our most recent study just upladed to bioRxiv for free download.
"Metabolic and Cellular Differences Between Sedentary and Active Individuals at Rest and During Exercise". biorxiv.org/content/10.110…
2/5 Our study investigates the metabolic and muscle bioenergetics underpinning the apparent health of sedentary individuals, considering the significant prevalence of non-communicable diseases associated with physical inactivity.
3/5 Using muscle biopsies and graded exercise testing, our research study delineated distinct variations in mitochondrial respiration, substrate oxidation capacities, and overall muscle bioenergetics between sedentary and moderately active groups.
1/9 The field of nutrition in oncology has become quite controversial in the last years. Mainly, because of misconceptions regarding cancer metabolism around the Warburg Effect... thelancet.com/journals/lanon…
2/9 The Warburg Effect is finally "mainstream" in oncology research but also a cause of misconceptions out there... The article is an interesting one about this controversy. In my opinion, in general, the article is well presented and I agree with most of it.
3/9 This is a figure from the article article summarizing some of the main controversies and misconceptions around the Warburg Effect and oncology nutrition...
A thread on how IMHO bicarbonate doesn’t work to “decrease” lactate from muscles
First of all, bicarbonate is one of the oldest supplements out there. It has been used for decades for this purpose. Like many supplements that don’t work, they tend to resurface 20-30 years later…
Blood pH is 7.35-7.45 and one of the most sacred homeostatic states for human body. 3 main elements “threaten” blood pH: CO2, electrolyte concentrations and weak acid concentrations. During high intensity exercise and pathological stress, these elements are threats to blood pH.
Our body possess a large pool of bicarb to constantly defend the physiological & sacred pH of 7.35-7.45. This is key as if your blood pH ⬇️ or ⬆️ over those ranges you could simply die. Hence, exogenous bicarb will normally be neutralized as blood pH cannot ⬇️ homeostatic levels
Effects of 5 weeks of plant-based diet on lipid profile. N=1, myself 😉
Thread here 👇
Ever since I stopped racing competitively, my lipid profile has been in the high end as have a genetic load. In general, I eat healthy w/ Mediterranean diet although “Americanized” with higher amount of cheese and eggs and less legumes than when I ate growing up in Spain.
As so many, I gained ~4kg (8.8lbs) with the pandemic and I started loosing weight as I focused to exercise 4-5 times a week, 1:30h each time at Z2. However, I started traveling again quite a bit and threw me off a bit so I gained weight again.