Epigenetic and RNA control of cancer stem cell plasticity and therapy resistance
Abstract
Cancer stem cell (CSC) plasticity and therapy resistance involve chromatin regulation, RNA modifications, and noncoding RNA circuits that differ in their mechanisms and evidential support. This review distinguishes functionally defined CSCs from marker-defined stem-like populations and drug-tolerant persisters (DTPs), which can overlap while retaining different defining properties. We synthesize DNA and histone modifications, chromatin organization, m6A and m6Am regulation, and noncoding RNAs, including extracellular-vesicle-mediated RNA trafficking. RNA-mediated signaling and intercellular transfer are classified separately where evidence for a chromatin or RNA-modification mechanism is lacking. A claim-specific E1–E4 framework separates human evidence with functional validation, causal in vivo experiments, cell-based functional stemness assays, and associations; developmental stage is assessed independently. Conflicting glioblastoma RNA-modification studies and the opposing effects of FTO across tumor contexts show that therapeutic direction depends on more than regulator identity. Longitudinal acute myeloid leukemia studies support regulatory-state heterogeneity at relapse, while a universal CSC-specific epigenetic cause remains unproven. Metabolic and niche examples are evaluated according to the measured regulatory change, rescue experiments, functional stemness assays, and treatment endpoints. Translation requires separate measures of target engagement, cell-state redistribution, and sustained loss of tumor-propagating capacity, together with normal-stem-cell and long-term safety assessment. This framework identifies testable therapeutic dependencies and defines the evidence needed to support claims of CSC eradication.
Related
- FOXM1 as a candidate dosage rheostat and state selector in breast cancer: linking multilevel regulation to adaptive plasticity and therapy resistance
- Cell plasticity in cancer and therapy resistance
- Autophagy as an adaptive resistance mechanism to epigenetic therapy in cancer.
- Epigenetic and metabolic plasticity of tumor cells in immunotherapy resistance
- Cellular senescence in ovarian cancer: a proposed geroncogenic shift linking aging, plasticity, and therapy resistance
BibTeX
@article{gao2026epigenetic,
title = {{Epigenetic and RNA control of cancer stem cell plasticity and therapy resistance}},
author = {Rong Gao and Chenqi Nie and Zekai Hu and Junsheng Zhao},
journal = {Frontiers in Oncology},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.3389/fonc.2026.2005505},
url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2026.2005505},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Epigenetic and RNA control of cancer stem cell plasticity and therapy resistance
AU - Rong Gao
AU - Chenqi Nie
AU - Zekai Hu
AU - Junsheng Zhao
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/04
JO - Frontiers in Oncology
DO - 10.3389/fonc.2026.2005505
UR - https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2026.2005505
AB - Cancer stem cell (CSC) plasticity and therapy resistance involve chromatin regulation, RNA modifications, and noncoding RNA circuits that differ in their mechanisms and evidential support. This review distinguishes functionally defined CSCs from marker-defined stem-like populations and drug-tolerant persisters (DTPs), which can overlap while retaining different defining properties. We synthesize DNA and histone modifications, chromatin organization, m6A and m6Am regulation, and noncoding RNAs, including extracellular-vesicle-mediated RNA trafficking. RNA-mediated signaling and intercellular transfer are classified separately where evidence for a chromatin or RNA-modification mechanism is lacking. A claim-specific E1–E4 framework separates human evidence with functional validation, causal in vivo experiments, cell-based functional stemness assays, and associations; developmental stage is assessed independently. Conflicting glioblastoma RNA-modification studies and the opposing effects of FTO across tumor contexts show that therapeutic direction depends on more than regulator identity. Longitudinal acute myeloid leukemia studies support regulatory-state heterogeneity at relapse, while a universal CSC-specific epigenetic cause remains unproven. Metabolic and niche examples are evaluated according to the measured regulatory change, rescue experiments, functional stemness assays, and treatment endpoints. Translation requires separate measures of target engagement, cell-state redistribution, and sustained loss of tumor-propagating capacity, together with normal-stem-cell and long-term safety assessment. This framework identifies testable therapeutic dependencies and defines the evidence needed to support claims of CSC eradication.
SN - 2234-943X
ER -