Aug 2026· Cancer Letters· pp.
218799
· 0 citations· 207 references
Medicine
TL;DR
How emerging single-cell and spatial multi-omics technologies, integrated with artificial intelligence-based modeling, enable mapping of cell state landscapes and transitional trajectories, transforming lineage plasticity from a descriptive phenomenon into a measurable and predictable property of tumor evolution is discussed.
Abstract
Lineage plasticity has emerged as a central mechanism through which cancer cells adapt to therapeutic pressure, evade immune surveillance, and acquire aggressive phenotypes. Although recognized across tumor types, the regulatory principles governing how cancer cells reprogram cellular identity remain incompletely understood. In this review, we propose that lineage plasticity in cancer reflects the redeployment of regulatory frameworks established during normal development. Rather than representing a stochastic byproduct of genomic instability, cancer plasticity frequently unfolds within gene regulatory architectures that also govern cell fate specification, lineage commitment, and controlled state transitions during embryogenesis and tissue homeostasis. Developmental transcription factors, including members of the SOX family, FOXA1, ASCL1, NKX2-1, and epithelial-mesenchymal transition regulators, function as lineage gatekeepers during development but are repurposed in cancer to destabilize lineage commitment and enable phenotypic switching. Similarly, epigenetic regulators that guide developmental trajectories, including chromatin remodeling complexes, Polycomb group proteins, and DNA methylation machinery, are frequently dysregulated or redistributed in tumors, altering the repression of lineage-stabilizing and alternative lineage programs and thereby weakening epigenetic barriers to lineage transitions. Together, these observations support a model in which development and cancer operate as mirror regulatory systems: one establishing and stabilizing cellular identity, the other exploiting the same regulatory architecture to permit adaptive reprogramming under selective pressure. We further discuss how emerging single-cell and spatial multi-omics technologies, integrated with artificial intelligence-based modeling, enable mapping of cell state landscapes and transitional trajectories, transforming lineage plasticity from a descriptive phenomenon into a measurable and predictable property of tumor evolution.
This review evaluating how the antagonistic interplay between Polycomb and Trithorax complexes, chromatin modifier activity, and enhancer reprogramming affects lineage identity and enables multi-lineage plasticity in cancer underscores epigenetic deregulation as a primary driver of lineage plasticity and intratumoral heterogeneity.
Ezgi Boyvatlı, Burcu Akman, E. Bağırsakçı et al.· FEBS Letters· 0 citations
Multicellularity necessitated the evolution of cellular diversity and specialization, yet across organisms, the retention of cellular plasticity within defined physiological contexts is a recurring principle. Here, we examine early-diverging metazoans to reevaluate the evolutionary logic of stemness. Rather than viewing stem cells as exceptional, we argue that cellular plasticity represents a deeply conserved attribute of early life. The ability of cells to remain responsive, multipotent, and regenerative under ecological or physiological contexts challenges the notion of cellular identity. We integrate evidence across three layers: evolutionary origins of cellular plasticity, systemic physiological axes that govern stem cell behavior, and metabolic and epigenetic mechanisms that execute fate decisions. This synthesis reveals that stemness is not a default cellular state but a licensed state, permitted when organism-level physiological signals align with local tissue demands. Within this framework, regeneration, age-associated decline, and cancer emerge as evidence of how effectively systemic governance regulates cellular plasticity across multicellular life.
Jagriti Arora, Sakshi Tiwari, Dasaradhi Palakodeti et al.· Annual Review of Genetics· 0 citations
The authors apply ARACNe and metaVIPER to published scRNA-seq datasets to characterize pancreatic cancer subtypes, identifying six distinct cell states as well as their mechanistic determinants.
P. Laise, Mikko M. Turunen, Álvaro Curiel-García et al.· Nature Genetics· 0 citations
Tumor plasticity and microenvironmental heterogeneity are established as an integrated, evolving system that fuels metastasis and limits durable treatment responses.
G. Dagar, M. Dagar, Ashna Gupta et al.· MedComm· 0 citations
These findings support a model in which normal-like cells tolerate oncogenic mutations not because most cells fail to respond, but because a p53-independent, cell-intrinsic barrier limits the stabilization of malignant transformation following a transient period of heightened plasticity.
Costakis Frangou, A. Safina, M. Commane et al.· bioRxiv· 0 citations
These findings suggest a highly conserved role for HDAC9 and class IIA HDACs in vertebrate pancreatic tumorigenesis and may lead to new strategies for reactivating (normal acinar/epithelial) differentiation programs to intercept and treat PDAC.
Somer Matar, Sandra Blázquez-Araguás, Andrea Diéguez-Docampo et al.· Cellular and Molecular Gastr...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.