Category: Research

  • Why MAHA wants to make health data much more accessible

    Why MAHA wants to make health data much more accessible

    WASHINGTON — The Make America Healthy Again movement wants your health data.

    The MAHA Institute, a think tank formed by allies of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after his appointment as health secretary, held an event on Monday that emphasized the benefits of opening up health data sharing in the United States. In particular, the event highlighted how sharing patients’ health records with federal researchers could benefit the study of the origins of chronic diseases.

    In a speech at the event, Kennedy said that user agreements restrict access to data, giving “institutions that control important health data the power to decide who can study it and what questions they’re allowed to ask, and that creates protectionism in science and it leads to the politicization of science.”

    “A qualified researcher with legitimate hypotheses should not need permission from a gatekeeper to test it, particularly from an industry gatekeeper,” he said in his remarks, which began and ended with a standing ovation.

    The idea of using data from health information exchanges for research is controversial because of privacy concerns.

    Speakers throughout the day brought up the state of Nebraska’s partnership with the federal government. As reported earlier this year by KFF Health News, Nebraska’s health information exchange network, called CyncHealth, is sharing patient data with the federal government to enable studies on vaccines and autism. 

    Kennedy said Monday he wants to aggregate “immunization records, clinical data, laboratory results, pharmacy information, and claims to create a more complete picture of a patient’s health over a long period of time.” That data would come from state health information exchanges, EHRs, laboratories, Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial health data platforms like HealthVerity. 

    “We’re already using all these data to answer some of our most important questions. Too much remains fragmented, vulcanized, difficult to link, and inaccessible to researchers,” he said, citing a desire to aggregate the data and make it available to all researchers.

    While KFF reported Nebraska’s partnership was with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and focused on vaccines and autism, MAHA Institute President Mark Gorton said a partnership between Nebraska and the National Institutes of Health “has successfully produced data for the study of chronic disease and serves as a proof of concept for the state-federal hybrid model.” Neither partnership seems to have been publicly announced, though the NIH has already stood up an effort to build Medicare and Medicaid databases within the NIH in an effort to better understand autism.

    Nebraska’s CyncHealth was, until the end of last year, led by Jamie Bland, who became chief data strategist of the MAHA Institute in April.

    At the time of KFF’s reporting, leaders of other state health information exchanges decided not to share information with the government. Using such data for research could run into patient privacy, ethics, and legal issues.

    For example, Jonathan Ketcham, who was chief health care economist at the White House until earlier this year, when he moved back to his economics professorship at Arizona State University, said on Monday that Arizona’s health information exchange data “cannot be used, even de-identified, for researcher grants without individual consent” from providers.

    “The issue is not a technical limitation,” Andrew Kress, CEO and founder of data company HealthVerity, told STAT last year. “It’s really been more around data governance, data ownership, data privacy. Those are the reasons that these things have not worked, more so than you can’t find the right data to do it.” Hospitals, for example, sometimes sell their patients’ de-identified data, or carefully grant access under data use agreements that spell out what purpose the data can be used for. Patients also normally have to consent to their information being used for research.

    Gorton said that the partnership with Nebraska has only worked “because of the investments that Nebraska has made in data governance.” “If this model is going to expand, we will need to see other states make similar investments in the mundane yet crucial function of data governance,” he said.

    The administration has sought to give patients more control over their own data through initiatives like the CMS Health Tech Ecosystem. “Liberate patient records,” said top HHS official Chris Klomp at a STAT event in March. “Let us be very clear on CMS’ official position on this: The record belongs to the patient. It goes everywhere the patient needs to go. We’re serious about this.” 

    But the improved health data infrastructure from these and other Trump administration efforts would help standardize health data, making it ripe for helping answer research questions.

    “We’ve had a lot of public controversy about vaccine safety,” said Donald Rucker, chief strategy officer at 1upHealth and national coordinator for health IT during the first Trump administration. “Many of the [health information exchanges] could answer these questions right now if the immunization registries weren’t actually unlinked to the HIEs,” he said.

    Gorton said at the event that the partnership with Nebraska is a model for state-federal cooperation on health data, and that all 50 states will try different approaches to “growing America’s health data infrastructure.”

    “With these successes, residents will experience health data record portability and a better healthcare experience. Once citizens experience what is possible in one state, other states will rush to follow,” said Gorton. “This pilot is just one small step on a long journey, and we are excited to be part of this adventure.”

  • Risk from toxic metals can persist months after wildfires, Maui study finds

    Risk from toxic metals can persist months after wildfires, Maui study finds

    Metal mixtures found in the leftover smoke, ash and debris from the deadly 2023 Maui wildfires were harmful to the lung health of people living nearby long after the burning ended, a new study says.

    The work shows that major wildfires, which are worsening with the planet’s warming, could have lasting effects beyond immediate exposure.

    Post-wildfire air quality needs to be monitored longer term, the research suggests, and recovery efforts need to consider what might remain in contaminated soot, residue and dirt well after burning stops.

    The wildfires, caused by wind spreading a brushfire spurred by downed power lines, burned on the Hawaiian island of Maui in August 2023, destroyed the town of Lāhainā and killed more than 100 people. They were among the deadliest in U.S. history.

    New research published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Monday found higher metal levels, associated with respiratory harm, in nearby residents up to a year and a half after the fires.

    As part of the Maui Wildfire Exposure Study, one of the largest postfire investigations in the country, University of Hawai‘i researchers studied the urine of 1,400 adults. They found substantially elevated concentrations of metals such as arsenic, cadmium, copper and antimony.

    Chemicals from burned buildings and electronics

    These metals could be the result of burned buildings, vehicles, electronics and other materials lost in the wildfires, the researchers say. They can cause a different human impact than simply the burned vegetation that is typically studied after fires of this magnitude.

    “What we’re dealing with, especially in the aftermath of what we experienced in Lāhainā, is a much more complicated mixture of these chemical exposures,” said Alika Maunakea, co-principal investigator of MauiWES and an anatomy, biochemistry, and physiology professor at the University of Hawai‘i, Mānoa.

    Alika Maunakea: Consequences of fire “can unfold over many years.”
    Crystal Milner/STAT

    The researchers found antimony nearly 40 times higher in the Maui participants than U.S. biomonitoring data. They found manganese 3.8 times higher, barium 2.3 times and arsenic 2.2 times.

    Having more metals in the body was more likely to result in abnormal lung function, such as having less breathing capacity and difficulty moving air in and out of one’s lungs, during standard breathing tests, the study found.

    Those lung effects aligned with the geographic distribution of smoke and ash; those nearest to Lāhainā, and Wailuku and Kahului, experienced a different impact than in those near Kula.

    “It’s really important to identify potential sources of these exposures and to mitigate and reduce potential risks for re-exposures that might be contributing to these effects,” Maunakea said. “What happens to the land and environment can shape what people breathe, take into their bodies, and develop over time. The consequences of that can unfold over many years.”

    Warming planet can worsen wildfires

    Wildfires are getting larger, more intense, faster-moving and more frequent in certain parts of the globe, experts say, in part due to the warming and drier weather associated with climate change. Human-caused climate change has upped the likelihood of many major fires around the world in recent years and led to fires in regions that typically do not see them as often.

    The researchers did note a limitation of the study in that it cannot assess exactly how much of the impact came directly from the wildfires versus chronic or other exposures — such as Hawai‘i’s geology, diet, historic agricultural and industrial activity and environmental sources — given there is no comparable data from before August 2023.

    However, previous studies have also found significant long-term human impacts from wildfires and other environmental crises. The impacts have included lung issues and mental health issues such as depression.

    “This is bigger than wildfires. These climate-related disasters can change the environment in ways that continue after the immediate emergency is over,” said Ruben Juarez, co-principal investigator of MauiWES and professor of health economics at the university. “Floods, hurricanes, fires, and other disasters definitely can disturb soil, debris, buildings, and legacy contaminants that we have in Hawai‘i, creating these pathways for exposure. … Disaster response should not stop when visible danger is gone.”

    Kekoa Taparra, a physician and assistant professor who studies chronic diseases at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the research expands our understanding of the health burden of the fires, particularly over an extended period.

    “This type of work echoes that climate-related disasters affect human health well beyond the immediate injuries and deaths we see during the event itself,” said Taparra, who was not involved in the study released Monday but has studied the health impacts of disasters. “Historic wildfires in Lāhainā  and even Los Angeles have highlighted how these disasters can produce longer-lasting consequences through displacement, disruption of healthcare and social networks, environmental exposures, and potentially increased mortality.

    “As these events become more frequent and severe, understanding and measuring their full health impact will be essential to building more resilient communities and health systems.” — Alexa St. John

  • STAT+: Scientists made mice with half a brain. Then they filled them with human organoids

    STAT+: Scientists made mice with half a brain. Then they filled them with human organoids

    For the last decade, scientists have been steadily getting better at growing “cerebral organoids,”  miniature, three-dimensional brain-like structures, from human stem cells in the lab. Now, a group from Stanford University has found a way to advance their usefulness for studying brain development and disease — by instead growing them inside mice that have had large parts of their own brains genetically removed. 

    Neuroscientists say these “neuro-chimeric” mice, whose brains are half-human — by volume, not by number of neurons — are an important innovation for a field hampered by longstanding challenges in accessing human brain tissue for research. But such models also raise a host of ethical questions that will get thornier the more advanced they become. 

    In a study published Wednesday in Nature, the Stanford team reported finding types of human cells inside the brains of 3-month-old chimeric mouse pups that are very hard to obtain in a dish. They included pyramidal projection neurons that had wound their way into some of the animals’ spinal cords. The scientists also found evidence of specialized, super-sized neurons involved in social cognition only found in large-brain mammals like elephants, whales, and primates, including humans. 

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • Judge blocks Trump administration plans to limit visa length for grad students, postdocs

    Judge blocks Trump administration plans to limit visa length for grad students, postdocs

    A federal judge on Monday issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from upending a long-standing policy that allows foreign students and scholars to stay in the U.S. for the duration of their training, a decision that suggests that plaintiffs opposed to the policy change are likely to ultimately succeed.

    The ruling halts plans by the Department of Homeland Security to place a four-year cap on the kinds of visas used by graduate students and postdoctoral researchers while a judge hears full arguments in a lawsuit over the new policy. Experts warn the outcome of the case could have a dramatic impact on the nation’s biomedical preeminence given that international researchers make up a large share of the U.S. life science workforce. The new policy had been set to take effect on Tuesday. 

    In his ruling, Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts wrote that “the promulgation of the rule clearly failed to comply with the [Administrative Procedure Act].” Saylor added that the administration’s argument that the new visa policy is needed to safeguard national security was weak and “raises legitimate questions as to whether its real purpose is not to safeguard national security and protect our borders, but to achieve other, undisclosed, goals — such as, for example, asserting greater government control over academic institutions.” 

    While Saylor said that the plaintiffs have a “substantial likelihood of success” in the case, he declined to issue a summary judgment definitively striking down the DHS rule.

    In a Sept. 3 hearing, an attorney for the coalition of academic groups that challenged the visa restrictions, Paul Hughes from the firm McDermott, Will & Schulte, argued the government did not conduct a sufficient analysis of the fallout of the new policy. Without a delay in its implementation or throwing out the change, he said schools would experience “irreparable harm.” 

    Michael Celone, a Department of Justice lawyer, in turn, argued that the government had done its due diligence and that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated tangible harm that would result from the policy. Celone said students who are impacted by the policy could either apply for extensions or easily apply elsewhere, comparing students choosing schools to taking a book out of the library. 

    Saylor seemed skeptical of the government’s reasoning, questioning how the policy would diminish any national security risks posed by international students. “I am struggling to see any real, rational connection between national security issues identified, which is not even half of a dozen incidents over 50 years, and this change,” he said to Celone during the hearing. 

    The judge also took issue with the relatively short time the policy was open for public comments: “Can I say it’s illegal? Probably not. But it is part of the mix here to what extent the government was taking its duty seriously in weighing costs and benefits.”

    Academic groups, including the nonprofit NAFSA: Association of International Educators and the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, have joined the suit. DHS; Markwayne Mullin, secretary of the department; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; and David Venturella, acting director of ICE, are named as defendants.

    The case centers around a long-standing policy known as duration of status, which for more than 40 years has allowed international students and scholars to remain in the U.S. for however long it took them to complete their training. 

    The federal government implemented the policy in 1979 to streamline international students’ admission into the country. But the Trump administration has argued duration of status has led to the creation of “forever students,” whom they allege cheat the system by perpetually enrolling in courses to avoid leaving the U.S.

    In mid-July, DHS announced that, going forward, foreign students and postdocs won’t be allowed to stay in the U.S. for more than four years on nonimmigrant visas unless they apply for and receive an extension. Students and postdocs already in the U.S. wouldn’t need to apply for extensions if their training will end before September 2030.

    But in a suit filed in mid-August, the academic groups alleged that the new rules violate the Administrative Procedure Act, a law that governs how agencies implement new regulations. The plaintiffs alleged that DHS didn’t give interested parties enough time to comment on the new rule, didn’t respond substantively to comments, and hasn’t clearly explained why the new policy is a rational and necessary response to alleged visa fraud.

    The academic coalition warned in the suit that uncertainty around whether foreign researchers will be able to stay in the U.S. for the length of their training could prevent them from coming here in the first place. A NAFSA poll of more than 1,000 current students and postdocs found that nearly half of them would not have come to the U.S. under a fixed period of admission.

    In its response, the Trump administration dismissed the findings of the poll as “uncertain and speculative.” The government also argued that the new rule was necessary to safeguard national security and would have minimal downside, and that if international enrollment does decline, it could be for reasons unrelated to the end of duration of status.

    International researchers make up nearly a quarter of life science Ph.D. graduates and around 60% of postdoctoral researchers. The new policy would mean many of them would need to apply for a visa extension; the average biomedical Ph.D. takes five to six years to complete, and National Science Foundation data indicate that about a fifth of postdocs have worked in that role for more than six years.

    STAT’s coverage of the federal government’s impact on the biomedical workforce is supported by a grant from the Dana Foundation and the Boston Foundation. Our financial supporters are not involved in any decisions about our journalism.

  • Platinum-based chemotherapy in childhood causes mutations that age the liver

    Platinum-based chemotherapy in childhood causes mutations that age the liver

    Platinum-based chemotherapy — in particular cisplatin and carboplatin — are a lifeline for children with certain cancers. These treatments, for instance, transformed the prognosis of hepatoblastoma, a rare cancer of the liver that is the most commonly diagnosed in childhood, from a five-year survival rate of 20% to more than 80% for localized tumors. 

    However, these medications work by damaging the DNA of cancer cells, and they are also known to cause mutations in the DNA of healthy cells, potentially raising the risk of new cancers later in life. The mutations have been documented in adults, but the picture is less clear when it comes to children. A new study published Thursday in Science sought a clearer understanding of the long-term impact of platinum agents in children treated for hepatoblastoma. 

    The study looked at children who had received platinum therapy followed by surgery to remove the tumor. The researchers sampled tissues from the liver — both healthy and cancerous — and the patient’s blood, analyzing them through a sophisticated DNA sequencing technique called NanoSeq. 

    They then compared the sequencing results to those from children who had been treated with different drugs, or had not been treated prior to surgery, as well as to fetal liver tissue. They found that being exposed to platinum agents led to hundreds of mutations in genes (on average 2,200 per liver sample), a burden of mutation usually found in adult livers. In other words, platinum aged the liver cells of treated children, making them look more like adult liver cells.

    Mutation load also increased proportionally to platinum exposure: children who received only cisplatin had a smaller number of mutations than those who received both cisplatin and carboplatin. These mutations could increase the likelihood of liver pathologies, or the emergence of secondary tumors, the authors said. 

    “We found lots of cancer genes but also genes associated with long-term changes in liver metabolism,” said Foad Rouhani, one of the authors of the paper and a professor at King’s College in London. However, he stressed that “by no means does that mean that these cells will definitely become cancerous in time. All we talk about is there was evidence for potential for these cells to eventually cause problems further down the line.” 

    Liver cells showed many more mutations than blood cells, even though chemotherapy is a systemic treatment. “The platinum is doing something differently to liver cells than other cells. Either it’s been metabolized differently or the liver cells are repairing differently, we don’t really know yet,” said Rouhani. This could mean that the liver was more susceptible to the effects of platinum, or it could be the other way around: The extent of the mutations may explain why that liver got sick in the first place. 

    In a perspective article, Sanjeev Vasudevan and Donald Williams Parsons, both professors at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, wrote that the findings “provide strong evidence for conducting survivorship studies of children that have undergone treatment for liver cancer beyond their third decade of life.”

    For the study authors, its primary contribution lies in establishing that the damage occurs, so clinicians can monitor these patients more closely during their lifetimes, said Rouhani, and identify issues at an earlier stage. 

    But there could be a prospective impact on treatment. “If we understand the mechanism, can we then eventually be able to design next-generation chemotherapies which are highly effective at treating the cancer but actually leave the background tissue largely untouched?” said Rouhani.

  • STAT+: The Ig Nobel Prizes, long held in the U.S., head to Europe due to Trump policies

    STAT+: The Ig Nobel Prizes, long held in the U.S., head to Europe due to Trump policies

    By Allyson Chiu — Boston Globe

    Sept. 2, 2026

    It usually takes 10 minutes for Marc Abrahams, founder of the Ig Nobel Prizes, to walk from his home in Cambridge, Mass., to the annual award ceremony — a world-renowned spectacle celebrating quirky scientific achievements.

    But this year, Abrahams’s trip involves an international flight.

    For the first time since the awards — a satirical version of the Nobel prizes — were created in 1991, the ceremony, which takes place Thursday and draws hundreds of scientists and journalists from around the world, is not being held in Cambridge or Boston. Organizers said they decided to move the event to Zurich, Switzerland, due to concerns that many international participants, including award winners, would not feel comfortable or be able to come to the United States amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown and upending of science.

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • STAT+: House votes to temporarily block Trump plan to politicize federal grants

    STAT+: House votes to temporarily block Trump plan to politicize federal grants

    Research policy was included in must-pass government funding bill

    Samuel Corum/Getty Images

    John writes about the politics of health care, and he is the author of the twice-weekly D.C. Diagnosis newsletter. You can reach John on Signal at John_Wilkerson.07.

    Anil Oza is a general assignment reporter at STAT focused on the NIH and health equity. You can reach him on Signal at aniloza.16.

    WASHINGTON — The House voted Tuesday to pass a stopgap government-funding bill that temporarily blocks the White House’s proposal to give political appointees more control over federal research grants.

    The vote was 370-48 in favor. The Senate passed the same bill a month ago, so it now goes to the president for his signature. 

    The reprieve is brief. The bill funds the government until Dec. 11 to get past the midterm elections without a government shutdown, and the ban on the research-funding policy expires at the same time.

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

    1. John writes about the politics of health care, and he is the author of the twice-weekly D.C. Diagnosis newsletter. You can reach John on Signal at John_Wilkerson.07.

    2. General Assignment Reporter

      Anil Oza is a general assignment reporter at STAT focused on the NIH and health equity. You can reach him on Signal at aniloza.16.

  • STAT+: Will House delay Trump plan to politicize NIH grants? 

    STAT+: Will House delay Trump plan to politicize NIH grants? 

    You’re reading the web edition of D.C. Diagnosis, STAT’s twice-weekly newsletter about the politics and policy of health and medicine. Sign up here to receive it in your inbox on Tuesdays and Thursdays.

    A New York bar sells a spritz in a Hermès-esque glass purse, while in Baltimore you can get a spritz made with Miller High Life beer. Way to keep it real, guys. Send news tips and your favorite cocktail of the Deadliest Drug to [email protected] or John_Wilkerson.07 on Signal.

    The need-to-know this week

    • The House returns for one week and will vote on the Senate’s stopgap funding bill that temporarily blocks the White House’s proposal to give political appointees control over federal research grants. The House will use a fast-track process that requires two-thirds support for passage, signaling that House GOP leadership believes the Senate bill will pass. The House vote is expected Tuesday evening, according to Punchbowl News. Were it to fail, lawmakers would have to wait until the Senate returns on Sept. 14 to work out differences between the two chambers’ bills.
    • Congressional Medicare advisers kick off their annual public meeting cycle on Thursday. This cycle, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission will analyze the Part D benefit redesign. The redesign reduced cost sharing for beneficiaries and gave insurers more reason to manage costs, but it has probably also contributed to more spending. MedPAC also will study clinician quality measurements, and commissioners will continue their work on Medicare Advantage.

    Nine, or 10, more MFN deals

    President Trump announced nine more deals to set drug prices in Medicaid on par with prices available in peer countries, Daniel Payne and Elaine Chen report. But it seems they missed one.

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • STAT+: NIH proposal to cap research grants draws mixed reception, agency says

    STAT+: NIH proposal to cap research grants draws mixed reception, agency says

    By Anil Oza

    Sept. 1, 2026

    General Assignment Reporter

    Under the Trump administration, competition for government funding for biomedical research has reached new heights. In June, the National Institutes of Health proposed one solution: limiting the number of grants each individual scientist can have at a given moment. 

    The agency recently released the anonymized 3,307 responses to its call for feedback, and it appears the proposal has drawn more mixed reactions than earlier such proposals. The NIH estimates that 40% of the responses opposed the proposal, 27% supported the idea of a cap, and 32% were mixed. 

    In a post on its site, the agency said it hopes a cap could “contribute to a more balanced research portfolio, advancing stewardship, workforce sustainability, and the goals of the NIH Unified Funding Strategy.” But even some experts who agree with the spirit of the proposal worry that it could be another source of disruption for researchers in what has been a tumultuous time; some also argue that a straight cap on the number of grants may be too simplistic. 

    STAT+ Exclusive Story

    Already have an account? Log in

    STAT+

    STAT+

    This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers

    Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and news alerts.

    Already have an account? Log in

    View All Plans

    To read the rest of this story subscribe to STAT+.

    Subscribe

  • Research Reveals How Fructose in Diet Enhances Tumor Growth

    Research Reveals How Fructose in Diet Enhances Tumor Growth

    Fructose consumption has increased considerably over the past five decades, largely due to the widespread use of high-fructose corn syrup as a sweetener in beverages and ultra-processed foods. New research from Washington University in St. Louis shows that dietary fructose promotes tumor growth in animal models of melanoma, breast cancer and cervical cancer. However, fructose does not directly fuel tumors, according to the study published Dec. 4 in the journal Nature.

    Instead, WashU scientists discovered that the liver converts fructose into usable nutrients for cancer cells, a compelling finding that could open up new avenues for care and treatment of many different types of cancer.

    “The idea that you can tackle cancer with diet is intriguing,” said Gary Patti, the Michael and Tana Powell Professor of Chemistry in Arts & Sciences and a professor of genetics and of medicine at the School of Medicine, all at WashU.

    “When we think about tumors, we tend to focus on what dietary components they consume directly. You put something in your body, and then you imagine that the tumor takes it up,” Patti said. “But humans are complex. What you put in your body can be consumed by healthy tissue and then converted into something else that tumors use.”

    Fowle-Grider

    “Our initial expectation was that tumor cells metabolize fructose just like glucose, directly utilizing its atoms to build new cellular components such as DNA. We were surprised that fructose was barely metabolized in the tumor types we tested,” said the study’s first author, Ronald Fowle-Grider, a postdoctoral fellow in Patti’s lab. “We quickly learned that the tumor cells alone don’t tell the whole story. Equally important is the liver, which transforms fructose into nutrients that the tumors can use.”

    Using metabolomics — a method of profiling small molecules as they move through cells and across different tissues in the body — the researchers concluded that one way in which high levels of fructose consumption promote tumor growth is by increasing the availability of circulating lipids in the blood. These lipids are building blocks for the cell membrane, and cancer cells need them to grow.

    “We looked at numerous different cancers in various tissues throughout the body, and they all followed the same mechanism,” Patti said.

    The corn syrup era

    Scientists have long recognized that cancer cells have a strong affinity for glucose, a simple sugar that is the body’s preferred carbohydrate-based energy source.

    In terms of its chemical structure, fructose is similar to glucose. They are both common types of sugar, with the same chemical formula, but they differ in how the body metabolizes them. Glucose is processed throughout the whole body, while fructose is almost entirely metabolized by the small intestine and liver.

    Gary Patti
    Patti

    Both sugars are found naturally in fruits, vegetables, dairy products and grains. They are also added as sweeteners in many processed foods. Fructose, in particular, has penetrated the American diet over the last few decades. It is favored by the food industry because it is sweeter than glucose.

    Prior to the 1960s, people consumed relatively little fructose compared with today’s numbers. A century ago, an average person consumed just 5-10 pounds of fructose per year. To put it in familiar terms, that is roughly equal to the weight of a gallon of milk. In the 21st century, that number has increased to be as high as the equivalent of 15 gallons of milk.

    “If you go through your pantry and look for the items that contain high-fructose corn syrup, which is the most common form of fructose, it is pretty astonishing,” said Patti, who is also a research member of Siteman Cancer Center, based at Barnes-Jewish Hospital and WashU Medicine, and the Center for Human Nutrition at WashU Medicine.

    “Almost everything has it. It’s not just candy and cake, but also foods such as pasta sauce, salad dressing and ketchup,” he said. “Unless you actively seek to avoid it, it’s probably part of your diet.”

    fast food
    (Photo: Shutterstock)

    Cancer’s appetite for fructose

    Given the rapid rise in the consumption of dietary fructose over recent decades, the WashU researchers wanted to know more about how fructose impacts the growth of tumors.

    Patti and Fowle-Grider began their investigation by feeding tumor-bearing animals a diet rich in fructose, then measuring how quickly their tumors grew. The researchers found that added fructose promoted tumor growth without changing body weight, fasting glucose or fasting insulin levels.

    “We were surprised to see that it had a rather dramatic impact. In some cases, the growth rate of the tumors accelerated by two-fold or even higher,” Patti said. “Eating a lot of fructose was clearly very bad for the progression of these tumors.”

    But the next step in their experiments initially stumped them. When Fowle-Grider attempted to repeat a version of this test by feeding fructose to cancer cells isolated in a dish, the cells did not respond. “In most cases they grew almost as slowly as if we gave them no sugar at all,” Patti said.

    So, Patti and Fowle-Grider went back to looking at changes in the small molecules in the blood of animals fed high-fructose diets. Using metabolomics, they identified elevated levels of a variety of lipid species, including lysophosphatidylcholines (LPCs). Additional dish tests showed that liver cells that were fed fructose release LPCs.

    “Interestingly, the cancer cells themselves were unable to use fructose readily as a nutrient because they do not express the right biochemical machinery,” Patti said. “Liver cells do. This allows them to convert fructose into LPCs, which they can secrete to feed tumors.”

    A defining characteristic of cancer is uncontrolled proliferation of malignant cells. Each time a cell divides, it must replicate its contents, including membranes. This requires a substantial amount of lipids. While lipids can be synthesized from scratch, it is much easier for cancer cells to simply take lipids up from their surrounding environment.

    “Over the past few years, it’s become clear that many cancer cells prefer to take up lipids rather than make them,” Patti noted. “The complication is that most lipids are insoluble in blood and require rather complex transport mechanisms. LPCs are unique. They might provide the most effective and efficient way to support tumor growth.”

    (Photo: Shutterstock)

    Avoiding fructose

    Interestingly, over the same period of time when human fructose consumption has surged, a number of cancers have become increasingly more prevalent among people under the age of 50. This raises the question whether the trends are linked. With $25 million in support from Cancer Grand Challenges, Patti recently teamed up with Yin Cao, an associate professor of surgery at WashU Medicine, and other investigators from around the world, none of whom were involved in this study, to investigate possible connections.

    “It will be exciting to better understand how dietary fructose influences cancer incidence. But one take-home message from this current study is that if you are unfortunate enough to have cancer, then you probably want to think about avoiding fructose. Sadly, that is easier said than done,” Patti said.

    Aside from dietary intervention, the study authors said that this research could help us develop a way to prevent fructose from driving tumor growth therapeutically, using drugs.

    “An implication of these findings is that we do not have to limit ourselves to therapeutics that only target disease cells,” Patti said. “Rather, we can think about targeting the metabolism of healthy cells to treat cancer. This has worked with mice in our study, but we would like to take advantage of our observations and try to improve the lives of patients.”

    The study authors are working with clinical partners at WashU Medicine to explore a clinical trial related to fructose in the diet.


    This research was funded in part by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (R35 ES028365)