Int J Mol Sci. 2026 Apr 24. pii: 3792. [Epub ahead of print]27(9):
Filip Blasko,
Lubica Horvathova,
Luba Hunakova,
Lucia Krivosikova,
Monika Burikova,
Bozena Smolkova,
Sara Durdiakova,
Benjamin Spanik,
Michal Mego,
Pavel Babal,
Boris Mravec.
Peripheral nerves provide a direct connection between the brain and the tumor microenvironment. This connection allows the nervous system to influence processes associated with the development, progression, and metastasis of different tumor types. Therefore, tumor innervation by peripheral nerve fibers is currently emerging as a characteristic that contributes to multiple hallmarks of cancer. Several experimental studies have shown that cancer progression involves actively inducing the ingrowth of autonomic and sensory nerve fibers into tumor tissue. In this process, known as neoaxonogenesis, cancer and other cells in the tumor microenvironment play an important role by synthesizing and releasing neurotrophic factors (e.g., nerve growth factor, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor), axonal guidance molecules (netrins, semaphorins, ephrins, slits), exosomes (containing microRNA and axonal guidance molecules), and other molecules present in the tumor microenvironment (e.g., granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, leukemia inhibitory factor), which modulate the ingrowth of nerve fibers into the tumor. This results in an increased nerve supply to tumor tissue, which is primarily linked to its growth. However, there are also studies demonstrating the protective effects of increased nerve fiber density against processes associated with cancer progression in certain types of cancer. The findings from these studies contribute to the complexity of neuro-cancer interactions, which is probably based on the type of cancer and the physiological specializations of the nerve fibers in a given organ. Despite contrasting findings, the stimulatory effects of nerve fibers on cancer growth are supported by several studies that described reducing the negative impact of nerve fibers on tumors and thus inhibiting cancer progression. The most significant approaches to reducing neural effects appear to be denervation, the administration of neurotransmitter receptor antagonists, the administration of local anesthetics, and the administration of antibodies against neurotrophic factors. Other significant approaches include methods that improve quality of life, such as psychotherapy and heart rate variability biofeedback. Despite their therapeutic potential, there are several limitations to using approaches that manipulate cancer innervation in clinical practice. These limitations include impaired normal tissue function and nervous system function, as well as the problematic direct application of the therapeutic agent to the tumor site, dosage-dependent, cancer type-dependent, cancer stage-dependent, duration-dependent, and timing-dependent effects. Procedures that modify neoaxonogenesis and nerve fiber signaling appear to be a promising new therapeutic approach in oncology. However, more research is needed to better understand their effects on cancer progression. In the future, the assessment of the presence and density of nerve fibers in tumors, as well as the evaluation of approaches aimed at reducing their negative impact, could be part of personalized anticancer therapy. As part of this therapy, a fresh tumor sample would be collected from the patient to generate patient-derived organoid models to test and consider the possibility of using supportive therapy and to predict its efficacy. Based on these results, it would be possible to evaluate the applicability of nerve-fiber-targeted therapy for a given patient. This review article summarizes and describes the current knowledge concerning the significance of nerve fibers in cancer progression, with a particular emphasis on neoaxonogenesis in tumors and the various factors that influence this process.
Keywords: axonal guidance molecules; cancer progression; exosomes; neoaxonogenesis; neurobiology of cancer; neurotrophic factors