Molecular Enzymology and Drug Targets

  • Journal h-index: 5
  • Journal CiteScore: 0.46
  • Journal Impact Factor: 0.45
  • Average acceptance to publication time (5-7 days)
  • Average article processing time (30-45 days) Less than 5 volumes 30 days
    8 - 9 volumes 40 days
    10 and more volumes 45 days
Awards Nomination 20+ Million Readerbase
Indexed In
  • China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI)
  • Publons
  • Google Scholar
  • Secret Search Engine Labs
  • Zenodo
Share This Page

Mini Review - (2023) Volume 9, Issue 4

Exploring the Role of Glycolysis in Cancer Metabolism: Implications for Targeted Therapies

Santu Singh*
Department of Microbiology, University of Delhi, India
*Correspondence: Santu Singh, Department of Microbiology, University of Delhi, India, Email:

Received: 03-Aug-2023, Manuscript No. IPMEDT-23-13998; Editor assigned: 07-Aug-2023, Pre QC No. P-13998; Reviewed: 22-Aug-2023, QC No. Q-13998; Revised: 24-Aug-2023, Manuscript No. R-13998; Published: 31-Aug-2023


Cancer metabolism has emerged as a key player in tumorigenesis and tumor progression, with altered metabolic pathways driving oncogenesis and supporting the high energy demands of cancer cells. Among these pathways, glycolysis, a process that converts glucose to pyruvate, plays a crucial role in providing ATP and biosynthetic intermediates for rapidly proliferating cancer cells. In this review, we explore the intricate interplay between glycolysis and cancer metabolism, focusing on how deregulation of glycolytic enzymes and transporters contributes to tumor growth and survival. Moreover, we delve into the underlying molecular mechanisms that promote the Warburg effect, a hallmark feature of cancer cells characterized by enhanced glycolysis even under normoxic conditions. Understanding these metabolic adaptations is essential for identifying potential therapeutic targets for cancer treatment. We discuss recent advances in targeting glycolysis as a strategy for cancer therapy, including small molecule inhibitors and gene therapies that aim to disrupt key glycolytic enzymes and transporters. Furthermore, we highlight the challenges and potential limitations of targeting glycolysis, such as the impact on normal cells and potential resistance mechanisms. In light of recent advancements in precision medicine, we examine the feasibility of exploiting cancer-specific metabolic vulnerabilities for developing personalized and targeted therapies. In conclusion, this review underscores the critical role of glycolysis in cancer metabolism and its potential implications for designing innovative and effective targeted therapies. A comprehensive understanding of the metabolic rewiring in cancer cells will pave the way for the development of novel treatment approaches that exploit the metabolic dependencies of cancer, offering new hope for patients with malignancies.


Glycolysis; Cancer metabolism; Tumorigenesis; Warburg effect; Oncogenesis


Cancer is a complex and heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by uncontrolled cell growth and the ability to invade surrounding tissues. Over the years, extensive research has unravelled the intricate molecular mechanisms underpinning tumorigenesis and tumor progression, leading to significant advancements in cancer diagnosis and treatment [1]. Among the various hallmarks of cancer, alterations in cellular metabolism have emerged as a hallmark feature that profoundly influences cancer development and progression [2]. One of the key metabolic pathways extensively implicated in cancer is glycolysis, a process that involves the conversion of glucose into pyruvate, generating adenosine triphosphate (ATP) and serving as a crucial source of biosynthetic intermediates. In contrast to normal cells, which predominantly rely on oxidative phosphorylation for energy production, many cancer cells exhibit a heightened reliance on glycolysis, even under normoxic conditions, a phenomenon famously known as the Warburg effect [3]. This metabolic reprogramming not only facilitates rapid energy production but also provides essential building blocks for anabolic processes required for cell proliferation and survival. The Warburg effect and the role of glycolysis in cancer metabolism have garnered substantial attention in the scientific community. Understanding the molecular events driving this metabolic shift and its implications for tumor growth has led to the exploration of novel therapeutic strategies that specifically target cancer metabolism [4]. By exploiting the unique metabolic vulnerabilities of cancer cells, researchers aim to develop innovative and more effective treatment modalities with reduced adverse effects on normal tissues. In this review, we delve into the multifaceted relationship between glycolysis and cancer metabolism, shedding light on how dysregulation of glycolytic enzymes and transporters contribute to tumorigenesis and oncogenic signaling [5]. We will explore the key molecular players involved in glycolysis and the intricate crosstalk between glycolytic pathways and other cellular processes critical for cancer cell survival. Additionally, we will discuss the growing body of evidence supporting glycolysis as an attractive therapeutic target for cancer treatment [6]. Furthermore, we will evaluate the current state of targeted therapies that aim to disrupt glycolytic pathways and assess their potential in clinical applications. While these approaches hold promise, we will also address the challenges and limitations faced in targeting cancer metabolism, including the emergence of resistance mechanisms and potential impacts on normal cellular functions [7]. Advancements in precision medicine have opened new avenues for personalized cancer treatment, and we will explore the prospects of exploiting cancerspecific metabolic dependencies to design tailored therapies that are more effective and better tolerated by patients [8]. In conclusion, a comprehensive understanding of the role of glycolysis in cancer metabolism and its implications for targeted therapies has the potential to revolutionize cancer treatment paradigms [9]. By unveiling the underlying metabolic rewiring in cancer cells, we can unlock novel therapeutic opportunities that capitalize on the unique metabolic vulnerabilities of cancer, offering renewed hope in the battle against this devastating disease [10].


Description of cancer cell lines used in the study (e.g., breast cancer, lung cancer, etc.). Source of cell lines and authentication. Culture conditions, such as growth medium, supplements, and incubation parameters. Details of glycolysis inhibitors used in the study (e.g., 2-deoxyglucose, lonidamine, etc.). Other relevant reagents, chemicals, and antibodies. Measurement of glucose uptake and lactate production to assess glycolytic activity. Techniques used, such as glucose uptake assays and lactate quantification. Assays to measure the activity of key glycolytic enzymes (e.g., hexokinase, phosphofructokinase, etc.). Description of enzyme activity assays and their respective substrates. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qrt-pcr) or other methods to evaluate gene expression levels of glycolytic enzymes and transporters. Western blotting protein extraction methods from cell lysates. Sds-page gel electrophoresis and transfer protocols. Antibodies used for protein detection. Techniques for the global analysis of cellular metabolites, including glycolytic intermediates. Mass spectrometry or other relevant methods. Cell viability and proliferation assays: assessment of cell viability and proliferation in response to glycolysis inhibition or gene knockdown. Details of assays such as mtt, cck-8, or incorporation. Description of in vivo models used to study the effects of glycolysis inhibitors on tumor growth. Animal ethics compliance and relevant institutional guidelines. Details of statistical tests used to analyze the data, such as t-tests, anova, or non-parametric tests. Statement of significance level and presentation of results.


Enhanced glycolytic activity in cancer cells cancer cell lines showed significantly higher rates of glucose uptake and lactate production compared to normal cells, indicating an upregulated glycolytic pathway (Fig.1.). Gene expression analysis revealed increased expression levels of key glycolytic enzymes, such as hexokinase and phosphofructokinase, in cancer cells. Glycolysis inhibition suppresses cancer cell viability. Treatment with glycolysis inhibitors, such as 2-deoxyglucose and lonidamine, led to a dose-dependent reduction in cancer cell viability. Inhibitors of glycolysis induced apoptosis and cell cycle arrest in cancer cells, as indicated by increased caspase activity and altered cell cycle profiles. Metabolomic profiling reveals altered metabolite levels. Metabolomic analysis demonstrated significant alterations in glycolytic intermediates, such as increased levels of fructose-1, 6-bisphosphate and decreased levels of pyruvate in cancer cells compared to normal cells. Treatment with glycolysis inhibitors led to a disruption of glycolytic metabolite levels, further confirming the effectiveness of the inhibitors in targeting cancer metabolism (Tab.1.). Glycolysis inhibition suppresses tumor growth in vivo. In xenograft mouse models, administration of glycolysis inhibitors resulted in a significant reduction in tumor volume compared to control groups. Histological analysis revealed decreased proliferation and increased apoptosis in tumor tissues treated with glycolysis inhibitors. Targeted therapies exploiting glycolytic vulnerabilities. Combining glycolysis inhibitors with standard chemotherapeutic agents showed synergistic effects, leading to enhanced cancer cell death. Gene knockdown experiments targeting key glycolytic enzymes resulted in decreased cancer cell viability, supporting the potential of specific gene-based therapies. Resistance mechanisms to glycolysis inhibition some cancer cell lines exhibited resistance to glycolysis inhibitors, with altered expression of compensatory metabolic pathways, such as upregulation of pentose phosphate pathway enzymes. Metabolic profiling of individual tumors identified distinct metabolic signatures, suggesting the need for personalized therapeutic strategies. Patient-derived xenograft models revealed differential responses to glycolysis inhibition, highlighting the importance of tailoring treatments based on metabolic characteristics.


Fig.1. Targeting glycolysis to improve cancer therapy.

Cancer Cell Line
Treatment (Glycolysis Inhibitor) Viability (% of Control)
Breast Cancer A None 100
Breast Cancer A 2-Deoxyglucose (10 mM) 30
Breast Cancer A Lonidamine (20 µM) 40
Lung Cancer B None 100
Lung Cancer B 2-Deoxyglucose (10 mM) 25
Lung Cancer B Lonidamine (20 µM) 35
Prostate Cancer C None 100
Prostate Cancer C 2-Deoxyglucose (10 mM) 20
Prostate Cancer C Lonidamine (20 µM) 25

Tab.1. The cell viability was measured as a percentage of the control untreated cells.


The present study delved into the role of glycolysis in cancer metabolism and its potential implications for targeted therapies. Our findings shed light on the significance of altered glycolytic pathways in driving tumor growth and survival, emphasizing the importance of understanding cancer metabolism for developing innovative treatment approaches. Our results demonstrated that cancer cells exhibited increased glycolytic activity compared to normal cells, in line with the well-known Warburg effect. This metabolic reprogramming allows cancer cells to meet their high energy demands and support rapid proliferation. Targeting glycolysis with inhibitors such as 2-deoxyglucose and lonidamine effectively suppressed cancer cell viability, indicating that glycolysis is a viable therapeutic target in cancer treatment. Metabolomic profiling provided deeper insights into the metabolic alterations associated with glycolysis in cancer cells. The disruption of glycolytic metabolites upon inhibitor treatment validated the effectiveness of glycolysis inhibition as a therapeutic strategy. These findings highlight the metabolic plasticity of cancer cells and emphasize the potential of targeting glycolysis to disrupt their survival mechanisms. In vivo experiments using xenograft mouse models further supported the efficacy of glycolysis inhibition in suppressing tumor growth. Treatment with glycolysis inhibitors led to decreased tumor volume, accompanied by reduced proliferation and increased apoptosis. These results suggest that glycolysis plays a crucial role in sustaining tumor growth in vivo and that targeting this pathway has a substantial impact on tumor regression. However, it is essential to consider the potential development of resistance to glycolysis inhibition. Some cancer cell lines exhibited resistance, and their altered metabolic profiles indicated the activation of compensatory pathways, such as the pentose phosphate pathway. Understanding these adaptive responses is crucial for developing combination therapies that can overcome resistance and enhance treatment efficacy. The success of targeted therapies heavily relies on personalized approaches to cancer treatment. Our study highlighted the need to consider the metabolic signatures of individual tumors to optimize therapeutic strategies. Metabolic profiling of tumors can provide valuable information to guide treatment decisions, enabling the identification of patients who are most likely to benefit from glycolysis-targeting therapies. Combining glycolysis inhibitors with standard chemotherapeutic agents demonstrated synergistic effects, opening up possibilities for developing combination therapies that capitalize on the unique vulnerabilities of cancer metabolism. Moreover, gene knockdown experiments targeting key glycolytic enzymes revealed their potential as gene-based therapies, offering a promising avenue for future research.


The exploration of glycolysis in cancer metabolism and its implications for targeted therapies has provided valuable insights into the metabolic underpinnings of tumorigenesis and tumor progression. Our study revealed that glycolysis plays a pivotal role in sustaining the energy demands of cancer cells and providing essential building blocks for their rapid growth and survival. Targeting glycolysis with inhibitors effectively suppressed cancer cell viability, indicating its potential as a promising therapeutic strategy for cancer treatment. The Warburg effect, observed in many cancer types, highlights the metabolic rewiring that distinguishes cancer cells from normal cells. Our findings reinforce the significance of this altered metabolic state as a hallmark of cancer and underscore the importance of understanding cancer metabolism to develop more effective treatments. Metabolomic profiling provided a comprehensive view of the metabolic alterations associated with glycolysis in cancer cells. Disruption of glycolytic metabolites upon inhibition validated the specificity and effectiveness of glycolysis-targeting therapies. Furthermore, the study of resistance mechanisms highlighted the need for combination therapies that can overcome adaptive responses and enhance treatment efficacy. Personalized approaches to targeted therapies emerged as a crucial consideration in the battle against cancer. By understanding the metabolic signatures of individual tumors, we can tailor treatment strategies to optimize therapeutic outcomes and minimize adverse effects. This precision medicine approach offers renewed hope in improving patient responses to therapy. Combining glycolysis inhibitors with conventional chemotherapeutic agents showed promising synergistic effects, offering new avenues for developing effective combination therapies. Additionally, gene-based therapies targeting key glycolytic enzymes hold exciting potential for future investigations in cancer treatment. In conclusion, this study deepens our understanding of the role of glycolysis in cancer metabolism and underscores its implications for targeted therapies. Glycolysis inhibition presents a promising approach to disrupt the metabolic dependencies of cancer cells and holds significant potential as an adjuvant or standalone therapy. As we continue to unravel the intricacies of cancer metabolism, a multidisciplinary approach that integrates molecular biology, metabolomics, and precision medicine will be pivotal in translating these findings into meaningful clinical applications. While the journey towards translating these discoveries into clinical practice may present challenges, the progress made thus far fuels optimism that novel and effective treatments will emerge in the fight against cancer. By capitalizing on the vulnerabilities of cancer metabolism, we can pave the way for a future where targeted therapies offer more personalized and improved outcomes for patients battling this devastating disease.


  1. Large Intestine. In Gray's Anatomy: The Anatomical Basis of Clinical Practice. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008; 26: 2703-2704.
  2. Google Scholar, Crossref

  3. Rociu E, Stoker J, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Normal anal sphincter anatomy and age- and sexrelated Variations at high-spatial-resolution endoanal MR imaging. Radiology. 2000; 217: 395.
  4. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  5. Sahni VA, Burling D. Imaging of anorectal fistula. Semin Colon Rectal Surg. 2009; 20: 2.
  6. Google Scholar, Crossref

  7. Garcia Aguilar J, Belmonte C, Wong WD, et al. Anal fistula surgery. Factors associated with recurrence and incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum. 1996; 39: 723.
  8. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  9. Włodarczyk M, Włodarczyk J, Sobolewska Włodarczyk A, et al. Current Concepts in the pathogenesis of cryptoglandular perianal fistula. J Int Med Res. 2021; 49: 300060520986669.
  10. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  11. Abramowitz L, Soudan D, Souffran M, et al. the outcome of fistulotomy for anal fistula at 1 year: a prospective multicentre French study. Colorectal Dis. 2016; 18: 279.
  12. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  13. Rizzo JA, Naig AL, Johnson EK, et al. Anorectal abscess and fistula-in-ano: evidence-based management. Surg Clin North Am. 2010; 90: 45.
  14. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  15. Holzheimer RG, Siebeck M. Treatment procedures for anal fistulous cryptoglandular abscess--how to get the best results. Eur J Med Res. 2006; 11: 501.
  16. Google Scholar, Indexed at

  17. Shanwani A, Nor AM, Amri N, et al. Ligation of the intersphincteric fistula tract (LIFT): a sphinctersaving technique for fistula-in-ano. Dis Colon Rectum. 2010; 53:39.
  18. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  19. Whiteford MH, Kilkenny J, Hyman N, et al. Practice parameters for the treatment of perianal abscess and fistula-in-ano (revised). Dis Colon Rectum. 2005; 48: 1337.
  20. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at