Skip to main content
Cancer Science logoLink to Cancer Science
. 2026 Oct 21:10.1111/cas.70569. Online ahead of print. doi: 10.1111/cas.70569

Higher LSD1 in Non‐Seminomatous Germ Cell Tumors and LSD1 Inhibition by NCL1 Suppresses Embryonal Carcinoma Growth

Nobuhiko Shimizu 1, Toshiki Etani 1, Taku Naiki 1,✉, Aya Naiki‐Ito 2,✉, Yosuke Sugiyama 1, Takashi Nagai 1, Akihiro Murakami 2, Hiroyuki Kato 2, Toshiharu Morikawa 1, Maria Aoki 1, Masakazu Gonda 1, Hiroko Suzuki 1, Yohei Tsubouchi 1, Daiki Ishikawa 1, Takayoshi Suzuki 3, Satoru Takahashi 2, Takahiro Yasui 1
PMCID: PMC13687810  PMID: 42908320

ABSTRACT

Lysine‐specific demethylase 1 (LSD1/KDM1A) is a potential therapeutic target in non‐seminomatous testicular germ cell tumors (NSGCTs). We assessed LSD1 and Ki‐67 immunostaining in 74 histologically distinct tumor components from 53 patients with testicular germ cell tumors and studied the selective LSD1 inhibitor NCL1 in embryonal carcinoma models. LSD1 positivity was higher in pooled non‐seminomatous than seminomatous components (p = 0.0104). Following Bonferroni correction, teratoma and yolk sac tumor components showed higher LSD1 positivity than seminoma, whereas the embryonal carcinoma–seminoma comparison did not reach statistical significance (adjusted p = 0.08). LSD1 positivity correlated with Ki‐67 positivity. In embryonal carcinoma cells, NCL1 increased H3K9me2 enrichment at SOX2 and OCT4 promoter regions, decreased pluripotency‐associated proteins and survivin, and increased cleaved caspase‐3 and apoptotic cell populations while reducing cell viability. NCL1 also reduced viability in cisplatin‐adapted cells and further reduced viability when combined with cisplatin in parental cells. In vivo, treatment initiated before tumors became measurable suppressed subsequent xenograft outgrowth, whereas treatment of established xenografts did not significantly inhibit growth at the doses tested. Together, the histological findings and responses observed in embryonal carcinoma models support LSD1 as a potential therapeutic target for further investigation in NSGCT; NCL1 efficacy in other histological subtypes and against established tumors remains to be established.

Keywords: autophagy, embryonal carcinoma, epigenetic therapy, LSD1, testicular germ cell tumor


LSD1 expression was higher in non‐seminomatous than in seminomatous testicular germ cell tumor components. In embryonal carcinoma models, selective LSD1 inhibition by NCL1 induced epigenetic and apoptotic responses, reduced viability including in cisplatin‐adapted cells, and suppressed early xenograft outgrowth, supporting LSD1 as a potential therapeutic target in NSGCT.

graphic file with name CAS-9999-0-g002.webp


Abbreviations

AFP

alpha‐fetoprotein

AJCC

American Joint Committee on Cancer

CC

choriocarcinoma

CQ

chloroquine

EC

embryonal carcinoma

IGCCCG

International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group

IPA

Ingenuity Pathway Analysis

LSD1

lysine‐specific demethylase 1

NSGCT

non‐seminomatous germ cell tumor

TE

teratoma

TGCT

testicular germ cell tumor

YST

yolk sac tumor

1. Introduction

Testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) are common solid malignancies that affect males aged from 15 to 44 [1]. They are categorized into two main histologic types, pure‐seminomas (no non‐seminomatous elements present) and all others termed non‐seminomatous germ cell tumors (NSGCT). Platinum‐based chemotherapy is a standard treatment in patients with advanced TGCT, leading to high rates of complete remission due to their high chemosensitivity. Despite the high cure rates achieved with platinum‐based chemotherapy, a subset of patients with advanced TGCT develop relapsed or platinum‐refractory disease, for which effective treatment options remain limited [2]. This represents a particular clinical challenge in NSGCT. Furthermore, long‐term survivors may experience late adverse effects following treatment, including second malignant neoplasms, cardiovascular and metabolic disorders, pulmonary complications, and renal impairment [3]. These challenges highlight the need to explore additional therapeutic strategies for TGCT, particularly for patients with NSGCT.

Testicular germ cell tumors exhibit an exceptionally low mutation rate (~0.5 mutations/Mb), compared with ~4 mutations/Mb observed in most other malignancies [4]. Instead of driver mutations, TGCT tumorigenesis is thought to be largely driven by chromosomal abnormalities, such as copy number gains and early tetraploidization, as well as epigenetic dysregulation [5, 6, 7]. These findings highlight how epigenetic regulators play a critical role in TGCT tumorigenesis. Of the various epigenetic regulators, lysine‐specific demethylase 1 (LSD1), a histone demethylase that removes methyl groups from histone 3 at lysines 4 or 9 [8], correlates with the progression of various types of cancer, including TGCT [9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]. We developed a highly selective LSD1 inhibitor, NCL1, which we found suppressed hormone‐sensitive and castration‐resistant prostate cancer growth via the regulation of autophagy and apoptosis [20, 21, 22, 23]. A previous study showed that the LSD1 inhibitor suppressed human embryonal carcinoma growth; however, downstream mechanisms in TGCT models are not well defined [10, 13].

In this study, we analyzed LSD1 expression in human TGCT specimens and evaluated the antitumor effects and underlying mechanisms of NCL1 in embryonal carcinoma cell lines and a subcutaneous xenograft model.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Human TGCT Specimens

Orchiectomy specimens were originally collected from 57 patients with TGCT at our institute between 2004 and 2015. After exclusion of four pediatric patients, 53 patients with 74 histologically distinct tumor components were included in the revised analysis. Pathological review of the remaining pure teratoma (n = 1) and pure yolk sac tumor (n = 2) cases confirmed postpubertal‐type germ cell tumors and identified germ cell neoplasia in situ (GCNIS) in adjacent testicular tissue. The quantitative LSD1 and Ki‐67 analyses focused on tumor components; non‐neoplastic seminiferous tubules were excluded from the statistical comparisons. Representative images of non‐neoplastic tubules are retained in Figure 1A,B solely as a histological reference. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Nagoya City University Hospital (Approval no. 60‐00‐1271). Written informed consent was obtained from all enrolled patients. Tumor specimens were reviewed by experienced pathologists.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Histology‐associated LSD1 positivity in human testicular germ cell tumor (TGCT) components. (A, B) Representative images of non‐neoplastic seminiferous tubules provided for histological reference only; non‐neoplastic tubules were excluded from quantitative comparisons. (C–Q) Representative hematoxylin–eosin and immunohistochemical images of major TGCT histologies stained for LSD1 and Ki‐67. (R) Distribution of LSD1 positivity in seminoma (SE), embryonal carcinoma (EC), teratoma (TE), yolk sac tumor (YST), and choriocarcinoma (CC) components (box‐and‐whisker plots). LSD1 positivity was higher in pooled non‐seminomatous components than in seminoma (p = 0.0104). Pairwise t‐tests of each non‐seminomatous histology versus SE were adjusted using the Bonferroni method: TE and YST had higher positivity than SE (adjusted p < 0.05 for each), whereas the SE–EC comparison did not meet the significance threshold (adjusted p = 0.08). No efficacy inference can be made from the expression comparisons. (S–U) Correlations between LSD1 and Ki‐67 positivity in seminoma, pooled non‐seminomatous components, and all evaluated tumor components, respectively; each point represents one histologically distinct tumor component. Scale bars, 200 μm. Comparisons were based on components and did not adjust for within‐patient clustering. *p < 0.05; LSD1, lysine‐specific demethylase 1.

2.2. Chemicals

The synthesis of NCL1 was as described in a previous paper [21].

2.3. TGCT Cell Lines

The human embryonal carcinoma (EC) cell lines, NTERA‐2 and Tera‐1, were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection. The medium used to culture cells was Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium (DMEM) containing 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin (P/S). Cells were grown at 37°C in 5% CO2 with humidity. Cisplatin‐adapted NTERA‐2 cells (NTERA‐2R) were established by repeated exposure of parental NTERA‐2 cells to increasing concentrations of cisplatin, using a previously reported stepwise‐exposure approach with modifications [24]. Initially, cells were exposed to 0.2 μM cisplatin, corresponding to the IC25 of the parental cells, for 48 h. The drug‐containing medium was then replaced with fresh medium, and the cells were allowed to recover until proliferation resumed. This procedure was repeated while gradually increasing the cisplatin concentration to 3 μM. Surviving cells were subsequently maintained in medium containing 1 μM cisplatin. After approximately 5 months of adaptation, a cell population capable of stable serial passaging was established and designated as NTERA‐2R.

2.4. Cell Proliferation Assay

Cell proliferation was evaluated using a WST‐8 Cell Counting Kit (Wako, Osaka, Japan). Testicular germ cell tumor cells in DMEM medium with 10% FBS and 1% P/S were seeded in 96‐well plates (6 × 103 cells/well) and then treated with 1–100 μM NCL1 alone or in combination with 10 μM chloroquine (CQ) for 48 h. Growth rate was determined by the uptake of WST tetrazolium dye as measured by the rate of dye absorption. For the additional experiments using cisplatin‐adapted cells and evaluating the combined effects of NCL1 and cisplatin, cells were seeded in 96‐well plates at a density of 1 × 104 cells/well. After 48 h of incubation, cells were treated with the indicated concentrations of cisplatin and/or NCL1 for an additional 48 h. In the combination experiments, NCL1 was administered at a fixed concentration of 5 μM together with increasing concentrations of cisplatin. Cell viability was assessed using the WST‐8 assay, and absorbance was measured at 450 nm. The experiments shown in Figure 2C,E,F were each repeated independently three times, with consistent qualitative trends. The data plotted in these panels are from one representative experiment for each assay.

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

LSD1 expression and growth inhibition by NCL1 in embryonal carcinoma cells. (A) Western blotting of LSD1 in NTERA‐2 and Tera‐1 cells treated with DMSO control. (B) ChIP‐qPCR showing H3K9me2 enrichment at SOX2 and OCT4 promoter regions after NCL1 treatment of NTERA‐2 cells. (C) NCL1 dose–response curves for NTERA‐2 and Tera‐1 cells measured using the WST‐8 assay. (D) Cisplatin dose–response curves for parental NTERA‐2 and cisplatin‐adapted NTERA‐2R cells assessed by WST‐8 assay. The corresponding cisplatin IC₅₀ values were 0.53 and 3.18 μM, respectively (6.0‐fold increase in NTERA‐2R). (E) NCL1 dose–response curve for cisplatin‐adapted NTERA‐2R cells. (F) WST‐8 absorbance in parental NTERA‐2 cells treated with increasing concentrations of cisplatin alone or combined with 5 μM NCL1. Data in panels (C–F) are mean ± SD of replicate wells within the experiment displayed; error bars indicate SD. For panels (C, E, and F), one representative experiment is shown from three independent experiments with consistent qualitative trends. Statistical comparisons in these three panels were performed using replicate wells from the representative experiment, not the independent experiments as replicates. Symbols in panels (C, E) indicate differences from the corresponding untreated control; symbols in panel (F) indicate differences between cisplatin alone and cisplatin plus NCL1 at the indicated cisplatin concentrations. The indicated comparisons in panels (C, E, and F) were evaluated using multiple‐comparison testing. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ****p < 0.0001. ChIP‐qPCR, chromatin immunoprecipitation quantitative PCR; LSD1, lysine‐specific demethylase 1.

2.5. Chromatin Immunoprecipitation Assay

NTERA‐2 cells were grown for 3 h 30 min in the presence or absence of 30 μM NCL1. Then, 1% formaldehyde was used to cross‐link cells. In a chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assay, chromatin was immunoprecipitated with an anti‐H3K9‐me2 antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, Beverly, MA, USA). Control antibody was isotype‐specific IgG. DNA was extracted from cells, dissolved in Tris‐EDTA buffer, and amplified in real‐time PCR with SOX2 and OCT4 specific primers: SOX2 F—CAGGAGTTGTCAAGGCAGAG, SOX2 R—GGAAAATCAGGCGAAGAATA; and OCT4 F—GCCACCACCATTAGGCAAAC, OCT4 R—GCGAAGGGACTACTCAACCC.

2.6. Western Blotting Analysis

Cells treated with the indicated concentrations of NCL1 and/or CQ were lysed in SDS buffer, and 10–30 μg protein samples were separated using 12% polyacrylamide gels and transferred to Hybond ECL membranes (GE Healthcare, Piscataway, NJ, USA). Primary antibodies and working dilutions were as follows: LSD1 (Cell Signaling Technology, 1:200), H3K9me1 (Active Motif, 1:400), H3K9me2 (Abcam, 1:300), SOX2 (Cell Signaling Technology, 1:1,000), OCT4 (Abcam, 1:500), NANOG (Abcam, 1:1,000), cyclin B1 (Abcam, 1:200), cyclin D1 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, 1:200), CDK2 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, 1:200), CDK4 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, 1:300), caspase‐3 (Casp 3) (Cell Signaling Technology, 1:1,000), cleaved caspase‐3 (Cl. Casp 3) (Cell Signaling Technology, 1:750), survivin (Cell Signaling Technology, 1:1,000), LC3‐II (Abcam, 1:1,000), p62 (Abcam, 1:250), and beclin‐1 (Abcam, 1:1,000). β‐actin (Sigma‐Aldrich) was used as a loading control.

2.7. Flow Cytometry

NTERA‐2 cells (1 × 105) were exposed to NCL1 for 72 h. Cell suspensions were subsequently prepared and stained with Guava Cell Cycle Reagent in accordance with the manufacturer's protocol (Guava Technologies, Hayward, CA, USA) for cell‐cycle analysis. Cell‐cycle phase distributions were assessed on a Guava PCA Instrument using CytoSoft software. For apoptosis analysis, cells treated with NCL1 for 24 h were stained using a phycoerythrin Annexin V Apoptosis Detection Kit with 7‐aminoactinomycin D according to the manufacturer's protocol (BioLegend, San Diego, CA, USA). Cells were analyzed using a FACSymphony A1 Cell Analyzer (BD, San Jose, CA, USA).

2.8. RNA Sequencing and Ingenuity Pathway Analysis

NTERA‐2 cells (1.5 × 105) were incubated with or without 5 μM NCL1 for 48 h (n = 3 per group). ISOGEN reagent (Nippon Gene, Tokyo, Japan) was used to extract total RNA according to the manufacturer's protocol. The purity and quantification of the extracted RNA were evaluated using a SimpliNano Spectrophotometer (Biochrom Ltd., Cambridge, UK). Then, RNA library preparation and transcriptomic sequencing were performed by Macrogen Japan Corp. (Tokyo, Japan). Differentially expressed genes obtained from Macrogen Japan were imported into the Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) system (QIAGEN Inc., Düsseldorf, Germany) for canonical pathway analysis.

2.9. Lysosome Localization Using LysoTracker Red DND‐99

NTERA‐2 cells (4 × 104) were seeded in 6‐well plates with DMEM medium containing 10% FBS. Cells were incubated for 48 h and treated with 5 μM NCL1 or both 5 μM NCL1 and 10 μM CQ. Solvent (dimethylsulfoxide [DMSO] and distilled water) was used on control cells. The medium was removed from each dish after 48 h of treatment. Prewarmed (37°C) probe‐containing medium was then added and cells incubated for 30 min. The loading solution was then replaced with fresh medium and cells observed using a BZ‐9000 multifunctional microscope (Keyence Japan, Osaka, Japan).

2.10. Fluorescent Immunocytochemistry Analysis

NTERA‐2 cells were incubated in 8‐well chamber slides with or without 10 μM CQ, and with or without 7.5 μM NCL1 for 12 h. The chamber slides were fixed by immersion in 4% formaldehyde for 10 min at room temperature, followed by permeabilization with digitonin. The primary anti‐LC3II antibody diluted with PBS was added and incubated for 1 h at room temperature. An anti‐rabbit polyclonal antibody (Abcam) at 1/500 dilution was used as the secondary antibody for 30 min at room temperature. DAPI (blue) was used to counterstain nuclei. Fluorescence images were observed and analyzed using an A1 confocal microscope (Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) and analysis software.

2.11. Transmission Electron Microscopy

NTERA‐2 cells (8 × 104) were seeded in 6‐well plates in DMEM medium containing 10% FBS. After 48‐h incubation, cells were exposed to 7.5 μM NCL1, or both 7.5 μM NCL1 and 7.5 μM CQ, for 3 or 24 h. Cells were prefixed in glutaraldehyde (2.5%) in 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) at 4°C. Osmium tetroxide (1%) in 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) was used to postfix specimens for 45 min. A graded series of ethanol was used to dehydrate specimens, and these then embedded in epoxy resin. Ultra‐thin sections were cut with an Ultracut‐S ultramicrotome (LEICA, Wetzlar, Germany) and a diamond knife. These were then stained with 2% uranyl acetate in distilled water for 15 min and a lead staining solution for 5 min. Sections were observed by transmission electron microscopy (TEM) using a JEM‐1011 J (JEOL, Tokyo, Japan) electron microscope at 80 KV.

2.12. In Vivo Subcutaneous NTERA‐2 Model

We used 6‐week‐old male KSN/nu‐nu nude mice from Nippon SLC Inc. (Hamamatsu, Shizuoka, Japan). T‐75 flasks were seeded with NTERA‐2 cells, which were grown to confluence, trypsinized, and counted. NTERA‐2 cells (0.5 × 106) resuspended in a mixture of 50 μL serum‐free DMEM and 50 μL matrigel were injected subcutaneously into the dorsal lumbar region of mice under isoflurane anesthesia. The administration dose of NCL1 in vivo was based on previous reports. In the initial experiment, mice were treated with vehicle or 1.0 mg/kg NCL1 (n = 15 and 15, respectively). NCL1 was injected intraperitoneally twice weekly, beginning 5 days after tumor inoculation, before tumors became measurable. Tumor size (caliper measurement) was measured twice weekly. Mice were subsequently sacrificed 5 weeks after the injection of cells and subcutaneous tumors, blood, livers, and kidneys were collected.

In a separate experiment evaluating established tumors, treatment began approximately 2 weeks after tumor inoculation, after measurable subcutaneous tumors had formed. Mice were randomized to vehicle, NCL1 0.5 mg/kg, or NCL1 1.0 mg/kg groups (n = 10 per group), with randomization stratified by baseline tumor volume. The mean baseline tumor volumes at randomization were 72.2 ± 30.2, 67.5 ± 37.4, and 68.7 ± 35.3 mm3 in the vehicle, NCL1 0.5 mg/kg, and NCL1 1.0 mg/kg groups, respectively. Intraperitoneal treatment was administered twice weekly for 4 weeks. Tumor volumes were calculated from caliper measurements, and body weights were recorded throughout the treatment period. Mice were subsequently sacrificed 4 weeks after the initiation of treatment of NCL1, and subcutaneous tumors, blood, livers, and kidneys were collected. Tumor volumes were calculated using the formula, V = (A × B 2)/2, where V represents volume in mm3, and A and B represent long and short diameters in mm, respectively. Protocols for animal experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Nagoya City University School of Medical Sciences (Approval number 21‐026, 26‐025).

2.13. Immunohistochemical Analysis

A 1:200 dilution of anti‐LSD1 (Cell Signaling) and anti‐Ki67 (Abcam) was incubated with deparaffinized human tissues. Deparaffinized animal tissues were exposed to 1:100 diluted anti‐CD31 (Santa Cruz) using a Bond‐Max automated staining system (Leica Biosystems) according to the manufacturer's standard protocol. Antibody binding was visualized by immunostaining using a Bond Intense R Detection system (Leica Biosystems) and 3,3′‐diaminobenzidine. In the evaluation of human specimens, LSD1 and Ki‐67 positivity was measured in individual histologically distinct tumor components using microscopy and image‐analysis software (Keyence Japan, Osaka, Japan). In mixed germ cell tumors, each histologically distinct component was evaluated separately. Accordingly, 74 components from 53 patients were treated as separate observations in the statistical analyses, including components obtained from the same patient. The positivity scores of LSD1 and Ki‐67 expression were evaluated in each histologically distinct TGCT component and in non‐neoplastic seminiferous tubules using BZ9000 multifunctional microscopy and analysis software (Keyence Japan, Osaka, Japan). For each tumor component, five measurements were obtained and averaged to generate a single positivity score. CD31‐positive vessels were evaluated in five randomly selected microscopic fields from the tumor tissue of each mouse.

2.14. TUNEL Assay

A terminal deoxy nucleotidyl transferase‐mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay was used to detect apoptotic cells in deparaffinized tissues. This was undertaken using an In situ Apoptosis Detection Kit from Takara (Otsu, Japan) according to the manufacturer's instructions. For each mouse, five randomly selected microscopic fields from the tumor tissue were evaluated to determine the proportion of TUNEL‐positive cells.

2.15. Statistical Analysis

Quantitative data plotted as group means are presented as mean ± standard deviation (SD), and error bars indicate SD, unless otherwise specified. Individual data points, boxplots, patient characteristics, and correlation coefficients are reported in the formats indicated in the corresponding figures and tables. Student's t‐test was used for comparisons between two groups, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) or the Kruskal–Wallis test was used for comparisons involving three or more groups, as appropriate. Correlations between LSD1 and Ki‐67 positivity were assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. For the LSD1 immunohistochemical subtype comparisons, pairwise t‐tests comparing each non‐seminomatous histology with seminoma were adjusted using the Bonferroni method. For the established‐tumor experiment, the reported group comparisons were performed using ANOVA. For the TUNEL and CD31 analyses, measurements from five microscopic fields were averaged to obtain one value per mouse, and individual mice were used as the independent experimental units for statistical comparisons. Two‐sided p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Because multiple histologically distinct components from the same patient were analyzed as separate observations, the component‐level immunohistochemical analyses did not account for possible within‐patient correlation.

3. Results

3.1. LSD1 Positivity Is Higher in Non‐Seminomatous Than Seminomatous Components and Correlates With Ki‐67 Positivity

The demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of the revised cohort are summarized in Table 1. Following exclusion of four pediatric patients, 53 patients were included (median age, 35 years; range, 20–74 years). The remaining pure teratoma (n = 1) and pure yolk sac tumor (n = 2) cases were confirmed as postpubertal‐type tumors, with germ cell neoplasia in situ identified in adjacent testicular tissue. Thirty‐five patients (66.0%) had pure seminoma and 13 (24.5%) had mixed germ cell tumors. In total, 74 histologically distinct tumor components were evaluated, comprising 42 seminomatous (56.7%) and 32 non‐seminomatous (43.3%) components. Non‐neoplastic seminiferous tubules were excluded from the quantitative comparisons; representative images are shown solely as a morphological reference (Figure 1A,B). Representative images of the tumor components are shown in Figure 1C–Q. LSD1 positivity was higher in pooled non‐seminomatous components than in seminoma (p = 0.0104; Figure 1R). Pairwise comparisons of individual non‐seminomatous histologies with seminoma, adjusted using the Bonferroni method, showed higher LSD1 positivity in teratoma and yolk sac tumor components (adjusted p < 0.05 for each). The embryonal carcinoma–seminoma comparison did not reach statistical significance (adjusted p = 0.08; Figure 1R). Because only two choriocarcinoma components were evaluated, the expression pattern in this subtype should be interpreted cautiously. LSD1 positivity correlated positively with Ki‐67 positivity in seminoma (r = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.24–0.72, p < 0.001), non‐seminomatous components (r = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.056–0.73, p < 0.05), and all tumor components (r = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37–0.72, p < 0.001; Figure 1S–U).

TABLE 1.

Demographic and clinicopathological characteristics of the study cohort.

Variables Patient cohort (n = 53) tumor samples (n = 74)
Median age, years (range) 35 (20–74)
Status of preoperative AFP, n (%)
Within normal range 40/53 (75.5)
Elevated 13/53 (24.5)
Status of preoperative β‐HCG, n (%)
Within normal range 25/53 (47.2)
Elevated 28/53 (52.8)
Status of preoperative LDH, n (%)
Within normal range 15/53 (28.3)
Elevated 38/53 (71.7)
Histologic subtypes, n (%)
Pure SE 35/53 (66.0)
Pure EC 1/53 (1.9)
Pure TE 1/53 (1.9)
Pure YST 2/53 (3.8)
Pure CH 1/53 (1.9)
Mixed tumor 13/53 (24.5)
Tumor components, n (%)
SE 42/74 (56.7)
EC 13/74 (17.6)
TE 9/74 (12.2)
YST 8/74 (10.8)
CH 2/74 (2.7)
Stage AJCCS (n, %)
I 39/53 (73.6)
II 4/53 (7.5)
III 10/53 (18.9)
Vascular invasion, n (%)
Yes 14/53 (26.4)
No 39/53 (73.6)
Metastatic disease at diagnosis, n (%)
Yes 14/53 (26.4)
No 39/53 (73.6)
IGCCCG prognosis group, n (%)
Good 10/14 (71.4)
Intermediate 4/14 (28.6)
Poor 0/14 (0)
Relapse/Progression, n (%)
Yes 13/53 (24.5)
No 40/53 (75.5)
Additional chemotherapy, n (%) 17/53 (32.1)
Vital status, n (%)
Alive with no disease 42/53 (79.2)
Alive with disease 0/53 (0)
Died from disease 3/53 (5.7)
Died with no evidence of disease 1/53 (1.9)
Unknown 7/53 (13.2)

Abbreviations: β‐HCG, beta‐human chorionic gonadotropin; AFP, alpha‐fetoprotein; AJCC, American Joint Committee on Cancer; CH, choriocarcinoma; EC, embryonal carcinoma; IGCCCG, International Germ Cell Cancer Collaborative Group; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; SE, seminoma; TE, teratoma; YST, yolk sac tumor.

3.2. NCL1 Suppresses Embryonal Carcinoma Cell Growth and Induces Apoptosis

We first examined LSD1 expression in human embryonal carcinoma cell lines. NTERA‐2 and Tera‐1 cells showed high LSD1 expression by western blotting (Figure 2A). To determine whether LSD1 inhibition influences gene‐specific histone methylation, NTERA‐2 cells treated with NCL1 were subjected to ChIP analysis. NCL1 increased H3K9me2 enrichment at the promoter regions of the pluripotency‐related genes SOX2 and OCT4 (Figure 2B). As shown in Figure 2C, NCL1 suppressed cell viability in both human embryonal carcinoma cell lines in a dose‐dependent manner. To further investigate the growth‐inhibitory effect of NCL1 in cells with reduced cisplatin sensitivity, we established cisplatin‐adapted NTERA‐2 cells (NTERA‐2R). The cisplatin IC₅₀ was 0.53 μM in parental NTERA‐2 cells and 3.18 μM in NTERA‐2R cells, representing a 6.0‐fold increase in the adapted cells (Figure 2D). NCL1 also suppressed cell viability in NTERA‐2R cells in a dose‐dependent manner (Figure 2E). Furthermore, the addition of NCL1 at 5 μM to cisplatin further reduced cell viability compared with cisplatin treatment alone in parental NTERA‐2 cells (Figure 2F).

To elucidate the mechanisms underlying NCL1‐induced growth inhibition, we evaluated proteins involved in pluripotency, apoptosis, and cell‐cycle regulation in NCL1‐treated NTERA‐2 cells. LSD1 expression remained largely unchanged, whereas H3K9me1 and H3K9me2 levels increased following NCL1 treatment. Consistent with the ChIP results, the expression of SOX2 and OCT4 was reduced. In addition, NANOG expression was decreased (Figure 3A). NCL1 treatment also reduced the expression of survivin, an inhibitor of apoptosis protein, and increased Cl. Casp 3 levels, whereas total Casp 3 expression remained largely unchanged (Figure 3A). In contrast, the expression of the examined cell‐cycle‐related proteins showed no marked changes. We therefore performed flow‐cytometric analyses of apoptosis and cell‐cycle distribution. NCL1 treatment increased the proportion of apoptotic NTERA‐2 cells in a dose‐dependent manner (Figure 3B), without markedly altering cell‐cycle distribution (Figure 3C).

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

NCL1 is associated with apoptosis‐related changes in embryonal carcinoma cells. (A) Western blotting of pluripotency‐associated proteins, cell‐cycle regulators, and apoptosis‐related proteins, including survivin and cleaved caspase‐3, in NTERA‐2 cells after NCL1 treatment. (B) Flow‐cytometric apoptosis analysis showing a dose‐dependent increase in apoptotic cells after NCL1 treatment. (C) Cell‐cycle distribution after NCL1 treatment showing no marked shift among G0/G1, S, and G2/M phases. *p < 0.05. Quantitative data in panel B are presented as mean ± SD; error bars represent SD.

3.3. NCL1 Provokes Autophagy‐Related Changes and Chloroquine Enhances Cytotoxicity

RNA sequencing followed by IPA suggested modest changes in autophagy‐related pathways after NCL1 exposure (activation z‐score, 1.61). We therefore examined autophagy–lysosome‐related responses and the effect of CQ on NCL1‐associated growth inhibition. NCL1 treatment increased LC3‐II and p62 levels, and these increases were further enhanced by CQ (Figure 4A). Co‐treatment with CQ was associated with lower WST‐8 absorbance than NCL1 alone at the indicated NCL1 concentrations (Figure 4B). The combination group also showed a higher apoptotic fraction in the displayed experiment (Figure 4C). LysoTracker Red fluorescence increased following NCL1 treatment (Figure 4D–F). Furthermore, LC3 puncta formation increased, consistent with LC3‐II accumulation at the cellular level (Figure 4G–I). TEM revealed an increase in autophagosome‐ and autolysosome‐like vesicular structures after NCL1 treatment, with further accumulation of enlarged vesicular structures after CQ co‐treatment (Figure 4J). Together, these findings indicate that NCL1 perturbs autophagy–lysosome dynamics and that pharmacologic lysosomal inhibition enhances NCL1‐associated cytotoxicity in embryonal carcinoma cells.

FIGURE 4.

FIGURE 4

Autophagy–lysosome‐related changes after NCL1 treatment and enhanced growth inhibition with chloroquine. (A) Western blotting of LC3‐II, p62, beclin‐1, and cleaved caspase‐3 (Cl. Casp 3) in NTERA‐2 cells treated with NCL1 and/or chloroquine (CQ). (B) WST‐8 absorbance after treatment with increasing concentrations of NCL1 alone or with CQ. (C) Apoptotic fractions after CQ alone, NCL1 alone, or NCL1 plus CQ treatment. (D–F) Representative LysoTracker Red fluorescence images from control, NCL1‐treated, and NCL1 plus CQ‐treated cells, respectively. (G–I) Representative images of LC3 puncta in control (G), NCL1‐treated (H), and NCL1 plus CQ‐treated (I) cells, respectively. (J) Transmission electron microscopy showing autophagosome‐ and autolysosome‐like vesicular structures after NCL1 treatment and enlarged vesicular structures after CQ co‐treatment. Scale bars, 10 μm for fluorescence images and 1 μm for transmission electron microscopy. Quantitative data in panels (B and C) are shown as mean ± SD; error bars indicate SD. Asterisks denote differences identified by multiple‐comparison testing in panels (B and C). *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001; ****p < 0.0001. Cl. Casp 3, cleaved caspase‐3; CQ, chloroquine.

3.4. NCL1 Suppresses Early Xenograft Growth Accompanied by Increased TUNEL Positivity In Vivo

To assess the effect of NCL1 on tumor progression in vivo, nude mice were injected subcutaneously with NTERA‐2 cells. In the initial experiment, NCL1 treatment was initiated 5 days after tumor inoculation, before tumors became measurable. Tumor growth and the serum AFP level were significantly inhibited in mice of the 1.0 mg/kg NCL1 treated group compared to those in the vehicle control group (Figure 5A,D). NCL1‐treated tumors showed vacuolar degeneration and other histopathological findings consistent with an antitumor effect (Figure 5E,F). A TUNEL assay was used to study the mechanism of attenuated tumor growth by NCL1 in vivo. Compared with the vehicle control, NCL1 treatment significantly increased the number of TUNEL‐positive cells (Figure 5B,G,H). In addition, CD31‐positive vessels were significantly reduced in NCL1 treated tumors (Figure 5C,I,J). These findings suggest that NCL1 suppressed early xenograft outgrowth, accompanied by increased TUNEL‐positive cells and a reduction in CD31‐positive vessels.

FIGURE 5.

FIGURE 5

Antitumor effects of NCL1 in a subcutaneous NTERA‐2 xenograft model. (A) Tumor growth curves in vehicle‐ and NCL1‐treated mice. (B) Quantification of TUNEL‐positive cells. (C) Quantification of CD31‐positive vessels. (D) Serum AFP levels (box‐and‐whisker plot). (E, F) Representative hematoxylin–eosin images of xenograft tumors. (G, H) Representative TUNEL staining (arrowheads indicate TUNEL positive cells). (I, J) Representative CD31 immunohistochemistry (arrowheads indicate CD31‐positive vessels). Scale bars, 200 μm in panels (E and F) and 25 μm in panels (G–J). *p < 0.05, AFP, alpha‐fetoprotein; TUNEL, terminal deoxy nucleotidyl transferase‐mediated dUTP nick end labeling. Quantitative data shown as group means in panels (A–C) are presented as mean ± SD; error bars represent SD.

To further evaluate the effect of NCL1 against established tumors, a separate experiment was performed in which treatment was initiated approximately 2 weeks after tumor inoculation, after measurable tumors had formed. Mice were randomized to vehicle, NCL1 0.5 mg/kg, or NCL1 1.0 mg/kg groups. No significant differences in tumor growth were observed among the three groups during the 4‐week treatment period (Figure S1A). No significant differences in body weight or relative liver and kidney weights were observed among the three groups. (Figure S1B, Table S1). Taken together, these findings indicate that NCL1 suppressed early NTERA‐2 xenograft outgrowth, accompanied by increased TUNEL positivity and fewer CD31‐positive vessels. In contrast, NCL1 did not significantly inhibit the growth of established xenografts under the treatment conditions examined.

4. Discussion

In this study, we examined LSD1 expression across human TGCT histologies and investigated the effects and associated cellular responses of the selective LSD1 inhibitor NCL1 in embryonal carcinoma models. LSD1 positivity was higher in pooled non‐seminomatous components than in seminoma, providing a histological rationale for investigating LSD1 as a potential target in NSGCT. NCL1 increased global H3K9me1/2 levels and H3K9me2 enrichment at SOX2 and OCT4 promoter regions, accompanied by decreased expression of pluripotency‐associated proteins and greater apoptosis‐associated readouts. NCL1 also reduced viability in cisplatin‐adapted cells and further decreased viability when added to cisplatin in parental NTERA‐2 cells. In vivo, growth suppression was observed in the early‐intervention xenograft experiment but not after treatment of established tumors at the doses tested. These findings identify both NCL1‐associated cellular responses and an important limitation of its observed in vivo activity.

LSD1 regulates a broad range of gene expression programs across multiple malignancies, and the mechanisms by which LSD1 inhibitors exert antitumor effects vary considerably among tumor types [9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]. In TGCT, particularly in EC, SOX2, and OCT4 are characteristically expressed and are used to maintain a pluripotent and proliferative state [6, 25]. Previous studies have shown that LSD1 inhibition decreases the expression of SOX2 and OCT4 and suppresses embryonal carcinoma cell proliferation [10, 13]. However, the chromatin‐level changes associated with these effects and the accompanying downstream cellular responses remain incompletely characterized. In this study, NCL1 increased H3K9me2 enrichment at the SOX2 and OCT4 promoter regions, accompanied by reduced expression of the corresponding proteins. These findings provide additional evidence linking LSD1 inhibition to epigenetic regulation of pluripotency‐associated programs in embryonal carcinoma cells. Furthermore, NCL1 treatment reduced survivin expression and increased Cl. casp 3 levels and apoptotic cell populations. Survivin, an inhibitor of apoptosis protein, has previously been reported to be expressed in undifferentiated testicular germ cell tumors and normal testes [26, 27]. These findings suggest that the growth‐inhibitory effect of NCL1 is accompanied by changes in both pluripotency‐associated and apoptosis‐related proteins. However, the present results do not establish a direct causal relationship between survivin downregulation and apoptosis induction.

Autophagy is a conserved homeostatic process in which cytoplasmic components are sequestered into double‐membrane autophagosomes and subsequently degraded after fusion with lysosomes [28, 29, 30]. Depending on cellular context, autophagy can function either as a cytoprotective mechanism that promotes survival or as a process that contributes to cell death [28, 29, 30]. Studies in other malignancies have linked autophagy inhibition to enhanced sensitivity to anticancer agents [31, 32, 33]. Autophagy‐related changes have also been examined in cisplatin‐resistant testicular cancer cells [34]. In this study, NCL1 treatment was accompanied by LC3‐II and p62 accumulation, increased lysosomal signal, LC3 puncta formation, and ultrastructural accumulation of autophagic vacuole‐like structures. CQ further enhanced LC3‐II/p62 accumulation, growth inhibition, and apoptosis. Although these findings do not, by themselves, establish productive autophagic flux, they support the interpretation that perturbation of the autophagy–lysosome pathway modulates sensitivity to NCL1. Thus, autophagy‐related responses may act, at least partly, as a cytoprotective program against LSD1 inhibition in embryonal carcinoma cells.

In this study, the timing and setting of NCL1 administration differed between the two xenograft experiments. NCL1 significantly suppressed subsequent growth when treatment began 5 days after implantation, before tumors became measurable. In contrast, when treatment began approximately 2 weeks after implantation, after measurable tumors had formed, no significant growth inhibition was observed at either 0.5 or 1.0 mg/kg. These findings are compatible with greater activity during tumor establishment or early outgrowth than against established tumors under the tested schedule. Nevertheless, because the experiments were performed independently, the difference cannot be attributed solely to treatment initiation time. In the early‐intervention experiment, increased TUNEL positivity and fewer CD31‐positive vessels were observed, but CD31 staining alone cannot demonstrate a direct anti‐angiogenic effect. Body weight and relative organ weight remained comparable among groups in the established‐tumor study, providing a limited tolerability observation rather than evidence of the absence of systemic or reproductive toxicity. LSD1/KDM1A is also expressed in multiple normal tissues, underscoring the need for systemic safety assessment [35]. Previous work has described testicular toxicity of NCL1 under other exposure conditions [36]; such risks require careful assessment before any clinical development.

Importantly, NCL1 reduced viability in cisplatin‐adapted NTERA‐2 cells and further decreased viability when combined with cisplatin in parental NTERA‐2 cells. These results extend the original investigation beyond untreated parental cells. However, the adapted cell population was generated by prolonged cisplatin exposure and is not equivalent to a clinically validated refractory tumor model. The present combination experiment also did not establish pharmacological synergy, enhanced efficacy against established xenografts, or the possibility of safely reducing cisplatin dose. These questions warrant dedicated studies. In human specimens, LSD1 positivity was higher in pooled non‐seminomatous components than in seminoma (p = 0.0104) and correlated with Ki‐67 positivity. Bonferroni‐adjusted comparisons showed higher LSD1 positivity in teratoma and yolk sac tumor components than in seminoma; the embryonal carcinoma–seminoma comparison did not reach statistical significance (adjusted p = 0.08). Together with the NCL1‐associated responses in embryonal carcinoma models, this expression pattern supports further investigation of LSD1 as a potential therapeutic target in NSGCT. A larger prior study did not identify a significant difference in LSD1 expression between seminomatous and non‐seminomatous tumors [37]. Nevertheless, LSD1 expression alone does not establish sensitivity to NCL1, and the current functional experiments do not establish efficacy in teratoma, yolk sac tumor, or seminoma.

Several limitations should be acknowledged. The functional experiments focused on embryonal carcinoma cell lines, and in vivo testing was limited to one NTERA‐2 xenograft model. Neither direct genetic validation of LSD1 dependence nor rescue of the proposed downstream pathways was performed. Furthermore, histologically distinct components from the same patient were analyzed as separate observations, without adjustment for within‐patient clustering in the immunohistochemical analyses. Most importantly, NCL1 did not significantly inhibit growth of established xenografts at the tested doses, and the present data do not demonstrate therapeutic efficacy against established or chemotherapy‐refractory TGCT in vivo.

In summary, NCL1 reduced embryonal carcinoma cell viability and was associated with promoter‐region H3K9me2 enrichment, decreased pluripotency‐associated proteins, and apoptosis‐related changes. NCL1 showed dose‐dependent growth inhibition in cisplatin‐adapted cells and further reduced viability when combined with cisplatin in parental cells. The in vivo response was restricted to the early‐intervention setting under the conditions tested. The human histological findings and NCL1‐associated cellular responses nominate LSD1 as a potential therapeutic target for further investigation in NSGCT, while the efficacy of NCL1 in other histological subtypes and against established tumors remains to be established. A graphical summary of the principal findings is shown in Figure 6.

FIGURE 6.

FIGURE 6

Higher LSD1 positivity in non‐seminomatous germ cell tumor components and the effects of selective LSD1 inhibition by NCL1 in embryonal carcinoma models. *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.0001.

Author Contributions

Nobuhiko Shimizu: conceptualization, data curation, writing – original draft. Toshiki Etani: conceptualization, data curation. Taku Naiki: conceptualization, methodology, writing – review and editing. Aya Naiki‐Ito: methodology, writing – review and editing. Yosuke Sugiyama: formal analysis. Takashi Nagai: data curation. Akihiro Murakami: data curation. Hiroyuki Kato: data curation. Toshiharu Morikawa: data curation. Maria Aoki: data curation. Masakazu Gonda: data curation. Hiroko Suzuki: data curation. Yohei Tsubouchi: data curation. Daiki Ishikawa: data curation. Takayoshi Suzuki: supervision. Satoru Takahashi: supervision. Takahiro Yasui: supervision.

Funding

This work was supported by Grant‐in‐aids from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports Science and Technology of Japan (23K19661) and from the Nagoya Co‐Creation Research Fund.

Ethics Statement

The human study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Nagoya City University Hospital (Approval no. 60‐00‐1271). Animal Studies: Protocols for animal studies were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences (Approval nos. 21‐026 and 26‐025).

Consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Conflicts of Interest

Dr. Aya Naiki‐Ito and Dr. Satoru Takahashi are editorial board members of Cancer Science. The other authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Figure S1: Effects of NCL1 on established NTERA‐2 xenografts and body weight. NTERA‐2 cells were subcutaneously implanted into nude mice. Approximately 2 weeks after tumor inoculation, when measurable tumors had formed, mice were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 10 per group) and treated with vehicle, NCL1 at 0.5 mg/kg, or NCL1 at 1.0 mg/kg by intraperitoneal injection twice weekly for 4 weeks. (A) Changes in tumor volume during the treatment period. Tumor volume was calculated from caliper measurements using a standard volume formula. No significant differences in tumor growth were observed among the three groups. (B) Changes in body weight during the treatment period. No significant differences in body weight were observed among the three groups. Data are presented as mean ± SD; error bars represent SD. Statistical comparisons were performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). n.s., not significant.

CAS-9999-0-s001.pdf (93.5KB, pdf)

Table S1: Body and relative organ weights in the established NTERA‐2 xenograft experiment. Values are presented as mean ± SD for the vehicle, NCL1 0.5 mg/kg, and NCL1 1.0 mg/kg groups (n = 10 per group).

CAS-9999-0-s002.docx (19.8KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Hiroshi Takase for the technical assistance in the Core Laboratory of the Research Equipment Sharing Center at Nagoya City University. We also thank the clinical staff of Nagoya City University Hospital and affiliated institutions for their assistance with patient care and data collection.

Contributor Information

Taku Naiki, Email: naiki@med.nagoya-cu.ac.jp.

Aya Naiki‐Ito, Email: ayaito@med.nagoya-cu.ac.jp.

Data Availability Statement

The RNA sequencing data generated in this study have been deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under BioProject accession number PRJNA1533615 and will be made publicly available upon publication. Other data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • 1. Chavarriaga J., Nappi L., Papachristofilou A., Conduit C., and Hamilton R. J., “Testicular Cancer,” Lancet 406, no. 10498 (2025): 76–90, 10.1016/S0140-6736(25)00455-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Evmorfopoulos K., Marsitopoulos K., Karachalios R., et al., “The Immune Landscape and Immunotherapeutic Strategies in Platinum‐Refractory Testicular Germ Cell Tumors,” Cancers (Basel) 16, no. 2 (2024): 428, 10.3390/cancers16020428. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Khan M. R., Sheehan P. K., Bazin A., et al., “Late Side Effects of Testicular Cancer and Treatment: A Comprehensive Review,” Discover Oncology 15, no. 1 (2024): 646, 10.1007/s12672-024-01549-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Litchfield K., Summersgill B., Yost S., et al., “Whole‐Exome Sequencing Reveals the Mutational Spectrum of Testicular Germ Cell Tumours,” Nature Communications 6 (2015): 5973, 10.1038/ncomms6973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Fichtner A., Richter A., Filmar S., et al., “The Detection of Isochromosome i(12p) in Malignant Germ Cell Tumours and Tumours With Somatic Malignant Transformation by the Use of Quantitative Real‐Time Polymerase Chain Reaction,” Histopathology 78, no. 4 (2021): 593–606, 10.1111/his.14258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. von Eyben F. E., Kristiansen K., Kapp D. S., Hu R., Preda O., and Nogales F. F., “Epigenetic Regulation of Driver Genes in Testicular Tumorigenesis,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 4 (2023): 4148, 10.3390/ijms24044148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Ní Leathlobhair M., Frangou A., Kinnersley B., et al., “Genomic Landscape of Adult Testicular Germ Cell Tumours in the 100,000 Genomes Project,” Nature Communications 15, no. 1 (2024): 9247, 10.1038/s41467-024-53193-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Metzger E., Wissmann M., Yin N., et al., “LSD1 Demethylates Repressive Histone Marks to Promote Androgen‐Receptor‐Dependent Transcription,” Nature 437, no. 7057 (2005): 436–439, 10.1038/nature04020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Hayami S., Kelly J. D., Cho H. S., et al., “Overexpression of LSD1 Contributes to Human Carcinogenesis Through Chromatin Regulation in Various Cancers,” International Journal of Cancer 128, no. 3 (2011): 574–586, 10.1002/ijc.25349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Wang J., Lu F., Ren Q., et al., “Novel Histone Demethylase LSD1 Inhibitors Selectively Target Cancer Cells With Pluripotent Stem Cell Properties,” Cancer Research 71, no. 23 (2011): 7238–7249, 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-0896. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Lv T., Yuan D., Miao X., et al., “Over‐Expression of LSD1 Promotes Proliferation, Migration and Invasion in Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer,” PLoS One 7, no. 4 (2012): e35065, 10.1371/journal.pone.0035065. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Nagasawa S., Sedukhina A. S., Nakagawa Y., et al., “LSD1 Overexpression Is Associated With Poor Prognosis in Basal‐Like Breast Cancer, and Sensitivity to PARP Inhibition,” PLoS One 10, no. 2 (2015): e0118002, 10.1371/journal.pone.0118002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Hoang N., Zhang X., Zhang C., et al., “New Histone Demethylase LSD1 Inhibitor Selectively Targets Teratocarcinoma and Embryonic Carcinoma Cells,” Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry 26, no. 8 (2018): 1523–1537, 10.1016/j.bmc.2018.01.031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Xie Q., Tang T., Pang J., et al., “LSD1 Promotes Bladder Cancer Progression by Upregulating LEF1 and Enhancing EMT,” Frontiers in Oncology 10 (2020): 1234, 10.3389/fonc.2020.01234. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Dreher R. D. and Theisen E. R., “Lysine Specific Demethylase 1 Is a Molecular Driver and Therapeutic Target in Sarcoma,” Frontiers in Oncology 12 (2022): 1076581, 10.3389/fonc.2022.1076581. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Du L., Yang H., Ren Y., et al., “Inhibition of LSD1 Induces Ferroptosis Through the ATF4‐xCT Pathway and Shows Enhanced Anti‐Tumor Effects With Ferroptosis Inducers in NSCLC,” Cell Death & Disease 14, no. 11 (2023): 716, 10.1038/s41419-023-06238-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Sang N., Zhong X., Gou K., et al., “Pharmacological Inhibition of LSD1 Suppresses Growth of Hepatocellular Carcinoma by Inducing GADD45B,” MedComm 4, no. 3 (2023): e269, 10.1002/mco2.269. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Shinjo K., Umehara T., Niwa H., et al., “Novel Pharmacologic Inhibition of Lysine‐Specific Demethylase 1 as a Potential Therapeutic for Glioblastoma,” Cancer Gene Therapy 31, no. 12 (2024): 1884–1894, 10.1038/s41417-024-00847-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Cai W., Xiao C., Fan T., et al., “Targeting LSD1 in Cancer: Molecular Elucidation and Recent Advances,” Cancer Letters 598 (2024): 217093, 10.1016/j.canlet.2024.217093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Ueda R., Suzuki T., Mino K., et al., “Identification of Cell‐Active Lysine Specific Demethylase 1‐Selective Inhibitors,” Journal of the American Chemical Society 131, no. 48 (2009): 17536–17537, 10.1021/ja907055q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Ogasawara D., Suzuki T., Mino K., et al., “Synthesis and Biological Activity of Optically Active NCL‐1, a Lysine‐Specific Demethylase 1 Selective Inhibitor,” Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry 19, no. 12 (2011): 3702–3708, 10.1016/j.bmc.2010.12.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Etani T., Suzuki T., Naiki T., et al., “NCL1, a Highly Selective Lysine‐Specific Demethylase 1 Inhibitor, Suppresses Prostate Cancer Without Adverse Effect,” Oncotarget 6, no. 5 (2015): 2865–2878, 10.18632/oncotarget.3067. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Etani T., Naiki T., Naiki‐Ito A., et al., “NCL1, a Highly Selective Lysine‐Specific Demethylase 1 Inhibitor, Suppresses Castration‐Resistant Prostate Cancer Growth via Regulation of Apoptosis and Autophagy,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 8, no. 4 (2019): 442, 10.3390/jcm8040442. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. van Helvoort Lengert A., do Nascimento Braga Pereira L., Ramos Martins Cabral E., et al., “Potential New Therapeutic Approaches for Cisplatin‐Resistant Testicular Germ Cell Tumors,” Frontiers in Bioscience (Landmark Edition) 27, no. 8 (2022): 245, 10.31083/j.fbl2708245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Eini R., Stoop H., Gillis A. J., Biermann K., Dorssers L. C., and Looijenga L. H., “Role of SOX2 in the Etiology of Embryonal Carcinoma, Based on Analysis of the NCCIT and NT2 Cell Lines,” PLoS One 9, no. 1 (2014): e83585, 10.1371/journal.pone.0083585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Weikert S., Schrader M., Krause H., Schulze W., Müller M., and Miller K., “The Inhibitor of Apoptosis (IAP) Survivin Is Expressed in Human Testicular Germ Cell Tumors and Normal Testes,” Cancer Letters 223, no. 2 (2005): 331–337, 10.1016/j.canlet.2004.10.038. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Weikert S., Schrader M., Christoph F., et al., “Quantification of Survivin mRNA in Testes of Infertile Patients and in Testicular Germ Cell Tumours: High Levels of Expression Associated With Normal Spermatogenesis,” International Journal of Andrology 28, no. 4 (2005): 224–229, 10.1111/j.1365-2605.2005.00549.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Choi A. M., Ryter S. W., and Levine B., “Autophagy in Human Health and Disease,” New England Journal of Medicine 368, no. 7 (2013): 651–662, 10.1056/NEJMra1205406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Yan X., Zhou R., and Ma Z., “Autophagy‐Cell Survival and Death,” Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 1206 (2019): 667–696, 10.1007/978-981-15-0602-4_29. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Liu S., Yao S., Yang H., Liu S., and Wang Y., “Autophagy: Regulator of Cell Death,” Cell Death & Disease 14, no. 10 (2023): 648, 10.1038/s41419-023-06154-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Fukuda T., Oda K., Wada‐Hiraike O., et al., “The Anti‐Malarial Chloroquine Suppresses Proliferation and Overcomes Cisplatin Resistance of Endometrial Cancer Cells via Autophagy Inhibition,” Gynecologic Oncology 137, no. 3 (2015): 538–545, 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.03.053. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Qin L., Xu T., Xia L., et al., “Chloroquine Enhances the Efficacy of Cisplatin by Suppressing Autophagy in Human Adrenocortical Carcinoma Treatment,” Drug Design, Development and Therapy 10 (2016): 1035–1045, 10.2147/DDDT.S101701. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Datta S., Choudhury D., Das A., et al., “Autophagy Inhibition With Chloroquine Reverts Paclitaxel Resistance and Attenuates Metastatic Potential in Human Nonsmall Lung Adenocarcinoma A549 Cells via ROS Mediated Modulation of Beta‐Catenin Pathway,” Apoptosis 24, no. 5–6 (2019): 414–433, 10.1007/s10495-019-01526-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Yuan M., Yao Y., Wu D., Zhu C., Dong S., and Tong X., “Pannexin1 Inhibits Autophagy of Cisplatin‐Resistant Testicular Cancer Cells by Mediating ATP Release,” Cell Cycle 21, no. 15 (2022): 1651–1661, 10.1080/15384101.2022.2060655. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. The Human Protein Atlas , “KDM1A Tissue Expression,” accessed September 22, 2026, https://www.proteinatlas.org/ENSG00000004487‐KDM1A/tissue.
  • 36. Nozaki S., Naiki T., Naiki‐Ito A., et al., “Selective Lysine‐Specific Demethylase 1 Inhibitor, NCL1, Could Cause Testicular Toxicity via the Regulation of Apoptosis,” Andrology 8, no. 6 (2020): 1895–1906, 10.1111/andr.12846. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Lourenco B. C., Guimaraes‐Teixeira C., Flores B. C. T., et al., “Ki67 and LSD1 Expression in Testicular Germ Cell Tumors Is Not Associated With Patient Outcome: Investigation Using a Digital Pathology Algorithm,” Life 12, no. 2 (2022): 264, 10.3390/life12020264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Figure S1: Effects of NCL1 on established NTERA‐2 xenografts and body weight. NTERA‐2 cells were subcutaneously implanted into nude mice. Approximately 2 weeks after tumor inoculation, when measurable tumors had formed, mice were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 10 per group) and treated with vehicle, NCL1 at 0.5 mg/kg, or NCL1 at 1.0 mg/kg by intraperitoneal injection twice weekly for 4 weeks. (A) Changes in tumor volume during the treatment period. Tumor volume was calculated from caliper measurements using a standard volume formula. No significant differences in tumor growth were observed among the three groups. (B) Changes in body weight during the treatment period. No significant differences in body weight were observed among the three groups. Data are presented as mean ± SD; error bars represent SD. Statistical comparisons were performed using analysis of variance (ANOVA). n.s., not significant.

CAS-9999-0-s001.pdf (93.5KB, pdf)

Table S1: Body and relative organ weights in the established NTERA‐2 xenograft experiment. Values are presented as mean ± SD for the vehicle, NCL1 0.5 mg/kg, and NCL1 1.0 mg/kg groups (n = 10 per group).

CAS-9999-0-s002.docx (19.8KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The RNA sequencing data generated in this study have been deposited in the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA) under BioProject accession number PRJNA1533615 and will be made publicly available upon publication. Other data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.


Articles from Cancer Science are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES