Cancer’s Secret Weapon: How Tumors Hijack the Immune System’s Power Plants

The Cellular Power Struggle

For decades, scientists have known that our immune system represents one of the body’s most powerful defenses against cancer. White blood cells patrol our tissues, identifying and destroying abnormal cells before they can form tumors. Yet cancers frequently manage to evade these defenses, growing and spreading despite the immune system’s best efforts. New research has uncovered a surprising mechanism that helps explain this puzzle: cancer cells are stealing the power generators from immune cells.

Two groundbreaking studies published in leading scientific journals have revealed that tumors engage in a biological form of theft, transferring mitochondria between cancer cells and immune cells in ways that benefit the tumor while crippling the body’s defenses.

Understanding Mitochondria: The Cellular Batteries

Every cell in your body contains small structures called mitochondria, often described as the cell’s power plants. These tiny organelles convert nutrients into energy that cells need to function. Without properly working mitochondria, cells cannot perform their jobs effectively.

What makes mitochondria unique is that they contain their own DNA, separate from the DNA found in the cell’s nucleus. This mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA, is essential for energy production but is also vulnerable to mutations because it lacks some of the protective mechanisms that nuclear DNA has.

For immune cells, healthy mitochondria are especially critical. Fighting cancer requires enormous amounts of energy. T cells and natural killer cells must rapidly multiply, travel through tissues, and directly attack tumor cells. All of these activities demand robust mitochondrial function.

A Two-Way Street of Sabotage

The new research reveals that mitochondrial transfer between cancer and immune cells operates as a two-way street, with both directions benefiting the tumor. The key to this cellular theft lies in structures called tunneling nanotubes (TNTs), which are microscopic channels that cancer cells extend toward neighboring immune cells. These structures function much like tiny straws, siphoning mitochondria from one cell to another.

These biological straws are remarkably thin, measuring just 50 to 200 nanometers in diameter, yet they create direct highways between cells that allow mitochondria and other cellular components to pass freely. Cancer cells actively build these TNT connections, reaching out to immune cells and establishing the infrastructure for their energy heist. Once connected, the tumor cell essentially drinks the power supply from immune cells through these nanotube straws.

In one direction, research published in Cell Metabolism demonstrated that cancer cells actively hijack mitochondria from a wide variety of immune cells, including T cells, natural killer cells, and antigen-presenting cells. Through the tunneling nanotube network, healthy mitochondria travel from immune cells into tumor cells, leaving the body’s defenders energy-depleted. When immune cells lose their mitochondria to tumors through these straw-like connections, their ability to fight cancer plummets. The research team found that this theft reduces the machinery needed for immune cells to recognize cancer, present warning signals to other immune cells, and directly kill tumor cells.

Remarkably, the stolen mitochondria do not simply disappear inside cancer cells. Instead, they fuse with the tumor’s existing mitochondrial networks, supercharging the cancer’s energy production. This fusion triggers the release of mitochondrial DNA into the cell’s main compartment, activating a molecular alarm system called the cGAS-STING pathway. Rather than harming the cancer, this activation paradoxically helps tumors evade the immune system and spread to lymph nodes, a critical early step in metastasis.

In the other direction, the TNT straws work in reverse. Cancer cells can also push their own mitochondria, often carrying harmful mutations, into immune cells. This reverse transfer poisons the immune response from within, as defective mitochondria gradually replace the healthy power plants that immune cells need to function. The two-way nature of these nanotube highways makes them doubly dangerous: cancer cells simultaneously steal energy from the immune system while corrupting it with their own damaged organelles.

Tumors Don’t Just Steal from Immune Cells, They Also Recruit and Rob Nerves

Cancer’s theft operation extends beyond immune cells. Tumors actively attract nerves by releasing chemical signals that stimulate nerve fibers to sprout and grow into the tumor. This process, sometimes called cancer neurogenesis, has been documented in prostate, pancreatic, and head and neck cancers, where higher nerve density inside the tumor predicts worse outcomes for patients. In other words, tumors are not just hiding from the body’s defenses. They are building their own nerve supply.

Once nerves grow into a tumor, cancer cells form direct physical connections with them, including the same tunneling nanotube structures used to steal from immune cells. A 2025 study in Nature confirmed what researchers had long suspected: cancer cells use these tiny cellular straws to siphon mitochondria directly from neurons. Using genetic tracking tools, scientists showed that roughly one-third of the mitochondria acquired by tumor cells came from neuronal sources. When researchers cut off the nerve supply to tumors in mice, the cancer cells had fewer mitochondria stolen from them.

The stolen nerve mitochondria appear to be especially valuable. Neurons are energy-hungry cells with highly efficient power plants, and cancer cells that acquire neuronal mitochondria show improved energy production, better stress resistance, and greater ability to form new tumors. Most striking was the finding that cancer cells carrying neuron-derived mitochondria were 5 times more likely to be present in brain metastases than in primary tumors. This suggests that stealing from nerves may give cancer cells a specific advantage when spreading to the nervous system.

Poisoning the Immune Response

The second study, published in Nature by researchers from multiple Japanese institutions, uncovered an even more insidious mechanism. Cancer cells with mutations in their mitochondrial DNA can transfer these defective mitochondria to immune cells, essentially poisoning the immune response from within.

What makes this mechanism particularly sinister is its elegance as a survival strategy. Rather than simply evading or suppressing the immune system—tactics that might eventually be overcome—cancer cells have evolved to corrupt the very soldiers sent to destroy them. The tumor doesn’t just hide from the body’s defenses; it actively recruits immune cells and then sabotages them from the inside out, turning the body’s protectors into unwitting accomplices in its spread. This biological betrayal represents one of the most devious mechanisms of immune evasion ever discovered.

The research team analyzed tumor samples from patients with melanoma, lung cancer, and other malignancies. They discovered that tumor-infiltrating T cells frequently harbor the same mitochondrial DNA mutations as the cancer cells themselves. This was not a coincidence but evidence of direct transfer.

When T cells receive these mutated mitochondria from cancer cells, something alarming happens. The healthy mitochondria that T cells already possess are gradually destroyed through a process called mitophagy, which is the cell’s normal way of removing damaged organelles. However, the cancer-derived mitochondria resist this destruction because they carry protective molecules that prevent their breakdown. Over time, the T cell’s original, healthy mitochondria are replaced entirely by the tumor’s defective mitochondria.

The Devastating Effects on Immune Cells

T cells that acquire mutated mitochondria from cancer suffer profound dysfunction. The research documented multiple problems in these cells. First, their metabolism becomes impaired. Instead of efficiently producing energy through normal oxygen-dependent processes, these cells must rely on less efficient pathways. Second, the cells show signs of premature aging, or senescence, becoming less capable of dividing and responding to threats. Third, and perhaps most concerning, these T cells lose their ability to form lasting immune memory, which is essential for long-term cancer control.

When scientists tested whether these damaged T cells could still fight cancer, the results were stark. T cells that had received mutated mitochondria showed markedly reduced ability to kill tumor cells compared to normal T cells. The cancer had essentially neutralized one of the body’s primary weapons against it.

Implications for Lymph Node Metastasis

One of the most puzzling aspects of cancer biology has been understanding how tumors colonize lymph nodes, small organs packed with immune cells. The lymphatic system serves as a highway for immune surveillance, filtering fluids, and capturing foreign invaders. Lymph nodes contain dense concentrations of T cells, B cells, and other immune cells that should, in theory, quickly identify and destroy any cancer cells that arrive. Yet lymph node metastasis represents one of the earliest and most clinically significant steps in cancer spread, and its presence often signals a poorer prognosis for patients.

The Cell Metabolism research helps resolve this paradox by demonstrating that mitochondrial hijacking provides cancer cells with the specific tools needed to survive in immune-rich environments. When cancer cells steal mitochondria from immune cells and trigger the cGAS-STING pathway, they activate type I interferon signaling. This signaling program, which normally helps coordinate immune responses against viruses, is co-opted by cancer cells to express immune-evasive molecules that help them hide from the very immune cells surrounding them in lymph nodes.

The researchers found that blocking various components of this pathway, including the mitochondrial transfer machinery itself, cGAS, STING, or type I interferon signaling, significantly reduced cancer metastasis to lymph nodes in experimental models. This suggests that the mitochondria stolen from immune cells are not merely providing extra energy to cancer cells but are actively reprogramming them with the molecular credentials needed to infiltrate and survive within the immune system’s strongholds.

In essence, cancer cells are using stolen immune cell components to generate a kind of biological passport that allows them safe passage through the body’s most heavily guarded checkpoints. The very act of disarming immune cells simultaneously arms the cancer with the means to evade destruction in lymph nodes, representing a devastatingly efficient strategy that accomplishes two goals with a single mechanism.

Implications for Cancer Immunotherapy

These findings carry significant implications for cancer treatment, particularly for immunotherapy. Checkpoint inhibitors such as Keytruda (pembrolizumab) work by releasing the brakes that cancer places on the immune system, enabling T cells to mount a stronger attack against tumors. But if those T cells have already been impaired through the two-way mitochondrial theft—both by receiving defective mitochondria from cancer cells and by having their healthy mitochondria siphoned away through tunneling nanotubes—lifting those brakes may offer little benefit. T cells that have been simultaneously poisoned with mutated mitochondria and drained of their own functional power plants face a double blow that checkpoint inhibitors alone cannot reverse.

Newer immune-activating strategies take different approaches: Anktiva, an IL-15 receptor agonist, directly stimulates and expands functional immune cells, including natural killer (NK) cells and cytotoxic T cells, while CAR-T cell therapy engineers a patient’s own T cells to recognize and attack specific tumor targets. Yet even these freshly generated or engineered immune cells could suffer the same fate once they infiltrate the tumor microenvironment, where cancer cells may hijack their mitochondria through tunneling nanotubes. This vulnerability suggests that combining immune cell expansion or engineering therapies with interventions that block mitochondrial transfer could prove essential for achieving durable responses.

The Japanese research team examined outcomes in patients with melanoma and lung cancer who received immunotherapy. They found that patients whose tumors harbored mitochondrial DNA mutations had significantly shorter survival and less benefit from treatment than those without such mutations. This suggests that mitochondrial transfer may represent a form of resistance to current immunotherapies.

Implications for Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy

The discovery of tunneling nanotubes adds a troubling new dimension to our understanding of why cancer treatments sometimes fail. Chemotherapy drugs and radiation therapy are designed to kill cancer cells by overwhelming them with toxic levels of reactive oxygen species, essentially flooding the cells with corrosive molecules that damage their internal machinery beyond repair. For decades, oncologists have observed that some tumors initially respond to these treatments only to become resistant over time, yet the mechanisms underlying this resistance remain incompletely understood.

Tunneling nanotubes may explain a significant piece of this puzzle. When chemotherapy or radiation begins damaging cancer cells, these cells don’t simply wait to die. Instead, they extend their microscopic “straws” toward healthy neighboring cells, including bone marrow stem cells, connective tissue cells, and even immune cells, and begin siphoning fresh, undamaged mitochondria from them. These stolen power plants are equipped with fully functional antioxidant defenses, including enzymes such as superoxide dismutase and glutathione peroxidase, which can neutralize the highly reactive oxygen species produced by chemotherapy and radiation. In essence, cancer cells are replacing their damaged batteries with fresh ones stolen from the body’s own healthy cells, allowing them to survive treatment that should have killed them.

Research has shown this process in action across multiple cancer types. In acute myeloid leukemia, cancer cells that acquired mitochondria from bone marrow stem cells showed dramatically increased ATP levels and enhanced survival when exposed to chemotherapy drugs such as cytarabine, etoposide, and doxorubicin. In glioblastoma, the most aggressive form of brain cancer, tumor cells used tunneling nanotubes to share a protective protein called MGMT with their neighbors following radiation and temozolomide treatment, spreading resistance throughout the tumor network. Ovarian cancer cells exposed to platinum-based chemotherapy formed more tunneling nanotube connections, essentially building additional pipelines to acquire the resources they needed to survive.

The implications extend beyond simple survival. Cancer cells appear to actively sense when they are under oxidative stress and respond by ramping up nanotube formation. Hydrogen peroxide treatment, which mimics the oxidative damage caused by many cancer therapies, triggered nanotube formation in up to 60 percent of glioblastoma cells in laboratory studies. Hypoxic conditions, which occur naturally in the oxygen-starved cores of tumors, similarly stimulated nanotube production. This suggests that the harsh conditions created by cancer treatment may paradoxically trigger the very survival mechanism that helps tumors resist that treatment.

Perhaps most concerning is the two-way nature of this exchange. While cancer cells acquire new mitochondria to bolster their defenses, they simultaneously dump their damaged, mutation-ridden mitochondria into immune and stromal cells. This represents a double survival strategy: the cancer offloads its most dysfunctional components while acquiring functional replacements, effectively using the body’s own cells as both a supply depot and a garbage dump.

Beyond swapping mitochondria, cancer cells have been shown to use tunneling nanotubes as direct pipelines for pumping chemotherapy drugs out of themselves and into neighboring cells. Research on pancreatic cancer demonstrated that exposure to doxorubicin triggered a surge in nanotube formation and that these nanotubes actively transported the drug from cancer cells to connected cells. This effectively dilutes the toxic drug concentration within the cancer cell, allowing it to survive doses that would otherwise be lethal. The same study found that cancer cells could redistribute the chemotherapy burden across an entire network of connected cells, transforming what should be a targeted strike into a diffuse, survivable exposure. This drug efflux mechanism represents a third survival strategy: in addition to stealing fresh mitochondria and dumping damaged ones, cancer cells can literally flush out the poison meant to kill them.

The therapeutic implications are significant. Studies have consistently shown that blocking tunneling nanotube formation, whether through drugs that disrupt the cellular scaffolding or by targeting the molecular machinery that builds these structures, increases cancer cell sensitivity to treatment. In laboratory models, preventing mitochondrial transfer made leukemia cells more vulnerable to chemotherapy and improved survival in mice. This suggests that combining conventional cancer treatments with therapies that block tunneling nanotubes could potentially overcome resistance and improve patient outcomes.

Understanding this mechanism also helps explain why cancers that initially respond well to treatment sometimes recur more aggressively. The cells that survive the initial assault are likely those most adept at acquiring resources through tunneling nanotubes. Over successive rounds of treatment, this selective pressure may enrich the tumor population with cells that have become expert thieves, creating a more treatment-resistant cancer. This insight underscores the potential value of targeting the nanotube transfer mechanism early in treatment, before resistant populations can establish.

Potential New Treatment Approaches

Understanding these mechanisms opens potential new avenues for treatment. The research teams identified several points where intervention might be possible. Blocking the transfer process itself represents one approach. The studies found that mitochondria move between cells via direct cell-to-cell connections called tunneling nanotubes and via small vesicles called extracellular vesicles. In laboratory experiments, drugs that block the release of these vesicles reduced mitochondrial transfer and improved immune function.

Another approach targets the molecular pathways activated by transferred mitochondria. The Cell Metabolism study found that blocking the cGAS-STING pathway or interferon signaling reduced cancer spread to lymph nodes in animal models.

The Nature study identified a protein, USP30, that protects cancer-derived mitochondria from destruction within T cells. In experiments, inhibiting this protein partially prevented the replacement of healthy mitochondria and preserved T cell function.

A Proposed Seven-Drug Cocktail to Block the Energy Heist

The peril of therapeutically ignoring tunneling nanotubes cannot be overstated. When immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and radiation are administered without addressing this escape route, they inadvertently set up a Darwinian selection process that breeds more dangerous cancer. The initial treatment kills the majority of cancer cells, but the survivors are precisely those most adept at extending these microscopic straws, stealing healthy mitochondria, dumping damaged ones, and flushing out toxic drugs. These survivors repopulate the tumor, and when the next round of treatment arrives, the same selection pressure applies again, further enriching the population with cells that have become expert resource thieves.

Over successive treatment cycles, this evolutionary pressure can transform a tumor from a heterogeneous mix of cells with varying nanotube capabilities into a homogeneous mass of highly connected, immunoresistant, chemoresistant, and radioresistant cells that rapidly sense oxidative stress, aggressively build nanotube networks, and efficiently exploit neighboring cells for survival. The resulting cancer is not merely resistant; it is actively more aggressive, having been trained by repeated treatment exposure to prioritize the very survival mechanisms that make it hardest to kill. This understanding provides the rationale for a multi-pronged therapeutic strategy that targets the nanotube transfer machinery itself, cutting off the cancer’s escape route before resistance can take hold.

Building on the mechanistic insights from this research, Dr. Thomas proposes a seven-drug approach designed to disable each step of the mitochondrial theft process. This formulation combines TNT disruption, mitochondrial dynamics modulation, and immune cell protection, all while avoiding immunosuppressive agents and bleeding risk combinations.

This proposed cocktail addresses a critical unmet need in oncology, as no FDA-approved drugs yet exist specifically designed to target cancer cells’ theft of immune-cell mitochondria. While immunotherapies like checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized cancer treatment, they cannot help patients whose immune cells have already been sabotaged at the mitochondrial level. The absence of approved therapies targeting this newly discovered mechanism represents a significant gap in our therapeutic arsenal, and this multi-drug approach aims to fill it by repurposing existing medications with established safety profiles.

The first component, mebendazole, is an antiparasitic drug that disrupts microtubules, the internal “railroad tracks” that cells use to transport cargo. Cancer cells rely on these tracks to move stolen mitochondria through tunneling nanotubes. By dismantling this transport system, mebendazole may prevent mitochondria from traveling through the cellular “straws” that connect cancer cells to immune cells.

The second component, pravastatin, is a cholesterol-lowering statin that starves cancer cells of the building blocks they need to assemble tunneling nanotubes. Think of it like cutting off the supply of lumber to a construction site. Pravastatin also reduces the release of tiny packets called exosomes that cancer cells use as an alternative delivery system for transferring mitochondria. Notably, pravastatin was chosen over simvastatin because it does not interact with other drugs in this cocktail, making it safer to combine.

The third component, ketorolac, is a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug that blocks proteins involved in the formation of tunneling nanotube structures. By disabling what might be called the “construction crew,” ketorolac could prevent cancer cells from assembling the physical connections needed for mitochondrial transfer.

The fourth component, doxycycline, is a common antibiotic that has an unexpected effect on mitochondria. It interferes with the cancer cell’s ability to merge stolen mitochondria with its own power grid. Without this fusion step, the stolen batteries cannot be plugged in and used, making the theft much less beneficial to the cancer. Doxycycline also provides partial coverage of downstream inflammatory signaling by modulating NF-kB.

The fifth component, honokiol, is a natural compound derived from magnolia bark that affects multiple cellular pathways. In this proposed cocktail, honokiol disrupts the energy supply that cancer cells need to power the theft process itself. Building and maintaining tunneling nanotubes requires substantial cellular resources, and honokiol helps cut off this energy.

The sixth component, urolithin A, is a compound naturally produced in the gut when we eat pomegranates and certain berries. It enhances the immune cell’s ability to identify and destroy defective mitochondria, including the damaged ones that cancer cells try to dump into them. Think of it as giving immune cells a better garbage disposal system so they can clear out the cancer’s toxic waste before it accumulates and causes harm.

The seventh component, dihydroberberine, is an enhanced form of berberine, a compound found in several plants used in traditional medicine. It works on multiple fronts: disrupting the cancer cell’s energy production, interfering with the packaging and fusion of mitochondria, and helping immune cells clear out defective mitochondria. Dihydroberberine also inhibits NF-kB and STAT3 signaling, which helps dampen the downstream inflammatory pathways that cancer cells exploit after stealing mitochondria. It is absorbed about five times better than regular berberine, meaning lower doses can achieve the same effect with fewer digestive side effects.

The logic behind combining all seven medications reflects the redundancy built into biological systems. Cancer cells, like all cells, have backup mechanisms that can compensate when one pathway is blocked. By simultaneously targeting multiple components of the transfer machinery, a combination approach might prevent cancer from simply switching to alternative methods of mitochondrial theft.

It is worth emphasizing that this proposed cocktail is theoretical and has not yet been validated in clinical trials. Each of these medications was developed for entirely different purposes, and while they have established safety profiles for their approved uses, their effects when combined specifically to block mitochondrial transfer remain unknown. Furthermore, the optimal doses, timing, and patient populations for such an approach would need to be studied. Nevertheless, the proposal illustrates how understanding the molecular details of mitochondrial theft could eventually lead to targeted therapeutic strategies.

How the Seven Drugs Cover the Theft Process

The mitochondrial theft process can be broken down into seven distinct steps, and this cocktail was designed to address each one:

1. The first step is TNT construction, where cancer cells build the nanotube straws. Pravastatin, ketorolac, and honokiol all contribute to blocking this assembly process, achieving an estimated 80–90% coverage of this critical first step.
2. The second step is mitochondrial fission, where mitochondria are cut into smaller, transportable pieces. Dihydroberberine addresses this step through its effects on Drp1, achieving approximately 50–60% coverage.
3. The third step is TNT transport, where mitochondria travel through the completed straws. Mebendazole’s disruption of microtubules directly blocks this transport mechanism, providing 80–90% coverage.
4. The fourth step is the exosome route, an alternative delivery system using tiny membrane packets. Pravastatin inhibits exosome release, providing 45–55% coverage of this backup pathway.
5. The fifth step is fusion in cancer cells, where stolen mitochondria merge with the cancer cell’s existing power grid. Doxycycline interferes with this fusion process through its effects on mitochondrial protein synthesis, achieving 65–75% coverage.
6. The sixth step is immune cell rescue, helping immune cells reject the defective mitochondria that cancer cells try to dump into them. Urolithin A and dihydroberberine both enhance mitophagy in immune cells, providing 65–75% coverage.
7. The seventh step is downstream signaling, where cancer cells exploit the cGAS-STING and inflammatory pathways triggered by mitochondrial transfer. Doxycycline and dihydroberberine both inhibit NF-kB signaling, providing 45–55% coverage.

The average coverage across all seven steps is approximately 62–71%. While no single drug blocks the entire process, the combination leaves no critical gaps. The weakest points are the exosome route and downstream signaling, each at 45–55%, but these represent partial coverage rather than complete vulnerability.

Protecting the Immune System While Blocking Cancer’s Theft

A central design principle of this cocktail is maintaining anti-tumor immunity. Every component has been evaluated for its effects on immune cells, and immunosuppressive agents have been deliberately excluded from the formulation.

Several components actually enhance immune function rather than suppressing it. Urolithin A has been shown to expand healthy T cells and reduce exhausted T cell populations. Dihydroberberine increases the infiltration of cancer-fighting T cells into tumors while reducing the regulatory T cells that can dampen immune responses. The remaining drugs are either immune-neutral or have anti-inflammatory properties that do not suppress the immune response.

The Broader Picture

These discoveries add important new dimensions to our understanding of how cancer evades the immune system. Rather than simply hiding from immune cells or blocking their function at the cell surface, tumors appear to engage in a more fundamental form of sabotage by corrupting the very organelles that power immune responses.

The findings also highlight the complexity of the tumor microenvironment, the ecosystem of cells and molecules that surrounds and supports a growing cancer. Within this environment, cancer and immune cells are not just adversaries; they engage in intimate physical interactions that can transfer cellular components between them.

Looking Forward

Much work remains before these discoveries translate into new treatments. Scientists must determine whether drugs that block mitochondrial transfer are safe and effective in patients. Researchers also need to develop methods to identify which patients are most likely to benefit from therapies targeting these pathways.

Nevertheless, these studies represent a significant advance in understanding cancer biology. By revealing how tumors steal and corrupt the power supplies of immune cells, researchers have identified a new vulnerability that future treatments might exploit. The battle against cancer continues on many fronts, and the cellular power plants we call mitochondria are now among the most important theaters of this conflict.

References

1. Ahmadi M, Amiri S, Pecic S, Machaj F, Rosik J, Łos MJ, Czarnecka-Chrebelska KH, Ghasemi Y, Ghavami S, Zarebkohan A. Pleiotropic effects of statins: A focus on cancer. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta – Molecular Basis of Disease. 2020;1866(12):165968.
2. Andreux PA, Blanco-Bose W, Ryu D, Burdet F, Ibberson M, Aebischer P, Auwerx J, Singh A, Rinsch C. The mitophagy activator urolithin A is safe and induces a molecular signature of improved mitochondrial and cellular health in humans. Nature Metabolism. 2019;1(6):595-603.
3. Arora S, Singh S, Piazza GA, et al. Honokiol: a novel natural agent for cancer prevention and therapy. Curr Mol Med. 2012;12(10):1244-52.
4. Ayala GE, Dai H, Powell M, Li R, Ding Y, Wheeler TM, Shine D, Kadmon D, Thompson T, Miles BJ, Ittmann MM, Rowley D. Cancer-related axonogenesis and neurogenesis in prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Dec 1;14(23):7593-603.
5. Bai RY, Staedtke V, Aprhys CM, Gallia GL, Riggins GJ. Antiparasitic mebendazole shows survival benefit in 2 preclinical models of glioblastoma multiforme. Neuro-Oncology. 2011;13(9):974-982.
6. Bi L, Yu Z, Wu J, Yu K, Hong G, Lu Z, Gao S. Honokiol Inhibits Constitutive and Inducible STAT3 Signaling via PU.1-Induced SHP1 Expression in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Cells. Tohoku J Exp Med. 2015 Nov;237(3):163-72.
7. Buchanan B, Meng Q, Poulin MM, Zuccolo J, Azike CG, Gabriele J, Bhardwaj N. Comparative pharmacokinetics and safety assessment of transdermal berberine and dihydroberberine. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(3):e0194979.
8. Denk D, Petrocelli V, Conche C, Drachber ML, Ziegler PK, Braber M, Kirchhoff K, Klatte K, Trber S, Kosinsky RL, Singh A, D’Amico D, Waldschmitt N, et al. Expansion of T memory stem cells with superior anti-tumor immunity by Urolithin A-induced mitophagy. Immunity. 2022;55(11):2059-2073.e8.
9. Desir S, Dickson EL, Vogel RI, et al. Tunneling nanotube formation is stimulated by hypoxia in ovarian cancer cells. Oncotarget. 2016;7(28):43150-43161.
10. Desir S, O’Hare P, Vogel RI, Sperduto W, Sarkari A, Dickson EL, Wong P, Nelson AC, Fong Y, Steer CJ, Subramanian S, Lou E. Chemotherapy-Induced Tunneling Nanotubes Mediate Intercellular Drug Efflux in Pancreatic Cancer. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):9484.
11. Fiorillo M, Tóth F, Sotgia F, Lisanti MP. Doxycycline, Azithromycin and Vitamin C (DAV): A potent combination therapy for targeting mitochondria and eradicating cancer stem cells (CSCs). Aging. 2019;11(8):2202-2216.
12. Ginefra P, Hope HC, Chiang YH, Nutten S, Blum S, Coukos G, Vannini N. Urolithin-A Promotes CD8+ T Cell-mediated Cancer Immunosurveillance via FOXO1 Activation. Cancer Res Commun. 2024 May 3;4(5):1189-1198.
13. Grimes MM, Kenney SR, Dominguez DR, et al. The R-enantiomer of ketorolac reduces ovarian cancer tumor burden in vivo. BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):40.
14. Guan F, Wu X, Zhou J, Lin Y, He Y, Fan C, Zeng Z, Xiong W. Mitochondrial transfer in tunneling nanotubes-a new target for cancer therapy. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2024 May 21;43(1):147.
15. Guerini AE, Triggiani L, Maddalo M, et al. Mebendazole as a Candidate for Drug Repurposing in Oncology: An Extensive Review of Current Literature. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(9):1284.
16. Guo Y, Kenney SR, Cook L, et al. A Novel Pharmacologic Activity of Ketorolac for Therapeutic Benefit in Ovarian Cancer Patients. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(22):5064-5072.
17. Guo Y, Kenney SR, Muller CY, et al. R-Ketorolac Targets Cdc42 and Rac1 and Alters Ovarian Cancer Cell Behaviors Critical for Invasion and Metastasis. Mol Cancer Ther. 2015;14(10):2215-2227.
18. Hanna SJ, McCoy-Simandle K, Miskolci V, et al. The Role of Rho-GTPases and actin polymerization during Macrophage Tunneling Nanotube Biogenesis. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):8547.
19. Hase K, Kimura S, Takatsu H, Ohmae M, Kawano S, Kitamura H, Ito M, Watarai H, Hazelett CC, Yeaman C, Ohno H. M-Sec promotes membrane nanotube formation by interacting with Ral and the exocyst complex. Nat Cell Biol. 2009 Dec;11(12):1427-32.
20. Hoover G, Gilbert S, Curley O, Obellianne C, Lin MT, Hixson W, Pierce TW, Andrews JF, Alexeyev MF, Ding Y, Bu P, Behbod F, Medina D, Chang JT, Ayala G, Grelet S. Nerve-to-cancer transfer of mitochondria during cancer metastasis. Nature. 2025 Aug;644(8075):252-262.
21. Hudson LG, Cook LS, Grimes MM, et al. Dual Actions of Ketorolac in Metastatic Ovarian Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(8):1049.
22. Ikeda H, et al. Shared mtDNA mutations between tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and cancer cells prove mitochondrial transfer induces T cell senescence. Nature. 2025;637:225-236.
23. Ikeda H, Kawase K, Nishi T, Watanabe T, Takenaga K, Inozume T, Ishino T, Aki S, Lin J, Kawashima S, Nagasaki J, Ueda Y, Suzuki S, Makinoshima H, Itami M, Nakamura Y, Tatsumi Y, Suenaga Y, Morinaga T, Honobe-Tabuchi A, Ohnuma T, Kawamura T, Umeda Y, Nakamura Y, Kiniwa Y, Ichihara E, Hayashi H, Ikeda JI, Hanazawa T, Toyooka S, Mano H, Suzuki T, Osawa T, Kawazu M, Togashi Y. Immune evasion through mitochondrial transfer in the tumour microenvironment. Nature. 2025;637(8049):225-236.
24. Kato K, Nguyen KT, Decker CW, Silkwood KH, Eck SM, Hernandez JB, Garcia J, Han D. Tunneling nanotube formation promotes survival against 5-fluorouracil in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. FEBS Open Bio. 2022;12(1):203-210.
25. Kulshreshtha A, Singh S, Ahmad M, Khanna K, Ahmad T, Agrawal A, Ghosh B. Simvastatin mediates inhibition of exosome synthesis, localization and secretion via multicomponent interventions. Sci Rep. 2019 Nov 8;9(1):16373.
26. Lamb R, Ozsvari B, Lisanti CL, Tanowitz HB, Howell A, Martinez-Outschoorn UE, Sotgia F, Lisanti MP. Antibiotics that target mitochondria effectively eradicate cancer stem cells, across multiple tumor types: treating cancer like an infectious disease. Oncotarget. 2015;6(7):4569-4584.
27. Li L, Han W, Gu Y, et al. Honokiol Induces a Necrotic Cell Death through the Mitochondrial Permeability Transition Pore. Cancer Res. 2007;67(10):4894-903.
28. Lin CC, Lo MC, Moody RR, Stevers NO, Tinsley SL, Sun D. Doxycycline targets aldehyde dehydrogenase-positive breast cancer stem cells. Oncology Reports. 2018;39(6):3041-3047.
29. Liu C, Chen H, Hu B, Shi J, Chen Y, Huang K. New insights into the therapeutic potentials of statins in cancer. Front Pharmacol. 2023 Jul 7;14:1188926.
30. Lou E, Fujisawa S, Morozov A, et al. Tunneling nanotubes provide a unique conduit for intercellular transfer of cellular contents in human malignant pleural mesothelioma. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e33093.
31. Lu J, Zheng X, Li F, et al. Tunneling nanotubes promote intercellular mitochondria transfer followed by increased invasiveness in bladder cancer cells. Oncotarget. 2017;8(9):15539-15552.
32. Ma S, Wu Q, Wu W, Tian Y, Zhang J, Chen L, Li X, Liu X, Wu L, Wang L. Urolithin A Hijacks ERK1/2-ULK1 Cascade to Improve CD8+ T Cell Fitness for Antitumor Immunity. Advanced Science. 2024;11(18):e2310065.
33. Magnon C, Hall SJ, Lin J, et al. Autonomic nerve development contributes to prostate cancer progression. Science. 2013;341(6142):1236361.
34. Marlein CR, Zaitseva L, Piddock RE, Robinson SD, Edwards DR, Shafat MS, Zhou Z, Lawes M, Bowles KM, Rushworth SA. NADPH oxidase-2 derived superoxide drives mitochondrial transfer from bone marrow stromal cells to leukemic blasts. Blood. 2017;130(14):1649-1660.
35. Mauffrey P, Tchitchek N, Barroca V, Bemelmans AP, Firlej V, Allory Y, Roméo PH, Magnon C. Progenitors from the central nervous system drive neurogenesis in cancer. Nature. 2019 May;569(7758):672-678.
36. Mehra S, Garrido VT, Dosch AR, Lamichhane P, Srinivasan S, Singh SP, Zhou Z, De Castro Silva I, Joshi C, Ban Y, Datta J, Gilboa E, Merchant NB, Nagathihalli NS. Remodeling of Stromal Immune Microenvironment by Urolithin A Improves Survival with Immune Checkpoint Blockade in Pancreatic Cancer. Cancer Res Commun. 2023 Jul 12;3(7):1224-1236.
37. Moon JM, Ratliff KM, Hagele AM, Stecker RA, Mumford PW, Kerksick CM. Absorption Kinetics of Berberine and Dihydroberberine and Their Impact on Glycemia: A Randomized, Controlled, Crossover Pilot Trial. Nutrients. 2022;14(1):124.
38. Moschoi R, Imbert V, Nebout M, Chiche J, Mary D, Prebet T, Saland E, Castellano R, Pouyet L, Collette Y, Vey N, Chabannon C, Recher C, Sarry JE, Alcor D, Peyron JF, Griessinger E. Protective mitochondrial transfer from bone marrow stromal cells to acute myeloid leukemic cells during chemotherapy. Blood. 2016;128(2):253-264.
39. Oprea TI, Sklar LA, Agola JO, et al. Novel Activities of Select NSAID R-Enantiomers against Rac1 and Cdc42 GTPases. PLoS One. 2015;10(11):e0142182.
40. Pan J, Lee Y, Cheng G, et al. Mitochondria-Targeted Honokiol Confers a Striking Inhibitory Effect on Lung Cancer via Inhibiting Complex I Activity. iScience. 2018;3:192-207.
41. Pan J, Lee Y, Wang Y, You M. Honokiol targets mitochondria to halt cancer progression and metastasis. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2016;60(6):1383-95.
42. Pan J, Lee Y, Zhang Q, et al. Honokiol Decreases Lung Cancer Metastasis through Inhibition of the STAT3 Signaling Pathway. Cancer Prev Res. 2017;10(2):133-141.
43. Pan J, Zhang Q, Liu Q, et al. Honokiol Inhibits Lung Tumorigenesis through Inhibition of Mitochondrial Function. Cancer Prev Res. 2014;7(11):1149-59.
44. Pandey MK, Sung B, Kunnumakkara AB, Sethi G, Chaturvedi MM, Aggarwal BB. Berberine and Curcumin Target Survivin and STAT3 in Gastric Cancer Cells and Synergize Actions of Standard Chemotherapeutic 5-Fluorouracil. Nutrition and Cancer. 2015;67(8):1293-1304.
45. Pasquier J, Guerrouahen BS, Al Thawadi H, et al. Preferential transfer of mitochondria from endothelial to cancer cells through tunneling nanotubes modulates chemoresistance. J Transl Med. 2013;11:94.
46. Puthdee N, Seubwai W, Sripa B, Wongkham S. Berberine Induces Cell Cycle Arrest in Cholangiocarcinoma Cell Lines via Inhibition of NF-κB and STAT3 Pathways. Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin. 2017;40(6):751-757.
47. Qin X, Zhao Y, Gong J, Huang W, Su H, Yuan F, Fang K, Wang D, Li J, Zou X, Xu L, Dong H, Lu F. Berberine Protects Glomerular Podocytes via Inhibiting Drp1-Mediated Mitochondrial Fission and Dysfunction. Theranostics. 2019 Feb 28;9(6):1698-1713.
48. Rajendran P, Li F, Shanmugam MK, et al. Honokiol inhibits signal transducer and activator of transcription-3 signaling, proliferation, and survival of hepatocellular carcinoma cells via the protein tyrosine phosphatase SHP-1. J Cell Physiol. 2012;227(5):2184-95.
49. Roehlecke C, Schmidt MHH. Tunneling Nanotubes and Tumor Microtubes in Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2020;12(4):857.
50. Roy M, Kung HJ, Ghosh PM. Statins and prostate cancer: role of cholesterol inhibition vs. prevention of small GTP-binding proteins. American Journal of Cancer Research. 2011;1(4):542-561.
51. Rustom A, et al. Nanotubular highways for intercellular organelle transport. Science. 2004;303(5660):1007-10.
52. Saha T, Dash C, Jayabalan R, Khiste S, Kulkarni A, Kurmi K, Mondal J, Majumder PK, Bardia A, Jang HL, Sengupta S. Intercellular nanotubes mediate mitochondrial trafficking between cancer and immune cells. Nat Nanotechnol. 2022;17(1):98-106.
53. Sasaki J, Ramesh R, Chada S, et al. The anthelmintic drug mebendazole induces mitotic arrest and apoptosis by depolymerizing tubulin in non-small cell lung cancer cells. Mol Cancer Ther. 2002;1(13):1201-1209.
54. Scatena C, Roncella M, Di Paolo A, Aretini P, Menicagli M, Fanelli G, Marini C, Mazzanti CM, Ghilli M, Sotgia F, Lisanti MP, Naccarato AG. Doxycycline, an Inhibitor of Mitochondrial Biogenesis, Effectively Reduces Cancer Stem Cells (CSCs) in Early Breast Cancer Patients: A Clinical Pilot Study. Frontiers in Oncology. 2018;8:452.
55. Sekhavati N, Noori E, Abbasifard M, Butler AE, Sahebkar A. How statin drugs affect exosomes? J Cell Biochem. 2023 Feb;124(2):171-180.
56. Son DS, Lee ES, Adunyah SE. The Antitumor Potentials of Benzimidazole Anthelmintics as Repurposing Drugs. Immune Network. 2020;20(4):e29.
57. Sonawane V, Ghosalkar J, Achrekar S, Joshi K. Ketorolac modulates Rac-1/HIF-1α/DDX3/β-catenin signalling via a tumor suppressor prostate apoptosis response-4 (Par-4) in renal cell carcinoma. Sci Rep. 2023 Apr 6;13(1):5659.
58. Sung SJ, Kim HK, Hong YK, Joe YA. Autophagy Is a Potential Target for Enhancing the Anti-Angiogenic Effect of Mebendazole in Endothelial Cells. Biomol Ther (Seoul). 2019;27(1):117-125.
59. Terasaki A, Bhatnagar K, Weiner AT, Tan Y, Szeifert V, Huang HL, Wiggers L, Rodrigues V, Rada CC, Shankar V, Saito S, Ankomah PO, Roth T, Chiu B, West R, Li L, Reticker-Flynn N, Axelrod JD, Brestoff JR, Li B, Engleman E, Okwan-Duodu D. Mitochondrial transfer from immune to tumor cells enables lymph node metastasis. Cell Metab. 2026 Jan 12:S1550-4131(25)00545-5.
60. Valdebenito S, Audia A, Bhat KPL, Okafo G, Eugenin EA. Tunneling Nanotubes Mediate Adaptation of Glioblastoma Cells to Temozolomide and Ionizing Radiation Treatment. iScience. 2020;23(9):101450.
61. Valdebenito S, Malik S, Luu R, Loudig O, Mitchell M, Okafo G, Bhat K, Prideaux B, Eugenin EA. Tunneling nanotubes, TNT, communicate glioblastoma with surrounding non-tumor astrocytes to adapt them to hypoxic and metabolic tumor conditions. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):14556.
62. Zhang L, Xu L, Zhang F, Vlashi E. Doxycycline inhibits the cancer stem cell phenotype and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in breast cancer. Cell Cycle. 2017;16(8):737-745.