Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Filter by Categories
Abstracts
Book Review
Case Report
Case Series
CMAS‡ - Pancreas - EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:1 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas - EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:3 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas - EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:4 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas -Sampling Techniques for Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:2 of 5
CMAS‡ - Pancreas- EUS-FNA Cytopathology (PSC guidelines) S1:5 of 5
Commentary
Correction
CytoJournal Monograph Related Review Series
CytoJournal Monograph Related Review Series (CMAS), Editorial
CytoJournal Monograph Related Review Series: Editorial
Cytojournal Quiz Case
Editorial
Erratum
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Methodology
Methodology Article
Methodology Articles
Original Article
Pap Smear Collection and Preparation: Key Points
Quiz Case
Research
Research Article
Review
Review Article
Systematic Review and Meta Analysis
View Point
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Editorial
2026
:23;
41
doi:
10.25259/Cytojournal_201_2025

Targeting the autophagic network: A new frontier in colorectal cancer chemotherapy response

Department of Emergency Medicine and Surgery, General Hospital of Nikaia and Piraeus, Athens, Greece.
Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
Author image
Corresponding author: Ilektra Kyrochristou, Department of Emergency Medicine and Surgery, General Hospital of Nikaia and Piraeus, Athens, Greece. electra.cyro@gmail.com
Licence
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, transform, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

How to cite this article: Kyrochristou I, Bali C, Mitsis M, Vlachos K, Lianos G. Targeting the autophagic network: A new frontier in colorectal cancer chemotherapy response. CytoJournal. 2026;23:41. doi: 10.25259/Cytojournal_201_2025

Dear Editor,

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the most frequent and deadly malignancies globally, despite advances in molecular diagnostics and targeted therapies. Standard chemotherapeutic regimens, typically based on 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan, still constitute the backbone of treatment. However, therapeutic resistance and tumor recurrence continue to undermine clinical outcomes. In recent years, an expanding body of evidence has identified autophagy, a tightly regulated catabolic process that recycles intracellular components to sustain homeostasis, as a central determinant of how CRC cells respond to chemotherapy.[1,2]

Autophagy exhibits a dual, context-dependent role in cancer biology. Early in carcinogenesis, it acts as a tumor-suppressive mechanism by mitigating oxidative stress and genomic instability. Once malignancy is established, autophagy becomes a survival strategy, allowing cancer cells to adapt to metabolic and therapeutic stress. This ambivalent nature positions the autophagic machinery at the crossroads of tumor maintenance and therapy resistance.

Recent studies have illuminated the complex interplay between autophagy and canonical oncogenic pathways, such as mechanistic target of rapamycin, Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog (KRAS), and activating transcription factor 4 (ATF4) signaling, and have demonstrated that modulation of these axes can substantially influence chemosensitivity.[3,4] Consequently, autophagy emerges not merely as a bystander process but also as a dynamic therapeutic target.

This editorial synthesizes current molecular insights and translational perspectives on how modulation of the autophagic network can reshape chemotherapy responses in CRC, highlighting opportunities for context-specific therapeutic exploitation.

AUTOPHAGY AND THE CHEMORESISTANCE PHENOTYPE

The persistence of chemoresistance in CRC is increasingly understood not as a static genetic event but as a dynamic adaptive state in which autophagy plays a central regulatory role. Rather than a passive stress response, autophagy enables cancer cells to enter a reversible survival mode, maintaining metabolic homeostasis and preserving cellular integrity under cytotoxic assault.[1,5]

Across therapeutic contexts, a consistent pattern emerges that treatments that disrupt nutrient or growth signaling, whether through epidermal growth factor receptor blockade, inhibition of DNA synthesis, or metabolic interference, tend to provoke compensatory autophagic activation.[3,6] This phenomenon reflects a broader principle of metabolic plasticity, whereby tumor cells exploit autophagy to recycle essential components and sustain bioenergetic balance when anabolic pathways fail. By clearing damaged organelles and limiting the production of reactive oxygen species, autophagy effectively buys time for adaptation and survival.[7]

Autophagy-driven resistance is not uniform but context-dependent. Its activation varies according to oncogenic background (e.g., KRAS or p53 status) and transcriptional regulators that define a tumor’s “autophagic tone.” The kruppel-like factor 4 and RAS related protein RAB-26 (KLF4-RAB26) axis, for example, redirects autophagy toward a drug-resistant phenotype[4] while post-translational interference in tripartite motif-containing protein 21 mediated cellular myelocytomatosis oncogene degradation (TRIM21) stabilizes metabolic drivers and entrenches resistance.[8] Chemoresistance thus emerges as an integrated systems property, shaped by the interplay of autophagic flux, metabolic signaling, and transcriptional control.

Therapeutically, the relationship between autophagy and chemoresistance is bidirectional. Inhibition can expose hidden metabolic vulnerabilities,[6] whereas excessive activation can overwhelm adaptive capacity and precipitate autophagy-associated cell death.[9-11] This duality reframes autophagy as a rheostat of cell fate, dictating whether a tumor adapts or succumbs to stress.

Viewing chemoresistance through the lens of autophagy reveals a crucial opportunity: autophagy does not simply accompany resistance but constructs it. Sustaining energy equilibrium and proteostasis under pharmacological pressure provides the architecture for adaptation.[1,7] Therapeutic strategies that disrupt this equilibrium or push it beyond tolerance may transform a mechanism of endurance into one of vulnerability. Overcoming chemoresistance may depend less on new cytotoxins and more on controlling the timing and intensity of autophagic adaptation itself.[5]

AUTOPHAGY-LINKED APOPTOSIS AND TUMOR SUPPRESSION

Long regarded as a survival mechanism, autophagy can, under certain conditions, become self-destructive, triggering apoptosis, and tumor suppression rather than protection.[1,5] This redefinition challenges the traditional dichotomy of autophagy as either “good” or “bad,” suggesting instead that its outcome depends on how far the system is driven from homeostasis.

When autophagic flux surpasses a critical threshold, the so-called autophagic threshold, the process shifts from adaptation to collapse. Agents such as resveratrol and aripiprazole exemplify this transition, pushing cells beyond their adaptive limit and triggering autophagy-dependent apoptosis that restores chemosensitivity.[9,11] The key distinction between cytoprotection and cytotoxicity lies not in the pathway itself but in its magnitude and persistence.

Autophagy and apoptosis are increasingly recognized as interconnected networks rather than competing processes. Excessive autophagy can degrade anti-apoptotic proteins, elevate reactive oxygen species, and destabilize mitochondria, converting a protective mechanism into a lethal one.[10,12] Under oxidative or endoplasmic reticulum stress, as seen with artesunate exposure, autophagy initially restores balance but ultimately triggers senescence or apoptosis once compensatory capacity is exhausted.[13] These dynamic reversals position autophagy as a metabolic checkpoint that decides between repair and destruction.

The tumor-suppressive consequences of autophagy also extend to immune regulation. Chaperone-mediated autophagy facilitates lysosomal degradation of immune checkpoint proteins such as B7-H3, enhancing immune recognition and limiting metastasis.[14] Moreover, modulation of autophagic balance in T and NK cells influences their cytotoxic persistence.[15] In this broader view, autophagy functions not only as an intrinsic death pathway but also as a bridge between metabolic stress and immune activation, redefining tumor suppression as a multicellular process.

Therapeutically, this understanding calls for a paradigm shift, from simply blocking autophagy to weaponizing it. Natural and repurposed compounds such as resveratrol, melatonin, andrographolide, and icaritin can convert a stress-buffering mechanism into a cell-killing one.[10-12] Contemporary strategies thus aim to tune, rather than silence, autophagy, pushing tumor cells past their adaptive threshold while preserving normal-tissue resilience.[16]

Collectively, these insights establish autophagy as a decision hub integrating metabolic signals, apoptotic machinery, and immune cues.[17] The same machinery that sustains CRC cells under moderate stress can, when hyperactivated, dismantle them from within. Recognizing this duality transforms autophagy from a passive recycling route into a context-dependent determinant of fate, where therapeutic control of autophagic dynamics, not its simple inhibition, may reawaken its tumor-suppressive potential.[1,5]

TRANSLATIONAL OUTLOOK AND PERSPECTIVES

The expanding evidence on autophagy in CRC reveals it as a biological fulcrum that can dictate therapeutic success or failure. What began as a cytoprotective mechanism has evolved into a framework explaining how cancer cells adapt, resist, or collapse under stress.[1,5]

First, autophagy should be treated as a context-specific target, its modulation guided by the tumor’s genetic, metabolic, and transcriptional profile.[3,4,8] Future progress depends on precision control of stress adaptation, tuning autophagic flux according to genotype and treatment stage.[6,7]

Second, autophagy forms a vital bridge between metabolic control and immune regulation, influencing antigen presentation and checkpoint degradation.[14,18] Integrating autophagy modulation with immunotherapy, particularly programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) regimens, offers new opportunities to transform resistant CRC into an immune-responsive disease.[2,15]

Third, biomarker-driven and computational strategies will refine these approaches. Profiling autophagy-related markers (ATG5, LC3B, TRIM21, and KLF4) may enable patient stratification and rational therapy design, while modeling of autophagic flux and synthetic-lethal interactions can inform individualized interventions.[7,19]

Ultimately, autophagy is emerging as a programmable therapeutic circuit. Integrating its modulation into chemo, targeted, and immunotherapies marks a step toward adaptive oncology, where treatments dynamically exploit cellular stress to overcome resistance.[8,16] Once considered a silent accomplice of tumor endurance, autophagy may now become a strategic ally, a controllable mechanism that converts adaptation into vulnerability.

SUMMARY

Autophagy has emerged as a central regulator of chemotherapy response in CRC. Depending on the molecular and metabolic landscape, it can either sustain survival under cytotoxic stress or promote tumor cell death. Mechanistic studies implicating the ATF4 and DNA Damage-Inducible Transcript 4, KLF4-RAB26, TRIM21-c-Myc, and Sirtuin 1 and Forkhead Box Q1 axes reveal how autophagy integrates signaling networks to shape therapeutic outcomes.

Targeting the autophagic network, through inhibition of survival pathways or activation of lethal autophagy, offers a promising route to overcome drug resistance. The future of CRC therapy lies in context-specific precision modulation of autophagy, informed by biomarkers and integrated with multi-modal treatment strategies. As understanding deepens, autophagy may shift from a barrier to treatment success into a powerful therapeutic.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Not applicable.

AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS

Not applicable for the current paper type.

ABBREVIATIONS

ATF4: Activating transcription factor 4

ATG5: Autophagy-related gene 5

B7-H3: B7 homolog 3, also known as CD276

c-Myc: Cellular myelocytomatosis oncogene

CRC: Colorectal cancer

DDIT4: DNA damage-inducible transcript 4

FOXQ1: Forkhead box Q1

KLF4: Kruppel-like factor 4

KRAS: Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homolog

LC3B: Microtubule-associated protein 1 light chain 3 beta

mTOR: Mechanistic target of rapamycin

NK: Natural killer cells

PD-1: Programmed cell death protein 1

PD-L1: Programmed death-ligand 1

RAB26: RAS related protein RAB-26

SIRT1: Sirtuin 1

TRIM21: Tripartite motif-containing protein 21

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

GL and IK: Conceptualization; IK: Data acquisition and original draft; CB and MM: Data analysis and interpretation; CB and GL: Review editing; GL, MM, and KV: Final approval of the version to be published; GL, KV, and IK: Aptitude to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All authors meet the ICMJE author qualifications.

ETHICS APPROVAL AND CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE

Not applicable.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

EDITORIAL/PEER REVIEW

To ensure the integrity and highest quality of CytoJournal publications, the review process of this manuscript was conducted under a double-blind model (authors are blinded for reviewers and vice versa) through an automatic online system.

FUNDING: Not applicable.

References

  1. , , , . The role of autophagy in colorectal cancer: Impact on pathogenesis and implications in therapy. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022;9:959348.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. , , . Perspectives of targeting autophagy as an adjuvant to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy for colorectal cancer treatment. Cells. 2025;14:745.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , . Targeting autophagy for overcoming resistance to anti-EGFR treatments. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(9):1374.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , , , et al. KLF4 targets RAB26 and decreases 5-FU resistance through inhibiting autophagy in colon cancer. Cancer Biol Ther. 2023;24:2226353.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. , . Anti-cancer strategy based on changes in the role of autophagy depending on the survival environment and tumorigenesis stages. Molecules. 2024;29:5134.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , , , , et al. Autophagy inhibitors increase the susceptibility of KRAS-mutant human colorectal cancer cells to a combined treatment of 2-deoxy-D-glucose and lovastatin. Acta Pharmacol Sin. 2021;42:1875-87.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. , , , , , , et al. Epigenetic modulation of autophagy pathway by small molecules in colorectal cancer: A systematic review. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2024;150:474.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , , et al. TRIM21 induces selective autophagic degradation of c-Myc and sensitizes regorafenib therapy in colorectal cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024;121:e2406936121.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , , , , et al. The antipsychotic drug aripiprazole suppresses colorectal cancer by targeting LAMP2a to induce RNH1/miR-99a/mTOR-mediated autophagy and apoptosis. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2024;11:e2409498.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , , , , et al. Icaritin represses autophagy to promote colorectal cancer cell apoptosis and sensitized low-temperature photothermal therapy via targeting HSP90-TXNDC9 interactions. Adv Sci (Weinh). 2025;12:e2412953.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , , , , et al. Resveratrol triggers autophagy-related apoptosis to inhibit the progression of colorectal cancer via inhibition of FOXQ1. Phytother Res. 2024;38:3218-39.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. , , . A combined treatment with melatonin and andrographis promotes autophagy and anticancer activity in colorectal cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2022;43:217-30.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. , , , , , , et al. Artesunate inhibits the cell growth in colorectal cancer by promoting ROS-dependent cell senescence and autophagy. Cells. 2022;11:2472.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. , , , , , , et al. FDW028, a novel FUT8 inhibitor, impels lysosomal proteolysis of B7-H3 via chaperone-mediated autophagy pathway and exhibits potent efficacy against metastatic colorectal cancer. Cell Death Dis. 2023;14:495.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. , , , , , , et al. Exploiting autophagy balance in T and NK cells as a new strategy to implement adoptive cell therapies. Mol Cancer. 2023;22:201.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. , , . Advances in natural products modulating autophagy influenced by cellular stress conditions and their anticancer roles in the treatment of ovarian cancer. FASEB J. 2024;38:e70075.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. . Proteasomal and autophagic degradation systems. Annu Rev Biochem. 2017;86:193-224.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. , , , , , , et al. CDK12 inhibition upregulates ATG7 triggering autophagy via AKT/ FOXO3 pathway and enhances anti-PD-1 efficacy in colorectal cancer. Pharmacol Res. 2024;201:107097.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. , , , , . Insights from a computational-based approach for analyzing autophagy genes across human cancers. Genes (Basel). 2023;14:1550.
    [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Show Sections