Back to all available

High-fat diet alters the signaling network of intestinal stem cells in the crypts: Implications for colorectal carcinogenesis

biochemistry
molecular-biology
gastroenterology-and-hepatology
oncology
obesity

Abstract

Intestinal stem cells (ISCs) are essential regulators of intestinal epithelial homeostasis. They adjust the composition of intestinal cells to adapt to various environmental changes. Diet was recognized as an extrinsic modulator of stem cell homeostasis and a significant risk factor for colorectal cancer. It influences stem cell regeneration and proliferation directly by its micronutrients and indirectly through physiological changes. There is are increasing number of studies linking a high-fat diet (HFD) to the dysregulation of ISCs, potentially contributing to cancer development. Notably, the type of dietary fat exerts a more substantial influence on cancer pathogenesis than total fat consumption in isocaloric diets. In this review, we summarize the intricate regulation of ISCs and highlight recent studies on the impact of HFDs on their activity, as well as the share of different types of fatty acids in colorectal carcinogenesis.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].