Antiandrogenic actions of medroxyprogesterone acetate on epithelial cells within normal human breast tissues cultured ex vivo

Objective: Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA), a component of combined estrogen-progestin therapy (EPT), has been associated with increased breast cancer risk in EPT users. MPA can bind to the androgen receptor (AR), and AR signaling inhibits cell growth in breast tissues. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the potential of MPA to disrupt AR signaling in an ex vivo culture model of normal human breast tissue. Methods: Histologically normal breast tissues from women undergoing breast surgical operation were cultured in the presence or in the absence of the native AR ligand 5α-dihydrotestosterone (DHT), MPA, or the AR antagonist bicalutamide. Ki67, bromodeoxyuridine, B-cell CLL/lymphoma 2 (BCL2), AR, estrogen receptor α, and progesterone receptor were detected by immunohistochemistry. Results: DHT inhibited the proliferation of breast epithelial cells in an AR-dependent manner within tissues from postmenopausal women, and MPA significantly antagonized this androgenic effect. These hormonal responses were not commonly observed in cultured tissues from premenopausal women. In tissues from postmenopausal women, DHT either induced or repressed BCL2 expression, and the antiandrogenic effect of MPA on BCL2 was variable. MPA significantly opposed the positive effect of DHT on AR stabilization, but these hormones had no significant effect on estrogen receptor α or progesterone receptor levels. Conclusions: In a subset of postmenopausal women, MPA exerts an antiandrogenic effect on breast epithelial cells that is associated with increased proliferation and destabilization of AR protein. This activity may contribute mechanistically to the increased risk of breast cancer in women taking MPA-containing EPT.10 page(s

Characterization of the prostate cancer susceptibility gene KLF6 in human and mouse prostate cancers

BACKGROUND Krüppel-like factor (KLF) 6 is a candidate tumor suppressor gene in prostate cancer, but the mechanisms contributing to its loss of expression are poorly understood. We characterized KLF6 expression and DNA methylation status during prostate tumorigenesis in humans and mice. METHODS KLF6 expression was assessed in matched human non-malignant (NM) and tumor prostate tissues (n = 22) by quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) and in three independent human prostate cancer cohorts bioinformatically. QPCR for KLF6 expression and methylation-sensitive PCR (MSP) were performed in human prostate LNCaP cancer cells after 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine treatment. Klf6 protein levels and DNA promoter methylation were assessed in TRansgenic Adenocarcinoma of Mouse Prostate (TRAMP) tumors by immunohistochemistry and MSP, respectively. RESULTS KLF6 splice variants expression was increased (P = 0.0015) in human prostate tumors compared to NM tissues. Overall, KLF6 was decreased in metastatic compared to primary prostate cancers and reduced expression in primary tumors was associated with a shorter time to relapse (P = 0.0028). Treatment with the demethylating agent 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine resulted in up-regulation of KLF6 expression (two-fold; P = 0.002) and a decrease in DNA methylation of the KLF6 promoter in LNCaP cells. Klf6 protein levels significantly decreased with progression in the TRAMP model of prostate cancer (P < 0.05), but there was no difference in Klf6 promoter methylation. CONCLUSION KLF6 expression was decreased in both clinical prostate cancer and the TRAMP model with disease progression, but this could not be explained by DNA methylation of the KLF6 promoter.12 page(s

Suppression of androgen receptor signaling in prostate cancer cells by an inhibitory receptor variant

Copyright © 2006 by The Endocrine SocietyThere is increasing evidence that sensitization of the androgen receptor (AR) signaling pathway contributes to the failure of androgen ablation therapy for prostate cancer, and that direct targeting of the AR may be a useful therapeutic approach. To better understand how AR function could be abrogated in prostate cancer cells, we have developed a series of putative dominant-negative variants of the human AR, containing deletions or mutations in activation functions AF-1, AF-5, and/or AF-2. One construct, AR inhibitor (ARi)-410, containing a deletion of AF-1 and part of AF-5 of the AR, had no intrinsic transactivation activity but inhibited wild-type AR (wtAR) in a ligand-dependent manner by at least 95% when transfected at a 4:1 molar ratio. ARi-410 was an equally potent inhibitor of gain-of-function AR variants. Ectopic expression of ARi-410 inhibited the proliferation of AR-positive LNCaP cells, but not AR-negative PC-3 cells. Whereas ARi-410 also marginally inhibited progesterone receptor activity, this was far less pronounced than the effect on AR (50% vs. 95% maximal inhibition, respectively), and there was no inhibition of either vitamin D or estrogen receptor activity. In the presence of ligand, ARi-410 interacted with wtAR, and both receptors translocated into the nucleus. Whereas the amino-carboxy terminal interaction was not necessary for optimal dominant-negative activity, disruption of dimerization through the ligand binding domain reduced the efficacy of ARi-410. In addition, although inhibition of AR function by ARi-410 was not dependent on DNA binding, the DNA binding domain was required for dominant-negative activity. Taken together, our results suggest that interaction between ARi-410 and the endogenous AR in prostate cancer cells, potentially through the DNA binding and ligand binding domains, results in a functionally significant reduction in AR signaling and AR-dependent cell growth.Lisa M. Butler, Margaret M. Centenera, Petra J. Neufing, Grant Buchanan, Catherine S. Y. Choong, Carmela Ricciardelli, Kathleen Saint, Melissa Lee, Aleksandra Ochnik, Miao Yang, Michael P. Brown, and Wayne D. Tille

Deciphering the divergent roles of progestogens in breast cancer

Most breast cancers are driven by oestrogen receptor‑α. Anti-oestrogenic drugs are the standard treatment for these breast cancers; however, treatment resistance is common, necessitating new therapeutic strategies. Recent preclinical and historical clinical studies support the use of progestogens to activate the progesterone receptor (PR) in breast cancers. However, widespread controversy exists regarding the role of progestogens in this disease, hindering the clinical implementation of PR‑targeted therapies. Herein, we present and discuss data at the root of this controversy and clarify the confusion and misinterpretations that have consequently arisen. We then present our view on how progestogens may be safely and effectively used in treating breast cancer.Jason S. Carroll, Theresa E. Hickey, Gerard A. Tarulli, Michael Williams and Wayne D. Tille