This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Whitaker, H. C. Articles by Bevan, C. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Whitaker, H. C. Articles by Bevan, C. L.

Androgen Receptor Is Targeted to Distinct Subcellular Compartments in Response to Different Therapeutic Antiandrogens

¹ Prostate Cancer Research Group and ² Cancer Research UK Molecular Oncology Unit, Department of Cancer Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; ³ Protein Analysis, Cancer Research UK, London Research Institute, London, United Kingdom; and ⁴ Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Institute of Toxicology and Genetics, Karlsruhe, Germany

Purpose: Antiandrogens are routinely used in the treatment of prostate cancer. Although they are known to prevent activation of the androgen receptor (AR), little is known about the mechanisms involved. This report represents the first study of the localization of wild-type AR following expression at physiologic relevant levels in prostate cells and treatment with androgen and antiandrogens.

Experimental Design: We have characterized a cellular model for prostate cancer using in situ cellular fractionation, proteomics, and confocal microscopy and investigated the effect of antiandrogens in clinical use on the subcellular localization of the AR.

Results: Different antiandrogens have diverse effects on the subcellular localization of the AR. Treatment with androgen results in translocation from the cytoplasm to the nucleoplasm, whereas the antiandrogens hydroxyflutamide and bicalutamide lead to reversible association with the nuclear matrix. In contrast, treatment with the antiandrogen cyproterone acetate results in AR association with cytoplasmic membranes and irreversible retention within the cytoplasm. In addition, we demonstrate that AR translocation requires ATP and the cytoskeleton, regardless of ligand.

Conclusions: These results reveal that not all antiandrogens work via the same mechanism and suggest that an informed sequential treatment regime may benefit prostate cancer patients. The observed subnuclear and subcytoplasmic associations of the AR suggest new areas of study to investigate the role of the AR in the response and resistance of prostate cancer to antiandrogen therapy.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. L. Cutress, H. C. Whitaker, I. G. Mills, M. Stewart, and D. E. Neal Structural basis for the nuclear import of the human androgen receptor J. Cell Sci., April 1, 2008; 121(7): 957 - 968. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Friry-Santini, D. Rouquie, P. Kennel, H. Tinwell, M. Benahmed, and R. Bars Correlation between Protein Accumulation Profiles and Conventional Toxicological Findings Using a Model Antiandrogenic Compound, Flutamide Toxicol. Sci., May 1, 2007; 97(1): 81 - 93. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Jasavala, H. Martinez, J. Thumar, A. Andaya, A.-C. Gingras, J. K. Eng, R. Aebersold, D. K. Han, and M. E. Wright Identification of Putative Androgen Receptor Interaction Protein Modules: Cytoskeleton and Endosomes Modulate Androgen Receptor Signaling in Prostate Cancer Cells Mol. Cell. Proteomics, February 1, 2007; 6(2): 252 - 271. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H.-J. Kim, Y. I. Park, and M.-S. Dong Effects of 2,4-D and DCP on the DHT-Induced Androgenic Action in Human Prostate Cancer Cells Toxicol. Sci., November 1, 2005; 88(1): 52 - 59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]