
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Molecular Oncology, Markers, Clinical Correlates |
1 Laboratory of Cancer Genetics, Institute of Medical Technology and 2 Department of Urology, University of Tampere and Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland; 3 Institute of Biomedicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; and 4 Department of Urology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Experimental Design: The expression of 16 AR coactivators and corepressors (SRC1, ß-catenin, TIF2, PIAS1, PIASx, ARIP4, BRCA1, AIB1, AIB3, CBP, STAT1, NCoR1, AES, cyclin D1, p300, and ARA24) was measured in prostate cancer cell lines, xenografts, and clinical prostate tumor specimens by using real-time quantitative reverse transcription-PCR. In addition, gene copy number of SRC1 was analyzed by fluorescence in situ hybridization.
Results: Both AR-positive and AR-negative cell lines and xenografts expressed the coregulators. Most of the coregulators studied were expressed at equal levels in benign prostatic hyperplasia and untreated and hormone-refractory carcinomas. However, the expression of PIAS1 and SRC1 was significantly (P = 0.048 and 0.017, respectively) lower in hormone-refractory prostate tumors than in untreated prostate tumors. No overexpression of the coregulators was found in the clinical material. Paradoxically, the SRC1 gene was found to be amplified and highly expressed in a LuCaP 70 prostate cancer xenograft.
Conclusions: These findings suggest that the decreased expression of PIAS1 and SRC1 could be involved in the progression of prostate cancer. In addition, gene amplification of SRC1 in one of the xenografts implies that, in some tumors, genetic alteration of SRC1 may provide a growth advantage.
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Androgen action in target tissues, such as the prostate gland, is mediated by nuclear androgen receptor (AR), which functions as a transcription factor. Several findings have already indicated that AR is involved in the development and progression of prostate cancer. First, it has been suggested that certain AR polymorphisms are associated with the risk of prostate cancer (4 , 5) . Second, somatic mutations of the AR gene have been found, especially in tumors treated with antiandrogens such as flutamide and bicalutamide (6, 7, 8) . Third, about one-third of the hormone-refractory prostate carcinomas contain amplification of the AR gene, leading to transcriptional up-regulation of the gene (9 , 10) . In addition, hormone-refractory tumors express more AR than the untreated tumors, even without the gene amplification (10) . Fourth, other growth factor signaling pathways may activate AR, especially in the presence of only low levels of androgens (11 , 12) . Finally, recent cDNA microarray studies (13 , 14) have demonstrated that many of the androgen-regulated genes become up-regulated at the progression of the disease during androgen withdrawal.
Activation of AR by androgens is a complex process. The apo-AR stays associated with chaperone proteins in the cytoplasm. Ligand binding leads to conformational changes in the receptor and its translocation into the nucleus, where it binds to an androgen response element located in the regulatory regions of target genes (15) . In addition to the AR itself, transcriptional regulation involves a large number of activating and repressing proteins (16) . In vitro studies have indicated that altered expression of some of these coregulators may modify transcriptional activity of AR (17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23) . For example, overexpression of a p160 family member, TIF2, in a cotransfection assay enhanced AR transcriptional activity in the presence of several steroids, including adrenal androgens, within physiological concentrations (23) . In addition, coregulators may modulate the effects of antiandrogens. For instance, it has been reported that hydroxyflutamide paradoxically increases AR activity when CBP is overexpressed (24) . Therefore, changes in the expression of the coregulators might be involved in the development and progression of prostate cancer (25) . However, only a few studies on the expression of the coregulators in prostate cancer have been published (22 , 23 , 26, 27, 28) .
To evaluate the significance of alterations in the expression of AR coregulators in prostate cancer, we have measured the expression of 16 different putative AR coactivators and corepressors by using quantitative reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR). Clinical tumor samples, prostate cancer cell lines, and xenografts were analyzed. The expression data were also combined with the data on the chromosomal alterations of the cell lines and xenografts, obtained previously by comparative genomic hybridization, to identify putative amplifications of the coregulator genes. Finally, the gene copy number of SRC1 was studied by using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
RT-PCR.
Total RNA from the cell lines was isolated using Trizol reagent (Life Technologies, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD) according to the manufacturers instructions. For RNA extraction from tumor material, tissue was first scratched from frozen tumor blocks using a precooled, sterile scalpel. Subsequently, tissue powder was added directly into Qiagen RNeasy MiniKit tissue lysis buffer (Qiagen, Valencia, CA), and total RNA was isolated according to the manufacturers instructions. The first-strand cDNA was synthesized with Superscript II reverse transcriptase and oligo(dT)1218 primer according to the manufacturers protocol (Life Technologies, Inc.). To prepare standard curves, total RNA from LNCaP was used. After first-strand cDNA synthesis, serial dilutions were made corresponding to about 100, 20, 4, 0.8, 0.16, and 0.032 ng of total RNA. Primer sequences used for PCR amplification of each gene are given in Table 1
. The primers were designed to correspond to different exons to avoid amplification of genomic DNA. We also checked carefully to ensure that the primers could not detect pseudogenes or retropseudogenes. The PCR reactions were performed in LightCycler apparatus (29)
using an LC Fast Start DNA SYBR Green I Kit (Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany). Thermocycling for each reaction was done in a final volume of 20 µl containing 2 µl of cDNA sample (or standard), 4 mM MgCl2, 0.5 µM each primer, and 1x ready-to-use SYBR Green I reaction mix including Taq DNA polymerase, reaction buffer, and deoxynucleotide triphosphate mix. The cycling conditions were designed according to the manufacturers guidelines. The annealing temperatures are given in Table 1
. The elongation time was calculated by dividing the size of the amplicon (Table 1)
by 25. The fluorescence emitted by SYBR Green I was measured in every cycle at the end of the elongation step or, to avoid any fluorescence from nonspecific products, at higher temperatures (for PIASx, CBP, cyclin D1, p300, and ARA24). After arithmetic background adjustment, the fit point method was used to determine the crossing-point value as described previously (10)
. Fig. 1
illustrates an example of a standard curve for PIAS1. For normalization of the expression levels, the expression of TATA box-binding protein (TBP) was measured as described previously (10)
. TBP was chosen as the reference gene because there are no known retropseudogenes for it, and the expression of TBP is lower than that of many commonly used, abundantly expressed reference genes. We have also shown previously that the use of ß-actin would give results similar to those obtained with TBP (10)
. The relative expression level was obtained by dividing the values for the gene of interest with the TBP value and then multiplying by 100. For xenograft and cell line samples, the TBP-normalized results were also normalized against the median expression value detected in those samples. In addition to the melting curve information obtained from the LightCycler, the PCR products were run in 1.5% agarose gel electrophoresis to ensure that a right-sized product (but not other products) was amplified in the reaction. Genomic DNA was also used as a control to ensure that no amplification could result from a residual DNA remaining in the RNA preparation. The intra-assay coefficient of variation for each gene was determined by repeating analyses of two samples 10 times. The coefficient of variation values were 5.7% for SRC1, 6.8% for TIF2, 6.9% for BRCA1, 17.3% for NCoR1, 11% for AES, 13.2% for STAT1, 20% for cyclin D1, 10.6% for AIB1, 12.6% for PIAS1, 4% for ß-catenin, 19% for PIASx, 26% for ARIP4, 11.5% for ARA24, 8.7% for AIB3, 13% for CBP, and 28% for p300.
|
|
Statistical Analyses.
The associations of tumor type, clinical stage, and histological grade with expression levels were calculated with nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests. Spearman rank test was used to study the correlation of expressions of the AR and coregulators. Grubbs test was used to detect the outlier values in box and whisker plot illustrations.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Expression of Coregulators in Prostate Cancer Cell Lines and Xenografts.
Fig. 3
depicts the relative expression levels of the coregulators in the prostate cancer cell lines and xenografts. Xenografts and cell lines were divided into two groups: androgen-independent ones (PC-3, DU145, NCI-H660, 22Rv1, and LuCaP 49); and androgen-sensitive ones (the rest of the cases). Of the xenografts, LuCaP 49 and 58 are the only ones established from tumor samples obtained from untreated patients. LuCaP 49 is a small cell carcinoma with neuroendocrine features and is therefore considered as truly androgen independent (31)
. The rest of the xenografts originated from patients treated with hormonal therapy. However, after serial passage in intact male athymic mice, the growth of the these xenografts was shown to be inhibited by castration, indicating that they had reacquired an androgen-sensitive phenotype. Of the cell lines examined, only LNCaP is considered to be androgen sensitive. 22Rv1 is androgen independent, expressing mutated AR (32)
, whereas PC-3, DU145, and NCI-H660 do not even express AR. The expression of all AR coregulators was also detected in AR-negative cell lines.
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A real-time RT-PCR approach was chosen to measure the expression of the different coregulatory genes for three reasons. First, good antibodies for immunostaining are available only for a few coregulators. Second, the RT-PCR strategy allows an analysis from small tumor specimens. Third, real-time RT-PCR is a reliable method for quantitation of mRNA abundance (10 , 29) . The intra-assay coefficient of variation values varied for different genes from 4% to 28%. Thus, at least severalfold expression differences should have been reliably detected, even in the case of the poorest assay (the highest coefficient of variation) performance. The small sample number (n = 41) of clinical tumors limits the statistical power of the analyses. However, with the same material, we have previously demonstrated statistically highly significant overexpression of AR in the hormone-refractory carcinomas (10) , indicating that at least common overexpression of any of the genes analyzed should have been detected in this material.
The most intensively investigated coactivator group is the p160/SRC protein family. It comprises three distinct but structurally and functionally related members, SRC1 (NCoA1), TIF2 (SRC2/GRIP1/NCoA2), and AIB1 [SRC3/RAC3/ACTR (16) ]. These proteins interact with steroid receptors and enhance their transcriptional activation in a ligand-dependent manner. In addition, these proteins possess histone acetyltransferase activity, and they are able to recruit CBP/p300 (16) . Here, the expression of SRC1 was found to be lower in hormone-refractory prostate carcinomas than in the untreated prostate carcinomas (P = 0.017). The finding that SRC1 expression is decreased in hormone-refractory prostate cancer is contradictory to the findings of Gregory et al. (23) , who showed increased SRC1 protein expression in hormone-refractory tumors. Although the average SRC1 expression was lower in our samples, the highest individual expression value was nevertheless found in a hormone-refractory tumor. This may explain, in part, the discrepancy between our results and those of the study by Gregory et al. (23) . It should also be noted that Gregory et al. (23) studied protein levels, whereas mRNA expression was analyzed here. We also immunostained untreated and hormone-refractory, formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded prostate carcinomas with polyclonal anti-SRC1 antibody (Affinity BioReagents Inc., Golden, CO). The tumors showed variable amounts of mainly nuclear staining. However, the quality of staining was not good enough for reliable quantitation (data not shown). Our finding of decreased expression of SRC1 in hormone-refractory tumors is concordant with the findings of an earlier study by Nessler-Menardi et al. (26) , who showed that an androgen-independent LNCaP subline has lower SRC1 expression than androgen-sensitive LNCaP. Decreased expression of SRC1 has also been suggested to be associated with tamoxifen resistance in breast cancers (38) . Two recent studies have investigated the association of histological differentiation with SRC1 expression in prostate cancer. Li et al. (28) found no association with SRC1 expression and Gleason score in 45 primary prostate cancers by using mRNA in situ hybridization. In contrast, Fujimoto et al. (27) reported that SRC1 expression, as measured by RT-PCR, was higher in poorly differentiated tumors and in cancers that responded poorly to therapy. Our data showed no correlation between SRC1 expression and tumor grade or clinical stage in the untreated tumors.
In contrast to down-regulation of SRC1 expression in hormone-refractory prostate tumors, amplification of the SRC1 gene was detected in the LuCaP 70 xenograft. LuCaP 70 was originally established from a hormone-refractory liver metastasis but has been serially passaged in intact male mice. To our knowledge, this is the first description of SRC1 gene amplification. The amplification seems to lead to up-regulation of the gene because LuCaP 70 expressed more SRC1 than the other cell lines and xenografts. The other cell lines, xenografts, and clinical tumors analyzed did not exhibit SRC1 gene amplification. A total of 66 tumors were analyzed for SRC1 copy number, and only 1 (LuCaP 70) showed the amplification. Nevertheless, the amplification may, in rare cases, give a growth advantage to cancer.
Expression of the other p160/SRC family members was also analyzed. AIB1, which is amplified and overexpressed in
10% of breast and ovarian cancers (39)
, showed no overexpression in prostate cancer. Interestingly, expression of AIB1 was very low in xenograft LuCaP 70, which showed high expression of SRC1. This may indicate that SRC1 has substituted the functions of AIB1 in the xenograft. Based on experiments with SRC1 knockout mice, it has been suggested that p160 coactivator proteins could compensate for the functions of each other, at least to some extent (40)
. The third member of p160/SRC family, TIF2, showed constant expression in different prostate tumor types. This latter finding disagrees with the findings of a study by Gregory et al. (23)
, who showed overexpression of TIF2 protein in hormone-refractory tumors.
The activities of the p160 family members are dependent on CBP and p300 (41) . For example, CBP has been shown to interact with AR and augment AR activity in a ligand-dependent manner (17) . Recently, Comuzzi et al. (24) showed that the antiandrogen hydroxyflutamide enhanced AR activity in DU145 cells forced to express CBP. In the present study, the expression of CBP and p300 was about equal in different groups of clinical prostate samples. However, the expression of p300 was decreased in poorly differentiated, untreated prostate carcinomas. The data indicate that CBP/p300 overexpression is unlikely during the progression of prostate cancer.
The PIAS (protein inhibitor of activated STAT) protein family members PIAS1 and splicing variants PIASx
(ARIP3) and PIASxß (Miz1) have been reported to enhance transcriptional activity of AR (42, 43, 44)
. PIAS proteins exhibit E3 small ubiquitin like modifier (SUMO) ligase activity and modulate nuclear receptor and their coregulator activities through protein sumoylation (45, 46, 47)
. Recently, Li et al. (28)
showed that expression of PIAS1 was increased in 33% of primary prostate cancers compared with normal prostates as determined by in situ hybridization for PIAS1 mRNA. Overexpression did not correlate with the Gleason score. Interestingly, we detected decreased PIAS1 expression in hormone-refractory cancers compared with untreated primary cancers. There was no difference in PIAS1 expression levels in BPH and untreated tumors. Biological significance of this finding requires additional studies, particularly because the E3 SUMO ligase activity of PIAS proteins is not restricted to steroid receptors and their coregulators (45
, 48)
.
Several putative AR coregulators are mutated in cancers. In addition to AIB1 (discussed above), AIB3 (RAP250/ASC-2) is known to be amplified and overexpressed in some breast carcinomas (49) . However, there was no difference in the expression levels of AIB3 in BPH, untreated, and hormone-refractory prostate cancer specimens. In addition, AIB3 expression was lower in poorly differentiated untreated tumors than in well-differentiated untreated tumors, suggesting that AIB3 overexpression is not common in prostate cancer. BRCA1 has also been reported to enhance the transcriptional activity of AR in a ligand-dependent manner (21) . Yeh et al. (50) demonstrated a contribution of BRCA1 to androgen-induced cell death via cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p21waf/cip1, which is an androgen target gene as well. In the present study, we did not find any changes in the expression of BRCA1 in the different prostate tissue and cancer samples studied. ß-Catenin is a known downstream effector of the Wnt signaling pathway, and mutations in ß-catenin have been described in numerous cancers, including prostate cancer (51) . ß-Catenin has also been shown to function as a transcriptional coactivator of AR (19) . No ß-catenin overexpression in prostate cancer was detected in this study.
Ran/ARA24 has been shown to interact with the polyglutamine region of AR and to enhance AR-dependent transcription. Recently, Li et al. (28) reported that ARA24 is overexpressed in 81% of primary prostate tumor specimens by using in situ hybridization for ARA24 mRNA. This did not correlate with the Gleason score of the tumors. In this work, we failed to find ARA24 overexpression with quantitative real-time RT-PCR. This discrepancy could be due to the fact that although mRNA in situ hybridization is able to localize expression, it is poorly quantitative.
ARIP4 modulates AR function in a promoter-dependent manner in transient transfection assays: it enhances receptor activity on minimal promoters, but it does not activate more complex promoters. ARIP4 mutants devoid of ATPase activity fail to alter DNA topology and behave as trans-dominant negative regulators of AR function (52) . Here, the expression levels of ARIP4 were found to be higher in either locally (T34) or distantly (N+ or M+) advanced disease than in localized cancer. However, ARIP4 expression was about equal in hormone-refractory tumors and untreated primary tumors. Thus, overexpression of ARIP4 is unlikely to be involved in the emergence of hormone-refractory disease.
Nuclear receptor corepressors were originally identified as proteins associated with nonliganded type II nuclear receptors that, unlike type I nuclear receptors such as AR, estrogen receptor (ER), glucocorticoid receptor (GR), and progesterone receptor (PR), can bind to DNA in the absence of ligand and mediate transcriptional repression (53) . Two of the best-characterized corepressors, NCoR1 and SMRT (silencing mediator of retinoid and thyroid hormone receptor), do not interact with ER, GR, or PR in the absence of ligand (54) . By analogy to other steroid receptors, one might expect that the interaction with these corepressors could only happen with antagonist-bound AR (55) . Several other corepressors of AR, including cyclin D1 and AES (NH2-terminal enhancer of split), have been identified (56 , 57) . We found that cyclin D1 was not overexpressed in prostate cancer, confirming the findings of a recent study by Gumbiner et al. (58) . No alterations in the expression of the other corepressors were found here either.
It should be pointed out that the relative expression levels of coregulators did not correlate with those of AR in the clinical tumors. In addition, the AR-negative small cell carcinoma samples (cell lines NCI-H660 and LuCaP 49) and cell lines PC-3 and DU145 expressed the coregulators. This may be due to the fact that most of the coregulators have been shown to possess functions that are not related to the AR signaling pathway.
In conclusion, we demonstrated that several AR coregulators are ubiquitously expressed in AR-positive and -negative prostate tissues and cancerous samples. It appears that overexpression of these AR coregulators is not commonly associated with the progression of prostate cancer. However, other alterations, such as mutations, in these coregulator genes should now be investigated. In addition, the decreased expression of PIAS1 and SRC1 in hormone-refractory prostate cancer warrants additional studies.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Requests for reprints: Tapio Visakorpi, Institute of Medical Technology, FIN-33014 University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland. Phone: 358-3-215-7725; Fax: 358-3-215-8597; E-mail: tapio.visakorpi{at}uta.fi
Received 6/29/03; revised 11/ 4/03; accepted 11/ 4/03.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
function as SUMO-E3 ligases toward androgen receptor and repress androgen receptor-dependent transcription. J. Biol. Chem., 277: 41311-41317, 2002.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S.-H. Tan and M. T Nevalainen Signal transducer and activator of transcription 5A/B in prostate and breast cancers Endocr. Relat. Cancer, June 1, 2008; 15(2): 367 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
O. R. Saramaki, A. E. Harjula, P. M. Martikainen, R. L. Vessella, T. L.J. Tammela, and T. Visakorpi TMPRSS2:ERG Fusion Identifies a Subgroup of Prostate Cancers with a Favorable Prognosis Clin. Cancer Res., June 1, 2008; 14(11): 3395 - 3400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Nakauchi, K.-i. Matsuda, I. Ochiai, A. Kawauchi, Y. Mizutani, T. Miki, and M. Kawata A Differential Ligand-mediated Response of Green Fluorescent Protein-tagged Androgen Receptor in Living Prostate Cancer and Non-prostate Cancer Cell Lines J. Histochem. Cytochem., June 1, 2007; 55(6): 535 - 544. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. C. Tu, X. Yan, L. Hood, and B. Lin Proteomics Analysis of the Interactome of N-myc Downstream Regulated Gene 1 and Its Interactions with the Androgen Response Program in Prostate Cancer Cells Mol. Cell. Proteomics, April 1, 2007; 6(4): 575 - 588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. R. Logan, L. Gaughan, S. R. C. McCracken, V. Sapountzi, H. Y. Leung, and C. N. Robson Human PIRH2 Enhances Androgen Receptor Signaling through Inhibition of Histone Deacetylase 1 and Is Overexpressed in Prostate Cancer. Mol. Cell. Biol., September 1, 2006; 26(17): 6502 - 6510. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L.-N. Song and E. P. Gelmann Interaction of {beta}-Catenin and TIF2/GRIP1 in Transcriptional Activation by the Androgen Receptor J. Biol. Chem., November 11, 2005; 280(45): 37853 - 37867. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Karenko, S. Hahtola, S. Paivinen, R. Karhu, S. Syrja, M. Kahkonen, B. Nedoszytko, S. Kytola, Y. Zhou, V. Blazevic, et al. Primary Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphomas Show a Deletion or Translocation Affecting NAV3, the Human UNC-53 Homologue Cancer Res., September 15, 2005; 65(18): 8101 - 8110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H.-J. Zhou, J. Yan, W. Luo, G. Ayala, S.-H. Lin, H. Erdem, M. Ittmann, S. Y. Tsai, and M.-J. Tsai SRC-3 Is Required for Prostate Cancer Cell Proliferation and Survival Cancer Res., September 1, 2005; 65(17): 7976 - 7983. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z Culig, H Steiner, G Bartsch, and A Hobisch Mechanisms of endocrine therapy-responsive and -unresponsive prostate tumours Endocr. Relat. Cancer, June 1, 2005; 12(2): 229 - 244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. J. Burd, C. E. Petre, H. Moghadam, E. M. Wilson, and K. E. Knudsen Cyclin D1 Binding to the Androgen Receptor (AR) NH2-Terminal Domain Inhibits Activation Function 2 Association and Reveals Dual Roles for AR Corepression Mol. Endocrinol., March 1, 2005; 19(3): 607 - 620. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. B. Wetherill, N. L. Fisher, A. Staubach, M. Danielsen, R. W. de Vere White, and K. E. Knudsen Xenoestrogen Action in Prostate Cancer: Pleiotropic Effects Dependent on Androgen Receptor Status Cancer Res., January 1, 2005; 65(1): 54 - 65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Kang, O. A. Janne, and J. J. Palvimo Coregulator Recruitment and Histone Modifications in Transcriptional Regulation by the Androgen Receptor Mol. Endocrinol., November 1, 2004; 18(11): 2633 - 2648. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||