| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Molecular Oncology, Markers, Clinical Correlates |
Department of Surgery, City Hospital, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, United Kingdom [F. S. K., R. W. B., J. F. R. R.]; The Breast Cancer Unit, Tenovus Cancer Research Centre, University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff, CF4 4XX, United Kingdom [J. M. W. G., R. I. N.]; and Cancer Research Program, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, St. Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia [R. H., E. A. M., R. L. S.]
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Cyclin D1 is essential for the formation of lobuloalveoli during normal mammary gland development (3 , 4) , whereas deregulated expression of cyclin D1 stimulates aberrant mammary epithelial cell proliferation and promotes tumorigenesis in transgenic mice (5) . Overexpression of cyclin D1 renders the growth of normal cells less dependent on growth factors and accelerates passage through the G1 phase of the cell cycle (6 , 7) , suggesting that increased expression may lead to the loss of normal regulatory constraints and confer a growth advantage. Cyclin D1 expression is elevated to similar levels in human mammary ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer (8 , 9) and is increased above normal levels in preneoplastic hyperproliferative lesions (9) , implying that molecular alterations leading to cyclin D1 overexpression occur relatively early during breast carcinogenesis.
Human cyclin D1 is encoded by the CCND1 gene, which is located at chromosome 11q13. This chromosomal locus, which encompasses several proto-oncogenes, is consistently amplified in a variety of epithelial cancers including breast, lung, esophageal, and bladder carcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck (10 , 11) . Whereas coamplification of adjacent oncogenes at this large locus may occur (12 , 13) , the fundamental role played by cyclin D1 in regulation of normal cell cycle control and the consistent amplification and overexpression of this gene in a range of malignancies imply that cyclin D1 is one of the dominant oncogenes in this region.
Several publications have reported that 11q13 amplification in breast cancer is associated with poor prognosis (14, 15, 16) . However, there is now a general consensus that whereas 11q13 is amplified in approximately 13% of breast cancers (10) , the frequency of cyclin D1 mRNA and protein overexpression is at least 3-fold higher (45–50% ; Refs. (17, 18, 19, 20) , indicating that the latter may result from mechanisms other than gene amplification. Thus, assessment of 11q13 amplification is likely to identify a minority of cyclin D1-overexpressing tumors, whereas examining the relationship between cyclin D1 overexpression and prognosis is likely to more accurately reflect the pathophysiological consequences of aberrant cyclin D1 expression. In contrast to most gene amplification studies, two groups using immunohistochemical assessment of cyclin D1 expression reported an improved outcome with cyclin D1 overexpression in primary breast cancer (21 , 22) , whereas others failed to find an association (23, 24, 25) . Thus, the true prognostic significance of cyclin D1 overexpression in human breast cancer has yet to be resolved.
The three largest published studies (15 , 16 , 26) examining 11q13 amplification found an association between cyclin D1 gene copy number and poor outcome, especially in the ER-positive phenotype. Moreover, a number of studies have reported a positive correlation between 11q13 amplification, cyclin D1 expression, and ER positivity in breast cancer (11 , 16 , 22 , 24 , 27) , suggesting that the two genes may be functionally related. Estrogens induce cyclin D1 expression in human breast cancer cell lines )28, 29, 30, 31) , whereas antiestrogenic inhibition of proliferation is preceded by a reduction in cyclin D1 mRNA and protein synthesis in G1 (32 , 33) , implicating cyclin D1 as a target for estrogen-stimulated mitogenesis in this disease. Furthermore, ectopic overexpression of cyclin D1 reverses the growth-inhibitory effect of antiestrogens in ER-positive breast cancer cells (34) . These in vitro experiments demonstrate a close functional interplay between ER and cyclin D1 gene expression at the molecular level, but the potential clinical implications of such a relationship remain to be elucidated.
We have previously demonstrated a strong positive correlation between cyclin D1 mRNA and ER mRNA levels (P = 0.0001) in a large series of 364 primary breast cancers (27) . To investigate issues of potential functionality between the two genes and their relationship to established prognostic features, we subsequently analyzed the relationship between cyclin D1 mRNA expression and various clinicopathological parameters in a subset of 253 patients. In particular, we assessed the clinical outcome of patients within the ER-positive and ER-negative subgroups and the degree of responsiveness to endocrine therapy according to their tumor cyclin D1 mRNA levels.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Twenty-one of the 36 elderly stage I-II cases (>70 years old) underwent surgical treatment in the form of simple or wedge mastectomy with no axillary intervention unless palpable lymph nodes were present (n = 8). These patients did not receive routine adjuvant therapy. The remaining 15 elderly patients were treated with primary tamoxifen (a tumor specimen had been obtained via operative endocrine biopsy before the commencement of treatment). Four locally advanced cases treated with initial hormone therapy were included in the assessment of hormone response in relation to cyclin D1 level but were excluded from the overall survival analyses due to their inherently worse prognosis.
Measurement of Cyclin D1 and ER Expression.
Total RNA was extracted from the primary breast cancer samples, Northern blotted, and analyzed as described previously (27)
. In brief, in the presence of 50% (v/v) deionized formamide, 2x saline-sodium phosphate-EDTA, 1% SDS, 0.5% Blotto (10% skim milk powder in 0.2% azide), 10% dextran sulfate, 0.04 mg/ml polyadenylic acid, and 0.5 mg/ml salmon sperm DNA, the filters were probed with full-length human cyclin D1 and ER cDNA (27)
and also with cDNA for 36B4, a non-estrogen-regulated ribosomal protein that served as a control for RNA loading (36)
, at 50°C. After hybridization, the filters were washed at a highest stringency of 0.2x SSC and 1% SDS for 30 min at 65°C. Each filter contained four control cell lines for normalization between the 22 filters. The ratio of cyclin D1:36B4 mRNA signal intensity for each sample was normalized to that of MDA-MB-231 cells, which was defined arbitrarily as 1.0 to yield the relative expression of cyclin D1 mRNA. Breast tissue sections were analyzed for the presence of ER using the monoclonal ER-ICA kit (Abbott, North Chicago, IL) as discussed elsewhere (37)
.
Statistical Analysis of Clinical Data.
Follow-up data were taken from the time of the last clinic appointment or the date of death (median follow-up, 75 months; range, 2–9 years). To date, 95 (38%) of the primary patients have relapsed, 64 (25%) have developed metastases, and 51 (20%) have died from breast cancer. Deaths from unrelated causes were censored for the purposes of survival analyses. All statistical calculations were performed using the SPSS Data Analysis Program (SPSS for Windows 6.1.3; SPPS United Kingdom Ltd.). The 
2 test was used to assess differences in categorical variables using Fisher’s exact (two-tailed) test where appropriate. Survival outcomes were assessed using univariate Cox regression analysis for comparison of continuous variables and life table analysis using the Wilcoxon Gehan statistic (38)
for comparison of categorical variables. Multivariate analysis of survival was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Clinical Outcome.
For analysis of clinicopathological parameters in relation to cyclin D1, the 253 primary cases were divided into two equal groups of high and low cyclin D1 expression as defined by the median level of cyclin D1 mRNA. Overall, there was no association between the level of cyclin D1 and clinicopathological features, except ER, or survival outcome (Tables 1
and 2
); however when the ER-positive and -negative subgroups were analyzed separately, there was a significant correlation between high cyclin D1 mRNA levels and worse outcome in patients with ER-positive tumors, i.e., reduced DFI (P = 0.0016), reduced time to local recurrence (P = 0.025), reduced time to metastasis (P = 0.019), and reduced overall survival (P = 0.025; Fig. 1
; Table 2
). In addition, there was a near-significant trend for larger ER-positive tumors to have a high cyclin D1 level (P = 0.055; Table 1
). The significant associations with reduced DFI (P = 0.016) and overall survival (P = 0.044) were upheld (with time to metastasis approaching significance, P = 0.058) on analysis of cyclin D1 level as a continuous variable within ER-positive disease. There were no corresponding associations with survival outcome when the level of ER expression was analyzed independently as a continuous variable within the ER-positive subgroup. In contrast to the result in ER-positive cases, we failed to establish an association between clinical outcome and cyclin D1 level in the 71 ER-negative cases, nor was there any relationship of cyclin D1 levels with prognostic groups as measured by the Nottingham Prognostic Index (35)
.
|
|
|
; Table 3
).
|
|
Finally, clinical response (as assessed by UICC criteria) to primary tamoxifen treatment was compared in relation to the level of cyclin D1 in 33 patients (15 elderly patients, 4 patients with locally advanced breast cancer, and 14 patients with recurrent breast cancer). There was no correlation between cyclin D1 and 6-month clinical response, best response, or responsive/static versus progressive disease; however, the duration of the response to tamoxifen was significantly longer in ER-positive patients with low cyclin D1 mRNA levels (n = 14) than in those with high cyclin D1 mRNA levels (n = 9; P = 0.04; Fig. 3
), implying that overexpression of cyclin D1 may confer a degree of resistance to antiestrogen therapy.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
CCND1 encoding cyclin D1 is considered to be the predominant oncogene in the 11q13 amplicon. There have been several publications reporting a relationship between 11q13 amplification and poor prognosis in a number of different human malignancies including breast cancer (14, 15, 16) . However, there was inconsistency among earlier smaller studies in defining the phenotype of breast cancer in which 11q13 amplification was associated with poor outcome (16) . Nevertheless, the three largest studies demonstrated an earlier relapse in patients with 11q13-amplified, lymph node-negative, or ER-positive disease (15 , 16 , 26) . Although 11q13 amplification can be used as a surrogate for cyclin D1 overexpression, we and others have shown that amplification greatly underestimates the frequency of overexpression. Both cyclin D1 mRNA and protein are overexpressed at a frequency two to three times greater than gene amplification (17, 18, 19, 20) , and this must mean that only about one in three overexpressing tumors can be accounted for by gene amplification as assessed by Southern blotting. One would therefore expect that mRNA data or immunohistochemical detection of cyclin D1 protein expression would be a more reliable estimate of overexpression. However, recent in vitro studies could not demonstrate a clear relationship between cyclin D1 expression and the activity of its major kinase partner Cdk4 in a series of breast cancer cell lines (41) . Thus, possibilities exist that cyclin D1 may be involved in functions other than the control of proliferation through Cdk-activated mechanisms and may be exerting some of its oncogenic potential through Cdk4-independent pathways, e.g., through binding to and activating the transcriptional activity of ER (42 , 43 ). Nonetheless, the worse prognosis in patients with an ER-positive phenotype and high levels of cyclin D1 mRNA documented in the current series is consistent with the previously published data from an earlier independent population measuring CCND1 amplification (16) .
In contrast to the finding of earlier relapse in 11q13-amplified, axillary lymph node-negative disease (15 , 16 , 26) , the present study failed to establish a relationship between high levels of cyclin D1 mRNA and prognosis in relation to nodal status alone. However, high levels of cyclin D1 mRNA predicted for an increased risk of death within the the ER-positive, lymph node-positive subgroup. Two previous studies employing approximately 1000 patients indicated that the two DNA markers CCND1 and EMS1 at 11q13 confer different phenotypes in ER-positive and ER-negative tumors (13 , 16) . CCND1 amplification was associated with an increased risk of relapse in the ER-positive group, whereas amplification of EMS1, which is 800 kb telomeric to CCND1, was associated with an increased risk of relapse in patients with ER-negative disease. However, amplification of either CCND1 or EMS1 predicted for worse prognosis in the node-negative subgroup. The apparent inconsistency between these findings may well indicate that unlike the prognosis in patients with the ER-positive phenotype, in which there is a strong relationship with cyclin D1, the outcome within the node-negative subgroup may be governed by another as yet undefined gene located between CCND1 and EMS1 and coamplified with either CCND1 or EMS1. Of the 222 patients with known lymph node status in this cohort, only 40 patients had node-negative disease; thus, the numbers are likely to be too small to detect any relationship with outcome within this group.
Several published studies using cyclin D1 immunohistochemistry have addressed the potential role of cyclin D1 as a prognostic indicator in breast cancer. Three studies failed to demonstrate a significant relationship between cyclin D1 protein overexpression and prognosis (23, 24, 25) , whereas two other groups reported an improved survival in patients with cyclin D1 overexpression (21 , 22) . However, there is now convincing evidence to suggest that cyclin D1 expression is closely correlated with ER positivity (21 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 27) . Unfortunately, the two former studies did not address the relationship between cyclin D1 expression and prognosis in patients with primary breast cancer within the ER subgroups (21 , 22) . The tumors with high expression of cyclin D1 are more likely to be ER positive and are consequently more likely to have a better clinical outcome than the ER-negative tumors that might well have low cyclin D1 expression. Moreover, these two studies noted a worse prognosis in the group with no cyclin D1 staining, a significant proportion of whom are likely to harbor mutations leading to dysfunctional pRb. Aberrations of other components of the cyclin D1 pathway such as loss of pRb or of the Cdk inhibitory proteins (44 , 45) may exert a greater influence on long-term outcome than cyclin D1 itself. Any comparison between the present cyclin D1 mRNA data and published data on cyclin D1 protein levels is potentially complicated by recently defined mechanisms of posttranscriptional control that likely result in disparities between these two parameters.
The strong positive correlation between high expression of cyclin D1 and ER positivity (22 , 24 , 27) suggests that these two genes are functionally related. There is accumulating evidence that this relationship is at least partly due to estrogen induction of cyclin D1 expression (28 , 29 , 31) and cyclin D1 stimulation of ER transcriptional activity (42 , 43) . Those tumors with higher cyclin D1 levels may be more likely to have functional ER and may therefore have a superior response to endocrine therapy. Conversely, there is also published evidence that inhibition of cyclin D1 gene expression with a concurrent decline in cyclin D1 mRNA and protein levels is an early and critical event in antiestrogen action (32 , 33) , suggesting that overexpression of cyclin D1 in ER-positive tumors may lead to insensitivity to antiestrogens. Subsequent results from in vitro studies have also been controversial. One study clearly demonstrated that ectopic induction of cyclin D1 expression in ER-positive breast cancer cell lines (T-47D and MCF-7) can overcome the inhibition of cell cycle progression induced by antiestrogen (34) , whereas another study showed that tet-inducible cyclin D1 overexpression in MCF-7 breast cancer cells does not prevent the inhibition of cell growth by antiestrogens (46) . Although the sample size in the subgroup treated with antiestrogen in this study was small and the analyses must therefore be interpreted with caution, the current finding of a shorter response duration in the ER-positive group of patients who had high tumor levels of cyclin D1 mRNA is compatible with the view that the resistance to hormonal therapy seen in some ER-positive breast cancers may be conferred by cyclin D1 overexpression, as hypothesized previously (34) . However in this small series of women, apart from response duration, no significant correlation of cyclin D1 mRNA expression with other response parameters including 6-month response, best response, or responsive/static versus progressive disease was observed. Nonetheless, the current data encourage further investigation of the potential role of cyclin D1 as a predictive marker for endocrine responsiveness in larger studies.
In conclusion, this study has shown that high expression of cyclin D1 mRNA is an adverse prognostic marker specifically within ER-positive breast cancer. The tight relationship between cyclin D1 and ER expression precludes meaningful interpretation if ER subgroup analysis is not performed. Additional large studies examining the relationship between cyclin D1 protein expression and prognosis within the ER subgroups and comparing the mRNA and protein expression of cyclin D1 may well further clarify the apparent inconsistency between published studies. The significance of elevated cyclin D1 expression in relation to therapeutic responsiveness is currently being addressed by additional in vitro and clinical studies.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 Supported by research grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the New South Wales State Cancer Council, and the Tenovus Organization. R. H. is the recipient of a National Health and Medical Research Council Medical Postgraduate Research Scholarship and the Beng Kang Kho Scholarship. 
2 F. S. K. and R. H. contributed equally to this work.
3 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Cancer Research Program, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, St. Vincent’s Hospital, 384 Victoria Street, Darlinghurst, Sydney, New South Wales 2010, Australia. Phone: 61-2-92958322; Fax: 61-2-92958321; E-mail: r.sutherland{at}garvan.unsw.edu.au
4 The abbreviations used are: Cdk, cyclin-dependent kinase; ER, estrogen receptor; DFI, disease-free interval; pRb, retinoblastoma protein.
Received 7/31/98; revised 3/ 4/99; accepted 5/10/99.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. Thakur, Y. Sun, A. Bollig, J. Wu, H. Biliran, S. Banerjee, F. H. Sarkar, and D. J. Liao Anti-invasive and Antimetastatic Activities of Ribosomal Protein S6 Kinase 4 in Breast Cancer Cells Clin. Cancer Res., July 15, 2008; 14(14): 4427 - 4436. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Satoh, S. Hamada, K. Kimura, A. Kanno, M. Hirota, J. Umino, W. Fujibuchi, A. Masamune, N. Tanaka, K. Miura, et al. Up-Regulation of MSX2 Enhances the Malignant Phenotype and Is Associated with Twist 1 Expression in Human Pancreatic Cancer Cells Am. J. Pathol., April 1, 2008; 172(4): 926 - 939. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Rudas, M. Lehnert, A. Huynh, R. Jakesz, C. Singer, S. Lax, W. Schippinger, O. Dietze, R. Greil, W. Stiglbauer, et al. Cyclin D1 Expression in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Adjuvant Tamoxifen-Based Therapy Clin. Cancer Res., March 15, 2008; 14(6): 1767 - 1774. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Trent, C. Yang, C. Li, M. Lynch, and E. V. Schmidt Heat Shock Protein B8, a Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Independent Cyclin D1 Target Gene, Contributes to Its Effects on Radiation Sensitivity Cancer Res., November 15, 2007; 67(22): 10774 - 10781. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. K. Saxena, P. M. Vertino, F. A. Anania, and D. Sharma Leptin-induced Growth Stimulation of Breast Cancer Cells Involves Recruitment of Histone Acetyltransferases and Mediator Complex to CYCLIN D1 Promoter via Activation of Stat3 J. Biol. Chem., May 4, 2007; 282(18): 13316 - 13325. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. L. Kilker and M. D. Planas-Silva Cyclin D1 Is Necessary for Tamoxifen-Induced Cell Cycle Progression in Human Breast Cancer Cells Cancer Res., December 1, 2006; 66(23): 11478 - 11484. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y. Ishii, A. Pirkmaier, J. V. Alvarez, D. A. Frank, I. Keselman, D. Logothetis, J. Mandeli, M. J. O'Connell, S. Waxman, and D. Germain Cyclin d1 overexpression and response to bortezomib treatment in a breast cancer model. J Natl Cancer Inst, September 6, 2006; 98(17): 1238 - 1247. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Aiello, G. Pandini, F. Frasca, E. Conte, A. Murabito, A. Sacco, M. Genua, R. Vigneri, and A. Belfiore Peroxisomal Proliferator-Activated Receptor-{gamma} Agonists Induce Partial Reversion of Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer Cells Endocrinology, September 1, 2006; 147(9): 4463 - 4475. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J-R Weng, C-Y Chen, J J Pinzone, M D Ringel, and C-S Chen Beyond peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor {gamma} signaling: the multi-facets of the antitumor effect of thiazolidinediones. Endocr. Relat. Cancer, June 1, 2006; 13(2): 401 - 413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Colozza, E. Azambuja, F. Cardoso, C. Sotiriou, D. Larsimont, and M. J. Piccart Proliferative markers as prognostic and predictive tools in early breast cancer: where are we now? Ann. Onc., November 1, 2005; 16(11): 1723 - 1739. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Wang, S. Fan, Z. Li, M. Fu, M. Rao, Y. Ma, M. P. Lisanti, C. Albanese, B. S. Katzenellenbogen, P. J. Kushner, et al. Cyclin D1 Antagonizes BRCA1 Repression of Estrogen Receptor {alpha} Activity Cancer Res., August 1, 2005; 65(15): 6557 - 6567. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 Y. M. Shah, M. Al-Dhaheri, Y. Dong, C. Ip, F. E. Jones, and B. G. Rowan Selenium disrupts estrogen receptor {alpha} signaling and potentiates tamoxifen antagonism in endometrial cancer cells and tamoxifen-resistant breast cancer cells Mol. Cancer Ther., August 1, 2005; 4(8): 1239 - 1249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. J Butt, C. M McNeil, E. A Musgrove, and R. L Sutherland Downstream targets of growth factor and oestrogen signalling and endocrine resistance: the potential roles of c-Myc, cyclin D1 and cyclin E Endocr. Relat. Cancer, July 1, 2005; 12(Supplement_1): S47 - S59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J.-W. Huang, C.-W. Shiau, Y.-T. Yang, S. K. Kulp, K.-F. Chen, R. W. Brueggemeier, C. L. Shapiro, and C.-S. Chen Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {gamma}-Independent Ablation of Cyclin D1 by Thiazolidinediones and Their Derivatives in Breast Cancer Cells Mol. Pharmacol., April 1, 2005; 67(4): 1342 - 1348. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Dong, J. Peng, H. Zhang, W. H. Mondesire, W. Jian, G. B. Mills, M.-C. Hung, and F. Meric-Bernstam Role of Glycogen Synthase Kinase 3{beta} in Rapamycin-Mediated Cell Cycle Regulation and Chemosensitivity Cancer Res., March 1, 2005; 65(5): 1961 - 1972. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Chen and J. Xu Activation of PPAR{gamma} by curcumin inhibits Moser cell growth and mediates suppression of gene expression of cyclin D1 and EGFR Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol, March 1, 2005; 288(3): G447 - G456. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. Chu, K. Blackwell, S. Chen, and J. Slingerland The Dual ErbB1/ErbB2 Inhibitor, Lapatinib (GW572016), Cooperates with Tamoxifen to Inhibit Both Cell Proliferation- and Estrogen-Dependent Gene Expression in Antiestrogen-Resistant Breast Cancer Cancer Res., January 1, 2005; 65(1): 18 - 25. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L Hilakivi-Clarke, C Wang, M Kalil, R Riggins, and R G Pestell Nutritional modulation of the cell cycle and breast cancer Endocr. Relat. Cancer, December 1, 2004; 11(4): 603 - 622. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. P. Alao, E. W-F. Lam, S. Ali, L. Buluwela, W. Bordogna, P. Lockey, R. Varshochi, A. V. Stavropoulou, R. C. Coombes, and D. M. Vigushin Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor Trichostatin A Represses Estrogen Receptor {alpha}-Dependent Transcription and Promotes Proteasomal Degradation of Cyclin D1 in Human Breast Carcinoma Cell Lines Clin. Cancer Res., December 1, 2004; 10(23): 8094 - 8104. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Wang, N. Pattabiraman, J. N. Zhou, M. Fu, T. Sakamaki, C. Albanese, Z. Li, K. Wu, J. Hulit, P. Neumeister, et al. Cyclin D1 Repression of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {gamma} Expression and Transactivation Mol. Cell. Biol., September 1, 2003; 23(17): 6159 - 6173. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. C. Hodges, J. D. Cook, E. K. Lobenhofer, L. Li, L. Bennett, P. R. Bushel, C. M. Aldaz, C. A. Afshari, and C. L. Walker Tamoxifen Functions As a Molecular Agonist Inducing Cell Cycle-Associated Genes in Breast Cancer Cells Mol. Cancer Res., February 1, 2003; 1(4): 300 - 311. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
) or high (•) cyclin D1 mRNA levels.
