|
|
||||||||
is mediated by aberrant regulation of cell cycle genes
Syngenta CTL, Alderley Park, Cheshire SK10 4TJ, UK
(Requests for offprints should be addressed to J G Moggs; Email: jonathan.moggs{at}syngenta.com)
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
in ER-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells has been used as a model system, in which hormone-dependent responses can be restored. Paradoxically, in contrast to the mitogenic activity of 17ß-estradiol (E2) in ER-positive breast cancer cells, E2 suppresses proliferation in ER-negative breast cancer cells in which ER
has been re-expressed. We have used global gene expression profiling to investigate the mechanism by which E2 suppresses proliferation in MDA-MB-231 cells that express ER
through adenoviral infection. We show that a number of genes known to promote cell proliferation and survival are repressed by E2 in these cells. These include genes encoding the anti-apoptosis factor SURVIVIN, positive cell cycle regulators (CDC2, CYCLIN B1, CYCLIN B2, CYCLIN G1, CHK1, BUB3, STK6, SKB1, CSE1 L) and chromosome replication proteins (MCM2, MCM3, FEN1, RRM2, TOP2A, RFC1). In parallel, E2-induced the expression of the negative cell cycle regulators KIP2 and QUIESCIN Q6, and the tumour-suppressor genes E-CADHERIN and NBL1. Strikingly, the expression of several of these genes is regulated in the opposite direction by E2 compared with their regulation in ER-positive MCF-7 cells. Together, these data suggest a mechanism for the E2-dependent suppression of proliferation in ER-negative breast cancer cells into which ER
has been reintroduced.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
and ERß. These ERs function as ligand-activated transcription factors that recruit a variety of coregulator proteins to activate or repress the expression of estrogen-responsive genes (Moggs & Orphanides 2001, Hall et al. 2001, McKenna and OMalley 2002, Tremblay and Giguere 2002).
ER antagonists are used widely as therapeutic agents in the treatment of ER-positive breast cancers (Vogel 2003). In contrast, ER-negative breast cancers cannot be controlled by hormone therapy, making their effective treatment very difficult. This led to the suggestion that re-introducing ER into these cells would allow them to be controlled using anti-estrogen therapies. However, paradoxically, the reintroduction of ER
into ER-negative breast cancer cells results in the suppression of proliferation by 17ß-estradiol (E2) (Garcia et al. 1992, Levenson and Jordan 1994). The mechanism underlying this anti-proliferative effect of E2 in these cells is not known.
We have used global gene expression profiling to identify the molecular pathways through which estrogens suppress proliferation in ER-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells that re-express ER
. Our data reveal that, in these cells, E2 regulates the expression of a number of genes involved in cell proliferation and survival that have been previously associated with mitogenic stimulation by estrogens. However, strikingly, many of these genes are regulated in the opposite direction compared with their response in ER-positive MCF-7 breast cancer cells exposed to estrogens. Identification of the molecular networks associated with the suppression of proliferation in ER-negative breast cancer cells may allow the development of new strategies to control the growth of ER-negative breast tumours.
| Materials and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
MDA-MB-231 cells were cultured routinely at 37 °C in humidified chambers at 5% CO2 in Minimal Essential Media (MEM) supplemented with non-essential amino acids, 2 mM glutamine, Penicillin, Streptomycin and 5% charcoal-dextran-treated fetal calf serum. HEK293 cells were cultured as described in He et al.(1998). MCF-7 cells were maintained at 37 °C in humidified chambers at 5% CO2 in RPMI 1640 media containing phenol red, 2 mM glutamine, Penicillin, Streptomycin and 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum. Prior to dosing with vehicle control (ethanol) or E2 (Sigma), MCF-7 cells were incubated for 4 days in RPMI 1640 media without phenol red and containing 2 mM glutamine, Penicillin, Streptomycin and 5% charcoal-dextran-treated fetal bovine serum.
Adenoviral system used to express ER
in human MDA-MB-231 cells
Full-length human ER
(1595; Green et al. 1986) cDNA was cloned into the shuttle vector pAdTrack-cytomegalovirus (CMV). The resulting construct was linearised and cotransformed into E. coli BJ5183 cells, together with an adenoviral backbone plasmid, pAdEasy-1 (He et al. 1998, see also Murphy & Orphanides 2002). Selected recombinants were analysed by restriction endonuclease digestion. Finally, recombinant plasmids encoding ER
were linearised and transfected into an adenovirus packaging cell line, HEK 293, in order to generate recombinant adenovirus that expresses ER
(Ad-ER
). A control recombinant adenovirus construct containing the E. coli ß-galactosidase gene (Ad-LacZ) was constructured in a similar manner. Recombinant adenovirus was harvested from HEK293 cells using Arklone extraction, purified by ultracentrifugation through a caesium chloride gradient and dialysed in a Slide-a-lyser cassette (Perbio Science, Cramlington, Northumbria, UK). The purified adeno-virus was aliquoted and stored at 80 °C. Each virus stock was titered in MDA-MB-231 cells, to determine the multiplicity of infection (MOI). For analysis of E2-dependent transcriptional responses, MDA-MB-231 cells were transfected with either Ad-LacZ or Ad-ER
at a MOI of 2500. Since both Ad-LacZ and Ad-ER
were engineered to co-express the green fluorescent protein (GFP), infection levels could be quantified by monitoring the expression of the GFP using fluorescent microscopy (% Infectivity=GFP cells/total cells x 100). Twelve hours after the initial infection, transfected MDA-MB-231 cells were photographed using both light and fluorescent microscopy, to determine the % of GFP-expressing cells. Both Ad-LacZ and Ad-ER
reproducibly gave between 90 and 100% infectivity of MDA-MB-231 cells under these conditions. Expression of ER
in cells transfected with Ad-ER
was confirmed by Northern blot analysis (Sambrook et al. 1989) using 1% denaturing agarose gels containing 10 µg total RNA per lane and a 417 bp 32P-labelled probe generated by PCR of the ER
cDNA (forward: 5'-ATACGAAA AGACCGAAGAGGAG-3; reverse: 5'-CCAGACGA GACCAATCATCA-3).
Reporter assay for ER-mediated transcription in MDA-MB-231 cells infected with adenovirus encoding ER
MDA-MB-231 cells infected for 24 h with adenovirus (MOI=2500) encoding either ß-galactosidase (control; Ad-LacZ) or ER
(Ad-ER
) were co-transfected with a luciferase reporter construct that contained two copies of the vitellogenin estrogen response element (ERE) and also with a CMV-phRenilla plasmid (Promega), to measure transfection efficiency. After 24 h, cells were treated with 0.01% ethanol, as a control, or E2 in fresh medium at the concentrations indicated. Cells were incubated for a further 24 h before harvesting for lysis and luciferase assays using the Dual-luciferase assay system (Promega). Results are expressed in terms of relative luciferase activity after normalisation for renilla luciferase activity ± S.D.
RT-PCR analysis of the endogenous estrogen-responsive gene pS2 in MDA-MB-231 cells infected with adenovirus encoding ER
Cells infected for 24 h with adenovirus (MOI=2500) encoding ß-galactosidase (control; Ad-LacZ) or ER
(Ad-ER
) were treated for 24, 30 and 50 h with 0.01% ethanol, as a control, or 108 M E2. Total RNA was isolated using Trizol reagent (Life Technologies) and purified according to the manufacturers instructions. DNA-free RNA was prepared using a DNA-free kit (Ambion, Huntingdon, Cambs, UK) according to the manufacturers instructions. DNase-treated RNA (1 µg) was reverse transcribed with oligo-dT using the Superscript II kit (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturers instructions. PCR analysis of pS2 gene expression was performed using the oligonucleotide primers 5'-TGACTCGGGGTCGCCT TTGGAG-3 and 5'-GTGAGCCGAGGCACAGCTG CAG-3. The ß-actin gene (5'-ACCATGGATGATG ATATCGC-3 and 5'-ACATGGCTGGGGTGTTG AAG-3) was used as a control.
Cell proliferation assay
Cells were maintained in MEM containing 5% CDFCS and were seeded at 5000 cells/well in 24-well dishes in the same media. After overnight infection with Ad-LacZ or Ad-ER
(MOI=2500), the medium was removed and replaced with fresh medium containing either 0.01% ethanol, as a control, or 108 M E2 for 24 h. Cells were then incubated with 1 µCi [methyl-3H]thymidine at 37 °C for 4 h. Plates were sequentially washed and fixed with ice cold PBS, 10% TCA, MeOH and the incorporated label was recovered by incubation of the wells in 0.5 M NaOH for 30 min at 37 °C. Lysates were transferred to vials containing Optiphase hi-safe 3 scintillation cocktail (PerkinElmer Life Sciences, Bea-consfield, Bucks, UK) and [3H]thymidine incorporation (c.p.m.) was determined in a scintillation counter.
Affymetrix GeneChip transcript profiling and data analysis for MDA-MB-231 cells infected with adenovirus encoding ER
Cells infected for 24 h with adenovirus (MOI=2500) encoding ß-galactosidase (control; Ad-LacZ) or ER
(Ad-ER
) were treated for 48 h with 0.01% ethanol, as a control, or 108 M E2. Total RNA was isolated using Trizol reagent (Life Technologies) and purified according to the manufacturers instructions. Biotin-Labeled complementary RNAs were synthesized using the Bioarray HighYield RNA Transcript Labeling Kit (Affymetrix, High Wycombe, Bucks, UK) from 5 µg total RNA and hybridised to Affymetrix human U133A GeneChips as described in the Affymetrix GeneChip Technical Manual. Microarrays were then scanned and the intensities were averaged using Microarray Analysis Suite 5.0 (Affymetrix). The mean signal intensity of each array was globally normalized to 500. Affymetrix pivot files were imported into GeneSpring 6.0 (Silicon Genetics, Redwood City, CA, USA) and normalised to the 50th percentile of each GeneChip and to the median of each gene. Normalised data was filtered to exclude genes that lack a present flag or a raw signal strength >500 in any of the treatment groups. The three independent biological replicates data sets for MDA-MB-231 cells infected Ad-LacZ (± E2) or Ad-ER
(± E2) were initially filtered using a one-sample Students t-test (P<0.05) to identify statistically differentially expressed genes within each treatment group. The resulting 574 genes were subsequently analysed using a one-way ANOVA test with the following conditions: parametric test assuming equal variance, Benjamini and Hochberg false discovery rate <0.01 (Benjamini & Hochberg 1995), Tukey post-hoc testing (see http://www.silicongenetics.com for further details). Using these criteria, less than 1% of the 88 genes selected by ANOVA can be expected to be significant by chance. Genes with similar expression profiles were grouped together using hierarchical clustering (Pearson correlation). Gene names used in this manuscript were derived by homology searching of nucleotide sequence databases (BLASTn) using Affymetrix probe target sequences and the NetAffx (Liu et al. 2003) database. All genes described in the figures and text showed statistically significant alterations in expression in all three replicate studies. MIAME (Minimum Information About a Microarray Experiment)-compliant microarray data for the three independent replicate studies were submitted to the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database (GEO 2004).
Quantitative real-time PCR analysis of gene expression
DNA-free RNA was prepared using DNA-free (Ambion) according to the manufacturers instructions. DNase-treated RNA (0.7 µg) was reverse transcribed with random hexamers using Superscript III kit (Invitrogen) according to the manufacturers instructions. All quantitative real-time PCR reactions were carried out using an ABI Prism 7700 sequence detection system (Applied Biosystems, Warrington, Chester, UK). The thermal cycler conditions were, 2 min at 50 °C and 10 min at 95 °C followed by 15 seconds at 95 °C (denaturation) and 1 min at 60 °C (annealextension) for 40 cycles. The total volume for each reaction was 20 µl comprising 9 µl diluted cDNA (0.5 ng/µl), 10 µl Taqman Universal Master mix and 1 µl Taqman gene expression assay (Applied Biosystems). Each Taqman gene expression assay contains forward primer, reverse primer and Taqman MGB probe (primer locations and corresponding gene accession numbers are shown in Table 1
). Each RNA sample was assayed in triplicate and the mean Ct value was calculated. The fold change was determined using the 
Ct method. All genes were normalised to the control gene RPLP0/36B4 (Accession number: NM_001002
[GenBank]
; Laborda 1991).
|
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
into ER-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells by adenoviral transfection
We used a recombinant adenoviral delivery system to examine the molecular mechanisms through which the reintroduction of ER
into ER-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells confers E2-dependent suppression of proliferation. (He et al. 1998, Fig. 1A
). Recombinant adenoviruses were engineered to co-express the full-length human ER
cDNA (amino acids 1595; Green et al. 1986) and GFP, as described in the Materials and methods (Ad-ER
). Recombinant adenoviruses containing the E. coli LACZ gene in place of the human ER
gene were used as a control (Ad-LacZ). Quantification of infection levels in MDA-MB-231 cells by fluorescent microscopy revealed that GFP was expressed in >90% of cells after infection (Fig. 1B
). The expression of a transcript corresponding to the transfected human ER
cDNA was confirmed by Northern blotting (Fig. 1C
). Quantitative real-time PCR analysis of ER
gene expression levels (data not shown) revealed that the reintroduction of ER
into ER-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells by adenoviral transfection results in higher levels (~5-fold) of ER
expression than those found in MCF-7 breast cancer cells, consistent with previous studies (Lazennec & Katzenellenbogen 1999).
|
re-expression in MDA-MB-231 cells was functional, we used a reporter-based transfec-tion assay that measures the ability of ligand-activated ERs to regulate transcription via a consensus multimer-ised ERE present on a transiently transfected plasmid. In cells infected with Ad-ER
, but not in cells infected with Ad-LacZ, the addition of E2 (108 M and 107 M) increased reporter gene expression (4.8- and 3.3-fold respectively; Fig. 2A
. We next examined the ability of adenoviral-encoded ER
to regulate endogenous (i.e. chromosomal) genes. For this purpose, we selected the classical estrogen responsive gene, pS2 (also known as TFF1; Davidson et al. 1986), which contains a consensus ERE in its promoter region and is regulated directly by ERs (Berry et al. 1989). Cells infected with Ad-LacZ or Ad-ER
were treated with 108 M E2 or vehicle (ethanol) for 24, 30 or 50 h prior to RT-PCR analysis of pS2 gene expression. As expected, pS2 gene expression was induced by E2 in cells expressing ER
(Fig. 2B
is capable of activating an endogenous chromosomal gene in the presence of E2.
|
on cell proliferation. The re-expression of human ER
in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells restores hormone responsiveness, but leads to the inhibition of proliferation by E2 (Garcia et al., 1992, Levenson and Jordan 1994, Lazennec and Katzenellenbogen 1999). Consistent with these observations, E2 caused a 3-fold decrease in proliferation in MDA-MB-231 cells that re-express ER
(Fig. 3
|
into the ER-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell line confers both transcriptional and anti-proliferative responses to E2. Therefore, this model system is suitable for investigating the mechanism by which E2 suppresses proliferation in ER-negative cells that re-express ER
.
Changes in gene expression associated with estrogen-induced suppression of proliferation in ER-negative MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells that re-express ER
Statistical analysis of genes regulated by E2
We used microarray gene expression profiling to obtain a holistic view of the endogenous transcriptional targets of ER
in our model system. The expression of 22 483 genes in each of four treatment groups (Ad-LacZ, Ad-LacZ+E2, Ad-ER
and Ad-ER
+E2) was measured using the Affymetrix human GeneChip U133A, and the resulting data were subjected to rigorous statistical analyses (Materials and methods). 574 gene probe sets were selected as being significantly (P<0.05) under- or overexpressed in one or more of the 4 treatment groups using a Students t-test, based on data from three independent biological replicates. A stringent ANOVA test (Benjamini and Hochberg multi-testing correction, false positive rate <0.01; Benjamini & Hochberg 1995) was then applied, resulting in the identification of 88 gene probe sets showing differential expression between one or more of the 4 treatment groups (Fig. 4
). Five of these gene probe sets represented the ER
gene, confirming that this gene was re-expressed in MDA-MB-231 cells infected with the ER
adenoviral construct. None of the 88 gene probe sets were E2-responsive in MDA-MB-231 cells transfected with the control adenovirus construct (Ad-LacZ), consistent with the ER-negative status of this cell line. In contrast, 83 probe sets showed a transcriptional response to E2 in MDA-MB-231 cells transfected with Ad-ER
. The magnitude of E2-dependent alterations in gene expression for the 83 gene probe sets, together with their gene ontology descriptions and functional classifications, are shown in Table 2
. These genes include the classical E2-responsive gene pS2/TFF1 (Davidson et al. 1986, Berry et al. 1989) and TGFA, both of which have previously been observed to be up-regulated by E2 after adenoviral transfection of ER
into MDA-MB-231 cells (Lazennec & Katzenellenbogen 1999).
|
|
-dependent estrogen-responsive genes.
In order to gain more evidence that these genes were regulated directly by ER
, we searched their regulatory regions for EREs, based on similarity to the consensus ERE sequence (Klinge 2001). In silico analysis of the sequences found 3000 bp immediately upstream of the transcriptional start site of each of the 83 genes and revealed the presence of one or more candidate EREs (Table 3
). This provides further evidence that the genes we have identified are regulated by ER
directly. A number of these ERE motifs have also been identified independently in a recent genome-wide screen for ERE motifs in the human and mouse genomes (Bourdeau et al. 2004).
|
(Fig. 3
In order to identify additional E2-responsive regulators of cell proliferation and survival that may have been missed by our initial stringent ANOVA analysis, in which multi-testing correction was employed to mini-mise the false discovery rate (Fig. 4
), we re-interrogated our transcript profiling data. We found 34 additional E2-responsive probe sets (Students t-test P<0.05) whose gene ontology classifications were consistent with a role in the regulation of cell cycle progression, proliferation or survival (Table 4
). This analysis revealed that E2 down-regulated the expression of many additional genes involved in cell cycle progression (CDC2, CYCLIN B1, CYCLIN B2, CYCLIN G1, CHK1, BUB3, STK6, SKB1, CSE1) and chromosome replication (MCM2, MCM3, FEN1, RRM2, TOPII, RFC1). A number of negative regulators of the cell cycle were also induced by E2, including KIP2, NBL1 (neuroblastoma suppressor of tumorigenicity 1, also known as DAN; Ozaki et al. 1995) and QUIESCIN Q6 (Coppock et al. 1998). The functional relationships between the numerous estrogen-responsive cell cycle regulators identified in this study (Table 4
) are summarised in the cell cycle pathway map shown in Fig. 5
. The overall effect of changes in the expression of these cell cycle genes is consistent with the observed suppression of proliferation (Fig. 3
).
|
|
and ER
-positive MCF-7 breast cancer cells
in the microarray analysis reported here (Table 5
confirms and extends our observations of opposing transcriptional responses to E2 in these two cell types (Fig. 6
may be due to the aberrant regulation of key cell cycle regulators.
|
|
and ER
-positive MCF-7 breast cancer cells
compared with ER-positive MCF7 cells. These include E-CADHERIN (CDH1), an important mediator of cellcell interactions that acts as a tumour suppressor gene and whose loss of expression is associated with invasive growth (Thiery 2002). CDH1 is down-regulated by E2 in ER-containing breast cancer cells (Oesterreich et al. 2003), but is up-regulated in MDA-MD-231 cells transfected with ER
(Table 5
Components of the c-myc and AP-1 transcription factors also show opposing transcriptional responses in breast cancer cells containing endogenous versus transfected ER
. The gene encoding the AP-1 transcription factor, Fos-like antigen 1 (FOSL1; also known as FRA-1), is repressed by E2 in MDA-MB-231 cells transfected with ER
(Table 2
, Fig. 6
), consistent with previous observations that AP-1 activity is inhibited by E2 in MDA-MB-231 cells stably transfected with ER
(Philips et al. 1998). Furthermore, c-myc has previously been reported to be repressed by E2 in MDA-MB-231 cells transfected with adenovirally encoded ER
(Lazennec & Katzenellenbogen 1999). The repression of these genes by E2 in cells that re-express ER
is in marked contrast to their induction by E2 in MCF-7 cells (Fig. 6
; van der Burg et al. 1989, Weisz et al. 1990) and suggests that the negative regulation of transcription factors that control growth and differentiation may be a key event leading to the E2-dependent suppression of proliferation in MDA-MB-231 cells that re-express ER
.
Overall, these data reveal the diverse gene networks and metabolic and cell regulatory pathways through which E2 exerts its effects on MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells that re-express ER
, and provide novel mechanistic insights into the anti-proliferative effect of E2 in these cells.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
. The genes we have identified are likely to be regulated directly by E2. Evidence for this comes from: (1) the dependence of their regulation on E2; (2) the requirement for ER
and (3) the presence of consensus EREs within 3000 bp upstream of their transcriptional start sites. Moreover, the molecular functions of many of the E2-responsive genes that we have identified, including chromosome replication, cell cycle regulation, cell survival and growth factor signalling, provide novel insights into the mechanisms underlying the E2-induced suppression of proliferation in ER-negative breast cancer cells that re-express ER
(Garcia et al. 1992, Levenson & Jordan 1994). Importantly, our data reveal that several key regulators of cell proliferation and survival are regulated in opposite directions when compared with their behaviour in ER-positive MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Therefore, these data go some way towards explaining the paradoxical effects of estrogens in ER-negative breast cancer cells in which ER
has been re-expressed.
An important question arising from our studies is how E2-bound ER
targets the same genes with opposing transcriptional outcomes in ER-negative and ER-positive breast cancer cells. Transfection of functional ER
into MDA-MB-231 cells does not alter gene expression significantly in the absence of exogenous E2 (Fig. 4
; Lazennec & Katzenellenbogen 1999), indicating that re-expression of ER
per se does not alter the transcriptional status of these genes. Since ER-mediated transcriptional regulation involves a plethora of coregu-lator proteins (Moggs & Orphanides 2001, Hall et al. 2001, McKenna & OMalley 2002, Tremblay & Giguere 2002), it is possible that cell type-specific differences in transcriptional responses to estrogens are due to differences in the expression levels, accessibility, or localisation of critical cofactors. Precedent exists for this mechanism: higher levels of steroid receptor coactivator 1 (SRC-1) expression in Ishikawa endome-trial cells, compared with MCF-7 breast cancer cells, result in opposing cellular responses to the selective estrogen receptor modulator tamoxifen (Shang & Brown 2002). Furthermore, the altered localisation of Retinoid x receptor alpha (RXR
) in MDA-MB-231 cells versus MCF-7 cells has been associated with the differential responsiveness of these cell lines to retinoids (Tanaka et al. 2004). RXR
is localized throughout the nucleoplasm in the retinoid-responsive MCF-7 breast cancer cell line, whereas it is found in the splicing factor compartment of the retinoid-resistant MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cell line. Interestingly, previous studies have shown that hydroxytamoxifen can reverse the suppression of proliferation by E2 in MDA-MB-231 cells that re-express ER
(Garcia et al. 1992, Lazennec & Katzenellenbogen 1999). Since hydroxytamoxifen normally suppresses proliferation in ER-containing breast cancer cells, these observations are consistent with MDA-MB-231 cells lacking the full complement of cofactors that are required for appropriate regulation of proliferation by E2 and anti-estrogens.
Another factor that may contribute to the contrasting ER-mediated transcriptional effects seen in MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells is the DNA methylation status and chromatin structure of the gene regulatory regions. Indeed, DNA methylation status determines the expression levels of ER
in breast cancer cells: silencing of the ER
gene in MDA-MB-231 cells occurs through epigenetic alterations that include the hypermethylation of CpG island DNA sequences in the gene promoter region (Ottaviano et al. 1994). Consistent with the existence of an epigenetic silencing mechanism in MDA-MB-231 cells, the ER
gene can be reactivated by the DNA methyltransferase inhibitor, 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (Ferguson et al. 1995), and the histone deacetylase inhibitor, trichostatin A (Yang et al. 2000), and a combination of these inhibitors results in the synergistic reactivation of ER
(Yang et al. 2001). It is, therefore, likely that differences in the direction of E2-induced gene regulation between MDA-MB-231 and MCF-7 cells may be due to differences in the epigenetic status of target genes.
The poor prognosis of ER-negative breast cancers, together with their unresponsiveness to anti-estrogen therapy, creates an urgent need for novel targeted therapies that do not rely on inhibition of ER
(Rochefort et al. 2003). Alternative approaches have met with some success. For example, over-expression of the human epidermal growth fator-2 (HER2) oncogene in human breast cancers has been associated with a more aggressive progression of disease, and a monoclonal antibody (trastuzumab) directed against the extracellular domain of HER2 is therapeutically active in a proportion of HER2-positive breast tumours (Menard et al. 2003). We have identified the transcriptional networks through which ER
is able to inhibit the proliferation of an ER-negative cell line. Targeting of these, or similar, pathways may lead to the development of novel approaches for the control of ER-negative breast tumours.
| Acknowledgements |
|---|
and also J Edmunds for generating the MCF-7 cell RNA samples. We would also like to thank T Barlow and B Jeffery from the Food Standards Agency and our colleagues at Syngenta CTL for their guidance and advice throughout the course of this project. This work was partially supported by a grant from the UK Food Standards Agency. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. | References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Benjamini Y & Hochberg Y 1995 Controlling the False Discovery Rate: a Practical and Powerful Approach to Multiple Testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 57 289300.
Berry M, Nunez AM & Chambon P 1989 Estrogen-responsive element of the human pS2 gene is an imperfectly palindromic sequence. PNAS 86 12181222.
Blow JJ & Hodgson B 2002 Replication licensing defining the proliferative state? Trends in Cell Biology 12 7278.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Bourdeau V, Deschenes J, Metivier R, Nagai Y, Nguyen D, Bretschneider N, Gannon F, White JH & Mader S 2004 Genome-wide identification of high-affinity estrogen response elements in human and mouse. Molecular Endocrinology 18 14111427.
Coppock DL, Cina-Poppe D & Gilleran S 1998 The quiescin Q6 gene (QSCN6) is a fusion of two ancient gene families: thioredoxin and ERV1. Genomics 54 460468.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
van der Burg B, van Selm-Miltenburg AJ, de Laat SW & van Zoelen EJ 1989 Direct effects of estrogen on c-fos and c-myc protooncogene expression and cellular proliferation in human breast cancer cells. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 64 223228.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Dahlquist KD, Salomonis N, Vranizan K, Lawlor SC & Conklin BR 2002 GenMAPP, a new tool for viewing and analyzing microarray data on biological pathways. Nature Genetics 31 1920.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Davidson NE, Bronzert DA, Chambon P, Gelmann EP & Lippman ME 1986 Use of two MCF-7 cell variants to evaluate the growth regulatory potential of estrogen-induced products. Cancer Research 46 19041908.
Ferguson AT, Lapidus RG, Baylin SB & Davidson NE 1995 Demethylation of the estrogen receptor gene in estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer cells can reactivate estrogen receptor gene expression. Cancer Research 55 22792283
Frasor J, Danes JM, Komm B, Chang KC, Lyttle CR & Katzenellenbogen BS 2003 Profiling of estrogen up- and down-regulated gene expression in human breast cancer cells: insights into gene networks and pathways underlying estrogenic control of proliferation and cell phenotype. Endocrinology 144 45624574.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Fujita N, Jaye DL, Kajita M, Geigerman C, Moreno CS & Wade PA 2003 MTA3, a Mi-2/NuRD complex subunit, regulates an invasive growth pathway in breast cancer. Cell 113 207219.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Garcia M, Derocq D, Freiss G & Rochefort H 1992 Activation of estrogen receptor transfected into a receptor-negative breast cancer cell line decreases the metastatic and invasive potential of the cells. PNAS 89 1153811542.
GEO 2004 Gene Expression Omnibus Homepage, Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/geo/.
Green S, Walter P, Kumar V, Krust A, Bornert JM, Argos P & Chambon P 1986 Human oestrogen receptor cDNA: sequence, expression and homology to v-erb-A. Nature 320 134139.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hall JM, Couse JF & Korach KS 2001 The multifaceted mechanisms of estradiol and estrogen receptor signaling. Journal of Biological Chemistry 276 3686936872.
He TC, Zhou S, da Costa LT, Yu J, Kinzler KW & Vogelstein B 1998 A simplified system for generating recombinant adenoviruses. PNAS 95 25092514.
Klinge CM 2001 Estrogen receptor interaction with estrogen response elements. Nucleic Acids Research 9 29052919.
Kobayashi K, Hatano M, Otaki M, Ogasawara T & Tokuhisa T 1999 Expression of a murine homologue of the inhibitor of apoptosis protein is related to cell proliferation. PNAS 96 14571462.
Laborda J 1991 36B4 cDNA used as an estradiol-independent mRNA control is the cDNA for human acidic ribosomal phosphoprotein P0. Nucleic Acids Research 19 3998.
Lazennec G & Katzenellenbogen BS 1999 Expression of human estrogen receptor using an efficient adenoviral gene delivery system is able to restore hormone-dependent features to estrogen receptor-negative breast carcinoma cells. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 149 93105.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Levenson AS & Jordan C 1994 Transfection of Human Estrogen Receptor (ER) cDNA into ER-negative Mammalian Cell Lines. Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 51 229239.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Levenson AS, Svoboda KM, Pease KM, Kaiser SA, Chen B, Simons LA, Jovanovic BD, Dyck PA & Jordan VC 2002 Gene expression profiles with activation of the estrogen receptor alpha-selective estrogen receptor modulator complex in breast cancer cells expressing wild-type estrogen receptor. Cancer Research 62 44194426.
Liu G, Loraine AE, Shigeta R, Cline M, Cheng J, Valmeekam V, Sun S, Kulp D & Siani-Rose MA 2003 NetAffx: Affymetrix probesets and annotations. Nucleic Acids Research 31 8286
Lobenhofer EK, Bennett L, Cable PL, Li L, Bushel PR & Afshari CA 2002 Regulation of DNA replication fork genes by 17 beta-estradiol. Molecular Endocrinology 16 12151229.
McKenna NJ & OMalley BW 2002 Combinatorial control of gene expression by nuclear receptors and coregulators. Cell 108 465474[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Menard S, Pupa SM, Campiglio M & Tagliabue E 2003 Biologic and therapeutic role of HER2 in cancer. Oncogene 22 65706578.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Moggs JG & Orphanides G 2001 Estrogen receptors: orchestrators of pleiotropic cellular responses. EMBO Reports 2 775781.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Murphy TC & Orphanides G 2002 Characterisation of the molecular responses to xenoestrogens using gene expression profiling. Phytochemistry Reviews 1 199208.[CrossRef]
Oesterreich S, Deng W, Jiang S, Cui X, Ivanova M, Schiff R, Kang K, Hadsell DL, Behrens J & Lee AV 2003 Estrogen-mediated Down-regulation of E-cadherin in Breast Cancer Cells. Cancer Research 63 52035208.
Ottaviano YL, Issa JP, Parl FF, Smith HS, Baylin SB & Davidson NE 1994 Methylation of the estrogen receptor gene CpG island marks loss of estrogen receptor expression in human breast cancer cells. Cancer Research 54 25522555.
Ozaki T, Nakamura Y, Enomoto H, Hirose M & Sakiyama S 1995 Overexpression of DAN gene product in normal rat fibroblasts causes a retardation of the entry into the S phase. Cancer Research 55 895900.
Philips A, Teyssier C, Galtier F, Rivier-Covas C, Rey JM, Rochefort H & Chalbos D 1998 FRA-1 expression level modulates regulation of activator protein-1 activity by estradiol in breast cancer cells. Molecular Endocrinology 12 973985.
Pike MC, Spicer DV, Dahmoush L & Press MF 1993 Estrogens, progestogens, normal breast cell proliferation, and breast cancer risk. Epidemiologic Reviews 15 1735.
Prall OW, Sarcevic B, Musgrove EA, Watts CK & Sutherland RL 1997 Estrogen-induced activation of Cdk4 and Cdk2 during G1-S phase progression is accompanied by increased cyclin D1 expression and decreased cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor association with cyclin E-Cdk2. Journal of Biological Chemistry 272 1088210894.
Reed SI 2003 Ratchets and clocks: the cell cycle, ubiquitylation and protein turnover. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology 4 855864.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Rochefort H, Glondu M, Sahla ME, Platet N & Garcia M 2003 How to target estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer? Endocrine Related Cancer 10 261266.[Abstract]
Sambrook J, Fritsch EF & Maniatis T 1989 Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, 2nd edition. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
Shang Y & Brown M 2002 Molecular determinants for the tissue specificity of SERMs. Science 295 23802381.
Tanaka T, Dancheck BL, Trifiletti LC, Birnkrant RE, Taylor BJ, Garfield SH, Thorgeirsson U & De Luca LM 2004 Altered localization of retinoid X receptor alpha coincides with loss of retinoid responsiveness in human breast cancer MDA-MB-231 cells. Molecular and Cellular Biology 24 39723982.
Thiery JP 2002 Epithelial-mesenchymal transitions in tumour progression. Nature Reviews Cancer 2 442454.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Tremblay GB & Giguere V 2002 Coregulators of estrogen receptor action. Critical Reviews in Eukaryotic Gene Expression 12 122[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Vodermaier HC 2001 Cell cycle: Waiters serving the Destruction machinery. Current Biology 11 R834R837.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Vogel VG & Lo S 2003 Preventing hormone-dependent breast cancer in high-risk women. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 95 9193.
Weisz A, Cicatiello L, Persico E, Scalona M & Bresciani F 1990 Estrogen stimulates transcription of c-jun protooncogene. Molecular Endocrinology 4 10411050.
Yang X, Ferguson AT, Nass SJ, Phillips DL, Butash KA, Wang SM, Herman JG & Davidson NE 2000 Transcriptional activation of estrogen receptor alpha in human breast cancer cells by histone deacetylase inhibition. Cancer Research 60 68906894.
Yang X, Phillips DL, Ferguson AT, Nelson WG, Herman JG & Davidson NE 2001 Synergistic activation of functional estrogen receptor (ER)-alpha by DNA methyltransferase and histone deacetylase inhibition in human ER-alpha-negative breast cancer cells. Cancer Research 61 70257029.
Received 22 November 2004
Accepted 13 December 2004
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. D. Cardamone, C. Bardella, A. Gutierrez, L. Di Croce, M. G. Rosenfeld, M. F. Di Renzo, and M. De Bortoli ER{alpha} as ligand-independent activator of CDH-1 regulates determination and maintenance of epithelial morphology in breast cancer cells PNAS, May 5, 2009; 106(18): 7420 - 7425. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Singh, M. Yang, H. Dai, D. Yu, Q. Huang, W. Tan, K. H. Kernstine, D. Lin, and B. Shen Overexpression and Hypomethylation of Flap Endonuclease 1 Gene in Breast and Other Cancers Mol. Cancer Res., November 1, 2008; 6(11): 1710 - 1717. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.-H. Park, L. W. T. Cheung, A. S. T. Wong, and P. C. K. Leung Estrogen Regulates Snail and Slug in the Down-Regulation of E-Cadherin and Induces Metastatic Potential of Ovarian Cancer Cells through Estrogen Receptor {alpha} Mol. Endocrinol., September 1, 2008; 22(9): 2085 - 2098. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. Li, S. L Nott, Y. Huang, R. Hilf, R. A Bambara, X. Qiu, A. Yakovlev, S. Welle, and M. Muyan Gene expression profiling reveals that the regulation of estrogen-responsive element-independent genes by 17{beta}-estradiol-estrogen receptor {beta} is uncoupled from the induction of phenotypic changes in cell models J. Mol. Endocrinol., May 1, 2008; 40(5): 211 - 229. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |