Cancer Research 09 AM Call for Abstracts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, F.
Right arrow Articles by Laiho, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, F.
Right arrow Articles by Laiho, M.
[Cancer Research 63, 5005-5010, August 15, 2003]
© 2003 American Association for Cancer Research

Regular Articles

Ski-related novel protein N (SnoN), a Negative Controller of Transforming Growth Factor-ß Signaling, Is a Prognostic Marker in Estrogen Receptor-positive Breast Carcinomas1 ,,2

Fan Zhang, Mikael Lundin, Ari Ristimäki, Päivi Heikkilä, Johan Lundin, Jorma Isola, Heikki Joensuu and Marikki Laiho3

Haartman Institute [F. Z., A. R., P. H., Ma. L.] and Molecular Cancer Biology Program [F. Z., A. R., H. J., Ma. L.], Biomedicum Helsinki, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Central Hospital [Mi. L., A. R., P. H., J. L., H. J.], FIN-00014 Helsinki, and Institute of Medical Technology, University of Tampere, FIN-33014 Tampere [J. I.], Finland


   ABSTRACT
Top
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Transforming growth factor (TGF)-ß arrests the growth of breast epithelial cells, whereas breast cancer cells are highly resistant to its growth restrictive properties. To define causes for the defect in TGF-ß action, we present here the first in vivo analysis of Ski-related novel protein N (SnoN), a negative regulator of TGF-ß signaling, in human breast carcinomas. SnoN expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry in a tissue microarray of 1122 breast carcinomas and 10 reduction mammoplasties. In the normal breast, SnoN was located predominantly in nuclei of large duct epithelial cells and the cytoplasm of terminal duct epithelial cells. Breast cancers displayed variances in both SnoN expression levels and subcellular localizations. High levels of cytoplasmic SnoN were more often observed in tumors of ductal histological type and associated with adverse prognostic features, such as lack of hormone receptors; high levels of p53, Ki-67, and cyclooxygenase-2; and amplifications of HER-2. High levels of nuclear SnoN were associated with lobular histology and favorable features, including presence of hormone receptors, low expression of p53 and Ki-67, and lack of HER-2 amplifications. Reduced expression of SnoN significantly correlated with longer distant disease-free survival in estrogen receptor-positive patients (P = 0.0027, relative risk = 3.27; 95% confidence interval = 1.44–7.41). The results suggest that the subcellular localization of SnoN may have clinical significance and that reduced expression of SnoN is associated with favorable outcome in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.


   INTRODUCTION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
TGF-ß4 is a negative regulator of proliferation of mammary gland epithelial cells. It regulates normal ductal and alveolar development of the mammary gland and is involved in postlactational involution (1, 2, 3, 4) . High levels of TGF-ß expression in vivo prevent mammary tumor formation (5) , suggesting that it is an important physiological controller of the mammary gland. TGF-ß signals are transduced by its type I and II receptors to the intracellular signaling mediators Smad2 and Smad3. After their phosphorylation and association of co-Smads, they migrate into the nucleus, where they modulate the transcription of a large number of genes (6, 7, 8) .

SnoN (SKIL) and Ski are negative controllers of TGF-ß signaling (9, 10, 11) . Ski was originally discovered as an oncogene present in the avian Sloan-Kettering virus (12) , followed by identification of Sno and its isoforms SnoN, SnoA, and SnoI (13 , 14) . SnoN and Ski are structurally and functionally highly homologous proteins. They are able to induce transformation in chicken embryonic fibroblasts as well as induce muscle differentiation in quail embryonic cells (15, 16, 17) . Furthermore, snoN+/- or ski+/- heterozygous mice display increased susceptibility to tumorigenesis (18 , 19) , suggesting these proteins also have tumor suppressive function. The diverse effects of SnoN/Ski may relate to their abilities to modulate transcription. They bind directly to nuclear hormone receptor corepressor, silencing mediator of retinoid and thyroid receptors (SMRT) corepressor, and mSin3A to form a complex with the histone deacetylase, which allows them to act as transcriptional repressors (20) . Thus, overexpression or alternatively absence of SnoN/Ski may disrupt multiple transcriptionally regulatory pathways in the cells.

SnoN functions like a "switch" in TGF-ß signal transduction; in the absence of TGF-ß, it interacts directly with Smad2/Smad3-Smad4 complexes and recruits nuclear hormone receptor corepressor/mSin3A/histone deacetylase complex to Smads, hence inhibiting their transactivation capability and repressing TGF-ß signal transduction (9 , 21) . On TGF-ß treatment, SnoN is rapidly degraded via the ubiquitin–proteasome pathway, mediated by anaphase-promoting complex or Smurf2 E3 ligases (22, 23, 24, 25) . This leads to dissociation of SnoN from the Smads and allows TGF-ß signal to pass through. However, longer TGF-ß treatment increases SnoN through an induction of SnoN mRNA (10) . This may exert a negative feedback to limit TGF-ß effects. Importantly, overexpression of Ski/SnoN results in the loss of certain TGF-ß inducible signals leading to growth arrest of the cells (9) , suggesting a potential mechanism for SnoN/Ski-mediated oncogenesis. The regulation of SnoN thus plays an important role in controlling TGF-ß activity corresponding to the environmental cues of the cells.

Cell lines isolated from breast tumors are generally highly resistant to TGF-ß growth inhibition. In some cases, this is attributable to alterations in either TGF-ß type I or II receptors, or in Smad2 or Smad4, but these represent a minority (26) . This suggests that the normal function of TGF-ß in breast epithelial cells, i.e., control of proliferation, is abrogated downstream of the signaling cascade. This is corroborated by a recent tissue microarray study of 456 breast tumors, which indicated that in the vast majority of the tumors (94%), phosphorylated SMAD2 was present in the tumor cells, indicating the presence of TGF-ß activity (27) . To address the question how TGF-ß signaling is turned off in breast carcinoma, we undertook a tissue microarray study of breast carcinomas to evaluate the expression of SnoN and its potential prognostic value as an inhibitor of TGF-ß signaling.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Patients and Tissue Microarray Preparation.
As reported previously (28, 29, 30) , the FinProg Breast Cancer Database comprises 2842 breast carcinoma patients identified using the files of the nationwide Finnish Cancer Registry. The database includes information on >50 clinical characteristics extracted from the hospital records, including a series of established prognostic markers. In this study, patients with in situ carcinomas, distant metastasis at the time of diagnosis, synchronous or metachronous bilateral breast cancer, malignancy other than breast cancer in history except for basal cell carcinoma or cervical in situ carcinoma, and patients who did not undergo breast surgery were excluded. After these exclusions, 2032 patients were eligible in the final data set, and in 1478 of these patients, tissue array core biopsies were available. The preparation of tissue microarray is described in Ristimäki et al. (29) . Paraffin-embedded tumor samples were extracted and represented in the array slides as core biopsies of 0.6 mm in diameter. Sections of 5 µm were cut and processed for staining. After excluding cores detached during the staining procedure or containing no identifiable tumor cells, 1122 primary breast cancer samples were used for further analysis. The median follow-up time for the unrelapsed patients was 9.5 years. Specimens from reduction mammoplasties (n = 10) were obtained from the Department of Pathology, University of Helsinki.

Normal tissue microarray (catalogue no. 3170) was purchased from AMBION, Inc. (Austin, TX), which contains 85 samples from 21 different tissue types, including adrenal, thyroid, tonsil, lymph node, spleen, liver, pancreas, stomach, colon, bladder, kidney, prostate, testis, lung, heart, brain, ovary, breast, myometrium, muscle, and parotid.

Antibody and Reagents.
Polyclonal goat-anti human SnoN (K-20) antibody and its blocking peptide were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology (Santa Cruz, CA). Biotinylated rabbit-anti goat IgG (H+L) and Vectastain avidin-biotin peroxidase complex kit were purchased from Vector Laboratories (Burlingame, CA). 3-amino-9-ethylcarbazole was obtained from Lab Vision Co. (Fremont, CA). Mayer’s hemalum was from Merck Eurolab (Espoo, Finland).

Immunohistochemical Staining.
Samples were deparaffinized in xylene and rehydrated in a series of graded alcohols, and the antigen was retrieved in 0.01 M sodium-citrate buffer (pH 6.0) using a microwave oven. The sections were then treated with 0.6% hydrogen peroxide in methanol for 30 min to exhaust endogenous peroxidase activity. After 1-h preincubation in a blocking buffer (0.01 M Tris-HCl, 0.1 M MgCl2, 0.5% Tween 20, 1% BSA, and 5% normal rabbit serum) to prevent unspecific staining, the samples were incubated with goat-anti human SnoN polyclonal antibody (2 µg/ml) in the blocking buffer at 4°C overnight and then 2 h at room temperature. The sections were thereafter treated with biotinylated rabbit-anti goat immunoglobulin (7.5 µg/ml) followed by incubations with avidin-biotin peroxidase complex solution and 3-amino-9-ethylcarbazole solution for 30 min at room temperature, respectively. The counterstaining was carried out using Mayer’s hemalum.

To verify the specificity of the antibody, tissue array slides and sections of breast tumors were stained in the presence of a blocking peptide (2 µg/ml). The blocking peptide abolished both cytoplasmic and nuclear SnoN signals, demonstrating the specificity of the antibody (Supplemental Fig. 1Citation ).



View larger version (100K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 1. Expression of SnoN in normal human breast. Reduction mammoplasty tissues were stained with a SnoN-specific antibody as described in "Materials and Methods." Representative images of terminal duct units with x100- and x400-fold magnifications, respectively (A and B), and large ducts with x100- and x400-fold magnifications, respectively (C and D), are shown.

 
Scoring of SnoN Immunostaining.
SnoN immunohistochemical staining was examined under a Leica DMBL microscope, and the staining intensity and subcellular localization were evaluated in a blinded manner by two investigators (F. Z. and Ma. L.) independently using a preagreed scoring standard. Cytoplasmic and nuclear staining were scored separately using the following scoring criteria: (a) 0–1, negative or low staining intensity in >50% of tumor cells or moderate to high in <50% of the cells (hereafter referred to as low); and (b) 2–3, moderate to high staining intensity in >50% of tumor cells (hereafter referred to as high).

Statistical Analysis.
The associations between SnoN expression and other clinicopathological markers were analyzed using the {chi}2 test. DDFS was calculated from the date of the diagnosis to the occurrence of metastases outside the locoregional area or death from breast cancer, whichever came first (28 , 30) . Life tables were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. Survival of the groups was compared with the Log-rank test. Multivariate survival analyses were performed with the Cox proportional hazards model, entering the following covariates: (a) SnoN expression (0–1 versus 2–3, in cytoplasm or nucleus); (b) age (<=50 year versus >50 year); (c) tumor size in centimeters (continuous); (d) the number of metastatic axillary lymph nodes (continuous); (e) histological grade (I, II, and III); (f) ER (negative versus positive); (g) PgR (negative versus positive); (h) p53 expression (negative-low versus high); (i) Ki-67 expression (low-moderate versus high); (j) Cox-2 expression (0–1 versus 2–3); and (k) HER-2 gene amplification (negative versus positive). Cox regression was done using a backward stepwise selection of variables, and a P of 0.05 was adopted as the limit for inclusion of a covariate. All statistical tests were two sided.


   RESULTS
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Expression Pattern of SnoN in Normal Breast and Breast Cancer.
SnoN mRNA is present in different tissues (14 , 31) , but there are few examples of its expression levels or subcellular localization. Nuclear staining of SnoN is detected in mink lung epithelial cells and spleen T cells of Sno +/- mice (18 , 32) . To first analyze the expression of SnoN in normal mammary tissues, SnoN immunohistochemical staining was carried out in samples of reduction mammoplasties (n = 10). Cytoplasmic as well as nuclear SnoN were present at moderate levels in epithelial cells lining the terminal ductuli units (Fig. 1, A and B)Citation , whereas epithelial cells lining larger mammary ducts showed moderate to high nuclear SnoN (Fig. 1, C and D)Citation . The expression of SnoN was also examined in other human tissues in a tissue microarray containing multiple samples from 21 different normal tissues (for details, see "Materials and Methods"). SnoN was detected in the epithelial cells of the thyroid, kidney, pancreas, and breast. In pancreas, the staining was cytoplasmic, whereas in thyroid, kidney, and breast, SnoN was present in both localizations (Supplemental Fig. 2Citation ). We thus conclude that only a subset of human epithelial tissues expresses SnoN and that normal mammary epithelial cells show cell- and structure-dependent expression of SnoN.



View larger version (122K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 2. SnoN expression pattern in human breast cancers. Breast tumor tissue microarray slides were stained with the SnoN antibody and scored according to preset standards. Staining for cytoplasmic and nuclear SnoN was scored separately as follows: negative to low (0–1; low) and moderate to high (2–3; high). Representative images of tumors with low SnoN in both cytoplasm and nucleus (A), high SnoN in nucleus and low in cytoplasm (B), high SnoN in cytoplasm and low in nucleus (C), and high SnoN in both cytoplasm and nucleus (D). Original magnification: x400.

 
SnoN immunohistochemical staining was evaluated in 1122 primary breast carcinomas included in the FinProg Database. Scoring of the immunohistochemical stainings indicated 31.2% of the breast tumors were negative or weakly positive for nuclear SnoN (scored as 0–1), whereas 68.8% of the tumors showed high nuclear SnoN expression (scored as 2–3). No or low cytoplasmic SnoN expression was seen in 29.5% cases, whereas the cytoplasm was moderately or strongly stained in 70.5%. In addition, SnoN expression was absent or low in both nucleus and cytoplasm in 10.2% of the tumors (Fig. 2A)Citation , whereas 49.5% of the tumors had moderate to high staining of SnoN in both localizations (Fig. 2D)Citation . We observed that 21% of the tumors had high cytoplasmic SnoN staining without nuclear SnoN expression (Fig. 2C)Citation , whereas 19.3% showed no or low cytoplasmic expression with moderate to high nuclear SnoN expression (Fig. 2B)Citation . Thus, the tumors showed variations both in the SnoN expression levels and localization patterns.

SnoN Expression Pattern Is Associated with Histological Tumor Types and Known Prognostic Markers.
SnoN was found to be expressed in both nucleus and cytoplasm in human breast carcinomas and show varying degrees of intensity (Fig. 2)Citation . To evaluate the significance of the expression pattern, we analyzed the association of SnoN expression with other clinical and pathological markers of breast cancer, provided in the FinProg Database. SnoN expression pattern was found to associate with certain subtypes of breast cancer (Table 1)Citation . Nuclear expression of SnoN was significantly more frequent in lobular tumors (P = 0.0232), grade I and II tumors (P = 0.0004), ER-positive tumors (P = 0.0014), and tumors with low levels of p53 (P = 0.003), Ki-67 (P < 0.0001), and Cox-2 (P < 0.0001). In contrast, cytoplasmic expression of SnoN was significantly more frequent in ductal tumors (P = 0.0019), grade III tumors (P = 0.0101), ER- and PgR-negative tumors (P = 0.0332 and 0.0168, respectively), and high levels of p53 (P < 0.0001), Ki-67 (P = 0.0009), and Cox-2 (P < 0.0001) and in tumors with HER-2 amplification (P = 0.0021).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1 Association of SnoN expression with other clinicopathological features

 
SnoN expression was not significantly associated with patients’ age (year 50 was used as a cutoff, P = 0.2364 and 0.2436 for cytoplasmic and nuclear SnoN) nor with tumor size (2 cm as a cutoff, P = 0.9459 and 0.2877 for cytoplasmic and nuclear SnoN) and did not correlate with the presence of lymph node metastases (P = 0.9381 and 0.4993, respectively, for cytoplasmic and nuclear SnoN). There was no significant association between nuclear and cytoplasmic expression levels of SnoN (P = 0.1289).

Low Levels of SnoN Associate with Better Prognosis.
To estimate the prognostic value of SnoN in breast carcinomas, we analyzed the DDFS in all patients with different expression patterns of SnoN. Univariate analyses in all tumors showed that low expression of SnoN (negative-low in both cytoplasm and nucleus) indicated a better survival (RR 1.61; 95% CI, 1.02–2.54; P = 0.0381; Table 2Citation ; Fig. 3ACitation ). In all tumors, low nuclear SnoN showed no statistically significant difference on survival, whereas the statistic significance of low cytoplasmic SnoN approached borderline (P = 0.0581, data not shown).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2 Eight-year disease-free survival according to SnoN expression levela

 


View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
  		Fig. 3. DDFS analysis of patients according to SnoN levels and localizations. In A, in all patients, a low level of SnoN in both nucleus and cytoplasm (0–1) is significantly related with longer DDFS, as compared with high SnoN expression in either cytoplasm or nucleus (2–3; RR = 1.61; 95% CI, 1.02–2.54; P = 0.0381). In B and C, a low SnoN level in both cytoplasm and nucleus is significantly related with longer DDFS as compared with patients with high SnoN in either localization in ER-positive tumors (RR = 3.26; 95% CI, 1.44–7.41; P = 0.0027; B) but not in ER-negative tumors (RR = 0.9; 95% CI, 0.52–1.6; P = 0.6985; C). In D, in ER-positive patients, low SnoN in both cytoplasm and nucleus, as compared with high in any localization or any combination (low nucleus and high cytoplasm; high nucleus and low cytoplasm; high in both), is significantly related with longer DDFS (Log-rank P = 0.0125). Cy, cytoplasmic; nu, nuclear.

 
Cox multivariate analysis showed that tumor size (RR = 1.22; 95% CI, 1.14–1.3; P < 0.0001), number of axillary node metastases (RR = 1.15; 95% CI, 1.12–1.18; P < 0.0001), and histological grade (grade 2 versus grade 1 RR = 2.59; 95% CI, 1.79–3.75; P < 0.0001 and grade 3 versus grade 1 RR = 3.19; 95% CI, 2.16–4.7; P < 0.0001) were independent prognostic factors, whereas nuclear, cytoplasmic, or combined expression of SnoN, age, histological type, ER or PgR status, p53 expression, Ki-67 expression, Cox-2 expression, or HER-2 gene amplification did not add independent prognostic information.

Subgroup analysis showed that low SnoN expression in both cytoplasm and nucleus as compared with high levels either in nucleus or cytoplasm, or both, indicated a statistically significant better outcome in several patient subgroups, including patients with tumors positive for ER (RR = 3.27; 95% CI, 1.44–7.41; P = 0.0027) or PgR (RR = 2.68; 95% CI, 1.09–6.58; P = 0.0255), tumors of the ductal type (RR = 1.69; 95% CI, 1.03–2.77; P = 0.0349), of grades I–II (RR = 2.32; 95% CI, 1.08–4.97; P = 0.0265), or with a low level of Cox-2 (RR = 2.14; 95% CI, 1.05–4.37; P = 0.0331; Table 2Citation ).

As SnoN had a highly significant prognostic value in ER-positive tumors (P = 0.0027; Fig. 3BCitation ) but not in ER-negative tumors (RR = 0.9; 95% CI, 0.52–1.6; P = 0.6985; Fig. 3CCitation ; Table 2Citation ), we further analyzed the prognostic effect of low expression level of SnoN either in cytoplasm or nucleus in the ER-positive patients. A low level of cytoplasmic SnoN associated significantly with longer DDFS (RR = 1.66; 95% CI, 1.14–2.4; P = 0.0076), whereas a low level of nuclear SnoN did not (RR = 1.28; 95% CI, 0.88–1.85; P = 0.1965), as compared with high levels of SnoN in cytoplasm or nucleus, respectively. When the DDFS was graphed according to different combinations of SnoN expression levels and localizations (low in both versus high in any location) in the ER-positive tumors, it showed that even in the presence of a low level of SnoN in the cytoplasm, its combination with high nuclear SnoN associated with worse DDFS (Fig. 3D)Citation . This indicates that the reduction of SnoN in both localizations is important for better outcome (P = 0.0125; Fig. 3DCitation ).


   DISCUSSION
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
TGF-ß potently inhibits the growth of mammary epithelial cells and regulates mammary development in vivo (3) . Mammary-specific overexpression of TGF-ß in transgenic mice can induce mammary hypoplasia and inhibit tumorigenesis (2 , 5 , 33) . Although normal human mammary epithelial cells are exquisitely sensitive to TGF-ß (34) , breast cancer cells require higher levels of TGF-ß to produce an antiproliferative response, and most of the cell lines show a complete loss of this effect (35) . Breast cancers usually have intact TGF-ß signal transducers (27) , which is in contrast to many other tumors, like gastrointestinal, lung, and ovarian cancers and lymphomas, which carry deletions or inactivating mutations of the TGF-ß signaling components (26 , 36) . One particular alteration in the TGF-ß resistance of a breast cancer cell line is the lack of down-regulation of c-myc mRNA, whereas several other genes maintain TGF-ß-targeted regulation (37) . Whether this is the sole mechanism how breast tumor cell lines evade TGF-ß arrest is unknown. It is interesting to note, however, that overexpression of Ski specifically abrogates TGF-ß-mediated down-regulation of c-myc, whereas other transcriptional events are intact (9) . Here, we provide evidence that a TGF-ß signaling inhibitor, SnoN, may contribute to the loss of TGF-ß antimitogenic action in breast carcinoma.

To address the involvement of SnoN in mediation of TGF-ß-resistant phenotype in breast cancer, we examined SnoN protein levels in 1122 human breast cancers by immunohistochemistry and analyzed the association of SnoN expression with other clinical and pathological features, as well as its prognostic significance. We found highly variable expression patterns of SnoN in respect to its level and cellular localization. Although SnoN is alluded as a nuclear protein according to its activity as inhibitor of Smads, we observed that 70% (791 cases) of the analyzed breast carcinomas have cytoplasmic SnoN staining. Similar cytoplasmic staining was observed in epithelial cells residing on the luminal side of the ductules in normal breast. The cytoplasmic location was significantly more frequent in ductal cancers and correlated with worse prognosis indicators, such as grade III; lack of estrogen and PgRs; high levels of p53, Ki-67, and Cox-2; and HER-2 amplifications. On the other hand, nuclear SnoN was observed specifically in epithelial cells lining the large ducts in normal breast, whereas in tumors, the nuclear location of SnoN was more frequently associated with lobular tumors and tumors of lower grade, expression of hormone receptors, and low levels of p53, Ki-67, and Cox-2.

The expression patterns of SnoN observed in the tumors may reflect different cell type-specific origins of the tumors. Alternatively, its levels and subcellular localization may be affected by other autocrine or paracrine factors. Although breast tumors are believed to originate from epithelial cells of the terminal duct units, alterations in differentiation programs of the breast cells are likely to contribute to the phenotype of the tumors (38) . Recent genomic analyses of gene expression profiles of breast tumors have clearly indicated that the breast tumors can be classified to separate entities, including tumors of basal and luminal cell origins (39 , 40) . The subcellular localizations of SnoN observed in normal breast epithelial cells corroborate those observed in tumors to some extent. SnoN expression in terminal ducts was mostly cytoplasmic, and this correlated with the higher fraction of cytoplasmic SnoN in ductal tumors. However, distinct nuclear staining of SnoN in epithelial cells lining the large ducts correlated with the phenotype of the lobular tumors. The highly distinct expression patterns of SnoN in these cell types may reflect different signals determining its location and subsequently affect its function. Reed et al. (41) reported that the subcellular localization of Ski, the analogue of SnoN, changed from being nuclear in preinvasive melanomas (melanoma in situ) to nuclear and cytoplasmic in primary invasive and metastatic melanomas in vivo. Furthermore, their in vitro study suggested that Ski/Smad association in cytoplasm may prevent the nuclear localization of the Smads in response to TGF-ß, revealing another pathway on how Ski/SnoN can block TGF-ß signal transduction. This is corroborated by the recent structural analysis of Ski interaction with Smad4, suggesting that Ski/SnoN blocks the interaction between Smad4 and the effector-Smads 2 and 3 (42) . Therefore, cytoplasmic SnoN could block the association between Smad2/3 and Smad4, inhibiting the entry of the Smads into the nucleus, whereas nuclear SnoN can directly interfere with the Smad-transcriptional complex. It cannot be excluded that cytoplasmic SnoN has also other regulatory functions besides governing the Smad pathway.

A low level of SnoN expression as compared with high in either nucleus or cytoplasm, or both, was a significant prognostic indicator in all tumors analyzed (P = 0.0381). Furthermore, in ER-positive tumors, low SnoN level was a significant good prognostic indicator (P = 0.0027). Similarly, it had prognostic value in ductal and grade I–II tumors, tumors positive for PgR, and tumors with low levels of Cox-2. In contrast, SnoN had no prognostic significance within the subgroups of patients with lymph node-negative versus -positive disease. The finding that SnoN is an independent prognostic factor in ER-positive tumors is intriguing. That TGF-ß and estrogen pathways cross-talk is suggested by several studies showing that in breast cancer cells, tamoxifen induces TGF-ß mRNA and protein and increases TGF-ß secretion (43, 44, 45, 46) . Tamoxifen treatment may therefore inhibit proliferation of ER-positive tumors through TGF-ß. Therefore, low levels of SnoN would maintain a positive feedback loop of TGF-ß signaling and lead to inhibition of cell cycling. Our observation that reduction in SnoN correlates with better prognosis in ER-positive patients gives another indication that TGF-ß and estrogen pathways may cross-talk.

We report here the first in vivo analysis of SnoN expression in human breast carcinomas. SnoN was found to be expressed in breast tumor cells in distinct but variable subcellular localizations. The localizations reflected those observed in normal breast epithelial cells but showed a greater degree of variation in expression levels and subcellular sites. Additional work in experimental models will be required to determine the significance of the variations of SnoN levels on TGF-ß signaling and especially on the proliferative responses. A confounding element in this assessment is the highly frequent mutational events in the cell cycle machinery proteins observed in breast carcinomas (47) , which may prohibit an adequate growth arrest despite functional signaling. In this study, a low level of SnoN was found to be a potential prognostic indicator, especially in patients with ER-positive tumors, suggesting that lack of a negative regulator of TGF-ß signaling is beneficial for breast cancer outcome. On the basis of the data, we therefore propose that SnoN is a novel prognostic marker for ER-positive breast cancers.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Maija Hälikkä, Marilotta Turunen, Harri Sihto, and Tuija Hallikainen for excellent technical assistance and advice.


   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.

1 Supported by the Academy of Finland Grant 44885 (Finnish Centre of Excellence Program 2000–2005), the University of Helsinki, Biocentrum Helsinki, Sigrid Juselius Foundation, the Cancer Society of Finland, and Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Funds. Back

2 Supplementary data for this article are available at Cancer Research Online (http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org). Back

3 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Haartman Institute, University of Helsinki, P. O. Box 63 (Haartmaninkatu 8), FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland. Phone: (358) 9 1912 5540; Fax: (358) 9 1912 5554; E-mail: marikki.laiho{at}helsinki.fi Back

4 The abbreviations used are: TGF, transforming growth factor; Cox-2, cyclooxygenase-2; DDFS, distant disease-free survival; ER, estrogen receptor; PgR, progesterone receptor; SnoN, Ski-related novel protein N; CI, confidence interval; RR, relative risk; Ski, Sloan-Kettering Institute. Back

Received 3/ 6/03. Revised 5/17/03. Accepted 5/20/03.


   REFERENCES
Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Daniel C. W., Silberstein G. B., van Hom K., Strickland P., Robinson S. TGF-ß1-induced inhibition of mouse mammary ductal growth: developmental specificity and characterization. Dev. Biol., 135: 20-30, 1989.[Medline]
  2. Pierce D. F., Johnson M. D., Matsui Y., Robinson S. D., Gold L. I., Purchio A. F., Daniel C. W., Hogan B. L., Moses H. L. Inhibition of mammary duct development but not alveolar outgrowth during pregnancy in transgenic mice expressing active TGF-ß1. Genes Dev., 7: 2308-2317, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Kordon E. C., McKnight R. A., Jhappan C., Hennighausen L., Merlino G., Smith G. H. Ectopic TGF beta 1 expression in the secretory mammary epithelium induces early senescence of the epithelial stem cell population. Dev. Biol., 168: 47-61, 1995.[Medline]
  4. Barcellos-Hoff M. H., Ewan K. B. R. Transforming growth factor-ß and breast cancer–mammary gland development. Breast Cancer Res., 2: 92-99, 2000.[Medline]
  5. Pierce D. F., Jr., Gorska A. E., Chytil A., Meise K. S., Page D. L., Coffey R. J., Moses H. L. Mammarytumorsuppressionbytransforminggrowthfactorß1transgeneexpression. Proc.Natl.Acad.Sci.USA, 92: 4245-4258, 1995.
  6. Massagué J., Blain S. W., Lo R. TGF-beta signaling in growth control, cancer, and heritable disorders. Cell, 103: 295-309, 2000.[Medline]
  7. Moustakas A., Souchelnytskyi S., Heldin C. H. Smad regulation in TGF-beta signal transduction. J. Cell Sci., 114: 4359-4369, 2001.
  8. Derynck R., Akhurst R. J., Balmain A. TGF-beta signaling in tumor suppression and cancer progression. Nat. Genet., 29: 117-129, 2001.[Medline]
  9. Sun Y., Liu X., Eaton E. N., Lane W. S., Lodish H. F., Weinberg R. A. Interaction of the Ski oncoprotein with Smad3 regulates TGF-ß signaling. Mol. Cell, 4: 499-509, 1999.[Medline]
  10. Stroschein S. L., Wang W., Zhou S., Zhou Q., Luo K. Negative feedback regulation of TGF-ß signaling by the SnoN oncoprotein. Science (Wash. DC), 286: 771-774, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Liu X., Sun Y., Weinberg R. A., Lodish H. F. Ski/Sno and TGF-beta signaling. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev., 12: 1-8, 2001.[Medline]
  12. Li Y., Turck M., Teumer J. K., Stavnezer E. Unique sequence, ski, in Sloan-Kettering avian retroviruses with properties of a new cell-derived oncogene. J. Virol., 57: 1965-1972, 1986.
  13. Nomura N., Sasamoto S., Ishii S., Date T., Matsui M., Ishizaki R. Isolation of human cDNA clones of ski and the ski-related gene, sno. Nucleic Acids Res., 17: 5489-5500, 1989.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Pearson-White S. SnoI, a novel alternatively spliced isoform of the ski proto-oncogene homolog, sno. Nucleic Acids Res., 21: 4632-4638, 1993.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Stavnezer E., Barkas A. E., Brennan L. A., Brodeur D., Li Y. Transforming Sloan-Kettering viruses generated from the cloned v-ski oncogene by in vitro and in vivo recombinations. J. Virol., 3: 1073-1083, 1986.
  16. Colmenares C., Stavnezer E. The ski oncogene induces muscle differentiation in quail embryo cells. Cell, 2: 293-303, 1989.
  17. Boyer P. L., Colmenares C., Stavnezer E., Hughes S. H. Sequence and biological activity of chicken snoN cDNA clones. Oncogene, 8: 457-466, 1993.[Medline]
  18. Shinagawa T., Dong H-D., Xu M., Maekawa T., Ishii S. The sno gene, which encodes a component of the histone deacetylase complex, acts as a tumor suppressor in mice. EMBO J., 19: 2280-2291, 2000.[Medline]
  19. Shinagawa T., Nomura T., Colmenares C., Ohira M., Nakagawara A., Ishii S. Increased susceptibility to tumorigenesis of ski-deficient heterozygous mice. Oncogene, 56: 8100-8108, 2001.
  20. Nomura T., Khan M. M., Kaul S. C., Dong H-D., Wadhwa R., Colmenares C., Kohno I., Ishii S. Ski is a component of the histone deacetylase complex required for transcriptional repression by Mad and thyroid hormone receptor. Genes Dev., 13: 412-423, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Akiyoshi S., Inoue H., Hanai J., Kusanagi K., Nemoto N., Miyazono K., Kawabata M. c-Ski acts as a transcriptional co-repressor in transforming growth factor-ß signaling through interaction with Smads. J. Biol. Chem., 274: 35269-35277, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Wan Y., Liu X., Kirschner M. W. The anaphase-promoting complex mediates TGF-ß signaling by targeting SnoN for destruction. Mol. Cell, 8: 1027-1039, 2001.[Medline]
  23. Stroschein S. L., Bonni S., Wrana J. L., Luo K. Smad3 recruits the anaphase-promoting complex for ubiquitination and degradation of SnoN. Genes Dev., 15: 2822-2836, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Bonni S., Wang H., Causing C. G., Kavsak P., Stroschein S. L., Luo K., Wrana J. L. TGF-ß induces assembly of a Smad2-Smurf2 ubiquitin ligase complex that targets SnoN for degradation. Nat. Cell Biol., 3: 587-595, 2001.[Medline]
  25. Sun Y., Liu X., Ng-Eaton E., Lodish H. F., Weinberg R. A. SnoN and Ski protooncoproteins are rapidly degraded in response to transforming growth factor beta signaling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 96: 12442-12447, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Kretzschmar M. Transforming growth factor-beta and breast cancer–transforming growth factor-beta/SMAD signaling defects and cancer. Breast Cancer Res., 2: 107-115, 2002.
  27. Xie W., Mertens J. C., Reiss D. J., Rimm D. L., Camp R. L., Haffty B. G., Reiss M. Alterations of Smad signaling in human breast carcinoma are associated with poor outcome: a tissue microarray study. Cancer Res., 62: 497-505, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Lundin J., Lundin M., Holli K., Kataja V. V., Elomaa L., Pylkkänen L., Turpeenniemi-Hujanen T., Joensuu H. Omission of histologic grading from clinical decision making may result in overuse of adjuvant therapies in breast cancer: results from a nationwide study. J. Clin. Oncol., 19: 28-36, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Ristimäki A., Sivula A., Lundin J., Lundin M., Salminen T., Haglund C., Joensuu H., Isola J. Prognostic significance of elevated cyclooxygenase-2 expression in breast cancer. Cancer Res., 62: 632-635, 2002.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Lundin J., Lundin M., Isola J., Joensuu H. A web-based system for individualised survival estimation in breast cancer. Br. Med. J., 326: 29 2003.[Free Full Text]
  31. Pearson-White S., Crittenden R. Proto-oncogene Sno expression, alternative isoforms and immediate early serum response. Nucleic Acids Res., 25: 2930-2937, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Zhang F., Mönkkönen M., Roth S., Laiho M. Proteasomal activity modulates TGF-ß signaling in a gene-specific manner. FEBS Lett., 527: 58-62, 2002.[Medline]
  33. Wakefield L. M. Transforming growth factor-ß and breast cancer: lessons learnt from genetically altered mouse models. Breast Cancer Res., 2: 100-106, 2002.
  34. Hosobuchi M., Stampfer M. Effects of the transforming growth factor ß on growth of human mammary epithelial cells in culture. In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol., 25: 705-713, 1989.[Medline]
  35. Fynan T. M., Reiss M. Resistance to inhibition of cell growth by transforming growth factor-beta and its role in oncogenesis. Crit. Rev. Oncog., 4: 493-540, 1993.[Medline]
  36. Schutte M., Hruban R. H., Cho K. R., Nadasdy G. M., Weinstein C. L., Bova G. S., Isaacs W. B., Cairns P., Nawroz H., Sidransky D., Casero R. A., Jr., Meltzer P. S., Hahn S. A., Kern S. E. DPC4 gene in various tumor types. Cancer Res., 56: 2527 1996.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Chen C. R., Kang Y., Massagué J. Defective repression of c-myc in breast cancer cells: a loss at the core of the transforming growth factor ß growth arrest program. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 992-999, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Petersen O. W., Nielsen H. L., Gudjonsson T., Villadsen R., Roennov-Jessen L., Bissell M. J. The plasticity of human breast carcinoma cells is more than epithelial to mesenchymal conversion. Breast Cancer Res., 3: 213-217, 2001.[Medline]
  39. Perou C. M., Soerlie T., Eisen M. B., van de Rijn M., Jeffrey S. S., Rees C. A., Pollack J. R., Ross D. T., Johnsen H., Akslen L. A., Fluge O., Pergamenschikov A., Williams C., Zhu S. X., Lonning P. E., Borresen-Dale A. L., Brown P. O., Botstein D. Molecular portraits of human breast tumors. Nature (Lond.), 406: 747-752, 2000.[Medline]
  40. Sorlie T., Perou C. M., Tibshirani R., Aas T., Geisler S., Johnsen H., Hastie T., Eisen M. B., van de Rijn M., Jeffery S. S., Thorsen T., Quist H., Matese J. C., Brown P. O., Botstein D., Eystein Lonning P., Borresen-Dale A. L. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 98: 10869-10874, 2000.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Reed J. A., Bales E., Xu W., Okan N. A., Bandyopadhyay D., Medrano E. E. Cytoplasmic localization of the oncogenic protein Ski in human cutaneous melanomas in vivo: functional implications for transforming growth factor ß signaling. Cancer Res., 61: 8074-8078, 2001.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Wu J. W., Krawitz A. R., Chai J., Li W., Zhang F., Luo K., Shi Y. Structural mechanism of Smad4 recognition by the nuclear oncoprotein Ski: insights on Ski-mediated repression of TGF-beta signaling. Cell, 111: 357-367, 2002.[Medline]
  43. Knabbe C., Lippman M. E., Wakefield L. M., Flanders K. C., Kasid A., Derynck R., Dickson R. B. Evidence that transforming growth factor-beta is a hormonally regulated negative growth factor in human breast cancer cells. Cell, 48: 417-428, 1987.[Medline]
  44. Chen C., Tritton T. R., Kenny N., Absher M., Chiu J. F. Tamoxifen induces TGF-ß 1 activity and apoptosis of human MCF-7 breast cancer cells in vitro. J. Cell. Biochem., 61: 9-17, 1996.[Medline]
  45. Koli K. M., Ramsey T. T., Ko Y., Dugger T. C., Brattain M. G., Arteaga C. L. Blockade of transforming growth factor-beta signaling does not abrogate antiestrogen-induced growth inhibition of human breast carcinoma cells. J. Biol. Chem., 272: 8296-8302, 1997.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Malet C., Fibleuil F., Mestayer C., Mowszowicz I., Kuttenn F. Estrogen and antiestrogen actions on transforming growth factor-ß (Tgfß) in normal human breast epithelial (HBE) cells. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol., 174: 21-30, 2001.[Medline]
  47. Malumbres M., Barbacid M. To cycle or not to cycle: a critical decision in cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer, 1: 222-231, 2001.[Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Ann. Surg. Oncol.Home page
I. Akagi, M. Miyashita, H. Makino, T. Nomura, N. Hagiwara, K. Takahashi, K. Cho, T. Mishima, T. Takizawa, and T. Tajiri
SnoN Overexpression is Predictive of Poor Survival in Patients with Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Ann. Surg. Oncol., October 1, 2008; 15(10): 2965 - 2975.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
A. A. Tone, H. Begley, M. Sharma, J. Murphy, B. Rosen, T. J. Brown, and P. A. Shaw
Gene Expression Profiles of Luteal Phase Fallopian Tube Epithelium from BRCA Mutation Carriers Resemble High-Grade Serous Carcinoma
Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2008; 14(13): 4067 - 4078.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Pathol.Home page
T. Fujita, W. Liu, H. Doihara, and Y. Wan
Regulation of Skp2-p27 Axis by the Cdh1/Anaphase-Promoting Complex Pathway in Colorectal Tumorigenesis
Am. J. Pathol., July 1, 2008; 173(1): 217 - 228.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
T. Fujita, W. Liu, H. Doihara, H. Date, and Y. Wan
Dissection of the APCCdh1-Skp2 Cascade in Breast Cancer
Clin. Cancer Res., April 1, 2008; 14(7): 1966 - 1975.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J ANIM SCIHome page
W. R. Dayton and M. E. White
Cellular and molecular regulation of muscle growth and development in meat animals
J Anim Sci, April 1, 2008; 86(14_suppl): E217 - E225.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
Y. Nagano, K. J. Mavrakis, K. L. Lee, T. Fujii, D. Koinuma, H. Sase, K. Yuki, K. Isogaya, M. Saitoh, T. Imamura, et al.
Arkadia Induces Degradation of SnoN and c-Ski to Enhance Transforming Growth Factor-beta Signaling
J. Biol. Chem., July 13, 2007; 282(28): 20492 - 20501.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Cell. Biol.Home page
Q. Zhu, A. R. Krakowski, E. E. Dunham, L. Wang, A. Bandyopadhyay, R. Berdeaux, G. S. Martin, L. Sun, and K. Luo
Dual Role of SnoN in Mammalian Tumorigenesis
Mol. Cell. Biol., January 1, 2007; 27(1): 324 - 339.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
Y.-H. R. Hsu, K. P. Sarker, I. Pot, A. Chan, S. J. Netherton, and S. Bonni
Sumoylated SnoN Represses Transcription in a Promoter-specific Manner
J. Biol. Chem., November 3, 2006; 281(44): 33008 - 33018.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 CarcinogenesisHome page
J. Seoane
Escaping from the TGF{beta} anti-proliferative control
Carcinogenesis, November 1, 2006; 27(11): 2148 - 2156.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Cell. Biol.Home page
Q. Zhu, S. Pearson-White, and K. Luo
Requirement for the SnoN Oncoprotein in Transforming Growth Factor {beta}-Induced Oncogenic Transformation of Fibroblast Cells
Mol. Cell. Biol., December 15, 2005; 25(24): 10731 - 10744.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
A. R. Krakowski, J. Laboureau, A. Mauviel, M. J. Bissell, and K. Luo
From the Cover: Cytoplasmic SnoN in normal tissues and nonmalignant cells antagonizes TGF-{beta} signaling by sequestration of the Smad proteins
PNAS, August 30, 2005; 102(35): 12437 - 12442.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, F.
Right arrow Articles by Laiho, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zhang, F.
Right arrow Articles by Laiho, M.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online