Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2010  Genetics and Biology of Brain Cancer
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 Email this article to a friend
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 Bae, I.
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, E. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bae, I.
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, E. M.
[Cancer Research 64, 7893-7909, November 1, 2004]
© 2004 American Association for Cancer Research


Regular Articles

BRCA1 Induces Antioxidant Gene Expression and Resistance to Oxidative Stress

Insoo Bae1, Saijun Fan1, Qinghui Meng1, Jeong Keun Rih1, Hee Jong Kim1, Hyo Jin Kang1, Jingwen Xu1, Itzhak D. Goldberg2, Anil K. Jaiswal3 and Eliot M. Rosen1

1 Department of Oncology, Lombardi Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC; 2 Department of Radiation Oncology, Long Island Jewish Medical Center, The Long Island Campus for the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, New Hyde Park, New York; and 3 Department of Pharmacology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas


    ABSTRACT
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 (BRCA1), a tumor suppressor, confer an increased risk for breast, ovarian, and prostate cancers. To investigate the function of the BRCA1 gene, we performed DNA microarray and confirmatory reverse transcription-PCR analyses to identify BRCA1-regulated gene expression changes. We found that BRCA1 up-regulates the expression of multiple genes involved in the cytoprotective antioxidant response, including glutathione S-transferases, oxidoreductases, and other antioxidant genes. Consistent with these findings, BRCA1 overexpression conferred resistance while BRCA1 deficiency conferred sensitivity to several different oxidizing agents (hydrogen peroxide and paraquat). In addition, in the setting of oxidative stress (due to hydrogen peroxide), BRCA1 shifted the cellular redox balance to a higher ratio of reduced to oxidized glutathione. Finally, BRCA1 stimulated antioxidant response element-driven transcriptional activity and enhanced the activity of the antioxidant response transcription factor nuclear factor erythroid-derived 2 like 2 [also called NRF2 (NFE2L2)]. The ability of BRCA1 to stimulate antioxidant response element-dependent transcription and to protect cells against oxidative stress was attenuated by inhibition of nuclear factor erythroid-derived 2 like 2. These findings suggest a novel function for BRCA1, i.e., to protect cells against oxidative stress. This function would be consistent with the postulated role of BRCA1 as a caretaker gene in preserving genomic integrity.


    INTRODUCTION
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Inherited mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility gene breast cancer susceptibility gene 1 (BRCA1) confer an increased risk for breast, ovarian, and prostate cancers (1 , 2) . In addition, BRCA1 expression is often decreased or absent in sporadic breast and ovarian cancers due, in part, to promoter methylation or other causes, suggesting a role for BRCA1 in nonhereditary tumors (3 , 4) . The specific functions of the BRCA1 gene that contribute to tumor suppression are unclear. However, established functional roles for BRCA1 include the regulation of cell cycle progression, DNA damage signaling and repair, maintenance of genomic integrity, and the regulation of various transcriptional pathways [reviewed by Rosen et al. (5) ].

A role for BRCA1 in transcriptional regulation was first suggested by the finding that BRCA1 has a conserved acidic COOH-terminal transcriptional activation domain (6) . Although BRCA1 is not known to bind to specific DNA sequences, it may regulate transcription through protein:protein interactions with components of the basal transcription factor (e.g., RNA helicase A and RNA pol II), transcriptional coactivators and corepressors [e.g., p300 and its functional homologue CBP (the cAMP-responsive element binding proteinbinding protein), retinoblastoma 1, retinoblastoma 1-associated proteins (RbAp46/48), and several histone deaceylases (HDAC-1/2)], and/or sequence-specific DNA-binding transcription factors (e.g., p53, c-Myc, estrogen receptor, and other proteins; refs. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ).

Some of the functions of BRCA1 cited above may be due, in part, to regulation of specific transcriptional pathways by BRCA1, but the linkage of these functions to BRCA1-regulated transcription is not well understood. We used cell culture models of BRCA1 overexpression, underexpression, and mutational inactivation to identify patterns of BRCA1-regulated gene expression. The identification of antioxidant genes as transcriptional targets of BRCA1 led to the findings that BRCA1 regulates the activity of the antioxidant response transcription factor nuclear factor erythroid-derived 2 like 2 [also called NRF2 (NFE2L2)] and protects cells against oxidative stress.


    MATERIALS AND METHODS
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Cell Lines and Culture
Human prostate (DU-145, LNCaP) and breast (MCF-7, T47D) cancer cell lines were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (Manassas, VA) and cultured as described before (12 , 13) . The stable wild-type BRCA1 (wtBRCA1) and control (Neo) DU-145 cell clones were isolated and characterized earlier (14 , 15) . A mouse embryonic fibroblast (MEF) cell line homozygous for a deletion of Brca1 exon 11 and the control wild-type (Brca1+/+) MEFs (16) were provided by Dr. Chuxia Deng (National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, MD). All of the above cell types were grown in DMEM supplemented with 5% (DU-145) or 10% (all other cell types) v/v fetal calf serum, L-glutamine (5 mmol/L), nonessential amino acids (5 mmol/L), penicillin (100 units/mL), and streptomycin (100 µg/mL; all obtained from BioWhittaker, Walkersville, MD).

EBV-immortalized peripheral blood lymphocyte cell lines R794 and R1041 were derived from a female BRCA1 (185delAG) and BRCA2 (6174delT) mutation carrier, respectively. These lymphoblastoid cell lines were provided by the Tissue Culture Shared Resource of the Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center. The genotypes of the cells were confirmed by the Familial Cancer Registry of the Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center.

BRCA1 Expression Vectors and Transfections
For transient expression experiments, cells were transfected with a wild-type BRCA1 expression vector (wtBRCA1) consisting of the full-length BRCA1 cDNA within the pcDNA3 mammalian expression vector (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) or within the pCMV-Tag2B vector (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA), which allows expression of the full-length protein containing a NH2-terminal FLAG epitope tag. Both the untagged and the FLAG-tagged proteins are expressed well and exhibit identical biological activities (13) . Methodologies used for transient transfections have been reported previously (13 , 15) and are also briefly described below.

Small Interfering (si) RNAs
The BRCA1 and control (scrambled-sequence) siRNAs were described earlier (15) . All siRNAs were chemically synthesized by Dharmacon, Inc. (Lafayette, CO). For siRNA treatments, subconfluent proliferating cells were treated with each siRNA (50 nmol/L), with siPORT Amine reagent (Ambion, Austin, TX). The cells were incubated with siRNA for 72 hours (to reduce BRCA1 protein levels to <25% of control) before the start of the experiment. The control siRNA has no effect on BRCA1 levels (15) , and neither siRNA is toxic to the cells under these experimental conditions, as determined by the use of 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assays.

Isolation of RNA
The total cellular RNA was extracted with TRIzol Reagent (Life Technologies, Inc., Rockville, MD), according to the manufacturer’s instructions, additionally purified with chloroform and precipitated with 95% etomidate before cDNA synthesis. The quality of isolated RNA was verified by electrophoresis through 1.0% agarose-formaldehyde gels, and its quantity was determined from absorbance measurements at 260 and 280 nm.

DNA Microarray Analyses
cDNA Spotted Microarrays.
cDNA-spotted slides corresponding to 9216 human genes (including expressed sequence tags) and 9568 mouse genes (including expressed sequence tags) were prepared at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine microarray facility (Bronx, NY). cDNA synthesis, hybridizations, scanning, gridding, and analysis have been described earlier (ref. 17 ; also see web site).4 On the basis of our experience suggesting that cDNA spotted microarrays often underestimate differences in gene expression (17) , ratios of gene expression were considered to be significant if they were ≥1.5 or ≤ 0.7 in at least two independent experiments.

Microarray Comparisons.
For DU-145 cells, we compared gene expression in two different wtBRCA1 versus Neo clone pairs, with two independent experiments per clone pair, for a total of n = 4 independent experiments. For MCF-7 cells, subconfluent proliferating cells were transiently transfected with wtBRCA1 or empty pcDNA3 vector (15) and postincubated for 24 hours to allow gene expression. Three independent experiments comparing wtBRCA1- versus pcDNA3-transfected cells were made after confirming that the wtBRCA1 gene was expressed in each experiment. For MEFs, we performed three independent comparisons of Brca1-deficient ({Delta} exon 11) versus wild-type MEFs. In each case, the ratios of gene expression were considered to be significant if they were ≥1.5 or ≤0.7 in at least two independent experiments.

Affymetrix Oligonucleotide Microarrays.
Affymetrix microarray analyses were performed at the North Shore-Long Island Jewish Research Institute core facility. RNA isolation, cRNA synthesis, gene chip hybridizations, and data analysis were performed as described earlier (18) . We performed one experiment each comparing a DU-145 wtBRCA1 versus Neo clone pair and comparing Brca1-deficient MEFs versus wild-type MEFs. The gene chips used for these experiments were HG-U133A (which contains ~16,000 human probe sets) and MG_U74Av2 (which contains ~12,000 mouse genes plus expressed sequence tags). Differences in gene expression were considered to be significant if the log signal ratios were ≥ +1 or ≤ –1 and the P values were significant according to the Affymetrix algorithm. These log signal ratio cutoffs correspond to ratios of ≥2.0 or ≤0.5, respectively.

Semiquantitative Reverse Transcription-PCR Analysis
Rigorously controlled semiquantitative reverse transcription-PCR assays were performed as described before (15 , 17) . The PCR primers, reaction conditions, and cycle numbers are shown in Tables 1Citation and 2Citation . The PCR reactions were individually optimized so that each reaction fell within the linear range of product amplification. The first-strand cDNA template was generated from 1 µg of total RNA in a final volume of 20 µL, with SuperScript II reverse transcriptase (Life Technologies, Inc.) and oligo(dT) primers. One microliter (of 20 µL) of 1:2.5-diluted cDNA template was amplified in a total volume of 50 µL, containing 200 µmol/L each of all four deoxynucleoside triphosphates, 2 µmol/L each of specific primers, and 1 unit of Tag DNA polymerase (Perkin-Elmer, Norwalk, CT). ß-Actin, whose expression is unaffected by BRCA1, was used as a control for loading. The PCR products were analyzed by electrophoresis through 1.0% agarose gels containing ethidium bromide (0.1 mg/mL) and photographed under UV illumination.


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

 
Table 1 PCR primers and expected product sizes for semi-quantitative reverse transcription-PCR analyses

 

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

 
Table 2 PCR reaction conditions

 
Assays of Oxidant Sensitivity
MTT Dye Reduction.
Subconfluent proliferating cells in 96-well dishes were treated with different doses of H2O2 or paraquat (Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, MO) for 24 hours (or for different time intervals) and then assayed for MTT dye reduction, a measure of mitochondrial viability (14 , 19) . Cell viability was normalized to 0 dose control cells. Cell viability values were calculated as means ± SE of n = 10 replicate wells or as means ± SE for three independent experiments, each of which used n = 10 replicate wells per cell type per assay condition.

Trypan Blue Dye Exclusion.
This assay measures the ability of intact cell membranes of viable cells to exclude trypan blue dye. Subconfluent proliferating DU-145 cells in 100-mm plastic Petri dishes were transfected overnight using Lipofectamine with a FLAG-wtBRCA1 expression vector or the empty pCMV-Tag2B vector (15 µg of plasmid DNA per dish), washed, and allowed to recover and express the transgene for 24 hours. wtBRCA1-transfected, empty vector-transfected, and untransfected control cells were harvested, plated into 2-cm2 wells (8 x 104 cells per well in quadruplicate wells), allowed to attach, and exposed to different doses of H2O2 for T = 24 hours at 37°C. The cells were then collected, suspended in a solution containing 0.4% trypan blue, and counted with a hemocytometer. For each experiment and dose of H2O2, at least 200 cells were counted per well. Three independent experiments were performed; and the cell viability values were expressed as means ± SE.

Assays of the Cellular Redox State
Subconfluent proliferating cells in 24-well dishes were transfected overnight with wtBRCA1 or empty pcDNA3 vector (0.25 µg per well) with Lipofectamine, washed, and postincubated in fresh culture medium for 24 hours to allow gene expression. The cells were then treated with different doses of H2O2 for T = 24 hours and assayed for reduced (GSH) or oxidized (GSSG) forms of glutathione using a kit from Oxis, Inc. (Portland, OR).

Transcriptional Assays
The wild-type NRF2 vector, dominant negative NRF2 vector (DN-NRF2), NQO1-ARE-Luc reporter, and mutant or truncated BRCA1 expression vectors have been described earlier (12 , 20) . The NQO1-ARE-Luc reporter contains the antioxidant response element (ARE) of NAD(P)H dehydrogenase quinone 1 (NQO1), driving a minimal promoter upstream of the luciferase gene. Transient transfection assays were performed to measure transcriptional activity, as described earlier (12 , 15) . Briefly, subconfluent proliferating cells in 24-well dishes were transfected overnight with the indicated expression vector(s) (0.25 µg per well) and luciferase reporter (0.25 µg per well), with Lipofectamine. The cells were washed and postincubated for 24 hours to allow luciferase expression. Luciferase values (minus background) were normalized to the control (reporter only) and expressed as means ± SE of quadruplicate wells. Transfection efficiency was monitored using the control plasmid pRSV-ß-gal (15) .

Western Blotting
Whole cell lysates were prepared and subjected to Western blotting, as described earlier (14 , 15) . Briefly, equal aliquots of total cellular protein (50 µg per lane) were electrophoresed on a 4 to 13% SDS-polyacrylamide gradient gel, transferred to nitrocellulose membranes (Millipore, Bedford, MA), and blotted with primary antibodies directed against human BRCA1 (C-20, rabbit polyclonal, 1:200; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) and {alpha}-actin (I-19, goat polyclonal, 1:500; Santa Cruz Biotechnology). After incubation with the appropriate horseradish peroxidase conjugated secondary antibody (Amersham Lifescience), immune complexes were visualized by using an enhanced chemiluminescence detection system (Amersham Lifescience, Buckinghamshire, UK), with colored markers (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA) as molecular size standards.

Statistical Methods
Where appropriate, statistical comparisons were made using the two-tailed Student’s t test.


    RESULTS
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Microarray Analysis of BRCA1-overexpressing Cell Lines.
To determine the effect of BRCA1 overexpression on the transcriptosome, we compared the gene expression profiles of DU-145 human prostate cancer cell clones stably expressing a wild-type BRCA1 gene (wtBRCA1) with control (Neo) clones with cDNA spotted microarrays. These wtBRCA1 and Neo cell clones have been described and extensively characterized in previous studies (13, 14, 15) . A partial list of genes up-regulated in the wtBRCA1 clones, categorized by function, is shown in Table 3Citation Citation (see Supplemental Material for complete list). The wtBRCA1 cells showed up-regulation of various types of genes, including those involved in transcription, stress responses, DNA replication and repair, signal transduction, metabolism, differentiation, and RNA and protein processing. As a check on the methodology, a separate experiment revealed that a large number of genes identified by the cDNA-spotted arrays were concordantly up-regulated with an Affymetrix oligonucleotide microarray (Table 3)Citation Citation .


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

 
Table 3 Genes for which expression is increased in DU-145 wtBRCA1 [versus control (Neo)] cell clones

 

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

 
Table 3A Continued

 
Noticeably, the wtBRCA1 cell lines overexpressed many genes that protect against oxidative stress, including microsomal glutathione S-transferases (GSTs; MGST1 and MGST2), cytoplasmic GSTs (GSTT1 and GSTZ1), a glutathione peroxidase (GPX3), and various oxidoreductases [e.g., NQO1, alcohol dehydrogenase 5 (ADH5), and malic enzyme (ME2)]. wtBRCA1 also up-regulated other potential antioxidant genes, including paraoxonase 2 (PON2), an enzyme that hydrolyzes toxic organophosphates (e.g., pesticides) and oxidized lipids (e.g., oxidized low density lipoprotein; ref. 21 ), the Klotho gene (KL), a deficiency of which causes oxidative brain damage and a shortened life span in mice (22) , and ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal esterase L1 (UCHL1), an oxidation-sensitive ubiquitin recycling enzyme that has been implicated in Parkinson’s disease (23) . A number of these genes are involved in xenobiotic and drug metabolism: e.g., GSTs, NQO1, PON2, and member of PAS protein 2 (MOP2, also called HIF2{alpha}), an aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) family gene.

Somewhat fewer genes were down-regulated by wtBRCA1 than were up-regulated (see Table 4Citation for a partial list and see Supplemental Material for the complete list). Again, an Affymetrix microarray experiment identified many of the same genes found with cDNA spotted arrays (Table 4)Citation . Only one GST, GSTP1, was decreased in wtBRCA1 clones. Interestingly, the overexpression of this particular isoform of GST in cancer cell lines is associated with cellular chemoresistance (24) . Various genes involved in cell cycle regulation and DNA repair were down-regulated, including the retinoblastoma susceptibility gene retinoblastoma 1, which is known to be down-regulated by wtBRCA1 (13) .


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

 
Table 4 Genes whose expression is decreased in DU-145 wtBRCA1 [versus control (Neo)] cell clones

 
On the basis of previous experience with cDNA-spotted microarrays, we expected a low rate of false positivity with the selected filtering criteria (ref. 17 ; see Materials and Methods). To confirm this expectation, we tested n = 15 genes with rigorously controlled semiquantitated reverse transcription-PCR assays (14 , 15 , 17) of RNA samples from parental DU-145 cells and three clones each of Neo and wtBRCA1 cells. ß-Actin, which is unaffected by BRCA1, was used as a control gene. The expression of BRCA1 in the wtBRCA1 relative to control cell lines is shown in Fig. 1ACitation . For all 15 genes, the expected increases (Fig. 1B)Citation or decreases (Fig. 1C)Citation in gene expression were confirmed. In some cases, the fold changes (determined by densitometry and expressed relative to ß-actin) were greater by reverse transcription-PCR than by microarray assays, consistent with our impression that cDNA spotted arrays often underestimate gene expression changes. We tested the effect of BRCA1 knockdown with a previously validated siRNA (15) on the expression of three antioxidant response genes that were up-regulated by wtBRCA1 (MGST1, NQO1, and GSTZ1). In each case, the mRNA levels were decreased by BRCA1-siRNA but not by control-siRNA (Fig. 1D)Citation . These findings suggest that BRCA1 regulates the expression of some antioxidant response genes over a very wide range of intracellular BRCA1 protein levels.



View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Fig. 1. Confirmation of DU-145 microarray results by semiquantitative reverse transcription-PCR. A, increased expression of BRCA1 in DU-145 wtBRCA1 cell clones. Semiquantitative reverse transcription-PCR and Western blot assays were carried out as described in Materials and Methods. B and C, genes increased (B) and decreased (C) in DU-145 wtBRCA1 cell clones. The amplified cDNA products were quantitated by densitometry and expressed relative to ß-actin. Values are means ± SE for n = 3 wtBRCA1 clones and n = 4 control cell lines (parental cells and three Neo clones). See Table 1Citation for full names of genes. D, down-regulation of BRCA1-inducible genes by BRCA1-siRNA. Parental DU-145 cells were treated with no siRNA (transfection reagent only), control-siRNA, or BRCA1-siRNA (50 nmol/L x 72 hours) and harvested for semiquantitative reverse transcription-PCR analysis.

 
We also examined the effect of overexpression of wtBRCA1 on gene expression in MCF-7 human breast cancer cells. In these studies, gene expression was compared in MCF-7 cells transiently transfected with wtBRCA1 versus empty pcDNA3 vector. Gene expression was compared in wtBRCA1 versus control (pcDNA3)-transfected cells in the absence (–E2) or presence (+E2) of exogenous estrogen (17ß-estradiol, 1 µmol/L x 24 hours). Although the cell types and duration of BRCA1 expression differed, we identified >40 genes concordantly regulated by wtBRCA1 in DU-145 versus MCF-7 cells (Table 5)Citation Citation . These include MGST1, ANX1, ADH5, DSS1, MOP2, IGFBP3, GNG10, NOV, G6PD, KRT19, IFRD2, and others. In the absence and/or presence of E2, wtBRCA1 up-regulated expression of genes involved in the oxidative stress response or the detoxification of xenobiotics and drugs in MCF-7 cells, including MGST1, MOP2, ADH5, ALDH8, an epoxide hydrolase (EPHX2), several selenoproteins (SEPHS1 and SEPW1), and several other antioxidant proteins (PRDX4 and TSA).


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

 
Table 5 Effect of exogenous wtBRCA1 on gene expression in MCF-7 breast cancer cells (selected)

 

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

 
Table 5A Continued

 
Microarray Analysis of Brca1 Mutant Cell Lines.
Next, we determined the effect of loss of the endogenous full-length Brca1 protein on gene expression. Thus, we compared gene expression in Brca1-deficient (exon 11-deleted) versus wild-type (Brca1+/+) MEFs. The Brca1 {Delta} exon 11 MEFs express a Mr 92,000 Brca1 protein that is defective in DNA repair function (25) . Examples of genes down-regulated in Brca1-deficient MEFs are listed in Table 6Citation Citation (see Supplemental Material for the full list.) Categories of genes underexpressed in the Brca1-deficient cells included those involved in transcription, stress responses, cell cycle regulation, DNA replication and repair, signal transduction, and other processes. Stress response genes up-regulated in Brca1-deficient cells included a GST (Gsta2), a glutathione peroxidase (Gpx3), the antioxidant response transcription factor Nfe2l2 (also called Nrf2), a Nrf2 binding partner [activating transcription factor 2 (Atf2)], a superoxide dismutase (Sod1), a selenoprotein (Sepp1), the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (Ahr), several etomidate-responsive genes, and several heat shock proteins. In contrast, very few genes were up-regulated, and the magnitude of the increases was small (see Supplemental Material). Examples of genes concordantly increased in BRCA1-overexpressing (DU-145 or MCF-7) cells and decreased in Brca1-deficient MEFs include PROS1, GPX3, BNIP3, and TGFB2 (see Table 7ACitation ).


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

 
Table 6 Selected genes whose expression is decreased in Brca1{Delta}ex11{Delta}ex (versus Brca1+/+) mouse embryo fibroblasts

 

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

 
Table 6A Continued

 

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

 
Table 7 Comparison of Brca1 {Delta} exon 11 MEFs versus exogenous wtBRCA1 in DU-145/MCF-7 (this study)

 
We compared our findings with published microarray studies of gene regulation by BRCA1 in 293T cells (26) , colon cancer cells (27) , and Brca1-deficient mouse embryonic stem cells (28) . Examples of genes concordantly regulated in our study versus published studies are provided in Table 7BCitation . These include (a) genes commonly induced by wtBRCA1 in 293T and in DU-145 and/or MCF-7 cells (MGAT2, CCNG2, FSTL1, LAMA3, and KCNK1), (b) genes induced by wtBRCA1 in 293T cells and decreased in Brca1-deficient MEFs (SEPP1, ZNF148, and ENPP2), (c) genes induced by wtBRCA1 in colon cancer cells and decreased in Brca1-deficient MEFs (TOP1 and SOD1), (d) genes decreased by wtBRCA1 in colon cancer and DU-145 cells (CD59), (e) genes decreased in Brca1-deficient embryonic stem cells and MEFs (Rock2, Qk, and Nfl), and (f) genes decreased in Brca1-deficient embryonic stem cells and up-regulated in DU-145 wtBRCA1 cells (CKB, SYHUQT, and PSMC2).

BRCA1 Protects against Oxidative Stress and Restores Cellular Redox Balance.
To determine whether the ability of BRCA1 to stimulate the expression of antioxidant response genes has functional consequences, we measured the effects of BRCA1 on the cellular sensitivity to two different oxidizing agents, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and paraquat. DU-145 wtBRCA1 or Neo clones were exposed to different doses of H2O2 for 24 hours, after which, the cell viability was determined by using MTT assays. The wtBRCA1 cells were significantly more resistant to H2O2 over a wide range of doses (P < 0.001, two tailed t tests; Fig. 2ACitation ). In concordance with these findings, pretreatment of parental DU-145 cells with a BRCA1-siRNA caused significant sensitization to H2O2 (P < 0.001; Fig. 2BCitation ). Please note that the experiments shown in Fig. 2, A and BCitation , are representative of two or three independent experiments of each type that showed similar results. These results suggest that both exogenous and endogenous BRCA1 protects DU-145 cells against oxidative stress due to H2O2.



View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Fig. 2. Exogenous and endogenous BRCA1 confer resistance to oxidative stress. A. DU-145 wtBRCA1 clones are resistant to H2O2. Two wtBRCA1 and two control (Neo) clones in 96-well dishes were incubated with different doses of H2O2 for 24 hours and assayed for cell viability using MTT assays. For each clone and H2O2 dose, n = 10 wells were tested. Because the two clones of each clonal type behaved similarly, the data were pooled and averaged. Cell viability values are means ± SE (relative to 0 dose control). Comparisons of wtBRCA1 versus Neo clones were statistically significant at each dose of H2O2 (P < 0.001, two-tailed t tests). Note: The data shown in A and B are representative of n = 2 to 3 independent experiments. B. BRCA1 knockdown confers sensitivity to H2O2. DU-145 cells were incubated with BRCA1 or control siRNA (50 nmol/L x 72 hours), exposed to different doses of H2O2 for T = 24 h, and tested for cell viability using MTT assays. Comparisons of BRCA1-siRNA– versus control-siRNA–treated cells were significant at all except the lowest dose of H2O2 (P < 0.001). C. Brca1-deficient MEFs are more sensitive than control MEFs to H2O2. Cell sensitivity to H2O2 was compared in Brca1 {Delta} exon 11 (Brca1–/–) versus wild-type (Brca1+/+) MEFs with MTT assays. Values of cell viability are means ± SE of n = 3 independent experiments. For each experiment and each dose of H2O2, n = 10 replicate wells were assayed, and the values were averaged. Brca1–/– MEFs were more sensitive to H2O2 at every dose tested (P < 0.001 to 0.01). D. Brca1-deficient MEFs are more sensitive to paraquat than control MEFs. Cells were treated with different doses of paraquat for T = 24 hours and then tested with MTT assays for their viability. The values of cell viability are means ± SE of n = 3 independent experiments. For each experiment and each dose of paraquat, n = 10 replicate wells were tested, and the cell viability values were averaged. Brca1–/– MEFs showed reduced survival rates relative to wild-type (Brca1+/+) MEFs at each dose of paraquat tested (P < 0.001 to 0.01). E. wtBRCA1 confers resistance and BRCA1-siRNA confers sensitivity to paraquat. (left). DU-145 wtBRCA1 and Neo cell clones were tested with MTT assays for sensitivity to paraquat. Cell viability values are means ± SE of n = 3 independent experiments. For each experiment and each dose, n = 10 replicate wells were assayed per clone x two clones per clone type = 20 wells per clone type, and the values were averaged. Comparisons of wtBRCA1 versus Neo clones were significant at all paraquat doses (P < 0.01 to 0.05) (right). DU-145 cells were treated with control-siRNA, BRCA1-siRNA (50 nmol/L x 72 hours) or vehicle only (Parental) and then assayed for paraquat sensitivity as above. BRCA1-siRNA–treated cells were more sensitive to paraquat than control-siRNA or vehicle-treated cells (P < 0.001 to 0.01). F, time course for wtBRCA1-mediated protection against H2O2. wtBRCA1 and Neo DU-145 cell clones were exposed to 25 nmol/L (left) or 10 nmol/L (right) of H2O2 for different time intervals ranging from T = 16 to 96 hours and then assayed for cell viability using MTT assays. Cell viability values are expressed relative to untreated cells (T = 0 hour) and represent means ± SE for three independent experiments. At 25 nmol/L H2O2, survival rates were higher for wtBRCA1 than Neo clones from T = 24 to 96 hours (P < 0.01 to 0.001, two-tailed t tests). At 10 nmol/L H2O2, survival was higher in wtBRCA1 cell clones from T = 24 to 96 hours (P < 0.01 to 0.05). G. Transient expression of wtBRCA1 protects DU-145 cells against H2O2, as indicated by trypan blue dye exclusion assays. Subconfluent proliferating cells were transfected overnight with FLAG-wtBRCA1, empty pCMVTag2B vector or no vector (parental), washed, postincubated for 24 hours to allow BRCA1 gene expression, and exposed to different doses of H2O2 for T = 24 hours. The cells were then harvested with trypsin, stained with trypan blue dye, and counted. Cell viability was determined by counting the trypan blue dye-excluding cells and expressed relative to untreated control cells. The values plotted are means ± SE of n = 3 independent experiments. For each experiment and each dose of H2O2, at least 200 cells were counted. At H2O2 doses of 300 to 500 nmol/L, cell viability was higher in wtBRCA1-transfected cells than in control cells (empty vector or untransfected; P < 0.001).

 
We also tested the ability of endogenous Brca1 to protect MEFs against H2O2 induced cytotoxicity. Consistent with the results obtained with DU-145 cells, Brca1-deficient MEFs were more sensitive than control (Brca1+/+) MEFs to H2O2 (P < 0.001 to 0.01; Fig. 2CCitation ). The cell viability values shown in Fig. 2CCitation are means ± SE of three independent experiment, each of which used 10 replicate wells per dose of H2O2. The herbicide paraquat induces cytotoxicity by causing the generation superoxide ions (O2), which are detoxified by a mechanism distinct from H2O2. Brca1-deficient MEFs were more sensitive to paraquat than wild-type MEFs (P < 0.001 to 0.01; Fig. 2DCitation ). A DU-145 wtBRCA1 clone was less sensitive than the Neo clone, whereas BRCA1-siRNA conferred increased sensitivity to paraquat (P < 0.001 to 0.05; Fig. 2ECitation ). These findings suggest that exogenous and endogenous BRCA1 protects cells against several distinct forms of oxidative stress.

The assays shown in Fig. 2A–ECitation used a 24-hour exposure to H2O2 or paraquat. We performed additional studies to rule out the possibility that the effects of BRCA1 are limited to short-term assays. Thus, DU-145 wtBRCA1 or Neo cell clones were incubated with H2O2 for different time intervals from T = 16 to 96 hours and then tested for cell viability with MTT assays. Because of the prolonged exposure times, lower doses of H2O2 (either 10 or 25 nmol/L) were tested. These studies revealed persistent and significant increases in viability of the wtBRCA1 cell clones. Thus, at the lower dose of H2O2, cell viability increases of up to ~20% were observed, whereas at the higher doses, increases of up to 30 to 35% were found (P < 0.001 to 0.05, two-tailed t tests).

Finally, we tested the effect of transient expression of wtBRCA1 on the response of DU-145 cells to H2O2 with a different end point, trypan blue dye exclusion. MTT assays assess the ability of mitochondria to reduce a tetrazolium salt to formazan, a measure of mitochondrial viability, whereas trypan blue exclusion assesses the ability of an intact plasma membrane to exclude the dye. At H2O2 doses of 300 to 500 nmol/L, we found significant increases (11 to 40%) in the proportion of wtBRCA1-transfected cells that excluded trypan blue dye, as compared with empty vector transfected cells or untransfected cells (P < 0.001; Fig. 2GCitation ). Values in Fig. 2GCitation are means ± SE of three independent experiments. Although there is some variability from experiment to experiment, the cell viability values tended to be higher with the trypan blue assay than the MTT assay. This may reflect the fact that loss of membrane integrity is a late end point; thus, cells that have lost mitochondrial function (MTT end point) may not yet have lost their membrane integrity. Regardless, it seems clear that overexpression of BRCA1 (by either stable or transient transfection) protects and inactivation of BRCA1 (by either knockdown or gene deletion) sensitizes cells against oxidative stress.

The response to oxidative stress depends upon the ability of the cell to maintain its redox balance (i.e., the ratio of reduced to oxidized glutathione) in the setting of stress. We examined the effect of exogenous wtBRCA1 on the redox balance of prostate (DU-145 and LNCaP) and breast (MCF-7) cancer cell lines after treatment with different doses of H2O2 for 24 hours. The end point was the ratio of GSH to GSSG. BRCA1-transfected cells showed a mostly similar basal redox balance to vector-transfected and untransfected control cells (Fig. 3)Citation . H2O2 caused a dose-dependent shift in the redox state to increased GSSG and decreased GSH levels. However, wtBRCA1-transfected cells were able to maintain significantly higher ratios of GSH/GSSG than control cells, especially at high doses of H2O2 (P < 0.001, two tailed t tests). These findings suggest that BRCA1 enhances the production of GSH in response to oxidative stress.



View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Fig. 3. BRCA1 attenuates loss of GSH in response to oxidative stress. For LNCaP and MCF-7, the cells were transfected overnight with wtBRCA1, empty vector, or vehicle, washed, treated with different doses of H2O2 for 24 hours, and assayed for GSH and GSSG. For DU-145, stable wtBRCA1 and Neo cell clones were tested. At doses of H2O2 ≥ 100 nmol/L for MCF-7 and LNCaP and ≥200 nmol/L for DU-145, wtBRCA1-transfected cells had significantly higher ratios of GSH/GSSG than control cells (P < 0.001, two-tailed t tests).

 
BRCA1 Regulates ARE-driven Transcription.
The cytoprotective antioxidant response is mediated, in part, by the nuclear factor (erythroid-derived 2)-like factors NFE2L2 (NRF2) and NFE2L1 (NRF1) via the ARE (29) . In this regard, BRCA1 appears to regulate a subset of genes that are known to be regulated by NRF2 [NQO1, MGST2, G6PD, malic enzyme (ME2), and Gsta1/2] and/or that are known to contain AREs in their promoters (NQO1, MGST1/2, and Gsta1/2; refs. 30 , 31 ). This finding suggests that BRCA1 protection against oxidants may be mediated, in part, by NRF2. To test this hypothesis, we performed transient transfection assays using an NRF2-responsive reporter driven by the ARE of NQO1 (NQO1-ARE-Luc).

wtBRCA1 increased the basal activity of the NQO1-ARE-Luc reporter in DU-145, T47D, and MCF-7 cells by 1.6 to 6.6-fold, as compared with empty pcDNA3 vector or no vector (Fig. 4A)Citation . In these assays, MCF-7 cells showed larger wtBRCA1-induced increases in ARE-Luc activity than DU-145 or T47D cells, but all cell types showed significant increases in ARE-Luc activity (P < 0.01). Co-expression of wtBRCA1 with NRF2 caused a modest but significant increase in NRF2-stimulated NQO1-ARE-Luc activity in DU-145 and T47D cells (36 to 50%; P < 0.01) but caused a much larger increase in NRF2-stimulated activity (4.3-fold) in MCF-7 cells (P < 0.001; Fig. 4BCitation ). In plasmid dose-response studies of MCF-7 cells, increases in NQO1-ARE-Luc reporter activity were detectable at 10 to 50 ng per well of wtBRCA1 and were half maximal by 100 ng per well (Fig. 4C)Citation . An 8-fold stimulation of reporter activity was achieved at our standard plasmid dose (0.25 µg per well), and the stimulation reached a maximum of 11-fold at 2.5 µg of plasmid per well.



View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Fig. 4. BRCA1 stimulates NRF2 activity through the AREs. A and B. wtBRCA1 stimulates basal (A) and NRF2-induced (B) NQO1-ARE-Luc reporter activity. Cells were transfected with the indicated vector(s), postincubated for 24 hours, and assayed for luciferase activity. The values are expressed relative to the control (reporter only) and are means ± SE of n = 4 wells. *Represents a significant difference (P < 0.01, two-tailed t test). C, plasmid dose response for wtBRCA1 stimulation of basal NQO1-ARE-Luc activity. The total transfected DNA content was kept constant by the addition of empty pcDNA3 vector. D and E. BRCA1-siRNA inhibits basal (D) and NRF2-stimulated (E) NQO1-ARE-Luc activity. The cells were pretreated with no siRNA (transfection reagent only), control-siRNA, or BRCA1-siRNA for 72 hours, and the transcriptional assays were performed as described above. F, structural determinants for stimulation of NQO1-ARE-Luc activity. MCF-7 cells were cotransfected with NQO1-ARE-Luc and a set of expression vectors encoding mutant or truncated BRCA1 proteins, postincubated for 24 hours, and assayed for luciferase activity. The luciferase values are expressed relative to control cells transfected only with NQO-ARE-Luc (= 100%). G, BRCA1 protein expression levels in different cell types and in response to experimental manipulation. Proliferating cell cultures were harvested and analyzed for BRCA1 and {alpha}-actin by Western blotting. Lanes 1 and 2 show BRCA1 protein expression in EBV-immortalized peripheral blood lymphocyte-derived cell lines from female BRCA1 (185delAG) [R794] and BRCA2 (6174delT) [R1041] mutation carriers. Lanes 3 to 12 show BRCA1 protein levels in MCF-7 or DU-145 cells that were untreated (parental), exposed to BRCA1 or control siRNAs (50 nmol/L x 72 hours), or transfected with FLAG-wtBRCA1 or empty pCMV-Tag2B vectors (overnight transfected followed by a 24-hour postincubation).

 
In contrast to wtBRCA1, BRCA1-siRNA (but not a control-siRNA) significantly decreased basal and NRF2-stimulated NQO1-ARE-Luc activity (Fig. 4, D and E)Citation . Decreases in basal and NRF2-stimulated activity ranged from 60 to 100% (P < 0.001). These findings suggest that BRCA1 regulates NRF2 activity through the ARE over a wide range of intracellular BRCA1 protein levels. Next, we determined the BRCA1 structural requirements for stimulation of ARE activity with a series of previously described expression vectors encoding truncated or mutant BRCA1 proteins (Fig. 4FCitation ; refs. 12 , 14 , 15 ). These studies revealed that COOH-terminal truncations ({Delta} BamHI, {Delta} KpnI, and {Delta} EcoRI) or mutations (5382insC and C5365G) of BRCA1 retained the ability to stimulate reporter activity, but a point mutation in the NH2-terminal RING domain (T300G) or a NH2-terminal truncation abrogated the ability of BRCA1 to stimulate activity (Fig. 4F)Citation . These findings suggest that the NH2 terminus of BRCA1 is both necessary and sufficient to stimulate NQO1-ARE-Luc activity.

Fig. 4GCitation shows BRCA1 protein levels in MCF-7 and DU-145 cells experimentally manipulated to over- or underexpress BRCA1. As noted earlier (14) , DU-145 cells show low basal BRCA1 expression that is significantly increased by stable (Fig. 1A)Citation or transient (Fig. 4G)Citation expression of exogenous wtBRCA1. In this (Fig. 4G)Citation and a prior study (15) , basal BRCA1 protein levels in MCF-7 cells were significantly higher than in DU-145 cells were similar to or slightly less than those observed in wtBRCA1-transfected DU-145 cells. By way of comparison, BRCA1 levels in lymphoblastoid cell lines derived from a BRCA1 (185delAG) [R794] and a BRCA2 (6174delT) [R1041] mutation carrier were generally similar to the BRCA1 levels observed in untransfected MCF-7 cells or in wtBRCA1-transfected DU-145 cells (Fig. 4G)Citation . For both MCF-7 and DU-145 cells, BRCA1-siRNA abolished or nearly abolished BRCA1 protein expression, whereas the control-siRNA had little or no effect on protein expression. The physiologic significance of these findings is considered in the Discussion.

We used a dominant negative NRF2 expression vector (20) to determine whether the endogenous NRF2 protein is required for BRCA1 to stimulate the antioxidant response. Here, we found that co-expression of DN-NRF2 ablated basal NQO1-ARE-Luc activity (some of which is dependent upon endogenous BRCA1), as well as wtBRCA1-stimulated activity (P < 0.001; Fig. 5ACitation ). Consistent with these findings, transient expression of the DN-NRF2 sensitized MCF-7 cells to H2O2 and abrogated the ability of wtBRCA1 to protect MCF-7 cells against to H2O2 (P < 0.01; Fig. 4BCitation ).



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
 
Fig. 5. Inhibition of NRF2 blocks wtBRCA1 stimulation of antioxidant response. A. Dominant negative NRF2 (DN-NRF2) inhibits BRCA1-induced NQO1-ARE-Luc activity. Cotransfection of a DN-NRF2 into MCF-7 cells inhibited basal and wtBRCA1-induced NQO1-ARE-Luc activity (P < 0.001 for comparisons of cells transfected – versus + DN-NRF2). B. DN-NRF2 abrogates wtBRCA1-mediated protection of MCF-7 cells against H2O2. Cells were transfected ± empty pcDNA3 vector, ± wtBRCA1, and ± DN-NRF2 overnight, washed, and postincubated for 24 hours to allow gene expression. The cells were then analyzed for sensitivity to H2O2 using MTT assays, as described above. Control assays in which pcDNA3 vector was omitted (i.e., no vector and DN-NRF2 alone) showed no effect of the pcDNA3 vector and are not shown in the figure for clarity. At 100 to 400 nmol/L, wtBRCA1 protected while DN-NRF2 sensitized cells to H2O2 (P < 0.01). Addition of DN-NRF2 abolished the protection because of wtBRCA1 (P < 0.01).

 

    DISCUSSION
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
DNA microarray analyses of BRCA1 overexpressing and Brca1-mutant cells identified various categories of genes positively regulated by BRCA1, including genes involved in transcription, stress responses, signal transduction, DNA replication and repair, cell proliferation, metabolism, and other processes. A number of these findings were confirmed by using independent mRNA assays. We identified potential BRCA1-regulated genes consistent with its known functions in DNA repair and cell cycle regulation, e.g., deleted in split hand/split foot syndrome 1 (DSS1) [a BRCA2-interacting protein required for homologous recombination (32) ], a DNA cross-link repair gene (Dclre1a, also called SNM1), and several cell cycle regulatory genes [e.g., CDKN2C (p18), G0S2, and Gspt1]. Brca1-deficient cells, which exhibit a defect in centrosome function (16) , showed decreased expression of a major centrosome protein, centrosomin A (Csma), three mitotic kinases (Stk2, Stk10, and Clk), and a chromosome segregation gene (Ttc3).

Although the functional categorization of genes is somewhat arbitrary (many genes fit into more than one category), it appeared that overexpression (mutation) of BRCA1 led to increased (decreased) expression of a sizeable group of genes involved in the response to stress, including the antioxidant response, detoxification of xenobiotics, and drug metabolism. Genes up-regulated in BRCA1 overexpressing cells include GSTs and peroxidases (e.g., MGST1/2, GSTT1, GSTZ1, and GPX3), oxidoreductases (e.g., NQO1 and ME2), alcohol and aldehyde dehydrogenases (e.g., ADH5 and ALDH7), a paraoxonase (PON2), an AhR-like protein (MOP2), and other antioxidant proteins.

Consistent with these findings, Brca1-deficient MEFs showed decreased expression of stress-response genes, including Gsta2, Gpx3, Nrf2, Sod1, Ahr, and Sepp1, a selenoprotein that mediates protection against oxidative stress (33) . Mice deficient for the major antioxidant response transcription factor Nrf2 exhibited increased susceptibility to hyperoxic lung damage, a reduced expression of several ARE-dependent phase II drug-metabolizing enzymes, increased sensitivity to carcinogens, and decreased protection against carcinogenesis by chemoprevention agents (34 , 35) . Our findings suggest that BRCA1 regulates the expression of several genes that are known to be regulated by NRF2 and/or to contain AREs in their regulatory regions. A recent study identified Nrf2-regulated genes for which basal and/or inducible expression was increased in the small intestine of Nrf2+/+ relative to Nrf2–/– mice (31) . BRCA1 increased the expression of some of these Nrf2-regulated genes (NQO1, MGST1/2, Gsta2, G6PD, and ME2). BRCA1 also induced (and Brca1 mutation inhibited) expression of a glutathione peroxidase (GPX3), other isoforms of which are down-regulated in Nrf2–/– cells (31 , 34) . These results suggest an overlap in the genes regulated by BRCA1 versus NRF2.

Consistent with its ability to up-regulate antioxidant gene expression, BRCA1 overexpression conferred resistance, whereas BRCA1 mutation or underexpression conferred sensitivity to two different oxidizing agents (H2O2 and paraquat). Because peroxides and superoxide, which is generated by paraquat, are detoxified by distinct enzymatic pathways (e.g., those involving catalase versus superoxide dismutase, respectively), these findings suggest that BRCA1 may stimulate more than one antioxidant defense pathway. However, this remains to be demonstrated. BRCA1 is classified as a caretaker gene based on the findings that BRCA1 mutations lead to chromosomal instability and defects in DNA repair (reviewed in ref. 5 ). The ability of BRCA1 to protect against oxidative stress may contribute to its caretaker function because reactive oxygen species (e.g., H2O2, O2, and hydroxyl radicals) generated endogenously in mitochondria and other organelles can cause DNA damage (oxidation). In addition to endogenous reactive oxygen species, which contribute to carcinogenesis (36) , many DNA-damaging agents and xenobiotics cause oxidative stress, resulting in DNA damage, protein oxidation, and lipid peroxidation. Some of these lesions are detoxified by BRCA1-regulated genes (e.g., GSTs, GPXs, oxidoreductases, and paroxonases).

Consistent its ability to up-regulate antioxidant genes and protect against oxidants, wtBRCA1 attenuated the loss of GSH due to H2O2, thus helping stressed cells to maintain their redox balance. It is not clear how BRCA1 stimulates GSH production under oxidizing conditions. GSH is produced via two processes: (a) conversion of GSSG to GSH by glutathione reductase, which requires NADPH; and (b) de novo synthesis via {gamma}-glutamylcysteine synthetase (31) . Both glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) and malic enzyme (ME2), which are up-regulated by wtBRCA1, stimulate NADPH formation (process 1). Although {gamma}-glutamylcysteine synthetase was not on the list of BRCA1-regulated genes, {gamma}-glutamylcysteine synthetase in an NRF2/ARE-regulated gene, and BRCA1 stimulates NRF2/ARE activity. Finally, we reported recently that BRCA1 up-regulates the expression of the small heat shock protein HSP27 (19) , which functions to maintain the redox balance, possibly by helping to maintain the activity of cellular redox enzymes (37) . Small heat shock proteins such as HSP27 protect cells against oxidative stress, in part, by enhancing G6PD activity (37) , which helps to generate the reducing power for conversion of GSSG to GSH. In this regard, our findings suggest that G6PD may be a transcriptional target of BRCA1. The role of HSP27 and other small heat shock proteins in the BRCA1-mediated protection against oxidative and generation of GSH in stressed cells is a subject for additional investigation.

We have established the principle that BRCA1 stimulates ARE signaling and NRF2 transcriptional activity, although the extent of stimulation varied in different cell lines. The stimulation of NQO1-ARE-Luc activity and protection against oxidative stress by wtBRCA1 were ablated by a DN-NRF2, suggesting that NRF2 may be downstream of BRCA1 in an antioxidant response pathway. Although DN-NRF2 also abolished basal ARE-Luc activity and sensitized cells to oxidative stress in the absence of exogenous wtBRCA1, the siRNA experiments suggest that endogenous BRCA1 contributes to basal ARE-Luc activity and resistance to oxidative stress. Hence, some of the effects of DN-NRF2 could be due to pathways downstream of the endogenous BRCA1.

The NH2 terminus of BRCA1, including the RING domain, was necessary and sufficient to stimulate ARE signaling. A similar pattern (i.e., requirement for the NH2 terminus but not the COOH-terminus of BRCA1) was observed for stimulation of the HSP27 promoter activity and TERT promoter activity by BRCA1 (15 , 19) . The siRNA studies suggest the relevance of our findings to sporadic cancers in which BRCA1 expression is reduced, but the implications for BRCA1 mutant cancers are unclear at present because we do not know the extent to which BRCA1 mutant proteins are expressed in human cancers. Although most cancer-associated BRCA1 mutations are protein truncating mutations that should retain the ability to stimulate ARE signaling, the ability to stimulate ARE signaling would be compromised if the mutant BRCA1 proteins are underexpressed or rapidly degraded. Moreover, one cancer-associated BRCA1 mutation, T300G (which affects the NH2-terminal RING domain), abrogated the ability of BRCA1 to stimulate ARE-Luc activity. Our previous work indicates that the BRCA1-T300G mutant protein is stable and is well expressed (12 , 15) .

The ability of BRCA1 to protect against oxidant toxicity may be due, in part, to stimulation of antioxidant defenses (e.g., increased expression of antioxidant genes, increased production of GSH, and stimulation of NRF2 transcriptional activity). However, because DNA is a major target of oxidizing agents, the ability of BRCA1 to stimulate DNA repair (5) could also contribute to its cytoprotective activity. The extent to which BRCA1 functions to prevent DNA damage by enhancing detoxification of peroxides and superoxides as opposed to repairing established DNA lesions remains to be determined.

Our studies used three different models to investigate BRCA1 function: (a) overexpression (via stable or transient expression of exogenous wtBRCA1); (b) underexpression (via RNA interference); and (c) inactivation via gene deletion ({Delta} exon 11, which removes most of the Brca1 protein). Relative to model 1 (overexpression), studies of mice indicate that Brca1 is particularly highly expressed in the mammary gland in proliferating cells undergoing differentiation during puberty and pregnancy (38 , 39) . It has been suggested that the BRCA1 may play a particularly important role in preventing tumors during specific windows of time (e.g., puberty and pregnancy) in which it is highly expressed. The BRCA1 overexpression model might reflect these time periods when BRCA1is normally overexpressed. This expression pattern may also be reflected in vitro because BRCA1 expression is greatly increased when cultured mammary epithelial cells are forced to undergo differentiation (e.g., by the use of a hormonal mixture; refs. 40 , 41 ). It remains to be proved whether these periods in which BRCA1 is highly expressed are directly related to its tumor suppressor function.

The role of endogenous BRCA1 in mediating protection against oxidative stress and/or stimulating NRF2 activity was documented in two different models (deletion of exon 11 in MEFs and knockdown of BRCA1 protein levels with an siRNA). The exon 11 deletion model may reflect the situation in BRCA1 mutant cancers, where the wild-type BRCA1 is usually lost (5 , 42) . We also note that the BRCA1 {Delta} exon 11 protein corresponds to a naturally occurring splice variant of BRCA1 in humans and mice (25 , 43) . As noted earlier, BRCA1 expression is often decreased or absent in sporadic breast cancers that do not exhibit a BRCA1 mutation (3 , 4) . This loss of BRCA1 expression may be due, in part, to epigenetic causes (hypermethylation of the BRCA1 promoter) and/or haploinsufficiency (loss of one BRCA1 allele; refs. 4 , 5 , 44 ). Regardless of the etiology, model 3 (BRCA1-siRNA) may reflect the underexpression of BRCA1 commonly observed in sporadic breast and ovarian cancers. The finding that BRCA1 can modulate various aspects of antioxidant defense over a wide range of BRCA1 expression levels is consistent with a physiologic role for BRCA1 in this pathway.

Taken together, our findings suggest a novel mechanism by which BRCA1 may prevent cancer development by enhancing antioxidant defenses, thereby protecting cells against damage caused by exogenous and/or endogenous reactive oxygen species. However, a definitive linkage between BRCA1-mediated protection against oxidative stress and tumor suppression remains to be demonstrated. They also suggest that in addition to its established roles in the repair of DNA damage, BRCA1 may prevent DNA damage due to ionizing radiation and other sources through the detoxification of reactive oxygen species, although this needs to be proven. Finally, these studies suggest a collaboration between BRCA1 and a transcription factor (NRF2) that functions to mobilize the cell’s antioxidant machinery.


    FOOTNOTES
 
Grant support: USPHS Grants R01-CA80000, R01-CA82599, and R01-ES09169, Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Grant BCTR0201295 (E. Rosen) and United States Army Idea Award DAMD17-02-1-0525 (I. Bae).

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.

Note: Supplementary data for this article can be found at Cancer Research Online (http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org).

Requests for reprints: Eliot M. Rosen, Department of Oncology, Lombardi Cancer Center, Georgetown University, 3970 Reservoir Road, NW, Box 571469, Washington, DC 20057-1469. Phone: (202) 687-7695; Fax: (202) 687-7256; E-mail: emr36{at}georgetown.edu

4 Internet address: http://www.aecom.yu.edu/cancer/new/cores/microarray. Back

Received 4/ 6/04. Revised 7/16/04. Accepted 8/16/04.


    REFERENCES
 Top
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Miki Y, Swensen J, Shattuck-Eidens D, et al A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science (Wash. DC) 1994;266:66-71.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Thompson D, Easton DF, and the Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Cancer Incidence in BRCA1 mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst (Bethesda) 2002;94:1358-65.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Wilson CA, Ramos L, Villasenor MR, et al Localization of human BRCA1 and its loss in high-grade, non-inherited breast carcinomas. Nat Genet 1999;21:236-40.[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Esteller M, Silva JM, Dominguez G, et al Promoter hypermethylation and BRCA1 inactivation in sporadic breast and ovarian tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst (Bethesda) 2000;92:564-9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Rosen EM, Fan S, Pestell RG, Goldberg ID The BRCA1 gene in breast cancer. J Cell Physiol 2003;196:19-41.[CrossRef][Medline]
  6. Monteiro AN, August A, Hanafusa H Evidence for a transcription activation function of BRCA1 C-terminal region. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996;93:13595-9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Anderson SF, Schlegel BP, Nakajima T, Wolpin ES, Parvin JD BRCA1 protein is linked to the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme complex via RNA helicase A. Nat Genet 1998;19:254-6.[CrossRef][Medline]
  8. Pao GM, Janknecht R, Ruffner H, Hunter T, Verma IM CBP/p300 interact with and function as transcriptional coactivators of BRCA1. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000;97:1020-5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Yarden RI, Brody LC BRCA1 interacts with components of the histone deacetylase complex. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998;96:4983-8.
  10. Wang Q, Zhang H, Kajino K, Greene MI BRCA1 binds c-Myc and inhibits its transcriptional and transforming activity in cells. Oncogene 1998;17:1939-48.[CrossRef][Medline]
  11. Ouichi T, Monteiro AN, August A, Aaronson SA, Hanafusa H BRCA1 regulates p53-dependent gene expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998;95:2302-6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Fan S, Wang J-A, Ma YX, et al Role of direct interaction in BRCA1 inhibition of estrogen receptor activity. Oncogene 2001;20:77-87.[CrossRef][Medline]
  13. Fan S, Yuan R-Q, Ma Y-X, Meng Q, Goldberg ID, Rosen EM Mutant BRCA1 genes antagonize phenotype of wild-type BRCA1. Oncogene 2001;20:8215-35.[CrossRef][Medline]
  14. Fan S, Wang J-A, Yuan R-Q, et al BRCA1 as a human prostate tumor suppressor, modulation of proliferation, damage responses, and expression of regulatory proteins. Oncogene 1998;16:3069-83.[CrossRef][Medline]
  15. Xiong J, Fan S, Meng Q, et al BRCA1 inhibition of telomerase activity in cultured cells. Mol Cell Biol 2003;23:8668-90.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Xu X, Weaver Z, Linke SP, et al Centrosome amplification and a defective G2-M cell cycle checkpoint induce genetic instability in BRCA1 exon 11 isoform-deficient cells. Mol Cell 1999;3:389-95.[CrossRef][Medline]
  17. Yuan R-Q, Fan S, Achary M, Stewart DM, Goldberg ID, Rosen EM Altered gene expression pattern in cultured human breast cancer cells treated with hepatocyte growth factor/scatter factor (HGF/SF) in the setting of DNA damage. Cancer Res 2001;61:8022-31.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Carter TH, Liu K, Ralph W, Jr., et al Diindolylmethane alters gene expression in human keratinocytes in vitro. J Nutr 2002;132:3314-24.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Ma YX, Fan S, Xiong J, et al Role of BRCA1 in heat shock response. Oncogene 2003;22:10-27.[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Bloom D, Dhakshinamoorthy S, Jaiswal AK Site-directed mutagenesis of cysteine to serine in the DNA binding region of Nrf2 decreases its capacity to up-regulate antioxidant response element-mediated expression and antioxidant induction of NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 gene. Oncogene 2002;21:2191-200.[CrossRef][Medline]
  21. Draganov DI, La Du BN Pharmacogenetics of paraoxonases, a brief review. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol 2004;369:8-88.
  22. Nagai T, Yamada K, Kim HC, et al Cognition impairment in the genetic model of aging klotho gene mutant mice, a role of oxidative stress. FASEB J 2003;17:50-2.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Chung KK, Dawson VL, Dawson TM New insights into Parkinson’s disease. J Neurol 2003;250 Suppl 3:III:15-24.
  24. Cullen KJ, Newkirk KA, Schumaker LM, Aldosari N, Rone JD, Haddad BR Glutathione S-transferase pi amplification is associated with cisplatin resistance in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cell lines and primary tumors. Cancer Res 2003;63:8097-102.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Huber LJ, Yang TW, Sarkisian CJ, Master SR, Deng CX, Chodosh LA Impaired DNA damage response in cells expressing an exon 11-deleted murine Brca1 variant that localizes to nuclear foci. Mol Cell Biol 2001;21:4005-15.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Welcsh PL, Lee MK, Gonzalez-Hernandez RM, et al BRCA1 transcriptionally regulates genes involved in breast tumorigenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002;28:7560-5.
  27. MacLachlan TK, Somasundaram K, Sgagias M, et al BRCA1 effects on the cell cycle and the DNA damage response are linked to altered gene expression. J Biol Chem 2000;275:2777-85.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Aprelikova O, Pace AJ, Fang B, Koller BH, Liu ET BRCA1 is a selective coactivator of 14-3-3 sigma gene transcription in mouse embryonic stem cells. J Biol Chem 2001;76:25647-50.
  29. Nguyen T, Sherratt PJ, Pickett CB Regulatory mechanisms controlling gene expression mediated by the antioxidant response element. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 2003;43:233-60.[CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Kelner MJ, Bagnell RD, Montoya MA, Estes LA, Forsberg L, Morgenstern R Structural organization of the microsomal glutathione S-transferase gene (MGST1) on chromosome 12p13.1-13.2. Identification of the correct promoter region and demonstration of transcriptional regulation in response to oxidative stress. J Biol Chem 2000;275:13000-6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Thimmulappa RK, Mai KH, Srisuma S, Kensler TW, Yamamoto M, Biswal S Identification of Nrf2-regulated genes induced by the chemopreventive agent sulforaphane by oligonucleotide microarray. Cancer Res 2002;62:5196-203.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Yang H, Jeffrey PD, Miller J, et al BRCA2 function in DNA binding and recombination from a BRCA2-DSS1-ssDNA structure. Science (Wash. DC) 2002;297:1837-48.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Holben DH, Smith AM The diverse role of selenium within selenoproteins, a review. J Am Diet Assoc 1999;99:836-43.[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. Cho HY, Jedlicka AE, Reddy SP, et al Role of NRF2 in protection against hyperoxic lung injury in mice. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 2002;26:175-82.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Ramos-Gomez M, Kwak MK, Dolan PM, et al Sensitivity to carcinogenesis is increased and chemoprotective efficacy of enzyme inducers is lost in nrf2 transcription factor-deficient mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001;98:3410-5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Kovacic P, Jacintho JD Mechanisms of carcinogenesis, focus on oxidative stress and electron transfer. Curr Med Chem 2001;8:773-96.[Medline]
  37. Preville X, Salvemini F, Giraud S, et al Mammalian small stress proteins protect against oxidative stress through their ability to increase glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase activity and by maintaining optimal cellular detoxifying machinery. Exp Cell Res 1999;247:61-78.[CrossRef][Medline]
  38. Lane TF, Deng C, Elson A, Lyu MS, Kozak CA, Leder P Expression of Brca1 is associated with terminal differentiation of ectodermally and mesodermally derived tissues in mice. Genes Dev 1995;9:2712-22.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Rajan JV, Marquis ST, Gardner HP, Chodosh LD Developmental expression of Brca2 colocalizes with Brca1 and is associated with proliferation and differentiation in multiple tissues. Devel Biol 1997;184:385-401.[CrossRef][Medline]
  40. Rajan JV, Wang M, Marquis ST, Chodosh LA Brca2 is coordinately regulated with Brca1 during proliferation and differentiation in mammalian epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996;93:3078-83.
  41. Kubista M, Rosner M, Kubista E, Bernaschek G, Hengstschlager M Brca1 regulates in vitro differentiation of mammary epithelial cells. Oncogene 2002;21:4747-56.[CrossRef][Medline]
  42. Merajver SD, Frank TS, Xu J, et al Germline BRCA1 mutations and loss of the wild-type allele in tumors from families with early onset breast and ovarian cancer. Clin Cancer Res 1995;1:539-44.[Abstract]
  43. Thakur S, Zhang HB, Peng Y, et al Localization of BRCA1 and a splice variant identifies the nuclear localization signal. Mol Cell Biol 1997;17:444-52.[Abstract]
  44. Staff S, Isola J, Tanner M Haplo-insufficiency of BRCA1 in sporadic breast cancer. Cancer Res 2003;63:4978-83.[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
S. Fan, Q. Meng, T. Saha, F. H. Sarkar, and E. M. Rosen
Low Concentrations of Diindolylmethane, a Metabolite of Indole-3-Carbinol, Protect against Oxidative Stress in a BRCA1-Dependent Manner
Cancer Res., August 1, 2009; 69(15): 6083 - 6091.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Molecular Cancer TherapeuticsHome page
M. Loignon, W. Miao, L. Hu, A. Bier, T. A. Bismar, P. J. Scrivens, K. Mann, M. Basik, A. Bouchard, P. O. Fiset, et al.
Cul3 overexpression depletes Nrf2 in breast cancer and is associated with sensitivity to carcinogens, to oxidative stress, and to chemotherapy
Mol. Cancer Ther., August 1, 2009; 8(8): 2432 - 2440.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Physiol. GenomicsHome page
A. Pautz, P. Rauschkolb, N. Schmidt, J. Art, M. Oelze, P. Wenzel, U. Forstermann, A. Daiber, and H. Kleinert
Effects of nitroglycerin or pentaerithrityl tetranitrate treatment on the gene expression in rat hearts: evidence for cardiotoxic and cardioprotective effects
Physiol Genomics, July 9, 2009; 38(2): 176 - 185.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
S. Fan, Q. Meng, J. J. Laterra, and E. M. Rosen
Role of Src Signal Transduction Pathways in Scatter Factor-mediated Cellular Protection
J. Biol. Chem., March 20, 2009; 284(12): 7561 - 7577.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Genomics ProteomicsHome page
P. SOORIAKUMARAN, P. MACANAS-PIRARD, G. BUCCA, A. HENDERSON, S.E.M. LANGLEY, R.W. LAING, C.P. SMITH, E.E. LAING, and H.M. COLEY
A Gene Expression Profiling Approach Assessing Celecoxib in a Randomized Controlled Trial in Prostate Cancer
Cancer Genomics Proteomics, March 1, 2009; 6(2): 93 - 99.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann OncolHome page
K. A. Thasni, S. Rakesh, G. Rojini, T. Ratheeshkumar, G. Srinivas, and S. Priya
Estrogen-dependent cell signaling and apoptosis in BRCA1-blocked BG1 ovarian cancer cells in response to plumbagin and other chemotherapeutic agents
Ann. Onc., April 1, 2008; 19(4): 696 - 705.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
S. Seng, H. K. Avraham, S. Jiang, S. Yang, M. Sekine, N. Kimelman, H. Li, and S. Avraham
The Nuclear Matrix Protein, NRP/B, Enhances Nrf2-Mediated Oxidative Stress Responses in Breast Cancer Cells
Cancer Res., September 15, 2007; 67(18): 8596 - 8604.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
J. Kotsopoulos, P. Ghadirian, A. El-Sohemy, H. T. Lynch, C. Snyder, M. Daly, S. Domchek, S. Randall, B. Karlan, P. Zhang, et al.
The CYP1A2 Genotype Modifies the Association Between Coffee Consumption and Breast Cancer Risk Among BRCA1 Mutation Carriers
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2007; 16(5): 912 - 916.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
H. J. Kang, H. J. Kim, S. K. Kim, R. Barouki, C.-H. Cho, K. K. Khanna, E. M. Rosen, and I. Bae
BRCA1 Modulates Xenobiotic Stress-inducible Gene Expression by Interacting with ARNT in Human Breast Cancer Cells
J. Biol. Chem., May 26, 2006; 281(21): 14654 - 14662.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
H. J. Kang, H. J. Kim, J.-K. Rih, T. L. Mattson, K. W. Kim, C.-H. Cho, J. S. Isaacs, and I. Bae
BRCA1 Plays a Role in the Hypoxic Response by Regulating HIF-1{alpha} Stability and by Modulating Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Expression
J. Biol. Chem., May 12, 2006; 281(19): 13047 - 13056.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol Cancer ResHome page
H. Lu, W. Ouyang, and C. Huang
Inflammation, a Key Event in Cancer Development
Mol. Cancer Res., April 1, 2006; 4(4): 221 - 233.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
C. A. Piantadosi and H. B. Suliman
Mitochondrial Transcription Factor A Induction by Redox Activation of Nuclear Respiratory Factor 1
J. Biol. Chem., January 6, 2006; 281(1): 324 - 333.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
Y. Ma, P. Katiyar, L. P. Jones, S. Fan, Y. Zhang, P. A. Furth, and E. M. Rosen
The Breast Cancer Susceptibility Gene BRCA1 Regulates Progesterone Receptor Signaling in Mammary Epithelial Cells
Mol. Endocrinol., January 1, 2006; 20(1): 14 - 34.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BloodHome page
M. E. Tome, D. B. F. Johnson, L. M. Rimsza, R. A. Roberts, T. M. Grogan, T. P. Miller, L. W. Oberley, and M. M. Briehl
A redox signature score identifies diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients with a poor prognosis
Blood, November 15, 2005; 106(10): 3594 - 3601.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
E. Kowalska, S. A. Narod, T. Huzarski, S. Zajaczek, J. Huzarska, B. Gorski, and J. Lubinski
Increased Rates of Chromosome Breakage in BRCA1 Carriers Are Normalized by Oral Selenium Supplementation
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2005; 14(5): 1302 - 1306.
[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 Email this article to a friend
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 Bae, I.
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, E. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bae, I.
Right arrow Articles by Rosen, E. 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