| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Regular Articles |
Stimulates the Proliferation of Human Breast and Prostate Cancer Cell Lines
1 Biomedical Research Centre and Cancer Research United Kingdom Molecular Pharmacology Unit, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, United Kingdom; 2 Atherosclerosis Research Unit, King Gustaf V Research Institute, Karolinska Institute, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; and 3 Cancer Research United Kingdom Molecular Oncology Unit, Weatherall lnstitute of Molecular Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, England, United Kingdom
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 Top ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
[PPAR/ß (NR1C2)] has been implicated in colorectal carcinogenesis by various molecular genetic observations. These observations have recently been supported by studies of activation of PPAR by pharmacological agents. Here we present the first report of the stimulation of breast and prostate cancer cell growth using PPAR selective agonists. Activation of PPAR with compound F stimulated proliferation in breast (T47D, MCF7) and prostate (LNCaP, PNT1A) cell lines, which are responsive to sex hormones. Conversely, we have found that several steroid-independent cell lines, including colon lines, were unresponsive to compound F. These findings were confirmed with an additional high-affinity PPAR agonist, GW501516. Conditional expression of PPAR in MCF7 Tet-On cells resulted in a doxycycline-enhanced response to GW501516, thus providing direct genetic evidence for the role of PPAR in the proliferative response to this drug. Activation of PPAR in T47D cells resulted in increased expression of the proliferation marker Cdk2 and also vascular endothelial growth factor 
(VEGF) and its receptor, FLT-1, thus, suggesting that PPAR may initiate an autocrine loop for cellular proliferation and possibly angiogenesis. Consistent with this hypothesis, we demonstrated a pro-proliferative effect of GW501516 on human umbilical vein endothelial cell cultures and found that GW501516 also regulated the expression of VEGF and FLT-1 in these cells. Our observations provide the first evidence that activation of PPAR can result in increased growth in breast and prostate cancer cell lines and primary endothelial cells and supports the possibility that PPAR antagonists may be of therapeutic value in the treatment of breast and prostate cancer. |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
/ß (PPAR/ß) is an ubiquitously expressed nuclear receptor that has been implicated in adipose tissue formation, brain development, placental function, wound healing, and atherosclerosis (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
. Three groups have reported targeted disruption of the PPAR gene in mice. One group reported relatively viable PPAR null mice (5)
. In contrast, another group reported over 90% mid-gestation lethality with placental defects (2)
, and the third group has reported almost complete prenatal lethality (4)
. The reason for the differences in viability among these three groups remains unknown. In both studies in which viable PPAR null mice were analyzed, it was found that PPAR null animals were reduced in size both in utero and neonatally, and had smaller adipose stores. Both PPAR homozygous and PPAR heterozygous null mice have been shown to have altered skin function (5)
. The skin defect has since been explored in detail using PPAR null embryonic cells, and this work revealed an important role for PPAR in the suppression of apoptosis in keratinocytes (6)
.
PPAR has been implicated in colorectal carcinogenesis by several studies. PPAR was first linked with colon cancer by the observation that PPAR gene expression is greatly repressed on overexpression of the wild-type adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene in a colon cancer cell line (7)
. Analysis of PPAR expression in matched normal and tumor samples revealed that it is up-regulated in tumors (8)
and that PPAR gene expression is increased by activated Ras signaling (9)
. It has also been postulated that PPAR may mediate cellular responses to the chemopreventive agent, sulindac sulfide (5
, 7)
. Furthermore, deletion of the PPAR gene in a human colon cancer cell line by homologous recombination resulted in a profound loss of tumorigenicity in nude mice (10)
.
Although all of these results suggest a pro-proliferative role for PPAR in tumor growth, attempts to demonstrate such an effect by ligand activation of PPAR have largely been unsuccessful. Studies of the biology of PPAR have been hampered by the lack of availability of potent and specific ligands for PPAR. Prostacyclin (PGI2) is the most selective eicosanoid agonist known for PPAR, and this has been shown to have no effect on the proliferation of colorectal cancer cell lines (8)
. In contrast, prostacyclin and its synthetic analogs display antimetastatic potential in vivo, and this appears to be mediated via the membrane-bound prostaglandin receptors (11)
. Several highly selective and potent ligands for PPAR have been described that activate PPAR at low nanomolar concentrations, and recently we have demonstrated that one of these compounds, GW501516, can stimulate the proliferation of the human hepatocarcinoma cell line HepG2 (12)
. This compound has also recently been shown to stimulate intestinal polyp growth in the adenomatous polyposis coli/min mouse model of colorectal cancer (13)
.
In this study, we have examined the effect of highly potent and selective PPAR agonists on the growth of a range of human epithelial cell lines. We have found that, under normal culture conditions, PPAR activation has no effect on cell growth. However, under conditions of hormonal deprivation, PPAR activation can stimulate the proliferation of certain sex hormone-sensitive cell lines of the breast and prostate, but not colon cancer cell lines. This study reveals a novel pathway for breast and prostate cancer growth and suggests the potential utility of PPAR antagonists in the treatment or prevention of breast and prostate cancer.
|
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Generation of Cell Lines for the Conditional Expression of PPAR.
The coding sequence of human PPAR (hPPAR) was amplified using primers PRMG15 (5'-CTAGTCTAGAATGGAGCAGCCACAGGAGGAAGC-3') and PRMG3 (5'-CTAGTCTAGATTAGTACATGTCCTTGTAGATCTCC-TG-3'; XbaI sites underlined and the ATG start codon in bold) and were cloned into plasmid pUHD10-3,4
thus creating plasmid pMGD7. Plasmid pMGD36 was generated by cloning the BamHI fragment of pMGD7 containing PPAR into pTREHyg (Clontech). The integrity of the PPAR coding sequence was confirmed by sequencing.
A doxycycline-responsive derivative of the breast cancer cell line MCF7 producing the Tet-On transactivator protein (MCF7-Tet-On; Clontech) was transfected with plasmid pMGD36 using LipofectAMINE Plus according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Invitrogen). Hygromycin B (500 µg/ml)- and G418 (100 µg/ml)-resistant clones were selected and expanded and were maintained under hygromycin B and G418 selection (each at 100 µg/ml).
PPAR Agonists.
The structures and pharmacology of compound F and GW501516 have been described previously (1
, 12
, 13
, 15
, 16)
. Compound F was a gift from GlaxoSmithKline (Stevenage, United Kingdom) and GW501516 was synthesized by Synthelec AB, Lund, Sweden; the selectivity of this compound was described by Oliver et al. (15)
. Compound F has an EC50 for hPPAR of 2 nM, activates PPAR
at concentrations >200 nM and PPAR at concentrations >10 µM (1)
. GW501516 activates hPPAR with an EC50 of 1 nM and does not activate PPAR or at concentrations of less than 1 µM (12
, 15)
. In addition, GW501516 has also been shown not to activate any other member of the human nuclear receptor superfamily at the concentrations used in this study (15)
.
Cell Proliferation Assays.
For cell proliferation assays, all of the cell lines apart from endothelial cells were seeded in RPMI 1640 (phenol red-free) containing 5% dextran charcoal-stripped FCS (DCFCS) and 2 mM glutamine for all cells other than MCF7 cells, for which this medium was supplemented with 10-12 M estradiol. Cells were seeded at a density of 5000 cells/well in 24-well culture plates. Cells were treated with compound F, with GW501516, or with vehicle (
0.1% DMSO); and the medium was replenished every 3rd day. The relative cell numbers were measured by a colorimetric assay for endogenous hexosaminidase activity (17)
. For cell proliferation assays, the endothelial cells were seeded in phenol red-free large-vessel endothelial cell-growth medium, containing 2% DCFCS, human epidermal growth factor, fibroblast growth factor with heparin, hydrocortisone, gentamicin (25 µg/ml), and amphotericin B (50 ng/ml) in 96-well plates coated with 30 µg/ml human plasma fibronectin (Sigma). Cells were treated with recombinant 20 ng/ml vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-165 (R&D systems), 1, 10, 20, 50, and 100 nM GW501516, or vehicle for up to 14 days. Cells were replenished with fresh medium every 3rd day, and relative cell numbers were quantified as above.
Western Blot Analysis.
Cell cultures that were 80–90% confluent growing in regular medium were lysed in SDS/PAGE loading buffer and were analyzed by Western blot using standard procedures (18)
. The PPAR antiserum was raised against bacterially expressed full-length hPPAR and was a gift from Dr. David Bell, Nottingham University (Nottingham, United Kingdom). This serum was used at a dilution of 1:2000. A peroxidase-conjugated, mouse antirabbit IgG antiserum (Sigma) was used as a secondary detection reagent at a dilution of 1:3000, and the results were visualized using enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL+) as described by the manufacturer (Amersham).
Immunohistochemistry.
Cultures were treated with 2 µg/ml doxycycline or DMSO for 48 h and then were fixed in fresh 4% paraformaldehyde. Immunostaining was performed using standard procedures (18)
with an antiserum raised against the AB domain (amino acids 1–100) of hPPAR. This serum was used at a dilution of 1:500. A FITC-conjugated mouse antirabbit IgG antiserum (Sigma) was used as a secondary detection reagent at a dilution of 1:320. Chromatin counterstaining was performed using 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; Molecular Probes).
Transient Transfection and Reporter Assays.
For transient transfection, cells were seeded at a density of 8 x 105 cells/well in 6 well plates in RPMI 1640 containing 5% DCFCS. The following day the medium was removed, replenished with serum free medium and transfected using LipofectAMINE Plus (Life Technologies, Inc.) with pFABPLuc reporter vector (1)
and the internal control pSVßgal (Promega). Drug treatments were started the day after transfection and were performed in RPMI 1640 containing 5% DCFCS. For the estrogen response element (ERE) reporter experiments, cells were transfected with pERELuc (19)
and the internal control pSVßgal. The cells were harvested 48 h posttransfection. Luciferase and ß-galactosidase activity was measured in the resulting lysates using the appropriate assay kits (Promega, Roche). The results are expressed as luciferase/ß-galactosidase ratios.
Cell Cycle Analysis.
T47D cells were plated out at 1 x 106 cells/dish in RPMI 1640, 10% FBS in 10 cm dishes and allowed to attach for 24 h. The medium was then changed to phenol red free RPMI 1640, 0.1% FBS containing GW501516 (50 nM), Compound F (50 nM), estradiol (10 nM) or DMSO for 72 h. Cells were labeled with 30 µM bromodeoxyuridine (BrdUrd, Sigma Aldrich) in tissue culture medium at 37°C for 15 min. Cells were then rinsed with PBS, trypsinized, added into medium, pelleted by centrifugation at 1000 rpm for 5 min, and resuspended in 1 ml PBS. The cell suspension was added dropwise to 3 ml of ethanol while gently vortexing. Cells were fixed at 4°C for a minimum of 2 h, after which, cells were centrifuged at 2500 rpm for 5 min and 2 ml of prewarmed pepsin (1 mg/ml, pH 1.5) was added. Samples were mixed for 30 min at 37°C and pelleted at 2500 rpm for 5 min. 1 ml of 2M HCl was added and samples incubated for 15 min at room temperature. The sample was then diluted in 5 ml of PBS before centrifuging at 2500 rpm for 5 min, this step was repeated with a final wash of antibody buffer (PBS, 0.5% BSA, and 0.5% Tween 20) and samples were centrifuged. Pellets were resuspended in 200 µl antibody buffer containing a 1:50 dilution of anti-bromodeoxyuridine monoclonal antibody (Becton-Dickinson) and incubated for 1 h at room temperature. 5 ml of PBS was added and samples pelleted by centrifugation. FITC conjugated antimouse antibody (diluted to 20 µg/ml in antibody buffer) was added and pellets resuspended and left at room temperature for 30 min. The sample was then diluted to 5 ml with PBS and centrifuged as before. The final pellet was resuspended in PBS containing 25 µg/ml propidium iodide and sorted on a Becton Dickinson FACScan Flow Cytometer. The resulting dual propidium iodide and FITC fluorescence profiles were analyzed using Cell Quest software (Becton Dickinson).
RNA Analysis.
For RNA analysis, 8 x 105 cells were plated in 6-well plates in phenol red-free RPMI containing 5% DCFCS and 2 mM glutamine. The following day the medium was changed and replenished with estradiol or compound F, or with DMSO. Experiments were performed with triplicate cultures and repeated three times. The cells were treated for 22 h, cells were harvested and, RNA extractions were performed as per the manufacturer’s protocol (RNA-Bee; Tel-Test Inc). The concentration of RNA was determined by absorbance at 260 nm. The RNA was then subjected to DNase treatment and cDNA was synthesized. TAQMAN quantitative real-time PCR analysis was carried out on the cDNA using reagents from Applied Biosystems. Relative levels of mRNA were calculated using the values obtained for each target gene compared with the value obtained for 18S rRNA (Applied Biosystems). The probes and primers used in the assays are described in Table 1
.
|
Statistical Analysis.
Graphpad Prism Version 3 for Macintosh was used for all statistical tests (GraphPad Software, SanDiego, CA). Standard Student t tests were used to test differences between samples. One-way ANOVA was used to examine the significance of the dose response in Fig. 2F
with a Dunnet’s post-test to examine the relationship between treatment groups and the control group. Two-way ANOVA was used to test the relationship between doxycycline treatment and GW501516 treatment on the 15-day proliferation of MCF7 Tet-On cells overexpressing PPAR in Fig. 7F
.
|
|
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Expression in Cancer Cell Lines. mRNA levels were compared between four breast cancer cell lines (MCF7, T47D, MDAMB-231, BT-20), three colon cancer cell lines (HCA-7, HT29, SW480), two prostate cancer cell lines (PC3, DU145), and one immortalized prostate epithelial cell line (PNT1A). The level of PPAR mRNA varied less than 5-fold among the cancer lines, with most cell lines expressing within a 2-fold range (Fig. 1A)
. Examination of PPAR protein expression in breast cancer cell lines by Western blot analysis demonstrated that PPAR protein levels do not totally correlate with mRNA levels (Fig. 1B)
. In particular, PPAR protein was barely detectable in MDA–MB-231 cells, which displayed similar levels of mRNA to the other cell lines. This observation was confirmed with another antibody raised against the AB domain of PPAR (data not shown).
|
Agonists Are Pro-Proliferative Agents in Hormone-Responsive Cell Lines., we proceeded to investigate the effects of compound F, a PPAR-selective agonist, on cell proliferation in each of these cell lines. Under normal culture conditions (high plating density, 10% FCS) no effects of compound F could be observed in any cell line (data not shown). However, we observed that compound F has the potential to stimulate proliferation on hormone deprivation of low-density cultures. Both T47D and MCF7 human breast cancer cells were growth stimulated by 10 nM compound F (Fig. 2A)
. In contrast, compound F did not have a proliferative effect on MDA-MB-231 or BT-20 cell lines. Importantly, all of these cell lines were growth stimulated by the addition of 10% FCS and only the known estrogen receptor (ER)-positive cell lines responded to added estrogen (data not shown). At the level of plating and serum used in these assays, the untreated T47D cells grew very poorly over a 2-week period; however, growth stimulation by compound F was evident after 3–7 days of culture (Fig. 2B)
. The magnitude of the growth stimulation by compound F represented 
20–40% of the magnitude of the maximal growth stimulation by estradiol (Fig. 2C)
. The hypothesis that the pro-proliferative responses to compound F represent a PPAR-specific phenomenon was supported by the observation that an unrelated, highly selective PPAR agonist, GW501516 (EC50 for PPAR = 1 nM) stimulated the proliferation of T47D cells to a similar extent as was observed with compound F (Fig. 2C)
.
We also examined the effect of compound F on the proliferation of a number of colon cancer cell lines and did not observe any effects on the proliferation of these cell lines in various experiments in which we modulated both the plating density and the serum concentrations. Shown are the negative results obtained using 5000 cells/well and RPMI containing 5% DCFCS (Fig. 2D)
. Two of the prostate cell lines did, however, respond to compound F, and these cell lines were also the prostate cell lines, known to be responsive to sex hormones (Fig. 2E)
. Indeed, the proliferation of the immortalized normal prostate epithelial (PNT1A) cells was stimulated by compound F, as was LnCaP, which is an androgen-responsive, poorly tumorigenic cancer cell line. This is in contrast to the steroid-insensitive and highly tumorigenic cell lines, DU145 and PC3, which did not display increased proliferation in the presence of compound F.
The concentrations at which compound F stimulated proliferation were well correlated with the known activity for PPAR activation (EC50 = 2 nM), with a maximal stimulation at 10 nM. This is shown for the PNT1A cell line in Fig. 2F
. A bell-shaped activity curve was observed with higher concentrations leading to decreased proliferation. Decreased proliferation only occurred at concentrations above 100 nM, at which concentrations the drugs may have PPAR-independent effects, including the activation of PPAR (1)
. An inhibition of growth at high concentrations was observed for all of the responsive cell lines studied (data not shown). In agreement with our studies of the T47D cells, GW501516 also stimulated proliferation of PNT1A cells at 1, 10, and 50 nM consistent with the activation of PPAR (Fig. 2G)
.
Effect of a PPAR Ligand on a Synthetic Peroxisome Proliferator Response Element-Driven Luciferase Reporter in Breast Cancer Cell Lines.
To further assess the ability of exogenous ligand to activate endogenous PPAR in MCF7, T47D, and MDA-MB-231 cells, these cell lines were transiently transfected with the reporter construct, pFABPLuc. After transfection, the cells were treated with either vehicle or compound F (10 nM). In the MCF7 and T47D cell lines (Fig. 3, A and B)
, compound F significantly increased peroxisome proliferator response element-driven luciferase reporter activity (2-fold). The MDA-MB-231 cells displayed a marginal (1.3-fold), but reproducible, response to compound F (10 nM; Fig. 3C
). This diminished peroxisome proliferator response element activation supports the observation that the MDA-MB-231 cells express less PPAR protein (Fig. 1B)
and do not display a proliferative response to compound F.
|
.
|
Modulates ER Expression Levels, but Is Not Sufficient to Activate ER Signaling.. In cells treated with compound F (10 nM) the levels of mRNA encoding ER increased 1.72-fold (P = 0.011; Fig. 5A
). We then investigated whether compound F could regulate the expression of an archetypical estrogen-regulated gene, PS2. PS2 is regulated by estrogen by direct binding of the ER to EREs in the vicinity of the gene (19)
. Estradiol increased PS2 expression 4.3-fold (P = 0.004), whereas compound F did not have any effect (Fig. 5B)
.
|
Expression Is Not Regulated by Estradiol or Compound F. gene expression can be induced in different cell lines by a variety of stimuli such as phorbol esters and tumor necrosis factor (1
, 21)
. We, therefore, examined the effect of estradiol and compound F on levels of PPAR mRNA. Neither estradiol nor compound F had any effect on PPAR expression (Fig. 5C)
.
Compound F-Induced Proliferation Is Associated with Altered Expression of Cell Cycle Genes.
Because compound F increases proliferation in T47D cells, the expression of selected genes involved in cell cycle was investigated. Estrogen has been shown to up-regulate the transcription of the gene encoding cyclin D1 in human breast cancer cell lines (22, 23, 24)
, and PPAR agonists have recently been shown to increase Cdk2 protein levels in vascular smooth muscle cells (25)
. In our experiments, compound F resulted in a 1.57-fold increase in the expression of Cdk2 (P = 0.001; Fig. 5E
) and a slightly greater increase by estradiol (fold induction = 1.925, P = 0.012). However, although estradiol clearly increased cyclin D1 expression, compound F did not have any significant effect (Fig. 5D)
.
Compound F Regulates the Expression of Other Transcription Factors.
In addition to the regulation of ER, compound F regulates the expression of several non-ligand-activated transcription factors. AP2 and have been shown to be up-regulated in breast tumor specimens compared with benign breast epithelia (26)
. AP2 expression has also been shown to be regulated by the activation of PPAR during development (27)
. Treatment of T47D cells with compound F resulted in a 1.58-fold increase of AP2 expression (P = 0.009; Fig. 5G
).
Compound F also increased the expression of AP2ß resulting in a 1.85-fold increase (P = 0.002; Fig. 5H
), whereas estradiol did not have any effect. AP2 expression was increased 1.58-fold by estradiol (P = 0.035; Fig. 5I
), and there was only a marginal increase of AP2 by compound F (P = 0.065). The up-regulation of the gene expression of the AP2 family members prompted the examination of the effects on ErbB2 gene expression. ErbB2 expression has been shown to be regulated by the AP2 family and the ER. However compound F had no effect on ErbB2 expression (Fig. 5F)
, whereas estradiol treatment resulted in a 52% decrease in expression (P = 0.007).
Effect on Other Genes That Regulate Growth through Autocrine and Paracrine Pathways.
VEGF has been shown to be regulated by estrogen in breast cancer cells (28)
. In this study, we have investigated whether PPAR could regulate the levels of VEGF mRNA. We observed a 2.11-fold increase in VEGF mRNA levels (P = 0.008) on stimulation by estrogen. Compound F treatment also increased VEGF mRNA levels (Fig. 5J
; 1.86-fold; P = 0.012). The expression of VEGFß was also explored. Treatment with estrogen resulted in a 1.76-fold increase (P = 0.032) in VEGFß mRNA levels, whereas compound F exerted no effect (Fig. 5K)
. KDR and FLT1 are the two known receptors for VEGFs. T47D cells expressed FLT1 but not KDR (data not shown), and treatment with compound F resulted in increased expression of FLT1 mRNA (1.96-fold; P = 0.012). Treatment with estrogen also increased the levels of FLT1 mRNA (3.5-fold; P < 0.001; Fig. 5L
).
PPAR Agonists Increase the Number of Cells in the Cell Cycle.
The above results suggested that the PPAR agonists were acting as mitogens and may modulate progression through the cell cycle. Fluorometric cell-sorting analysis (FACS) was used to determine the cell cycle status of cell populations. T47-D cells were grown in 5% DCFCS as used in the proliferation experiments shown in Fig. 2
. The cells were then labeled with bromodeoxyuridine and propidium iodide and subjected to fluorometric cell-sorting analysis. Both compound F and estradiol increased the proportion of the cells that were observed in S phase to a similar extent (Fig. 6A)
, indicating a stimulation of the cell cycle with these compounds. We also performed the experiment under very low serum conditions (0.1% FCS) as described for the stimulation of the proliferation of HepG2 cells (12)
. Treatment of the cells with estradiol, compound F, and GW501516, all stimulated S phase to a similar extent (Fig. 6B)
. The levels of sub-G0 DNA content indicative of apoptosis did not alter under any of the conditions examined.
|
in MCF7 Tet-On Cells Increases the Proliferative Effect of PPAR Agonists. in the proliferative response to the drugs, a MCF7 Tet-On cell line bearing a construct mediating the doxycycline regulation of the PPAR cDNA was characterized. The regulation of PPAR at the mRNA level was assessed by quantitative real-time PCR and found to be 18-fold inducible by doxycycline (Fig. 7A)
. Doxycycline-dependent PPAR protein expression was also observed by fluorescence-based immunohistochemistry (Fig. 7B)
. From the RNA levels it was apparent that PPAR was overexpressed constitutively in this cell line, albeit at much lower levels than the doxycycline-treated cells. These cells displayed much higher growth rates at lower concentrations of estradiol when compared with the MCF7 cell line. Therefore, proliferation experiments with this cell line had to be carried out in the absence of any estradiol (The proliferation experiments using the MCF7 cells in Fig. 2
all required the presence of 1 pM estradiol). Under completely estradiol-free conditions, neither the MCF7 nor the MCF7 Tet-On empty vector control lines would grow to any appreciable extent (Fig. 7, C–E)
and cannot be growth stimulated by GW501516 or doxycycline. However, the PPAR-overexpressing cell line demonstrated a doxycycline- and GW501516-dependent increase in proliferation under these conditions (Fig. 7, D–F)
. In the complete absence of estradiol, it was possible to stimulate this cell line with doxycycline and GW501516 to 60% of the growth rate of the cells that have been fully stimulated by 1 nM estradiol. Importantly, the growth rate of all of the cell lines was stimulated to the same maximal rate in the presence of 1 nM estradiol (Fig. 7, C and D)
.
PPAR Activation Also Stimulates VEGF Receptor Expression and Proliferation of Human Endothelial Cells.
Regulation of the VEGF pathway by PPAR agonists invoked a model in which PPAR agonists may affect both cancer cell proliferation and the concomitant angiogenesis that is required for tumor growth. We, therefore, examined the effect of PPAR activation on primary cultures of HUVECs. HUVECs that were treated with various concentrations of the PPAR agonist GW501516 showed a dose-dependent increase in proliferation. The magnitude of the stimulation of proliferation by GW501516 was similar to that observed with the addition of recombinant VEGF (Fig. 8A)
. Treatment of HUVECs with GW501516 also resulted in increased expression of both VEGF and FLT-1 mRNA similar to that observed in the breast cancer cell line (Fig. 8, B and C)
.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
in the regulation of proliferation of breast and prostate cancer cells. Our study demonstrates that the highly selective agonist for PPAR, compound F, can increase proliferation in some prostate and breast cancer cell lines. We have reproduced this observation using a second PPAR selective agonist, GW501516, to stimulate the growth of T47D and PNT1A cells and have used a conditional expression system to validate PPAR as the mediator of these effects. Our observation that growth stimulation occurs only under hormone-deprived conditions may be because, under regular growth conditions, i.e., in the presence of serum, the effect of PPAR agonists may be masked because of the overriding activation of other signaling pathways (9)
or may be caused by the endogenous production of ligands for PPAR (8
, 29)
. These ligands may include prostacyclin and also other unknown ligands. It has been shown in many previous studies that estrogen can stimulate the synthesis of prostaglandins that may act as potential ligands for PPARs (30, 31, 32)
. This may help explain the finding that we were able to demonstrate the PPAR effects on growth in the sex hormone-sensitive lines, in which this stimulus can be removed experimentally, but not in colon cancer cell lines, which are devoid of sex-hormonal control of cell growth. Interestingly, it has recently been shown that GW501516 can prevent apoptosis stimulated by complete growth factor withdrawal in the human colorectal cancer cell line HCT116. This response to GW501516 is absent in cells that have had the PPAR gene deleted (13)
.
PPAR activation was associated with increased expression of ER. This suggested that PPAR agonists may promote proliferation by acting as a direct or indirect activator of ER signaling.
Further experimentation suggested that this was not the case. First, PPAR activation by compound F was not associated with increased transcription of the typical estrogen-regulated gene PS2, and, secondly, transient transfection studies demonstrated that compound F cannot transactivate an ERE reporter. This indicates that compound F treatment does not appear to be sufficient for the activation of the ER in these cells. In addition, PPAR has previously been shown to bind directly to the particular ERE used in this study (33)
; however, PPAR does not appear to be able to signal through this particular enhancer. Additional studies are in progress to assess the role of PPAR in regulating cellular responses to estrogens.
Although both estrogen and compound F elicit a growth response, there are some gene targets that are ligand selective and other targets that are promiscuous. Cdk2 represents a common gene target that was increased by both estrogen and compound F. In contrast, selectivity was observed in the regulation of the genes encoding the AP2 family of transcription factors. Expression of the genes encoding AP2 and AP2ß was regulated by compound F, whereas estrogen selectively regulated AP2. The AP2 family of transcription factors has been reported to regulate the expression of both ER and ErbB2 in breast cancer (34
, 35)
. Interestingly, in our system PPAR activation did not have any effect on ErbB2 expression. This could be because the transcription of ErbB2 is under the control of a complex range of transcription factors (34)
. In contrast, estrogen resulted in down-regulation of ErbB2 in the T47D cells as reported previously (36)
. The mechanism of the repression of ErbB2 gene expression by estradiol has recently been shown to be due to coactivator competition on a non-ER binding site of the ErbB2 promoter (34)
.
The observation that PPAR activation can result in increased expression of VEGF and its receptor FLT-1, suggests a novel autocrine mode to regulate growth in breast cancer (Fig. 9)
. This agrees with recent observations that VEGF gene expression is increased in response to PPAR agonists in human bladder cancer (37)
. Regulation of VEGF expression by PPAR ligands has also been observed in macrophages and vascular smooth muscle cells (38
, 39)
. In contrast, the genes encoding FLT-1 and FLK-1 are repressed by PPAR ligands in endothelial cells (40)
. Another interesting observation was that PPAR activation in HUVECs was associated with increased proliferation. Interestingly, the extent to which GW501516 stimulated growth was similar to that exerted by VEGF. Furthermore, PPAR activation in HUVECs resulted in increased expression of FLT-1, in a manner similar to that observed in T47D cells, which suggests that PPAR may play a role in tumor angiogenesis. This hypothesis will have to be tested in in vivo models of cancer growth.
|
by an agonist ligand can result in increased proliferation of breast and prostrate cancer cell lines, as well as endothelial cells, and supports the hypothesis that PPAR antagonists might be of therapeutic value in the management of common epithelial cancers.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Requests for reprints: Colin N. A. Palmer, Biomedical Research Centre and Cancer Research United Kingdom Molecular Pharmacology Unit, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, United Kingdom. E-mail: colin.palmer{at}cancer.org.uk
4 M. Gossen, unpublished data; GenBank accession no. U89931. 
Received 9/ 3/03. Revised 2/20/04. Accepted 3/ 2/04.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TopABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMATERIALS AND METHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
promotes lipid accumulation in human macrophages. J Biol Chem, 276: 44258-65, 2001. on placentation, adiposity, and colorectal cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 99: 303-8, 2002., an integrator of transcriptional repression and nuclear receptor signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 99: 2613-8, 2002. and PPARß mutant mice. J Cell Biol, 154: 799-814, 2001.). Mol Cell Biol, 20: 5119-28, 2000. is an APC- regulated target of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Cell, 99: 335-45, 1999.[CrossRef][Medline]
in colorectal cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 97: 13275-80, 2000.] decreases the tumorigenicity of human colon cancer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 98: 2598-603, 2001. activation induces COX-2 gene expression and cell proliferation in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 308: 361-8, 2003.[CrossRef][Medline]
accelerates intestinal adenoma growth. Nat Med, 10: 245-7, 2004.[CrossRef][Medline]
agonist promotes reverse cholesterol transport. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 98: 5306-11, 2001.. J Org Chem, 68: 9116-8, 2003.[CrossRef][Medline]
in keratinocyte response to inflammation. Genes Dev, 15: 3263-77, 2001. is up-regulated during vascular lesion formation and promotes post-confluent cell proliferation in vascular smooth muscle cells. J Biol Chem, 277: 11505-12, 2002. by valproic acid and its teratogenic derivatives. Mol Pharmacol, 59: 1269-76, 2001. to induce apoptosis in colorectal cancer cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 100: 9968-73, 2003. agonists increase vascular endothelial growth factor expression in human vascular smooth muscle cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 271: 571-4, 2000.[CrossRef][Medline]
ligands are potent inhibitors of angiogenesis in vitro and in vivo. J Biol Chem, 274: 9116-21, 1999.This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  H. Kwak, I. Hwang, J. H. Kim, M. Y. Kim, J. S. Yang, and S. Jeong Modulation of transcription by the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor {delta}-binding RNA aptamer in colon cancer cells Mol. Cancer Ther., September 1, 2009; 8(9): 2664 - 2673. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 X. Sun, J. D. Ritzenthaler, X. Zhong, Y. Zheng, J. Roman, and S. Han Nicotine Stimulates PPAR{beta}/{delta} Expression in Human Lung Carcinoma Cells through Activation of PI3K/mTOR and Suppression of AP-2{alpha} Cancer Res., August 15, 2009; 69(16): 6445 - 6453. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 X. Zuo, Z. Peng, M. J. Moussalli, J. S. Morris, R. R. Broaddus, S. M. Fischer, and I. Shureiqi Targeted Genetic Disruption of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-{delta} and Colonic Tumorigenesis J Natl Cancer Inst, May 20, 2009; 101(10): 762 - 767. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Han, J. D. Ritzenthaler, X. Sun, Y. Zheng, and J. Roman Activation of Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {beta}/{delta} Induces Lung Cancer Growth via Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor Coactivator {gamma}-1{alpha} Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol., March 1, 2009; 40(3): 325 - 331. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. V. Pedchenko, A. L. Gonzalez, D. Wang, R. N. DuBois, and P. P. Massion Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {beta}/{delta} Expression and Activation in Lung Cancer Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol., December 1, 2008; 39(6): 689 - 696. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. D. Conzen Minireview: Nuclear Receptors and Breast Cancer Mol. Endocrinol., October 1, 2008; 22(10): 2215 - 2228. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J.-K. Han, H.-S. Lee, H.-M. Yang, J. Hur, S.-I. Jun, J.-Y. Kim, C.-H. Cho, G.-Y. Koh, J. M. Peters, K.-W. Park, et al. Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-{delta} Agonist Enhances Vasculogenesis by Regulating Endothelial Progenitor Cells Through Genomic and Nongenomic Activations of the Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase/Akt Pathway Circulation, September 2, 2008; 118(10): 1021 - 1033. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Gaudel, C. Schwartz, C. Giordano, N. A. Abumrad, and P. A. Grimaldi Pharmacological activation of PPAR{beta} promotes rapid and calcineurin-dependent fiber remodeling and angiogenesis in mouse skeletal muscle Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, August 1, 2008; 295(2): E297 - E304. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Han, J. D. Ritzenthaler, Y. Zheng, and J. Roman PPAR{beta}/{delta} agonist stimulates human lung carcinoma cell growth through inhibition of PTEN expression: the involvement of PI3K and NF-{kappa}B signals Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol, June 1, 2008; 294(6): L1238 - L1249. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Sun, I. M. Berquin, R. T. Owens, J. T. O'Flaherty, and I. J. Edwards Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {gamma}-Mediated Up-regulation of Syndecan-1 by n-3 Fatty Acids Promotes Apoptosis of Human Breast Cancer Cells Cancer Res., April 15, 2008; 68(8): 2912 - 2919. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. G. Venkata, C. S. Aung, P. J. Cabot, G. R. Monteith, and S. J. Roberts-Thomson PPAR{alpha} and PPAR{beta} Are Differentially Affected by Ethanol and the Ethanol Metabolite Acetaldehyde in the MCF-7 Breast Cancer Cell Line Toxicol. Sci., March 1, 2008; 102(1): 120 - 128. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. E. Hollingshead, M. G. Borland, A. N. Billin, T. M. Willson, F. J. Gonzalez, and J. M. Peters Ligand activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-{beta}/{delta} (PPAR{beta}/{delta}) and inhibition of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX2) attenuate colon carcinogenesis through independent signaling mechanisms Carcinogenesis, January 1, 2008; 29(1): 169 - 176. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. E. Hollingshead, R. L. Killins, M. G. Borland, E. E. Girroir, A. N. Billin, T. M. Willson, A. K. Sharma, S. Amin, F. J. Gonzalez, and J. M. Peters Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor- /{delta} (PPAR /{delta}) ligands do not potentiate growth of human cancer cell lines Carcinogenesis, December 1, 2007; 28(12): 2641 - 2649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. M. Hall and D. P. McDonnell The Molecular Mechanisms Underlying the Proinflammatory Actions of Thiazolidinediones in Human Macrophages Mol. Endocrinol., August 1, 2007; 21(8): 1756 - 1768. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Genini and C. V. Catapano Block of Nuclear Receptor Ubiquitination: A MECHANISM OF LIGAND-DEPENDENT CONTROL OF PEROXISOME PROLIFERATOR-ACTIVATED RECEPTOR {delta} ACTIVITY J. Biol. Chem., April 20, 2007; 282(16): 11776 - 11785. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Piqueras, A. R. Reynolds, K. M. Hodivala-Dilke, A. Alfranca, J. M. Redondo, T. Hatae, T. Tanabe, T. D. Warner, and D. Bishop-Bailey Activation of PPAR{beta}/{delta} Induces Endothelial Cell Proliferation and Angiogenesis Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol, January 1, 2007; 27(1): 63 - 69. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Xu, C. Han, K. Lim, and T. Wu Cross-talk between Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor {delta} and Cytosolic Phospholipase A2{alpha}/Cyclooxygenase-2/Prostaglandin E2 Signaling Pathways in Human Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells Cancer Res., December 15, 2006; 66(24): 11859 - 11868. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Wang, H. Wang, Y. Guo, W. Ning, S. Katkuri, W. Wahli, B. Desvergne, S. K. Dey, and R. N. DuBois From the Cover: Crosstalk between peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor {delta} and VEGF stimulates cancer progression PNAS, December 12, 2006; 103(50): 19069 - 19074. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Xu, C. Han, and T. Wu A Novel Positive Feedback Loop between Peroxisome Proliferator-activated Receptor-{delta} and Prostaglandin E2 Signaling Pathways for Human Cholangiocarcinoma Cell Growth J. Biol. Chem., November 10, 2006; 281(45): 33982 - 33996. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Knight, B. B. Yeap, G. C. Yeoh, and J. K. Olynyk Inhibition of adult liver progenitor (oval) cell growth and viability by an agonist of the peroxisome proliferator activated receptor (PPAR) family member {gamma}, but not {alpha} or {delta} Carcinogenesis, October 1, 2005; 26(10): 1782 - 1792. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 V. K.W. Wong, P. Chiu, S. S.M. Chung, L. M.C. Chow, Y.-Z. Zhao, B. B. Yang, and B. C.B. Ko Pseudolaric Acid B, a Novel Microtubule-Destabilizing Agent That Circumvents Multidrug Resistance Phenotype and Exhibits Antitumor Activity In vivo Clin. Cancer Res., August 15, 2005; 11(16): 6002 - 6011. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Sun, I. M. Berquin, and I. J. Edwards Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Regulate Syndecan-1 Expression in Human Breast Cancer Cells Cancer Res., May 15, 2005; 65(10): 4442 - 4447. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. J. Kim, I. A. Murray, A. M. Burns, F. J. Gonzalez, G. H. Perdew, and J. M. Peters Peroxisome Proliferator-activated Receptor-{beta}/{delta} Inhibits Epidermal Cell Proliferation by Down-regulation of Kinase Activity J. Biol. Chem., March 11, 2005; 280(10): 9519 - 9527. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. T. Bility, J. T. Thompson, R. H. McKee, R. M. David, J. H. Butala, J. P. Vanden Heuvel, and J. M. Peters Activation of Mouse and Human Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptors (PPARs) by Phthalate Monoesters Toxicol. Sci., November 1, 2004; 82(1): 170 - 182. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 |
