ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We have previously identified peroxiredoxin-3 (PRDX-3) as a cell-surface protein that is androgen regulated in the LNCaP prostate cancer (PCa) cell line. PRDX-3 is a member of the peroxiredoxin family that are responsible for neutralising reactive oxygen species. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: PRDX-3 expression was examined in tissue from 32 patients using immunohistochemistry. Subcellular distribution was determined using confocal microscopy. PRDX-3 expression was determined in antiandrogen-resistant cell lines by western blotting and quantitative RT-PCR. The pathways of PRDX-3 overexpression and knockdown on apoptosis and response to oxidative stress were investigated using protein arrays. RESULTS: PRDX-3 is upregulated in a number of endocrine-regulated tumours; in particular in PCa and prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Although the majority of PRDX-3 is localised to the mitochondria, we have confirmed that PRDX-3 at the cell membrane is androgen regulated. In antiandrogen-resistant LNCaP cell lines, PRDX-3 is upregulated at the protein but not RNA level. Resistant cells also possess an upregulation of the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) pathway and resistance to H2O2-induced apoptosis through a failure to activate pro-apoptotic pathways. Knockdown of PRDX-3 restored H2O2 sensitivity. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that PRDX-3 has an essential role in regulating oxidation-induced apoptosis in antiandrogen-resistant cells. PRDX-3 may have potential as a therapeutic target in castrate-independent PCa.
Subject(s)
Mitochondria/metabolism , Oxidative Stress/physiology , Peroxiredoxin III/metabolism , Prostatic Neoplasms/metabolism , Apoptosis/physiology , Cell Line, Tumor , Cell Survival/physiology , Gene Knockdown Techniques , Humans , Male , Microscopy, Confocal , Peroxiredoxin III/physiology , Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia/metabolism , Prostatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia/pathology , Prostatic Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
AIMS: To describe a robust pretreatment protocol for preparing paraffin wax embedded tissues on tissue microarrays for fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH). The newly developed pretreatment protocol described here was compared with the commonly used sodium thiocyanate based protocol and two different heating methods used in standard antigen unmasking protocols for immunohistochemistry (pressure cooking and microwaving in citrate acid buffer). METHODS: Dewaxed tissue sections were incubated in 10mM citric acid buffer at 80 degrees C for 30 minutes to two hours, followed by a short pepsin digestion (1-5 mg/ml). Pretreated tissues were co-denatured with DNA probes at 80 degrees C for 10 minutes, followed by hybridisation at 37 degrees C for 48-72 hours. RESULTS: The three protocols using citrate acid buffer produced FISH signals with superior signal to noise ratios compared with sodium thiocyanate pretreatment. Most importantly, the best tissue attachment was achieved using the newly developed pretreatment protocol: on tissue microarrays less than 1% of cores were lost. To date, a total of 30 probes have been successfully hybridised on to breast tissue and multi-tissue microarrays. CONCLUSION: This pretreatment protocol is easy, reproducible, and facilitates FISH on tissue microarrays, with potential for widespread application in cancer research.
