Breast tumors that overexpress nuclear metastasis-associated 1 (MTA1) protein have high recurrence risks but enhanced responses to systemic therapies.

Nuclear metastasis-associated 1(MTA1) protein is an estrogen receptor co-repressor that regulates transcription via chromatin remodeling, and MTA1 messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) levels are elevated in several kinds of locally advanced and metastatic tumors relative to non-metastatic tumors. Previous studies in our laboratory mapped MTA1 into a region showing significantly lower LOH (loss of heterozygosity) in primary breast cancers with metastases compared to node-negative tumors, suggesting that epigenetic alterations of MTA1 affect metastatic potential. The present study examined immunohistochemical expression of the MTA1 protein in treated and untreated primary human breast cancers to study the relationship between MTA1 expression and clinical outcome. Node-negative tumors that overexpress MTA1 protein had recurrence risks similar to node-positive tumors. In multivariate analysis of untreated node-negative tumors, highest expression of MTA1 was associated with increased relapse risk (hazard ratio (HR)=2.72, p=0.0003 for multivariate analysis). Tamoxifen and/or anthracylcene-based chemotherapies eliminated all MTA1 associations with clinical outcome, suggesting MTA1 overexpression predicts early disease relapse, but sensitizes breast tumors to systemic therapies.

Low levels of estrogen receptor beta protein predict resistance to tamoxifen therapy in breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Breast cancer is a hormone-dependent cancer, and the presence of estrogen receptor alpha (ER-alpha) in tumors is used clinically to predict the likelihood of response to hormonal therapies. The clinical value of the second recently identified ER isoform, called ER-beta, is less clear, and there is currently conflicting data concerning its potential role as a prognostic or predictive factor. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: To assess whether ER-beta expression is associated with clinical outcome, protein levels were measured by immunoblot analysis of a retrospective bank of tumor cell lysates from 305 axillary node-positive patients. A total of 119 received no adjuvant therapy, and 186 were treated with tamoxifen only. The median follow-up time was 65 months. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression modeling was done to assess the prognostic and predictive significance of ER-beta expression. RESULTS: Expression of ER-beta protein did not correlate significantly with any other clinical variables, including ER and progesterone levels (as measured ligand binding assay), tumor size, age, or axillary nodal status. In the untreated population, those patients whose tumors who expressed both receptor isoforms exhibited the most favorable outcome as compared with those patients who had lost ER-alpha expression. However, there was no association between ER-beta levels alone and either disease-free or overall survival in the untreated patient population. In contrast, in both univariate and multivariate analyses, high levels of ER-beta predicted an improved disease-free and overall survival in patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen therapy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide evidence that ER-beta may be an independent predictor of response to tamoxifen in breast cancer. Furthermore, these results suggest that ER-beta may influence tumor progression in ways different from those mediated by the ER-alpha isoform.

Regulation of the estrogen receptor alpha minimal promoter by Sp1, USF-1 and ERalpha.

The exact molecular mechanisms regulating estrogen receptor alpha (ERalpha) expression in breast tumors are unclear, but studies suggest that they are partly at the level of transcription. We have focused on the transcription factors that regulate the ERalpha minimal promoter, which we have previously shown to reside within the first 245 bp of the 5'-flanking region of the gene. Within this region are several elements essential for full ERalpha promoter transcriptional activity, including a GC box and an imperfect E box. In earlier studies we demonstrated an essential function for the Sp1 family of transcription factors in the regulation of ERalpha expression. We have now identified both USF-1 and ERalpha itself as components of a multi-protein complex of transcription factors that interacts at the ERalpha minimal promoter and is essential for its full transcriptional activity. Electrophoretic mobility shift assays demonstrated that Sp1 and USF-1, but not ERalpha, bind directly to the ERalpha minimal promoter. We showed by GST pull-down assays that ERalpha is able to interact in vitro with USF-1, suggesting, in addition to a possible interaction between ERalpha and Sp1, a mechanism whereby ERalpha is able to interact with the protein complex. Combined exogenous expression of the components of the complex in MCF-7 breast cancer cells resulted in a synergistic effect on transactivation of the ERalpha minimal promoter, suggesting that the importance of the protein complex is in the interactions among the components. Based upon these findings, we propose a possible model for transcription from the ERalpha minimal promoter.

Breast cancer patients with progesterone receptor PR-A-rich tumors have poorer disease-free survival rates.

PURPOSE: No study has yet analyzed whether changes in relative expression levels of progesterone receptor (PR) isoforms A and B in human breast tumors have significance in predicting clinical outcome. Human PRs are ligand-activated nuclear transcription factors that mediate progesterone action. Their presence in breast tumors is used to predict functional estrogen receptors (ERs) and, therefore, also to predict the likelihood of response to endocrine therapies and disease prognosis. The two PR isoforms, PR-A and PR-B, possess different in vitro and in vivo activities, suggesting that in tumors, the ratio of their expression may control hormone responsiveness. In general, PR-B are strong transcriptional activators, whereas PR-A can act as dominant repressors of PR-B and ER. Thus their balance may affect tamoxifen response in breast cancers. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: To determine whether differential expression of the PR isoforms is associated with clinical outcome and hormonal responsiveness, PR-A and PR-B were measured by immunoblot analysis of cell lysates from 297 axillary node-positive breast tumors. RESULTS: Expression of the two isoforms correlated with each other, as well as with ER. Additional analyses revealed that patients with PR-positive tumors but high PR-A:PR-B ratios, which were often caused by high PR-A levels, were 2.76 times more likely to relapse than patients with lower ratios, indicating resistance to tamoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that knowledge of the PR-A:PR-B ratio may identify a subgroup of ER-positive/PR-positive patients with node-positive breast cancer that benefit poorly from endocrine therapy.

Progesterone crosstalks with insulin-like growth factor signaling in breast cancer cells via induction of insulin receptor substrate-2.

Both progesterone and the insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) are critically involved in mammary gland development and also in breast cancer progression. However, how the progesterone and IGF signaling pathways interact with each other to regulate breast cancer cell growth remains unresolved. In this study, we investigated progesterone regulation of IGF signaling components in breast cancer cells. We found that insulin receptor substrate-2 (IRS-2) levels were markedly induced by progesterone and the synthetic progestin R5020 in MCF-7 and other progesterone receptor (PR) positive breast cancer cell lines, whereas IRS-1 and the IGF-I receptor were not induced. The antiprogestin RU486 blocked the R5020 effect on IRS-2 expression. Ectopic expression of either PR-A or PR-B in C4-12 breast cancer cells (estrogen receptor and PR negative) showed that progestin upregulation of IRS-2 was mediated specifically by PR-B. The IRS-2 induction by R5020 occurred via an increase of IRS-2 mRNA levels. Furthermore, progestin treatment prior to IGF-I stimulation resulted in higher tyrosine-phosphorylated IRS-2 levels, increased binding of IRS-2 to Grb-2 and the PI3K regulatory subunit p85, and correspondingly enhanced ERK and Akt activation, as compared with IGF-I-only conditions. Taken together, our data suggest that IRS-2 may play an important role in crosstalk between progesterone and the IGFs in breast cancer cells.

Role of the estrogen receptor coactivator AIB1 (SRC-3) and HER-2/neu in tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: AIB1 (SRC-3) is an estrogen receptor (ER) coactivator that, when overexpressed in cultured cells, can reduce the antagonist activity of tamoxifen-bound ERs. Signaling through the HER-2 receptor pathway activates AIB1 by phosphorylation. To determine whether high AIB1 expression alone or together with HER-2 reduces the effectiveness of tamoxifen in breast cancer patients, we quantified expression of AIB1 and HER-2 in tumors from breast cancer patients with long-term clinical follow-up who received either no adjuvant therapy or adjuvant tamoxifen therapy after breast cancer surgery. METHODS: AIB1 and HER-2 protein levels in tumors from 316 breast cancer patients were determined using western blot analysis. Molecular variables (e.g., expression of AIB1, ER, progesterone receptor, p53, Bcl-2), tumor characteristics, and patient outcome were assessed using Spearman rank correlation. Disease-free survival (DFS) curves were derived from Kaplan-Meier estimates, and the curves were compared by log-rank tests. The effect of AIB1 on DFS adjusted for other prognostic factors was assessed by multivariable analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: High AIB1 expression in patients not receiving adjuvant tamoxifen therapy was associated with better prognosis and longer DFS (P =.018, log-rank test). In contrast, for patients who did receive tamoxifen therapy, high AIB1 expression was associated with worse DFS (P =.049, log-rank test), which is indicative of tamoxifen resistance. The test for interaction between AIB1 expression and tamoxifen therapy was statistically significant (P =.004). When expression of AIB1 and HER-2 were considered together, patients whose tumors expressed high levels of both AIB1 and HER-2 had worse outcomes with tamoxifen therapy than all other patients combined (P =.002, log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: The antitumor activity of tamoxifen in patients with breast cancer may be determined, in part, by tumor levels of AIB1 and HER-2. Thus, AIB1 may be an important diagnostic and therapeutic target.