BACKGROUND: PC-3 prostate cancer cell growth is inhibited by 1alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3) (1,25 D) and retinoids, but not to the same extent as the androgen receptor (AR) positive LNCaP prostate cancer cells. Previous reports suggest a role for AR in growth inhibition of LNCaP cells by 1,25 D and retinoids. PC-3 cells do not express AR. We therefore asked whether re-expression of AR would enhance the response of PC-3 cells to 1,25 D and retinoids. METHODS: PC-3 cells were stably transfected with wild type human AR cDNA. Pooled cells expressing AR protein at levels comparable to LNCaP cells were used to analyze response to 1,25 D, retinoids, androgens, and anti-androgens. RESULTS: AR re-expression in PC-3 cells restored response to androgens and anti-androgens, but growth inhibition by 1,25 D was not significantly altered. However, cells were sensitized to low levels of retinoids, and, in contrast to the parental PC-3 cells, sub-optimal levels of 1,25 D and retinoids caused additive growth inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: Restoring AR expression and activity in PC-3 cells results in enhanced sensitivity to low levels of retinoids while the response to 1,25 D remains unaltered. Thus, the involvement of AR in prostate cancer growth inhibition by 1,25 D appears to be cell line specific. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
BACKGROUND: PC-3 prostate cancer cell growth is inhibited by 1alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3) (1,25 D) and retinoids, but not to the same extent as the androgen receptor (AR) positive LNCaP prostate cancer cells. Previous reports suggest a role for AR in growth inhibition of LNCaP cells by 1,25 D and retinoids. PC-3 cells do not express AR. We therefore asked whether re-expression of AR would enhance the response of PC-3 cells to 1,25 D and retinoids. METHODS: PC-3 cells were stably transfected with wild type humanAR cDNA. Pooled cells expressing AR protein at levels comparable to LNCaP cells were used to analyze response to 1,25 D, retinoids, androgens, and anti-androgens. RESULTS:AR re-expression in PC-3 cells restored response to androgens and anti-androgens, but growth inhibition by 1,25 D was not significantly altered. However, cells were sensitized to low levels of retinoids, and, in contrast to the parental PC-3 cells, sub-optimal levels of 1,25 D and retinoids caused additive growth inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: Restoring AR expression and activity in PC-3 cells results in enhanced sensitivity to low levels of retinoids while the response to 1,25 D remains unaltered. Thus, the involvement of AR in prostate cancer growth inhibition by 1,25 D appears to be cell line specific. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Wendong Yu; Shu Feng; Olga Dakhova; Chad J Creighton; Yi Cai; Jianghua Wang; Rile Li; Anna Frolov; Gustavo Ayala; Michael Ittmann Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2011-05-27 Impact factor: 12.531