BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is thought to arise as a result of oxidative stresses and induction of antioxidant electrophile defense (phase 2) enzymes has been proposed as a prostate cancer prevention strategy. The isothiocyanate sulforaphane, derived from cruciferous vegetables like broccoli, potently induces surrogate markers of phase 2 enzyme activity in prostate cells in vitro and in vivo. To better understand the temporal effects of sulforaphane and broccoli sprouts on gene expression in prostate cells, we carried out comprehensive transcriptome analysis using cDNA microarrays. METHODS: Transcripts significantly modulated by sulforaphane over time were identified using StepMiner analysis. Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) was used to identify biological pathways, networks, and functions significantly altered by sulforaphane treatment. RESULTS: StepMiner and IPA revealed significant changes in many transcripts associated with cell growth and cell cycle, as well as a significant number associated with cellular response to oxidative damage and stress. Comparison to an existing dataset suggested that sulforaphane blocked cell growth by inducing G2/M arrest. Cell growth assays and flow cytometry analysis confirmed that sulforaphane inhibited cell growth and induced cell cycle arrest. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in prostate cells sulforaphane primarily induces cellular defenses and inhibits cell growth by causing G2/M phase arrest. Furthermore, based on the striking similarities in the gene expression patterns induced across experiments in these cells, sulforaphane appears to be the primary bioactive compound present in broccoli sprouts, suggesting that broccoli sprouts can serve as a suitable source for sulforaphane in intervention trials.
BACKGROUND:Prostate cancer is thought to arise as a result of oxidative stresses and induction of antioxidant electrophile defense (phase 2) enzymes has been proposed as a prostate cancer prevention strategy. The isothiocyanate sulforaphane, derived from cruciferous vegetables like broccoli, potently induces surrogate markers of phase 2 enzyme activity in prostate cells in vitro and in vivo. To better understand the temporal effects of sulforaphane and broccoli sprouts on gene expression in prostate cells, we carried out comprehensive transcriptome analysis using cDNA microarrays. METHODS: Transcripts significantly modulated by sulforaphane over time were identified using StepMiner analysis. Ingenuity Pathway Analysis (IPA) was used to identify biological pathways, networks, and functions significantly altered by sulforaphane treatment. RESULTS: StepMiner and IPA revealed significant changes in many transcripts associated with cell growth and cell cycle, as well as a significant number associated with cellular response to oxidative damage and stress. Comparison to an existing dataset suggested that sulforaphane blocked cell growth by inducing G2/M arrest. Cell growth assays and flow cytometry analysis confirmed that sulforaphane inhibited cell growth and induced cell cycle arrest. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in prostate cells sulforaphane primarily induces cellular defenses and inhibits cell growth by causing G2/M phase arrest. Furthermore, based on the striking similarities in the gene expression patterns induced across experiments in these cells, sulforaphane appears to be the primary bioactive compound present in broccoli sprouts, suggesting that broccoli sprouts can serve as a suitable source for sulforaphane in intervention trials.
Authors: G Sherlock; T Hernandez-Boussard; A Kasarskis; G Binkley; J C Matese; S S Dwight; M Kaloper; S Weng; H Jin; C A Ball; M B Eisen; P T Spellman; P O Brown; D Botstein; J M Cherry Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2001-01-01 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: L N Kolonel; J H Hankin; A S Whittemore; A H Wu; R P Gallagher; L R Wilkens; E M John; G R Howe; D M Dreon; D W West; R S Paffenbarger Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2000-08 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Victoria A Kirsh; Ulrike Peters; Susan T Mayne; Amy F Subar; Nilanjan Chatterjee; Christine C Johnson; Richard B Hayes Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2007-07-24 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Li Tang; Gary R Zirpoli; Khurshid Guru; Kirsten B Moysich; Yuesheng Zhang; Christine B Ambrosone; Susan E McCann Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Laura M Beaver; Alex Buchanan; Elizabeth I Sokolowski; Allison N Riscoe; Carmen P Wong; Jeff H Chang; Christiane V Löhr; David E Williams; Roderick H Dashwood; Emily Ho Journal: Mol Nutr Food Res Date: 2014-08-05 Impact factor: 5.914
Authors: Jana Jakubikova; David Cervi; Melissa Ooi; Kihyun Kim; Sabikun Nahar; Steffen Klippel; Dana Cholujova; Merav Leiba; John F Daley; Jake Delmore; Joseph Negri; Simona Blotta; Douglas W McMillin; Teru Hideshima; Paul G Richardson; Jan Sedlak; Kenneth C Anderson; Constantine S Mitsiades Journal: Haematologica Date: 2011-06-28 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Suniti Misra; Shibnath Ghatak; Alok Vyas; Paul O'Brien; Roger R Markwald; Madhukar Khetmalas; Vincent C Hascall; James B McCarthy; Nikos K Karamanos; Markku I Tammi; Raija H Tammi; Glenn D Prestwitch; Subhash Padhye Journal: Med Chem Res Date: 2014-08-01 Impact factor: 1.965
Authors: Gregory W Watson; Samanthi Wickramasekara; Claudia S Maier; David E Williams; Roderick H Dashwood; Emily Ho Journal: EuPA Open Proteom Date: 2015-08-10