BACKGROUND: The majority of the prostatic cancers are adenocarcinomas characterized by glandular formation and the expression of luminal differentiation markers androgen receptor (AR) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Most adenocarcinomas are indolent and androgen-dependent. Hormonal therapy that inhibits AR signaling produces symptomatic relief in patients with advanced and metastatic adenocarcinomas. Prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (SCNC) is a variant form of prostate cancer (PC). In contrast to adenocarcinoma, the tumor cells of SCNC do not form glands and are negative for AR and PSA. SCNC is extremely aggressive and does not respond to hormonal therapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the important and relevant features of two most commonly used PC cell lines, LNCaP and PC3, with prostatic adenocarcinoma and SCNC. METHODS: Xenograft tumors of LNCaP and PC3 were prepared and compared with human prostatic adenocarcinoma and SCNC for the expression of key signaling molecules by immunohistochemistry and Western blot analysis. RESULTS: LNCaP cells express AR and PSA and their growth is inhibited by androgen withdrawal, similar to human prostatic adenocarcinoma. PC3 cells do not express AR and PSA and their proliferation is independent of androgen, similar to SCNC. Adenocarcinoma cells and LNCaP cells are negative for neuroendocrine markers and stem cell-associated marker CD44 while SCNC and PC3 cells are positive. LNCaP cells have identical cytokeratin profiles to adenocarcinoma while PC3 cells have cytokeratin profiles similar to SCNC. CONCLUSION: LNCaP cells share common features with adenocarcinoma while PC3 cells are characteristic of SCNC.
BACKGROUND: The majority of the prostatic cancers are adenocarcinomas characterized by glandular formation and the expression of luminal differentiation markers androgen receptor (AR) and prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Most adenocarcinomas are indolent and androgen-dependent. Hormonal therapy that inhibits AR signaling produces symptomatic relief in patients with advanced and metastatic adenocarcinomas. Prostatic small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (SCNC) is a variant form of prostate cancer (PC). In contrast to adenocarcinoma, the tumor cells of SCNC do not form glands and are negative for AR and PSA. SCNC is extremely aggressive and does not respond to hormonal therapy. The purpose of this study was to compare the important and relevant features of two most commonly used PC cell lines, LNCaP and PC3, with prostatic adenocarcinoma and SCNC. METHODS:Xenograft tumors of LNCaP and PC3 were prepared and compared with humanprostatic adenocarcinoma and SCNC for the expression of key signaling molecules by immunohistochemistry and Western blot analysis. RESULTS:LNCaP cells express AR and PSA and their growth is inhibited by androgen withdrawal, similar to humanprostatic adenocarcinoma. PC3 cells do not express AR and PSA and their proliferation is independent of androgen, similar to SCNC. Adenocarcinoma cells and LNCaP cells are negative for neuroendocrine markers and stem cell-associated marker CD44 while SCNC and PC3 cells are positive. LNCaP cells have identical cytokeratin profiles to adenocarcinoma while PC3 cells have cytokeratin profiles similar to SCNC. CONCLUSION:LNCaP cells share common features with adenocarcinoma while PC3 cells are characteristic of SCNC.
Authors: Jiaoti Huang; Jorge L Yao; Li Zhang; Patricia A Bourne; Andrew M Quinn; P Anthony di Sant'Agnese; Jay E Reeder Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: J S Horoszewicz; S S Leong; T M Chu; Z L Wajsman; M Friedman; L Papsidero; U Kim; L S Chai; S Kakati; S K Arya; A A Sandberg Journal: Prog Clin Biol Res Date: 1980
Authors: Adrie van Bokhoven; Marileila Varella-Garcia; Christopher Korch; Widya U Johannes; E Erin Smith; Heidi L Miller; Steven K Nordeen; Gary J Miller; M Scott Lucia Journal: Prostate Date: 2003-11-01 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Sandra M Axiak-Bechtel; Senthil R Kumar; Kristin K Dank; Nicole A Clarkson; Kim A Selting; Jeffrey N Bryan; Thomas J Rosol; Jahna Espinosa; Charles J Decedue Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2013-09-13 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Megan Hall; Bryan Todd; Edwin D Allen; Nga Nguyen; Yoon-Jung Kwon; Vu Nguyen; Jennifer L Hearne; Miguel Martin-Caraballo Journal: Am J Cancer Res Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: Holly Lewis; Raymond Lance; Dean Troyer; Hind Beydoun; Melissa Hadley; Joseph Orians; Tiffany Benzine; Kenya Madric; O John Semmes; Richard Drake; Aurora Esquela-Kerscher Journal: Cell Cycle Date: 2013-11-07 Impact factor: 4.534
Authors: C Pistore; E Giannoni; T Colangelo; F Rizzo; E Magnani; L Muccillo; G Giurato; M Mancini; S Rizzo; M Riccardi; N Sahnane; V Del Vescovo; K Kishore; M Mandruzzato; F Macchi; M Pelizzola; M A Denti; D Furlan; A Weisz; V Colantuoni; P Chiarugi; I M Bonapace Journal: Oncogene Date: 2017-06-05 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Anilchandra Attaluri; Sri Kamal Kandala; Michele Wabler; Haoming Zhou; Christine Cornejo; Michael Armour; Mohammad Hedayati; Yonggang Zhang; Theodore L DeWeese; Cila Herman; Robert Ivkov Journal: Int J Hyperthermia Date: 2015-03-26 Impact factor: 3.914
Authors: Dannah R Miller; Cherng-Chyi Tzeng; Trey Farmer; Evan T Keller; Steve Caplan; Yu-Shuin Chen; Yeh-Long Chen; Ming-Fong Lin Journal: Cancer Lett Date: 2018-08-03 Impact factor: 8.679
Authors: Julia A Ju; Cornell J Lee; Keyata N Thompson; Eleanor C Ory; Rachel M Lee; Trevor J Mathias; Stephen J P Pratt; Michele I Vitolo; Christopher M Jewell; Stuart S Martin Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2020-08-03 Impact factor: 6.799