BACKGROUND: Membrane receptors are frequent targets of cancer therapeutic and imaging agents. However, promising in vitro results often do not translate to in vivo clinical applications. To better understand this obstacle, we measured the expression differences in receptor signatures among several human prostate cancer cell lines and xenografts as a function of tumorigenicity. METHODS: Messenger RNA and protein expression levels for integrin α(ν) β(3), neurotensin receptor 1 (NTSR1), prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA), and prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA) were measured in LNCaP, C4-2, and PC-3 human prostate cancer cell lines and in murine xenografts using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, flow cytometry, and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Stable expression patterns were observed for integrin α(ν) and PSMA in all cells and corresponding xenografts. Integrin β(3) mRNA expression was greatly reduced in C4-2 xenografts and greatly elevated in PC-3 xenografts compared with the corresponding cultured cells. NTSR1 mRNA expression was greatly elevated in LNCaP and PC-3 xenografts. PSCA mRNA expression was elevated in C4-2 xenografts when compared with C4-2 cells cultured in vitro. Furthermore, at the protein level, PSCA was re-expressed in all xenografts compared with cells in culture. CONCLUSIONS: The regulation of mRNA and protein expression of the cell-surface target proteins α(ν) β(3), NTSR1, PSMA, and PSCA, in prostate cancer cells with different tumorigenic potential, was influenced by factors of the microenvironment, differing between cell cultures and murine xenotransplants. Integrin α(ν) β(3), NTRS1 and PSCA mRNA expression increased with tumorigenic potential, but mRNA expression levels for these proteins do not translate directly to equivalent expression levels of membrane bound protein.
BACKGROUND: Membrane receptors are frequent targets of cancer therapeutic and imaging agents. However, promising in vitro results often do not translate to in vivo clinical applications. To better understand this obstacle, we measured the expression differences in receptor signatures among several human prostate cancer cell lines and xenografts as a function of tumorigenicity. METHODS: Messenger RNA and protein expression levels for integrin α(ν) β(3), neurotensin receptor 1 (NTSR1), prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA), and prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA) were measured in LNCaP, C4-2, and PC-3human prostate cancer cell lines and in murine xenografts using quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction, flow cytometry, and immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Stable expression patterns were observed for integrin α(ν) and PSMA in all cells and corresponding xenografts. Integrin β(3) mRNA expression was greatly reduced in C4-2 xenografts and greatly elevated in PC-3 xenografts compared with the corresponding cultured cells. NTSR1 mRNA expression was greatly elevated in LNCaP and PC-3 xenografts. PSCA mRNA expression was elevated in C4-2 xenografts when compared with C4-2 cells cultured in vitro. Furthermore, at the protein level, PSCA was re-expressed in all xenografts compared with cells in culture. CONCLUSIONS: The regulation of mRNA and protein expression of the cell-surface target proteins α(ν) β(3), NTSR1, PSMA, and PSCA, in prostate cancer cells with different tumorigenic potential, was influenced by factors of the microenvironment, differing between cell cultures and murine xenotransplants. Integrin α(ν) β(3), NTRS1 and PSCA mRNA expression increased with tumorigenic potential, but mRNA expression levels for these proteins do not translate directly to equivalent expression levels of membrane bound protein.
Authors: Anne H Schmieder; Patrick M Winter; Shelton D Caruthers; Thomas D Harris; Todd A Williams; John S Allen; Elizabeth K Lacy; Huiying Zhang; Michael J Scott; Grace Hu; J David Robertson; Samuel A Wickline; Gregory M Lanza Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Ravikumar Aalinkeel; Madhavan P N Nair; Gerald Sufrin; Supriya D Mahajan; Kailash C Chadha; Ram P Chawda; Stanley A Schwartz Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2004-08-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: A Gupta; M J Roobol; C J Savage; M Peltola; K Pettersson; P T Scardino; A J Vickers; F H Schröder; H Lilja Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-07-27 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Ja Hye Myung; Ashley Cha; Kevin A Tam; Michael Poellmann; Alain Borgeat; Roohollah Sharifi; Robert E Molokie; Gina Votta-Velis; Seungpyo Hong Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2019-06-19 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: Laurel O Sillerud; Yirong Yang; Lisa Y Yang; Kelsey B Duval; Jeffrey Thompson; Yi Yang Journal: J Cereb Blood Flow Metab Date: 2020-09-22 Impact factor: 6.200
Authors: Sinan Wang; Charles Blaha; Raquel Santos; Tony Huynh; Thomas R Hayes; Denis R Beckford-Vera; Joseph E Blecha; Andrew S Hong; Miko Fogarty; Thomas A Hope; David R Raleigh; David M Wilson; Michael J Evans; Henry F VanBrocklin; Tomoko Ozawa; Robert R Flavell Journal: Mol Pharm Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Feng Chen; Kai Ma; Li Zhang; Brian Madajewski; Melik Z Turker; Fabio Gallazzi; Kiara Cruickshank; Xiuli Zhang; Pocharapong Jenjitranant; Karim A Touijer; Thomas P Quinn; Pat Zanzonico; Ulrich Wiesner; Michelle S Bradbury Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces Date: 2019-11-13 Impact factor: 9.229
Authors: Claudia Kessler; Alessa Pardo; Mehmet K Tur; Stefan Gattenlöhner; Rainer Fischer; Katharina Kolberg; Stefan Barth Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2017-06-30 Impact factor: 4.322
Authors: Mark Sutherland; Andrew Gordon; Steven D Shnyder; Laurence H Patterson; Helen M Sheldrake Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2012-10-26 Impact factor: 6.639