George R Schade1, Sarah K Holt2, Xiaotun Zhang2, Dan Song3, Jonathan L Wright4, Shanshan Zhao5, Suzanne Kolb5, Hung-Ming Lam2, Linda Levin5, Yuet-Kin Leung6, Shuk-Mei Ho7, Janet L Stanford8. 1. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Electronic address: grschade@uw.edu. 2. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 3. Division of Environmental Genetics and Molecular Toxicology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio. 4. Department of Urology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. 5. Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. 6. Center for Environmental Genetics and Department of Environmental Health, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio. 7. Division of Environmental Genetics and Molecular Toxicology, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio; Center for Environmental Genetics and Department of Environmental Health, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati Cancer Institute, Cincinnati, Ohio. 8. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Existing data regarding the expression of estrogen receptors (ERs) and prostate cancer outcomes have been limited. We evaluated the relationship of expression profiles of ERβ subtypes and the ER GPR30 (G-protein-coupled receptor-30) with patient factors at diagnosis and outcomes following radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tissue microarrays constructed using samples from 566 men with long-term clinical followup were analyzed by immunohistochemistry targeting ERβ1, ERβ2, ERβ5 and GPR30. An experienced pathologist scored receptor distribution and staining intensity. Tumor staining characteristics were evaluated for associations with patient characteristics, recurrence-free survival and prostate cancer specific mortality following radical prostatectomy. RESULTS: Prostate cancer cells had unique receptor subtype staining patterns. ERβ1 demonstrated predominantly nuclear localization while ERβ2, ERβ5 and GPR30 were predominantly cytoplasmic. After controlling for patient factors intense cytoplasmic ERβ1 staining was independently associated with time to recurrence (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6, p = 0.01) and prostate cancer specific mortality (HR 6.6, 95% CI 1.8-24.9, p = 0.01). Intense nuclear ERβ2 staining was similarly independently associated with prostate cancer specific mortality (HR 3.9, 95% CI 1.1-13.4, p = 0.03). Patients with cytoplasmic ERβ1 and nuclear ERβ2 co-staining had significantly worse 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality than patients with expression of only cytoplasmic ERβ1, only nuclear ERβ2 and neither ER (16.4%, 4.3%, 0.0% and 2.0 %, respectively, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Increased cytoplasmic ERβ1 and nuclear ERβ2 expression is associated with worse cancer specific outcomes following radical prostatectomy. These findings suggest that tumor ERβ1 and ERβ2 staining patterns provide prognostic information on patients treated with radical prostatectomy.
PURPOSE: Existing data regarding the expression of estrogen receptors (ERs) and prostate cancer outcomes have been limited. We evaluated the relationship of expression profiles of ERβ subtypes and the ER GPR30 (G-protein-coupled receptor-30) with patient factors at diagnosis and outcomes following radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Tissue microarrays constructed using samples from 566 men with long-term clinical followup were analyzed by immunohistochemistry targeting ERβ1, ERβ2, ERβ5 and GPR30. An experienced pathologist scored receptor distribution and staining intensity. Tumor staining characteristics were evaluated for associations with patient characteristics, recurrence-free survival and prostate cancer specific mortality following radical prostatectomy. RESULTS:Prostate cancer cells had unique receptor subtype staining patterns. ERβ1 demonstrated predominantly nuclear localization while ERβ2, ERβ5 and GPR30 were predominantly cytoplasmic. After controlling for patient factors intense cytoplasmic ERβ1 staining was independently associated with time to recurrence (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6, p = 0.01) and prostate cancer specific mortality (HR 6.6, 95% CI 1.8-24.9, p = 0.01). Intense nuclear ERβ2 staining was similarly independently associated with prostate cancer specific mortality (HR 3.9, 95% CI 1.1-13.4, p = 0.03). Patients with cytoplasmic ERβ1 and nuclear ERβ2 co-staining had significantly worse 15-year prostate cancer specific mortality than patients with expression of only cytoplasmic ERβ1, only nuclear ERβ2 and neither ER (16.4%, 4.3%, 0.0% and 2.0 %, respectively, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Increased cytoplasmic ERβ1 and nuclear ERβ2 expression is associated with worse cancer specific outcomes following radical prostatectomy. These findings suggest that tumor ERβ1 and ERβ2 staining patterns provide prognostic information on patients treated with radical prostatectomy.
Authors: T Fujimura; S Takahashi; T Urano; S Ogawa; Y Ouchi; T Kitamura; M Muramatsu; S Inoue Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 2001-12-07 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: L G Horvath; S M Henshall; C S Lee; D R Head; D I Quinn; S Makela; W Delprado; D Golovsky; P C Brenner; G O'Neill; R Kooner; P D Stricker; J J Grygiel; J A Gustafsson; R L Sutherland Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-07-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Tobias Zellweger; Susanne Stürm; Silvia Rey; Inti Zlobec; Joel R Gsponer; Cyrill A Rentsch; Luigi M Terracciano; Alexander Bachmann; Lukas Bubendorf; Christian Ruiz Journal: Endocr Relat Cancer Date: 2013-05-21 Impact factor: 5.678
Authors: J T Moore; D D McKee; K Slentz-Kesler; L B Moore; S A Jones; E L Horne; J L Su; S A Kliewer; J M Lehmann; T M Willson Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun Date: 1998-06-09 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Anthony E Rizzardi; Xiaotun Zhang; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Suzanne Kolb; Milan S Geybels; Yuet-Kin Leung; Jonathan C Henriksen; Shuk-Mei Ho; Julianna Kwak; Janet L Stanford; Stephen C Schmechel Journal: Diagn Pathol Date: 2016-07-11 Impact factor: 2.644
Authors: Adrián Ramírez-de-Arellano; Ana Laura Pereira-Suárez; Cecilia Rico-Fuentes; Edgar Iván López-Pulido; Julio César Villegas-Pineda; Erick Sierra-Diaz Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 5.555