Paola A Rojas1, María May1, Gonzalo R Sequeira1, Andrés Elia1, Michelle Alvarez1, Paula Martínez2, Pedro Gonzalez2, Stephen Hewitt3, Xiaping He4, Charles M Perou4, Alfredo Molinolo5, Luz Gibbons6, Martin C Abba7, Hugo Gass2, Claudia Lanari1. 1. Laboratory of Hormonal Carcinogenesis, Instituto de Biología y Medicina Experimental (IBYME), Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina. 2. Hospital de Agudos Magdalena V de Martínez, General Pacheco, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 3. Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA. 4. Department of Genetics, Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 5. Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA. 6. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 7. CINIBA-CONICET, Escuela de Ciencias Médicas, UNLP, La Plata, Argentina.
Abstract
Background: Compelling evidence shows that progestins regulate breast cancer growth. Using preclinical models, we demonstrated that antiprogestins are inhibitory when the level of progesterone receptor isoform A (PR-A) is higher than that of isoform B (PR-B) and that they might stimulate growth when PR-B is predominant. The aims of this study were to investigate ex vivo responses to mifepristone (MFP) in breast carcinomas with different PR isoform ratios and to examine their clinical and molecular characteristics. Methods: We performed human breast cancer tissue culture assays (n = 36) to evaluate the effect of MFP on cell proliferation. PR isoform expression was determined by immunoblotting (n = 282). Tumors were categorized as PRA-H (PR-A/PR-B ≥ 1.2) or PRB-H (PR-A/PR-B ≤ 0.83). RNA was extracted for Ribo-Zero-Seq sequencing to evaluate differentially expressed genes. Subtypes and risk scores were predicted using the PAM50 gene set, the data analyzed using The Cancer Genome Atlas RNA-seq gene analysis and other publicly available gene expression data. Tissue microarrays were performed using paraffin-embedded tissues (PRA-H n = 53, PRB-H n = 24), and protein expression analyzed by immunohistochemistry. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: One hundred sixteen out of 222 (52.3%) PR+ tumors were PRA-H, and 64 (28.8%) PRB-H. Cell proliferation was inhibited by MFP in 19 of 19 tissue cultures from PRA-H tumors. A total of 139 transcripts related to proliferative pathways were differentially expressed in nine PRA-H and seven PRB-H tumors. PRB-H and PRA-H tumors were either luminal B or A phenotypes, respectively ( P = .03). PRB-H cases were associated with shorter relapse-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.71 to 6.20, P = .02) and distant metastasis-free survival (HR = 4.17, 95% CI = 2.18 to 7.97, P < .001). PRB-H tumors showed increased tumor size ( P < .001), Ki-67 levels ( P < .001), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression ( P = .04), high grades ( P = .03), and decreased total PR ( P = .004) compared with PRA-H tumors. MUC-2 ( P < .001) and KRT6A ( P = .02) were also overexpressed in PRB-H tumors. Conclusion: The PRA/PRB ratio is a prognostic and predictive factor for antiprogestin responsiveness in breast cancer.
Background: Compelling evidence shows that progestins regulate breast cancer growth. Using preclinical models, we demonstrated that antiprogestins are inhibitory when the level of progesterone receptor isoform A (PR-A) is higher than that of isoform B (PR-B) and that they might stimulate growth when PR-B is predominant. The aims of this study were to investigate ex vivo responses to mifepristone (MFP) in breast carcinomas with different PR isoform ratios and to examine their clinical and molecular characteristics. Methods: We performed humanbreast cancer tissue culture assays (n = 36) to evaluate the effect of MFP on cell proliferation. PR isoform expression was determined by immunoblotting (n = 282). Tumors were categorized as PRA-H (PR-A/PR-B ≥ 1.2) or PRB-H (PR-A/PR-B ≤ 0.83). RNA was extracted for Ribo-Zero-Seq sequencing to evaluate differentially expressed genes. Subtypes and risk scores were predicted using the PAM50 gene set, the data analyzed using The Cancer Genome Atlas RNA-seq gene analysis and other publicly available gene expression data. Tissue microarrays were performed using paraffin-embedded tissues (PRA-H n = 53, PRB-H n = 24), and protein expression analyzed by immunohistochemistry. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: One hundred sixteen out of 222 (52.3%) PR+ tumors were PRA-H, and 64 (28.8%) PRB-H. Cell proliferation was inhibited by MFP in 19 of 19 tissue cultures from PRA-H tumors. A total of 139 transcripts related to proliferative pathways were differentially expressed in nine PRA-H and seven PRB-H tumors. PRB-H and PRA-H tumors were either luminal B or A phenotypes, respectively ( P = .03). PRB-H cases were associated with shorter relapse-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.71 to 6.20, P = .02) and distant metastasis-free survival (HR = 4.17, 95% CI = 2.18 to 7.97, P < .001). PRB-H tumors showed increased tumor size ( P < .001), Ki-67 levels ( P < .001), humanepidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression ( P = .04), high grades ( P = .03), and decreased total PR ( P = .004) compared with PRA-H tumors. MUC-2 ( P < .001) and KRT6A ( P = .02) were also overexpressed in PRB-H tumors. Conclusion: The PRA/PRB ratio is a prognostic and predictive factor for antiprogestin responsiveness in breast cancer.
Authors: Victoria Wargon; Marina Riggio; Sebastián Giulianelli; Gonzalo R Sequeira; Paola Rojas; María May; María L Polo; María A Gorostiaga; Britta Jacobsen; Alfredo Molinolo; Virginia Novaro; Claudia Lanari Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-11-12 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Victoria Wargon; Sandra V Fernandez; Mercedes Goin; Sebastián Giulianelli; Jose Russo; Claudia Lanari Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-05-04 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Hisham Mohammed; I Alasdair Russell; Rory Stark; Oscar M Rueda; Theresa E Hickey; Gerard A Tarulli; Aurelien A Serandour; Aurelien A A Serandour; Stephen N Birrell; Alejandra Bruna; Amel Saadi; Suraj Menon; James Hadfield; Michelle Pugh; Ganesh V Raj; Gordon D Brown; Clive D'Santos; Jessica L L Robinson; Grace Silva; Rosalind Launchbury; Charles M Perou; John Stingl; Carlos Caldas; Wayne D Tilley; Jason S Carroll Journal: Nature Date: 2015-07-08 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Ana Sahores; Virginia Figueroa; María May; Marcos Liguori; Adrián Rubstein; Cynthia Fuentes; Britta M Jacobsen; Andrés Elía; Paola Rojas; Gonzalo R Sequeira; Michelle M Álvarez; Pedro González; Hugo Gass; Stephen Hewitt; Alfredo Molinolo; Claudia Lanari; Caroline A Lamb Journal: Horm Cancer Date: 2018-06-28 Impact factor: 3.869
Authors: Thu H Truong; Amy R Dwyer; Caroline H Diep; Hsiangyu Hu; Kyla M Hagen; Carol A Lange Journal: Endocrinology Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.736
Authors: Hari Singhal; Marianne E Greene; Allison L Zarnke; Muriel Laine; Rose Al Abosy; Ya-Fang Chang; Anna G Dembo; Kelly Schoenfelt; Raga Vadhi; Xintao Qiu; Prakash Rao; Bindu Santhamma; Hareesh B Nair; Klaus J Nickisch; Henry W Long; Lev Becker; Myles Brown; Geoffrey L Greene Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-09-28
Authors: Victoria Fabris; María F Abascal; Sebastián Giulianelli; María May; Gonzalo R Sequeira; Britta Jacobsen; Marc Lombès; Julie Han; Luan Tran; Alfredo Molinolo; Claudia Lanari Journal: J Pathol Clin Res Date: 2017-10-10
Authors: Cameron E Snell; Madeline Gough; Cheng Liu; Kathryn Middleton; Christopher Pyke; Catherine Shannon; Natasha Woodward; Theresa E Hickey; Jane E Armes; Wayne D Tilley Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2018-11-09 Impact factor: 7.640