| Literature DB >> 29973218 |
Arantzazu Zubeldia-Plazaola1,2, Leire Recalde-Percaz1,2, Núria Moragas1,2, Mireia Alcaraz1,2, Xieng Chen1,2, Mario Mancino1,2, Patricia Fernández-Nogueira1,2, Miquel Prats de Puig2,3, Flavia Guzman4, Aleix Noguera-Castells1,2, Anna López-Plana1,2, Estel Enreig1,2, Neus Carbó5, Vanessa Almendro6, Pedro Gascón1,2,7, Paloma Bragado8,9, Gemma Fuster10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The microenvironment and stress factors like glucocorticoids have a strong influence on breast cancer progression but their role in the first stages of breast cancer and, particularly, in myoepithelial cell regulation remains unclear. Consequently, we investigated the role of glucocorticoids in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in breast cancer, focusing specially on myoepithelial cells.Entities:
Keywords: Apoptosis; DCIS; Glucocorticoids; Invasiveness; Myoepithelial cells
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29973218 PMCID: PMC6032539 DOI: 10.1186/s13058-018-0977-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Breast Cancer Res ISSN: 1465-5411 Impact factor: 6.466
Fig. 1Cortisol effects on myoepithelial, MCF10A and MCF10DCIS cell viability, cell cycle and apoptosis. a Cell viability evaluation by 3-(4, 5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2, 5-diphenyl tetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay after 48 h of increasing doses of cortisol treatment (0.1–10 μM). b Cell cycle distribution was determined by bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU)-fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) and Propidium iodide (PI) assay after 48 h of treatment with cortisol 0.7 μM or vehicle (methanol) and evaluated by flow cytometry. c Graphic representation of cell cycle distribution in percentages by the population evaluated. d Cell apoptosis in its different stages (early apoptosis, apoptosis and late apoptosis) was determined after cortisol treatment with 0–1 μM doses by the Annexin V method and measured by flow cytometry. All experiments were carried out in triplicate. The Mann-Whitney test was used for statistical analysis
Fig. 2Influences of cortisol treatment on 3D growth of mammary epithelial cells for 14 days identified by immunofluorescence. Cells were treated with cortisol 0.7 μM or vehicle (methanol) from day 5 after seeding until day 14. a Upper panels: immunodetection in primary epithelial and myoepithelial cells of K14 (myoepithelial cells), K19 (epithelial cells) and Hoechst dye was used as nuclei counterstaining. Scale bar = 50 μm. Bottom panels: quantification of morphometric analysis in the control group and cortisol-treated group of the number of acini formed and quantification of disrupted acini per total number of acini. b Upper panels: immunofluorescence of laminin (BM), cytokeratin14 (myoepithelial cells) and Hoechst dye to counterstain nuclei. Scale bar = 100 μm. Bottom panels: quantification by Image J software of laminin intensity after cortisol 0.7 μM or vehicle treatment. c Immunofluorescence in MCF10DCIS 3D growth of laminin (basement membrane), Muc1 (epithelial cells) and Hoechst dye to stain the nuclei under control (vehicle), cortisol 0.7 μM, RU486 0.5 μM and cortisol 0.7 μM + RU486 0.5 μM. Arrows indicate rupture points of the acini. d Morphometric quantification of disrupted acini and acinar fusion and intensity of laminin determined by the integrated density parameter of Image J software. Scale bar = 50 μm. All experiments were carried out in triplicate. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney test or one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey post-hoc test
Fig. 3In vivo stress model and the effects on evolution of the MCF10DCIS xenograft. a Timeline of the in vivo stress model indicating blood extraction and the immobilization method applied. b Corticosterone levels (ng/ml) in plasma samples obtained at different points of the in vivo stress model in mice, in the control and stressed group of MCF10DCIS xenograft. The Wilcoxon paired test was used for statistical analysis. c Left panel: representative image of α-smooth muscle actin (α-SMA, a myoepithelial cell marker) from immunohistochemical analysis of the control and stressed tumours in mice. Scale bar = 50 μm. c Right panel: duct size quantification by Image J Software. In vivo experiments were performed using five animals per group. The Mann-Whitney test was used for statistical analysis. d Left panel: representative laminin immunohistochemical images in control and stressed MCF10DCIS xenografts. Scale bar = 50 μm. d Right panel: laminin and p63 double immunofluorescence and quantification of laminin intensity images (Image J Software) of tumours derived from control and stressed mice. Hoechst dye was used to counterstain the nuclei. Scale bar = 20 μm. e Left panel: representative cleaved caspase 3 immunohistochemical image of a tumour from stressed mice. Scale bar = 20 μm. e Middle panel: representative cleaved caspase 3(green) and p63(red) immunofluorescence image of a tumour from stressed mice. Hoechst dye was used as the counterstain for nuclei. Scale bar = 20 μm. e Right panel: quantification of caspase 3-positive myoepithelial cells per duct in control and tumours from stressed mice; n = 5 animals/group. The Mann-Whitney test was used for statistical analysis. DCIS, ductal carcinoma in situ
Fig. 4In vivo chicken embryo chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) system for growing MCF10DCIS tumours. a Timeline of CAM model indicating how the inoculation of MCF10DCIS cells was performed and how the tumours were treated. b Representative tumour images after treating with control, cortisol 0.7 μM, RU486 0.5 μM and cortisol + RU486 for 5 days. c Graphical representation of tumour volume in mm3. d α-Smooth muscle actin (α-SMA) (in red) immunofluorescence of the tumours after treatment with cortisol 0.7 μM, RU486 0.5 μM and cortisol + RU486. Hoechst dye was used to counterstain nuclei. Scale bar =20 μm. e Quantification of acini size (μm). Bottom panel: representation of percentage of α-SMA-positive area in tumours. Scale bar = 50 μM. f Images of double p63 (myoepithelial cells) and cleaved caspase 3 immunofluorescence in tumours. Scale bar = 50 μM. g Graphical representation of apoptotic myoepithelial cells quantification in tumours under the different treatments. One-way analysis of variance was used for statistical analysis followed by Tukey post-hoc test
Fig. 5Immunohistochemical and immunofluorescence images of human samples from patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and DCIS + invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). a CD10 (myoepithelial cells) immunohistochemical analysis of samples from patients. Scale bar = 100 μm. b Double immunofluorescence of p63 (myoepithelial cells) and cleaved caspase 3 and Hoechst dye as a nuclei counterstain. Upper panel: patients with DCIS; bottom panel: patients with DCIS + IDC. White scale bar = 20 μm and red scale bar = 50 μm. c Quantification of apoptotic myoepithelial cells in DCIS (13 patients) and DCIS + IDC (15 patients). The Mann-Whitney test was used for statistical analysis
Fig. 6Effects of glucocorticoids (GC) on ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) transition to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Glucocorticoids promote progression of DCIS to invasiveness by reducing laminin levels and inducing myoepithelial cell apoptosis in vitro and in vivo, effects that can be partially blocked by the glucocorticoid receptor antagonist RU486