Circulating microRNAs as potential new biomarkers for prostate cancer.

Since they were first described in the 1990s, circulating microRNAs (miRNAs) have provided an active and rapidly evolving area of current research that has the potential to transform cancer diagnostics and therapeutics. In particular, miRNAs could provide potential new biomarkers for prostate cancer, the most common cause of cancer in UK men. Current diagnostic tests for prostate cancer have low specificity and poor sensitivity. Further, although many prostate cancers are so slow growing as not to pose a major risk to health, there is currently no test to distinguish between these and cancers that will become aggressive and life threatening. Circulating miRNAs are highly stable and are both detectable and quantifiable in a range of accessible bio fluids, thus have the potential to be useful diagnostic, prognostic and predictive biomarkers. This review aims to summarise the current understanding of circulating miRNAs in prostate cancer patients and their potential role as biomarkers.

AR mRNA stability is increased with AR-antagonist resistance via 3'UTR variants.

Advanced prostate cancer is often treated with AR antagonists which target the androgen receptor (AR) on which the growth of the tumour depends. Prostate cancer often develops AR-antagonist resistance via a plethora of mechanisms, many of which are as yet unknown, but it is thought that AR upregulation or AR ligand-binding site mutations, may be responsible. Here we describe the production of cell lines based on LNCaP and VCaP, with acquired resistance to the clinically relevant AR antagonists, bicalutamide and enzalutamide. In these resistant cells, we observed, via RNA-seq, that new variants in the 3'UTR of the AR mRNA were detectable and that the levels were increased both with AR-antagonist treatment and with hormonal starvation. Around 20% of AR transcripts showed a 3 kb deletion within the 6.7 kb 3'UTR sequence. Actinomycin D and luciferase fusion studies indicated that this shorter mRNA variant was inherently more stable in anti-androgen-resistant cell lines. Of additional interest was that the AR UTR variant could be detected in the sera of prostate cancer patients in a cohort of serum samples collected from patients of Gleason grades 6-10, with an increasing level correlated to increasing grade. We hypothesise that the shorter AR UTR variant is a survival adaptation to low hormone levels and/or AR-antagonist treatment in these cells, where a more stable mRNA may allow higher levels of AR expression under these conditions.

Prohibitin, a protein downregulated by androgens, represses androgen receptor activity.

Prohibitin (PHB) is a cell cycle regulatory protein, known to repress E2F1-mediated gene activation via recruitment of transcriptional regulatory factors such as retinoblastoma and histone deacetylase 1 (HDAC1). We previously identified PHB as a target protein of androgen signaling in prostate cancer cells and showed that downregulation of PHB is required for androgen-induced cell cycle entry in these cells. We now present evidence that PHB, which has 54% homology at the protein level to the oestrogen receptor corepressor REA (repressor of oestrogen receptor activity), can repress androgen receptor (AR)-mediated transcription and androgen-dependent cell growth. Depletion of endogenous PHB resulted in an increase in expression of the androgen-regulated prostate-specific antigen gene. The repression appears to be specific to androgen and closely related receptors, as it is also evident for the glucocorticoid and progesterone, but not oestrogen, receptors. In spite of interaction of PHB with HDAC1, HDAC activity is not required for this repression. Although AR and PHB could be co-immunoprecipitated, no direct interaction was detectable, suggesting that PHB forms part of a repressive complex with the AR. Competition with the co-activator SRC1 further suggests that formation of a complex with AR, PHB and other cofactors is the mechanism by which repression is achieved. It appears then that repression of AR activity is one mechanism by which PHB inhibits androgen-dependent growth of prostate cells. Further, this study implies that the AR itself could, by mediating downregulation of a corepressor, be involved in the progression of prostate tumours to the hormone refractory stage.

Recruitment of ATR to sites of ionising radiation-induced DNA damage requires ATM and components of the MRN protein complex.

ATM and ATR are two related kinases essential for signalling DNA damage. Although ATM is thought to be the principle kinase responsible for signalling ionising radiation (IR)-induced DNA damage, ATR also contributes to signalling this form of genotoxic stress. However, the molecular basis of differential ATM and ATR activation in response to IR remains unclear. Here, we report that ATR is recruited to sites of IR-induced DNA damage significantly later than activation of ATM. We show that ATR is recruited to IR-induced nuclear foci in G(1) and S phase of the cell cycle, supporting a role for ATR in detecting DNA damage outside of S phase. In addition, we report that recruitment of ATR to sites of IR-induced DNA damage is concomitant with appearance of large tracts of single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) and that this event is dependent on ATM and components of the Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 (MRN) protein complex.

The prohibitin-repressive interaction with E2F1 is rapidly inhibited by androgen signalling in prostate cancer cells.

Prohibitin (PHB) is a tumour suppressor molecule with pleiotropic activities across several cellular compartments including mitochondria, cell membrane and the nucleus. PHB and the steroid-activated androgen receptor (AR) have an interplay where AR downregulates PHB, and PHB represses AR. Additionally, their cellular locations and chromatin interactions are in dynamic opposition. We investigated the mechanisms of cell cycle inhibition by PHB and how this is modulated by AR in prostate cancer. Using a prostate cancer cell line overexpressing PHB, we analysed the gene expression changes associated with PHB-mediated cell cycle arrest. Over 1000 gene expression changes were found to be significant and gene ontology analysis confirmed PHB-mediated repression of genes essential for DNA replication and synthesis, for example, MCMs and TK1, via an E2F1 regulated pathway-agreeing with its G1/S cell cycle arrest activity. PHB is known to inhibit E2F1-mediated transcription, and the PHB:E2F1 interaction was seen in LNCaP nuclear extracts, which was then reduced by androgen treatment. Upon two-dimensional western blot analysis, the PHB protein itself showed androgen-mediated charge differentiation (only in AR-positive cells), indicating a potential dephosphorylation event. Kinexus phosphoprotein array analysis indicated that Src kinase was the main interacting intracellular signalling hub in androgen-treated LNCaP cells, and that Src inhibition could reduce this AR-mediated charge differentiation. PHB charge change may be associated with rapid dissociation from chromatin and E2F1, allowing the cell cycle to proceed. The AR and androgens may deactivate the repressive functions of PHB upon E2F1 leading to cell cycle progression, and indicates a role for AR in DNA replication licensing.

Reducing prohibitin increases histone acetylation, and promotes androgen independence in prostate tumours by increasing androgen receptor activation by adrenal androgens.

Prostate cancers (PCs), initially responsive to anti-androgen therapies, often advance to a hormone-refractory 'castrate-resistant' PC (CRPC) stage. However, the androgen receptor (AR) pathway remains active and key for cell growth and gene expression within tumours, even in the apparent absence of hormone. Proposed mechanisms to explain progression, including AR amplification/mutation, are insufficient to completely explain CRPC and possible roles of AR cofactors such as prohibitin (PHB) are poorly understood. We investigated whether PHB loss could sensitise PC cells and tumours to adrenal gland-derived androgens, which persist even after androgen ablation, hence contribute to development of CRPC. Using a pair of PC cell lines, inducibly expressing ectopic cDNA or RNAi for PHB, responses to different androgens and hormone concentrations were studied both in vitro and in vivo. PHB was found at the promoters of several genes, both AR and non-AR-regulated, and knockdown increased histone acetylation at these promoters. Further, PHB knockdown increased the rate of AR ligand-induced chromatin binding, and binding rate and occupancy of AR upon the PSA promoter. This resulted in increased cell growth and AR activity in response to all androgens, including promoting a response to the weaker adrenal androgens previously absent at physiological concentrations. In vivo this had functional consequences such that PHB knockdown resulted in androstenedione being sufficient to promote tumour growth, under conditions mimicking those in patients undergoing androgen ablation therapy. We conclude that reduction in PHB levels is sufficient to lower the threshold of AR activity in vitro and in vivo; this may be via a general increase in histone acetylation that could potentially affect signalling by other transcription factors. PHB loss may provide a mechanism for progression to CRPC by sensitising PC cells to 'castrate' conditions-that is, low levels of testicular androgens in the continued presence of weak adrenal and dietary androgens.

Mechanisms of androgen receptor repression in prostate cancer.

Anti-androgens used in prostate cancer therapy inhibit AR (androgen receptor) activity via largely unknown mechanisms. Although initially successful in most cases, they eventually fail and the disease progresses. We need to elucidate how anti-androgens work to understand why they fail, and prolong their effects or design further therapies. Using a cellular model, we found different anti-androgens have diverse effects on subcellular localization of AR, revealing that they work via different mechanisms and suggesting that an informed sequential treatment regime may benefit patients. In the presence of the anti-androgens bicalutamide and hydroxyflutamide, a significant proportion of the AR is translocated to the nucleus but remains inactive. Receptor inhibition under these conditions is likely to involve recruitment of co-repressor proteins, which interact with antagonist-occupied receptor but inhibit receptor-dependent transcription. Which co-repressors are required in vivo for AR repression by anti-androgens is not clear, but one candidate is the Notch effector Hey1. This inhibits ligand-dependent activity of the AR but not other steroid receptors. Further, it is excluded from the nucleus in most human prostate cancers, suggesting that abnormal subcellular distribution of co-repressors may contribute to the aberrant hormonal responses observed in prostate cancer. A decrease in co-repressor function is one possible explanation for the development of anti-androgen-resistant prostate cancer, and this suggests that it may not occur at the gross level of protein expression.