3,3'-Diindolylmethane, but not indole-3-carbinol, inhibits histone deacetylase activity in prostate cancer cells.

Increased consumption of cruciferous vegetables is associated with a reduced risk of developing prostate cancer. Indole-3-carbinol (I3C) and 3,3'-diindolylmethane (DIM) are phytochemicals derived from cruciferous vegetables that have shown promise in inhibiting prostate cancer in experimental models. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibition is an emerging target for cancer prevention and therapy. We sought to examine the effects of I3C and DIM on HDACs in human prostate cancer cell lines: androgen insensitive PC-3 cells and androgen sensitive LNCaP cells. I3C modestly inhibited HDAC activity in LNCaP cells by 25% but no inhibition of HDAC activity was detected in PC-3 cells. In contrast, DIM significantly inhibited HDAC activity in both cell lines by as much as 66%. Decreases in HDAC activity correlated with increased expression of p21, a known target of HDAC inhibitors. DIM treatment caused a significant decrease in the expression of HDAC2 protein in both cancer cell lines but no significant change in the protein levels of HDAC1, HDAC3, HDAC4, HDAC6 or HDAC8 was detected. Taken together, these results show that inhibition of HDAC activity by DIM may contribute to the phytochemicals' anti-proliferative effects in the prostate. The ability of DIM to target aberrant epigenetic patterns, in addition to its effects on detoxification of carcinogens, may make it an effective chemopreventive agent by targeting multiple stages of prostate carcinogenesis.

Transcriptome analysis reveals a dynamic and differential transcriptional response to sulforaphane in normal and prostate cancer cells and suggests a role for Sp1 in chemoprevention.

SCOPE: Epidemiological studies provide evidence that consumption of cruciferous vegetables, like broccoli, can reduce the risk of cancer development. Sulforaphane (SFN) is a phytochemical derived from cruciferous vegetables that induces anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic responses in prostate cancer cells, but not in normal prostate cells. The mechanisms responsible for this cancer-specific cytotoxicity remain unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We utilized RNA sequencing and determined the transcriptomes of normal prostate epithelial cells, androgen-dependent prostate cancer cells, and androgen-independent prostate cancer cells treated with SFN. SFN treatment dynamically altered gene expression and resulted in distinct transcriptome profiles depending on prostate cell line. SFN also down-regulated the expression of genes that were up-regulated in prostate cancer cells. Network analysis of genes altered by SFN treatment revealed that the transcription factor Specificity protein 1 (Sp1) was present in an average of 90.5% of networks. Sp1 protein was significantly decreased by SFN treatment in prostate cancer cells and Sp1 may be an important mediator of SFN-induced changes in expression. CONCLUSION: Overall, the data show that SFN alters gene expression differentially in normal and cancer cells with key targets in chemopreventive processes, making it a promising dietary anti-cancer agent.