Despite the AR being one of the most studied and attended targets in cancer, those gain-of-function mutations in the receptor remain a significant challenge for the development of PCa therapies.
To evaluate the hypothesis that amplification of the AR gene is a cause for the failure of androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer, we studied whether AR amplification leads to gene overexpression, whether the amplified AR gene is structurally intact, and whether tumors with AR amplification have distinct biological and clinical characteristics.
We integrated chromatin-immunoprecipitation-coupled sequencing and microarray expression profiling in TMPRSS2-ERG gene rearrangement positive DUCaP cells with the GWAS PCa risk SNPs catalog to identify disease susceptibility SNPs localized within functional androgen receptor-binding sites (ARBSs).
Deletion or mutation of the androgen receptor (AR) renders prostate tumors refractory to apoptosis by androgen ablation, the mainstay of prostate cancer therapy.
The androgen-mediated repression of hTERT is abrogated in a human prostate cancer cell line exhibiting hormone-dependent growth, which expresses a mutant AR (T877A) frequently occurring in prostate cancer.
This mutant AR contains two mutations (L701H and T877A) and was previously reported as a high-affinity cortisol/cortisone responsive AR (AR(ccr)) isolated from the androgen-independent human prostate cancer cell lines MDA PCa 2a and 2b (Zhao et al.Nature Med.2000, 6, 703-6).
Moreover, expressing AR-Q784* in an AR positive PCa cell line enhances the chromatin binding of endogenous AR and the recruitment of p300 coactivator under the low androgen condition, leading to increased cell growth.
Coding mutations in the AR (androgen receptor) gene have been identified in tissue samples from patients with advanced prostate cancer and represent a possible mechanism underlying the development of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC).
Allele-specific recruitment of the transcription factors androgen receptor (AR) and activating protein-1 (AP-1) account for the increased enhancer activity ascribed to this PCa-risk LD block.
Thus, our results show that CAG repeat polymorphism in AR gene is significantly associated with CaP risk, suggesting that AR CAG polymorphism may act as a risk modifier to CaP in Indian population.
Many genes exhibit evidence for allele-specific transcriptional activation by PrCa master-regulators (including androgen receptor) in Position Weight Matrix, Chip-Seq, and Hi-C experimental data, suggesting common regulatory mechanisms for the associated genes.
Although a number of studies have been conducted on the association between prostate cancer and CAG repeat polymorphisms of the androgen receptor gene, this association remains elusive and controversial.
In addition, an inverse correlation between BRCA1 and IGF-IR levels was observed in the androgen receptor (AR)-negative prostate cancer-derived P69 and M12 cell lines.
The authors focus on CAG repeat length because recent research suggests that men with shorter AR CAG lengths (e.g., < or =22 repeats) are at a greater risk of developing prostate cancer than are those with longer variants.
Two enhancers in one risk region were occupied by AR and responded to androgen treatment; one contained a single nucleotide polymorphism (rs11986220) that resides within a FoxA1 binding site, with the prostate cancer risk allele facilitating both stronger FoxA1 binding and stronger androgen responsiveness.
Thus, this new cell line with partial androgen responsiveness and PSA expression can serve as a functionally relevant model system of bone metastatic prostate cancer, and can be used to investigate the role of AR mutations in prostate cancer and its progression to androgen independence.
In conclusion, our findings highlight novel consequences of constitutively active AR variants on the regulation of mesenchymal markers in prostate cancer.