Transcriptional profiles of progestogen effects in the postmenopausal breast

Identification of Candidate Genes in Breast Cancer Induced by Estrogen Plus Progestogens Using Bioinformatic Analysis

Menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) was widely used to treat menopause-related symptoms in menopausal women. However, MHT therapies were controversial with the increased risk of breast cancer because of different estrogen and progestogen combinations, and the molecular basis behind this phenomenon is currently not understood. To address this issue, we identified differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between the estrogen plus progestogens treatment (EPT) and estrogen treatment (ET) using the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data. As a result, a total of 96 upregulated DEGs were first identified. Seven DEGs related to the cell cycle (CCNE2, CDCA5, RAD51, TCF19, KNTC1, MCM10, and NEIL3) were validated by RT-qPCR. Specifically, these seven DEGs were increased in EPT compared to ET (p < 0.05) and had higher expression levels in breast cancer than adjacent normal tissues (p < 0.05). Next, we found that estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer patients with a higher CNNE2 expression have a shorter overall survival time (p < 0.05), while this effect was not observed in the other six DEGs (p > 0.05). Interestingly, the molecular docking results showed that CCNE2 might bind to 17β-estradiol (−6.791 kcal/mol), progesterone (−6.847 kcal/mol), and medroxyprogesterone acetate (−6.314 kcal/mol) with a relatively strong binding affinity, respectively. Importantly, CNNE2 protein level could be upregulated with EPT and attenuated by estrogen receptor antagonist, acolbifene and had interactions with cancer driver genes (AKT1 and KRAS) and high mutation frequency gene (TP53 and PTEN) in breast cancer patients. In conclusion, the current study showed that CCNE2, CDCA5, RAD51, TCF19, KNTC1, MCM10, and NEIL3 might contribute to EPT-related tumorigenesis in breast cancer, with CCNE2 might be a sensitive risk indicator of breast cancer risk in women using MHT.

Menstrual cycle associated changes in hormone-related gene expression in oestrogen receptor positive breast cancer

The major changes in hormone levels that occur through the menstrual cycle have been postulated to affect the expression of hormone-regulated and proliferation-associated genes (PAGs) in premenopausal ER+ breast cancer. Whilst previous studies have demonstrated differences in gene expression, here, we investigated if there are within patient changes in the expression of oestrogen- and progesterone-regulated genes (ERGs and PRGs) and PAGs in ER+ breast cancer during the menstrual cycle. Samples from 96 patients in two independent prospective studies of the effect of menstrual cycle on ER+ breast cancer were used. Plasma hormone measurements were used to assign tumours to one of three pre-defined menstrual cycle windows: W1 (days 27-35 and 1-6; low oestradiol and low progesterone), W2 (days 7-16; high oestradiol and low progesterone) and W3 (days 17-26; intermediate oestradiol and high progesterone). RNA expression of 50 genes, including 27 ERGs, 11 putative PRGs and seven PAGs was measured. The AvERG (geomean of PGR, GREB1, TFF1 and PDZK1) was used as a composite measure of ERG expression and showed significant changes between the three windows of the menstrual cycle increasing over 2.2-fold between W1 and W2 and decreasing between W2 and W3 and between W3 and W1. Proliferation gene expression also varied significantly, following the same pattern of changes as ERG expression, but the changes were of lower magnitude (1.4-fold increase between W1 and W2). Significant changes in the expression of eight individual ERGs, including GREB1, PGR and TFF1, and two PAGs were observed between W1 and either W2 or W3 with all genes showing higher levels in W2 or W3 (1.3-2.4-fold; FDR 0.016-0.05). The AvProg, a composite measure of PRG expression, increased significantly (1.5-fold) in W3 compared to W1 or W2 but no significant changes were observed for individual PRGs. In conclusion, we observed significant changes in ERG, PRG and PAG expression in ER+ breast tumours during the menstrual cycle that may affect the assessment and interpretation of prominent biomarkers (e.g. PgR) and commonly used multigene prognostic signatures in premenopausal ER+ breast cancer.

Human versus non-human sex steroid use in hormone replacement therapies part 1: Preclinical data

Prior to 2002, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) was considered to be an important component of postmenopausal healthcare. This was based on a plethora of basic, epidemiological and clinical studies demonstrating the health benefits of supplementation with human sex steroids. However, adverse findings from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) studies that examined the 2 major forms of HRT in use in the US at that time - Premarin (conjugated equine estrogens; CEE) and Prempro (CEE + medroxyprogesterone acetate; MPA), cast a shadow over the use of any form of HRT. Here we review the biochemical and physiological differences between the non-human WHI study hormones - CEE and MPA, and their respective human counterparts 17β-estradiol (E₂) and progesterone (P₄). Preclinical data from the last 30 years demonstrate clear differences between human and non-human sex steroids on numerous molecular, physiological and functional parameters in brain, heart and reproductive tissue. In contrast to CEE supplementation, which is not always detrimental although certainly not as optimal as E₂ supplementation, MPA is clearly not equivalent to P₄, having detrimental effects on cognitive, cardiac and reproductive function. Moreover, unlike P₄, MPA is clearly antagonistic of the positive effects of E₂ and CEE on tissue function. These data indicate that minor chemical changes to human sex steroids result in physiologically distinct actions that are not optimal for tissue health and functioning.

The impact of micronized progesterone on breast cancer risk: a systematic review

Postmenopausal women with an intact uterus using estrogen therapy should receive a progestogen for endometrial protection. The debate on bioidentical hormones including micronized progesterone has increased in recent years. Based on a systematic literature review on the impact of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) containing micronized progesterone on the mammary gland, an international expert panel's recommendations are as follows: (1) estrogens combined with oral (approved) or vaginal (off-label use) micronized progesterone do not increase breast cancer risk for up to 5 years of treatment duration; (2) there is limited evidence that estrogens combined with oral micronized progesterone applied for more than 5 years are associated with an increased breast cancer risk; and (3) counseling on combined MHT should cover breast cancer risk - regardless of the progestogen chosen. Yet, women should also be counseled on other modifiable and non-modifiable breast cancer risk factors in order to balance the impact of combined MHT on the breast.

Molecular changes in premenopausal oestrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer in Vietnamese women after oophorectomy

For premenopausal women with primary ER + breast cancer, oophorectomy (OvX) is an evidence-based cost-effective option and is standard treatment in many countries. However, there is virtually no data describing the effects of OvX on breast tumour biology. We therefore, characterised the endocrine and genome-wide transcriptional impact of OvX in 56 premenopausal women with ER + breast cancer for 2 weeks prior to mastectomy. Plasma estradiol concentrations decreased from 406 ± 41 to 20.7 ± 2.6 pmol/l (mean ± sem) 24 h after OvX, and to 8.1 ± 0.8 pmol/l 2 weeks later at mastectomy. Ki67 decreased in 33/36 (91.7%) tumours. The expression of 655 genes changed significantly (FDR < 1%) with an absolute mean fold-change (FC) ≥ 1.25 (257 up, 398 down). Archetypal oestrogen-regulated genes (TFF1, GREB1, PGR and PDZK1) showed large decreases in expression (FC = 0.20–0.69; p < 1e-6-1e-7). Proliferation-associated genes (e.g. TOP2A, AURKA and UBE2C) were also strongly downregulated (FC = 0.38–0.56; p < 1e-7) along with putative progesterone-regulated genes (e.g. FKBP4, MYB; FC = 0.64–0.68; p < 1e-4-1e-7). The gene expression changes did not differ according to HER2 status and correlated strongly with the changes reported previously after aromatase inhibitor (AI) treatment in postmenopausal women (rho = 0.55, p < 1e-04). However, after OvX the mean FC was significantly higher compared to AI (p < 1e-04). In conclusion, changes in tumoural gene expression after OvX were largely similar, but of a greater magnitude to those observed after AI in postmenopausal patients; however, OvX appeared to have a greater effect on progesterone-regulated genes than AI.

Surgical removal of the ovaries alters the expression of hundreds of genes in the tumour cells of premenopausal women with breast cancer. Ben Haynes from Royal Marsden Hospital in London, UK and colleagues characterised molecular changes in 56 premenopausal women from Vietnam with oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer who underwent oophorectomies, a standard treatment for this patient population. They showed that blood levels of the hormone estradiol dropped precipitously following ovary-removal surgery. Levels of a protein that was indicative of tumour growth also went down, as did genes involved in regulating hormone signalling and cell proliferation. The results are consistent with those seen in postmenopausal women following treatment with an oestrogen-blocking drug, but oophorectomy had a more dramatic effect. The data could aid the search for predictive biomarkers of who stands to benefit most from ovary removal.

Reprint of "Use of medroxyprogesterone acetate for hormone therapy in postmenopausal women: Is it safe?"

Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) has been in clinical use for over 30 years, and was generally considered to be safe until the results of long-term studies of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) using treatment with conjugated equine estrogens (CEE) combined with MPA and CEE alone suggested that MPA, and perhaps other progestogens, may play a role in the increased risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular diseases. This review examines critically the safety of MPA in terms of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease risk, and its effects on brain function. Research into mechanisms by which MPA might cause adverse effects in these areas, combined with the available clinical evidence, suggests a small increase in relative risk for breast cancer and stroke, and a decline in cognitive function, in older women using MPA with an estrogen for postmenopausal HT. However, short-term (less than 5 years) use of MPA with an estrogen in the years immediately after the onset of menopause for the management of vasomotor symptoms does not appear to be associated with any increased risk of these disorders.

The Effect of Menopausal Hormone Therapies on Breast Cancer: Avoiding the Risk

Estrogen and P treatment results in greater risk of breast cancer than placebo. Treatment with estrogen alone does not increase the risk of breast cancer, may be used by women who have had a hysterectomy, and may even result in a decreased risk of breast cancer. Continued research seeks to improve the understanding of the interplay between estrogen and progestogens that predispose to adverse effects on breast tissue. Caution over this hypothesized benefit is warranted until it is substantiated by data on the incidence of breast cancer in tissue selective estrogen complex users.

Sex hormone replacement in ovarian failure - new treatment concepts

Premature ovarian failure is associated with decreased bone mass and fractures, and an increased risk of premature death from cardiovascular disease. There is also fertility compromise associated not only with the loss of ovarian function but, in those with pre-pubertal POF, inadequate uterine morphology. A wide variety of hormone replacement regimes are reported, but there is no clear evidence of best practice. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and the combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP) will suppress menopausal symptoms; however neither is designed to achieve physiological replacement of oestrogen and progesterone. There is evidence that physiological sex steroid replacement is superior to standard hormone replacement, in improving uterine volume as well as an improved blood pressure profile and bone mineral density. Sex steroid replacement therapy is long-term in these women, and therefore it is essential that the risk benefit ratio is optimal to maximise longer term health.

Is breast cancer risk the same for all progestogens?

The population-based case–control study CECILE investigated the impact of various menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) products on breast cancer (BC) risk in 1,555 postmenopausal women [1]. The case group (n = 739) included incident cases of in situ (!) or invasive BC in postmenopausal women. The control group (n = 816) included women from the general population within predefined quotas by age and socio-economic status (SES). While quotas by age were applied to obtain similar distributions by age among controls and among cases, quotas by SES in control women were applied to reflect the distribution by SES of women in the general population in the study area. Data of participants were obtained by a structured questionnaire during in-person interviews, and from pathology reports if applicable, respectively. Women were divided into current and past MHT user. MHTs were classified in estrogen-only therapy (ET), estrogen combined with progestin therapy (EPT) and tibolone. EPT was subdivided in three subtypes according to the progestogen constituent: natural micronized progesterone, progesterone derivatives, and testosterone derivatives. In comparison to never MHT users, any current or past MHT use (ET, EPT, tibolone) was not associated with an increased BC risk. However, in subanalysis BC risk was significantly increased for current use of EPT for 4 or more years (n = 73 cases and n = 56 controls, adjusted OR 1.55; 95 % CI 1.02–2.36). Within the group of current EPT users for 4 or more years, 14 cases had used estrogens combined with micronized progesterone (n = 17 controls), and 55 a combination with a synthetic progestogen (n = 34 controls), respectively. Compared to never MHT use, current use of EPT containing a synthetic progestogen for 4 or more years was associated with a significantly increased BC risk (adjusted OR 2.07; 95 % CI 1.26–3.39), but EPT containing micronized progesterone was not (adjusted OR 0.79; 95 % CI 0.37–1.71). 73 % of current MHT users started treatment within the first year of onset of menopause. Early EPT (n = 52 cases and n = 38 controls, adjusted OR 1.65; 95 % CI 1.02–2.69), but not early ET, starters had a significantly higher BC risk compared to never MHT users. In contrast, MHT initiation beyond 1 year after menopause was not associated with an increased BC risk. The authors concluded that: (1) ET and EPT containing natural progesterone did not increase BC risk whereas, (2) BC risk was increased in users of tibolone or EPT containing a synthetic progestogen, respectively, and that (3) MHT use early after onset of menopause was associated with an increased BC risk as compared to women who delay MHT beyond 1 or more years.

The mTOR effectors 4EBP1 and S6K2 are frequently coexpressed, and associated with a poor prognosis and endocrine resistance in breast cancer: a retrospective study including patients from the randomised Stockholm tamoxifen trials

Introduction

mTOR and its downstream effectors the 4E-binding protein 1 (4EBP1) and the p70 ribosomal S6 kinases (S6K1 and S6K2) are frequently upregulated in breast cancer, and assumed to be driving forces in tumourigenesis, in close connection with oestrogen receptor (ER) networks. Here, we investigated these factors as clinical markers in five different cohorts of breast cancer patients.

Methods

The prognostic significance of 4EBP1, S6K1 and S6K2 mRNA expression was assessed with real-time PCR in 93 tumours from the treatment randomised Stockholm trials, encompassing postmenopausal patients enrolled between 1976 and 1990. Three publicly available breast cancer cohorts were used to confirm the results. Furthermore, the predictive values of 4EBP1 and p4EBP1_S65 protein expression for both prognosis and endocrine treatment benefit were assessed by immunohistochemical analysis of 912 node-negative breast cancers from the Stockholm trials.

Results

S6K2 and 4EBP1 mRNA expression levels showed significant correlation and were associated with a poor outcome in all cohorts investigated. 4EBP1 protein was confirmed as an independent prognostic factor, especially in progesterone receptor (PgR)-expressing cancers. 4EBP1 protein expression was also associated with a poor response to endocrine treatment in the ER/PgR positive group. Cross-talk to genomic as well as non-genomic ER/PgR signalling may be involved and the results further support a combination of ER and mTOR signalling targeted therapies.

Conclusion

This study suggests S6K2 and 4EBP1 as important factors for breast tumourigenesis, interplaying with hormone receptor signalling. We propose S6K2 and 4EBP1 as new potential clinical markers for prognosis and endocrine therapy response in breast cancer.

Use of medroxyprogesterone acetate for hormone therapy in postmenopausal women: is it safe?

Medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) has been in clinical use for over 30 years, and was generally considered to be safe until the results of long-term studies of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) using treatment with conjugated equine estrogens (CEE) combined with MPA and CEE alone suggested that MPA, and perhaps other progestogens, may play a role in the increased risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular diseases. This review examines critically the safety of MPA in terms of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease risk, and its effects on brain function. Research into mechanisms by which MPA might cause adverse effects in these areas, combined with the available clinical evidence, suggests a small increase in relative risk for breast cancer and stroke, and a decline in cognitive function, in older women using MPA with an estrogen for postmenopausal HT. However, short-term (less than 5 years) use of MPA with an estrogen in the years immediately after the onset of menopause for the management of vasomotor symptoms does not appear to be associated with any increased risk of these disorders.

Ulipristal acetate does not impact human normal breast tissue

BACKGROUND

Antiprogestins are of growing interest for the development of new treatments in the gynecological field. Ulipristal acetate (UPA) is a progesterone receptor (PR) modulator considered for long-term administration in contraception and is currently being registered for the treatment of uterine fibroids. In light of the influences of hormonal dysfunction in breast pathologies, the secondary consequences of chronic UPA therapy need to be established. The aim of this study was to determine UPA actions mediated by PR and glucocorticoid receptor (GR) in normal and transformed breast.

METHODS

UPA, progesterone (P) and dexamethasone (DEX) effects were observed on PR and GR responsive genes and on proliferation and apoptosis of normal human breast epithelial (HBE) and breast cancer cells. Human normal breast tissue samples were xenografted in athymic mice and treated with estradiol (E2), or E2 + P, or E2 + P + UPA.

RESULTS

Analysis of PR and GR reporter gene transactivation and their respective endogenous target genes indicated that UPA exerted anti-progestational and anti-glucocorticoid activity in both types of cells with a more pronounced effect in cancer cells. When combined with P or DEX, UPA limits the proliferation of HBE cells but increases growth in breast cancer cell lines. UPA administration had no impact on the mitotic index on xenografted human breast tissue exposed to gonadal hormones at similar concentrations to those present in normal women.

CONCLUSIONS

Although further clinical trials are required to confirm that the results from our experimental models can be extrapolated to women treated with UPA, they suggest that such treatment would not be deleterious to normal breast tissue at least for a cycle (28 days) of continuous administration.

Signal transducer and activator of transcription 5 as a key signaling pathway in normal mammary gland developmental biology and breast cancer

STAT5 consists of two proteins, STAT5A/B, that impact mammary cell differentiation, proliferation, and survival. In normal development, STAT5 expression and activity are regulated by prolactin signaling with JAK2/ELF5, EGF signaling networks that include c-Src, and growth hormone, insulin growth factor, estrogen, and progesterone signaling pathways. In cancer, erythropoietin signaling can also regulate STAT5. Activation levels are influenced by AKT, caveolin, PIKE-A, Pak1, c-Myb, Brk, beta-integrin, dystroglycan, other STATs, and STAT pathway molecules JAK1, Shp2, and SOCS. TGF-β and PTPN9 can downregulate prolactin- and EGF-mediated STAT5 activation, respectively. IGF, AKT, RANKL, cyclin D1, BCL6, and HSP90A lie downstream of STAT5.

Glucocorticoid receptor and breast cancer

Stress enhances glucocorticoid (GC) synthesis, which alters inflammation and immune responses, as well as cellular proliferation and apoptosis in a number of tissues. Increasingly, stress has been associated with cancer progression, and in particular in breast cancer. Consequently, an operational glucocorticoid receptor system in breast tissue influences breast cancer development. In this review, we summarize the data on the GC/GR system in normal and tumoral breast tissue. We also review the molecular mechanisms by which GCs control apoptosis and proliferation in breast cancer models and how GCs alter the chemotherapy of breast cancer treatment when used in combination. Finally, we discuss the participation of GR in breast tumorigenesis under hormone replacement therapy.

Hippocampal volume in postmenopausal cynomolgus macaques with behavioral depression

OBJECTIVE

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies report hippocampal (HC) volume reductions in depression. Despite observations of functional heterogeneity and ovarian steroid influence in the hippocampus, few studies report regional volume alterations or control for menstrual cycle phase. Using in vitro methods, we recently observed reduced anterior HC volume in antidepressant-naive, ovarian-intact, behaviorally depressed adult female monkeys. The purpose of this study was to confirm these findings in vivo and examine whether lack of ovarian steroids affects the relationship between depression and HC volume.

METHODS

MRI was used to measure whole, anterior, and posterior HC volumes in a matched sample of antidepressant-naive, surgically postmenopausal adult female cynomolgus macaques characterized for behavioral depression (six depressed, six nondepressed). High-resolution structural MRIs were acquired, and HC regions of interest were manually segmented. HC volumes were normalized to whole brain volumes before analysis.

RESULTS

Similar to the previous in vitro study, HC volume measured in vivo was associated with depression. In contrast to the previous study of ovarian-intact female monkeys, whole, anterior, and posterior volumes of both the left and right hippocampi were significantly smaller in depressed compared with nondepressed surgically postmenopausal female monkeys.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings confirm and extend previous observations of smaller HC volumes in behaviorally depressed female monkeys and suggest a possible role for ovarian steroids in HC protection in depression. Further studies of the potential modulating effects of ovarian function on the relationship between depression and HC volume are warranted.

Mammary gland and endometrial effects of testosterone in combination with oral estradiol and progesterone

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this pilot study was to evaluate the effects of testosterone (T) cotherapy on mammary gland and endometrial measures in a postmenopausal primate model.

METHODS

Twenty-five surgically postmenopausal cynomolgus monkeys were randomized by social group to receive daily treatment with (1) placebo, (2) oral micronized 17beta-estradiol (1 mg/d equivalent in women) + progesterone (200 mg/d equivalent in women) (E + P), or (3) E + P with T administered via subcutaneous pellets for 8 weeks at a high dose (15 mg) followed by 8 weeks at a low dose (1.5 mg) (E + P + T). The main outcome measures were breast and endometrial epithelial proliferation, as measured by Ki67/MIB1 immunolabeling.

RESULTS

Intralobular breast proliferation did not differ significantly among groups after 8 weeks of treatment but was marginally higher (P = 0.03) in the E + P + T group after 16 weeks of treatment. No significant increase in proliferation was seen for E + P alone. Comparable changes in mammary gland markers of estrogen-receptor activity were seen for the E + P and E + P + T groups. In the endometrium, the addition of T did not increase endometrial glandular proliferation or estrogen-receptor activity or result in any distinct histologic changes.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study do not support the idea that T antagonizes the effects of combined hormone therapy on breast proliferation or markers of estrogen-receptor activity. Overall, the short-term effects of T cotherapy on the mammary gland and endometrium were minimal.