A(nother) scientific strategy to prevent breast cancer in postmenopausal women by enhancing estrogen-induced apoptosis?

Modulation of Estrogen Receptor Alpha (ERα) and Tumor Suppressor Gene BRCA1 in Breast Cancer Cells by Bazedoxifene Acetate (BZA)

Selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) are steroid analogs with dual functionality, acting as partial estrogen receptor agonists to preserve postmenopausal bone density and as estrogen receptor antagonists in breast tissue. Bazedoxifene acetate (BZA) is an FDA-approved, third-generation SERM used in the treatment of osteoporosis in women. It demonstrates potential as a therapeutic option for breast cancer patients undergoing endocrine therapy. Our study aimed to assess BZA's effects on Estrogen Receptor Alpha (ERα) and tumor suppressor gene BRCA1 in T-47D and MCF-7 breast cancer cells, using Western blots, cellular viability, apoptosis assays, and RT-qPCR. Cells were cultured in 5% charcoal-stripped fetal bovine serum for six days to deplete endogenous steroids. Following a 24 h exposure to 2 µM BZA (optimal concentration determined from 1 nM-2 µM studies), Western blot analyses revealed reduced ERα and BRCA1 protein levels in both cell lines. ERα decreased by 48-63% and BRCA1 by 61-64%, indicating sensitivity to antiestrogens. Cytolocalization of ERα and BRCA1 remained unchanged after BZA and 17-β-estradiol (E2) treatment. ESR1 mRNA expression correlated with Western blot findings. Image cytometric analysis using the stain, propidium iodide, detected decreased cellular proliferation in T-47D and MCF-7 cells following a 6-day treatment ranging from 1 nM to 2 µM BZA. BZA treatment alone led to a tenfold reduction in cellular proliferation compared to estrogen-treated cells, suggesting antiproliferative effects. Understanding BZA's modulation of BRCA1 and ERα, along with their mechanistic interactions, is vital for comprehending its impact on breast cancer tumor suppressors and hormone receptors.

Comparative safety of conjugated estrogens/bazedoxifene versus estrogen/progestin combination hormone therapy among women in the United States: a multidatabase cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the risk of select safety outcomes including endometrial cancer, endometrial hyperplasia, and breast cancer among women using conjugated estrogens/bazedoxifene (CE/BZA) as compared with estrogen/progestin combination hormone therapy (EP).

METHODS

We conducted a new-user cohort study in five US healthcare claims databases representing more than 92 million women. We included CE/BZA or EP new users from May 1, 2014, to August 30, 2019. EP users were propensity score (PS) matched to users of CE/BZA. Incidence of endometrial cancer, endometrial hyperplasia, breast cancer, and eight additional cancer and cardiovascular outcomes were ascertained using claims-based algorithms. Rate ratios (RR) and differences pooled across databases were estimated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

The study population included 10,596 CE/BZA and 33,818 PS-matched EP new users. Rates of endometrial cancer and endometrial hyperplasia were slightly higher among CE/BZA users (1.6 and 0.4 additional cases per 10,000 person-years), although precision was limited because of small numbers of cases (endometrial cancer: RR, 1.50 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.79-2.88]; endometrial hyperplasia: RR, 1.69 [95% CI, 0.51-5.61]). Breast cancer incidence was lower in CE/BZA users (9.1 fewer cases per 10,000 person-years; RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.58-1.05). Rates of other outcomes were slightly higher among CE/BZA users, but with confidence intervals compatible with a wider range of possible associations.

CONCLUSIONS

CE/BZA users might experience slightly higher rates of endometrial cancer and endometrial hyperplasia, and a lower rate of breast cancer, than EP users in the first years of use.

Hormonal management of menopausal symptoms in women with a history of gynecologic malignancy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to review the role of hormone therapy in menopausal patients with breast cancer and gynecologic malignancies.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) using a combination of keywords and database-specific subject headings for the following concepts: menopause, hormone therapy, and cancer. Editorials, letters, case reports, and comments were excluded, as were non-English articles. Additional references were identified by hand-searching bibliographies of included articles. The searches yielded a total of 1,484 citations. All citations were imported into EndNote X9, where they were screened by the authors.

RESULTS

In breast cancer survivors, systemic hormone therapy is not recommended, whereas local low-dose estrogen therapy may be considered after discussion with the patient's oncologist. Among endometrial cancer survivors, hormone therapy is considered safe in low-risk cancers but should be avoided in high-risk subtypes. For survivors of epithelial ovarian cancer and cervical cancer, hormone therapy can be considered, but should be avoided in women with estrogen-sensitive histologic subtypes.

CONCLUSIONS

The risks of hormone therapy should be assessed on an individual basis, with consideration of age, type of hormone therapy, dose, duration of use, regimen, route, and prior exposure. Systemic hormone therapy is not recommended in breast cancer survivors, whereas vaginal low-dose estrogen appears safe. Hormone therapy may be used by endometrial, cervical, and ovarian cancer survivors with low-risk, non-estrogen-receptor-positive subtypes. Video Summary: http://links.lww.com/MENO/A516.

The new biology of estrogen-induced apoptosis applied to treat and prevent breast cancer

The successful use of high-dose synthetic estrogens to treat postmenopausal metastatic breast cancer is the first effective 'chemical therapy' proven in clinical trial to treat any cancer. This review documents the clinical use of estrogen for breast cancer treatment or estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) in postmenopausal hysterectomized women, which can either result in breast cancer cell growth or breast cancer regression. This has remained a paradox since the 1950s until the discovery of the new biology of estrogen-induced apoptosis at the end of the 20th century. The key to triggering apoptosis with estrogen is the selection of breast cancer cell populations that are resistant to long-term estrogen deprivation. However, estrogen-independent growth occurs through trial and error. At the cellular level, estrogen-induced apoptosis is dependent upon the presence of the estrogen receptor (ER), which can be blocked by nonsteroidal or steroidal antiestrogens. The shape of an estrogenic ligand programs the conformation of the ER complex, which, in turn, can modulate estrogen-induced apoptosis: class I planar estrogens (e.g., estradiol) trigger apoptosis after 24 h, whereas class II angular estrogens (e.g., bisphenol triphenylethylene) delay the process until after 72 h. This contrasts with paclitaxel, which causes G2 blockade with immediate apoptosis. The process is complete within 24 h. Estrogen-induced apoptosis is modulated by glucocorticoids and cSrc inhibitors, but the target mechanism for estrogen action is genomic and not through a nongenomic pathway. The process is stepwise through the creation of endoplasmic reticulum stress and inflammatory responses, which then initiate an unfolded protein response. This, in turn, initiates apoptosis through the intrinsic pathway (mitochondrial) with the subsequent recruitment of the extrinsic pathway (death receptor) to complete the process. The symmetry of the clinical and laboratory studies now permits the creation of rules for the future clinical application of ERT or phytoestrogen supplements: a 5-year gap is necessary after menopause to permit the selection of estrogen-deprived breast cancer cell populations to cause them to become vulnerable to apoptotic cell death. Earlier treatment with estrogen around menopause encourages growth of ER-positive tumor cells, as the cells are still dependent on estrogen to maintain replication within the expanding population. An awareness of the evidence that the molecular events associated with estrogen-induced apoptosis can be orchestrated in the laboratory in estrogen-deprived breast cancers now supports the clinical findings regarding the treatment of metastatic breast cancer following estrogen deprivation, decreases in mortality following long-term antihormonal adjuvant therapy, and the results of treatment with ERT and ERT plus progestin in the Women's Health Initiative for women over the age of 60. Principles have emerged for understanding and applying physiological estrogen therapy appropriately by targeting the correct patient populations.

Molecular modulation of estrogen-induced apoptosis by synthetic progestins in hormone replacement therapy: an insight into the women's health initiative study

Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is widely used to manage menopausal symptoms in women and can be comprised of an estrogen alone or an estrogen combined with a progestin. The Women's Health Initiative demonstrated in their randomized trials that estrogen alone HRT decreases the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women, whereas combined estrogen plus a progestin (medroxyprogesterone acetate, MPA) HRT increases this risk. Long-term estrogen-deprived MCF-7:5C cells were used to model the postmenopausal breast cancer cell environment. MPA is able to modify E2-induced apoptosis in MCF-7:5C cells. MPA, similar to dexamethasone, increases glucocorticoid receptor (GR) transcriptional activity, increases SGK1, a GR target gene, and can be blocked by RU486 (an antiglucocorticoid), suggesting that it functions through the GR. Norethindrone acetate (NETA), another progestin used in HRT, acts like an estrogen at high doses, upregulating estrogen receptor target genes and generating apoptosis in MCF-7:5C cells. The data suggest that women taking HRT comprising an estrogen plus MPA may have an increased risk of breast cancer due to MPA acting as a glucocorticoid and blunting E2-induced apoptosis in this environment. Therefore, perhaps other approved progestins (e.g., NETA) should be considered as alternatives to MPA.

Linking estrogen-induced apoptosis with decreases in mortality following long-term adjuvant tamoxifen therapy

The impressive first results of the Adjuvant Tamoxifen: Longer Against Shorter (ATLAS) and the adjuvant Tamoxifen To offer more (aTTom) trials both demonstrate that 10 years of tamoxifen is superior to five years of treatment. Tamoxifen is a nonsteroidal antiestrogen that blocks estrogen-stimulated tumor growth. Paradoxically, mortality decreases dramatically only in the decade after long-term tamoxifen is stopped. It is proposed that the evolution and clonal selection of micrometastases that acquire tamoxifen resistance now become increasingly vulnerable to endogenous estrogen-induced apoptosis. Laboratory and clinical studies confirm the concept, and supporting clinical evidence from the estrogen-alone trial in the Women's Health Initiative (WHI), demonstrate that long-term estrogen-deprived women given exogenous physiologic estrogen have a decreased incidence of breast cancer and decreased mortality. It is proposed that a natural process of apoptosis is recruited to execute the long-term survival benefit of stopping ten years of adjuvant tamoxifen, but only after clonal selection of vulnerable breast cancer cells in an estrogen-deprived environment.

Acquired resistance to selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) in clinical practice (tamoxifen & raloxifene) by selection pressure in breast cancer cell populations

Tamoxifen, a pioneering selective estrogen receptor modulator (SERM), has long been a therapeutic choice for all stages of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. The clinical application of long-term adjuvant antihormone therapy for the breast cancer has significantly improved breast cancer survival. However, acquired resistance to SERM remains a significant challenge in breast cancer treatment. The evolution of acquired resistance to SERMs treatment was primarily discovered using MCF-7 tumors transplanted in athymic mice to mimic years of adjuvant treatment in patients. Acquired resistance to tamoxifen is unique because the growth of resistant tumors is dependent on SERMs. It appears that acquired resistance to SERM is initially able to utilize either E2 or a SERM as the growth stimulus in the SERM-resistant breast tumors. Mechanistic studies reveal that SERMs continuously suppress nuclear ER-target genes even during resistance, whereas they function as agonists to activate multiple membrane-associated molecules to promote cell growth. Laboratory observations in vivo further show that three phases of acquired SERM-resistance exists, depending on the length of SERMs exposure. Tumors with Phase I resistance are stimulated by both SERMs and estrogen. Tumors with Phase II resistance are stimulated by SERMs, but are inhibited by estrogen due to apoptosis. The laboratory models suggest a new treatment strategy, in which limited-duration, low-dose estrogen can be used to purge Phase II-resistant breast cancer cells. This discovery provides an invaluable insight into the evolution of drug resistance to SERMs, and this knowledge is now being used to justify clinical trials of estrogen therapy following long-term antihormone therapy. All of these results suggest that cell populations that have acquired resistance are in constant evolution depending upon selection pressure. The limited availability of growth stimuli in any new environment enhances population plasticity in the trial and error search for survival.

The evolution of nonsteroidal antiestrogens to become selective estrogen receptor modulators

The discovery of the first nonsteroidal antiestrogen ethamoxytriphetol (MER25) in 1958, opened the door to a wide range of clinical applications. However, the finding that ethamoxytriphetol was a "morning after" pill in laboratory animals, energized the pharmaceutical industry to discover more potent derivatives. In the wake of the enormous impact of the introduction of the oral contraceptive worldwide, contraceptive research was a central focus in the early 1960's. Numerous compounds were discovered e.g., clomiphene, nafoxidine, and tamoxifen, but the fact that clinical studies showed no contraceptive actions, but, in fact, induced ovulation, dampened enthusiasm for clinical development. Only clomiphene moved forward to pioneer an application to induce ovulation in subfertile women. The fact that all the compounds were antiestrogenic made an application in patients to treat estrogen responsive breast cancer, an obvious choice. However, toxicities and poor projected commercial returns severely retarded clinical development for two decades. In the 1970's a paradigm shift in the laboratory to advocate long term adjuvant tamoxifen treatment for early (non-metastatic) breast cancer changed medical care and dramatically increased survivorship. Tamoxifen pioneered that paradigm shift but it became the medicine of choice in a second paradigm shift for preventing breast cancer during the 1980's and 1990's. This was not surprising as it was the only medicine available and there was laboratory and clinical evidence for the eventual success of this application. Tamoxifen is the first medicine to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to reduce the risk of breast cancer in women at high risk. But it was the re-evaluation of the toxicology of tamoxifen in the 1980's and the finding that there was both carcinogenic potential and a significant, but small, risk of endometrial cancer in postmenopausal women that led to a third paradigm shift to identify applications for selective estrogen receptor (ER) modulation. This idea was to establish a new group of medicines now called selective ER modulators (SERMs). Today there are 5 SERMs FDA approved (one other in Europe) for applications ranging from the reduction of breast cancer risk and osteoporosis to the reduction of menopausal hot flashes and improvements in dyspareunia and vaginal lubrication. This article charts the origins of the current path for progress in women's health with SERMs.