New insights into the role of androgen and oestrogen receptors in molecular apocrine breast tumours

Is it time to consider the Androgen receptor as a therapeutic target in breast cancer?

Breast cancer (BC) is a heterogeneous disease and the most prevalent malignant tumor in women worldwide. The majority of BC cases are positive for estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR), both known to be involved in cancer pathogenesis, progression, and invasion. In line with this, hormonal deprivation therapy appears to be a useful tool and an effective treatment for these BC subtypes. Unfortunately, prognosis among patients with hormone-negative tumors or therapy-refractory and metastatic patients remains poor. Novel biomarkers are urgently needed in order to predict the course of the disease, make better therapy decisions and improve the overall survival of patients. In this respect, the androgen receptor (AR), a member of the hormonal nuclear receptor superfamily and ER and PgR, emerges as an interesting feature widely expressed in human BCs. Despite the advances, the precise tumorigenic mechanism of AR and the role of its endogenous ligands are yet not well-understood. In this review, we aim to elaborate on the prognostic impact of AR expression and current AR-targeting approaches based on previous studies investigating AR's role in different BC subtypes.

[Androgen receptor-positive triple negative breast cancer: From biology to therapy]

A subgroup of androgen receptor-expressing tumors represents approximately 30 % of all triple negative tumors. The androgen receptor and its signaling pathways have a central biological role in this tumor entity. These triple negative androgen receptor-positive tumors occur in older patients and do not appear to have a better prognosis compared to other triple negative tumors. In addition to androgen receptor-expression, these tumors are genomically characterized by a high frequency of PIK3CA activating mutation. Three clinical trials reported efficacy data for anti-androgens (bicalutamide, abiraterone acetate and enzalutamide) based on strong preclinical rationale. These trials report clinical benefit rates in about one in five patients. These encouraging but still limited results make a case for the identification of predictive response factors and therapeutic combinations to improve response rates. This review will provide an update on the biological and clinical knowledge of this tumoral subgroup that opens the way to non-cytotoxic anti-androgen therapies.

Steroid metabolism in breast cancer: Where are we and what are we missing?

It is well-known that breast cancer is hormone-dependent and that steroid hormones exert their mitogenic effects by binding to estrogen, progesterone and androgen receptors. Vital to our understanding and treatment of this malignancy, is the local metabolism of steroid hormones in breast cancer tissue. This review summarises our current knowledge on steroid producing pathways in the adrenal, ovary and breast, while focussing on the availability of specific circulating hormone precursors and steroidogenic enzymes involved in the local synthesis and metabolism of steroid hormones in the breast. Consequently, we highlight alternate pathways that may be instrumental in the etiology of breast cancer.

Dietary lignan intake and androgen receptor expression in breast tumors

PURPOSE

Lignans, a class of phytoestrogen commonly found in the Western diet, have been linked to decreased breast cancer risks in epidemiologic studies. Similar to estrogen receptors, the androgen receptor (AR), a prognostic factor in breast tumors, may be affected by lignans. However, few studies have investigated this link in the context of breast cancer etiology. We evaluated the relationship between dietary lignan intake and AR expression in incident breast tumors.

METHODS

Tumor tissue, epidemiological, and clinical data were collected from 216 women with incident, primary, histologically confirmed breast cancer enrolled in the Roswell Park Cancer Institute (RPCI) Data Bank and BioRepository (DBBR). On average, three tumor cores from each participant were assembled into a tissue micro array. After immunohistochemical staining, a trained RPCI pathologist determined AR status of each core. Lignan intake was calculated from a food frequency questionnaire collected upon enrollment into the DBBR.

RESULTS

We observed a weak positive association between dietary lignans and AR expression [β (SE) 27.6 (17.0), p 0.10], and there was no significant difference in lignan intake across categories of AR expression (p = 0.09, R (2) = 0.35).

CONCLUSION

Our results do not support a clear relationship between dietary lignan intake and AR expression. This investigation is the first, to our knowledge, to examine dietary lignan intake and AR expression in breast tumors. Further research is needed within a larger, more representative sample to determine whether lignan intake is truly associated with AR expression.

FABP7 and HMGCS2 are novel protein markers for apocrine differentiation categorizing apocrine carcinoma of the breast

Apocrine carcinoma of the breast is a distinctive malignancy with unique morphological and molecular features, generally characterized by being negative for estrogen and progesterone receptors, and thus not electable for endocrine therapy. Despite the fact that they are morphologically distinct from other breast lesions, no standard molecular criteria are currently available for their diagnosis. Using gel-based proteomics in combination with mass spectrometry and immunohistochemistry we have identified two novel markers, HMGCS2 and FABP7 that categorize the entire breast apocrine differentiation spectrum from benign metaplasia and cysts to invasive stages. Expression of HMGCS2 and FABP7 is strongly associated with apocrine differentiation; their expression is retained by most invasive apocrine carcinomas (IAC) showing positive immunoreactivity in 100% and 78% of apocrine carcinomas, respectively, as compared to non-apocrine tumors (16.7% and 6.8%). The nuclear localization of FABP7 in tumor cells was shown to be associated with more aggressive stages of apocrine carcinomas. In addition, when added to the panel of apocrine biomarkers previously reported by our group: 15-PGDH, HMGCR and ACSM1, together they provide a signature that may represent a golden molecular standard for defining the apocrine phenotype in the breast. Moreover, we show that combining HMGCS2 to the steroidal profile (HMGCS2+/Androgen Receptor (AR)+/Estrogen Receptor(ER)-/Progesteron Receptor (PR)- identifies IACs with a greater sensitivity (79%) as compared with the steroidal profile (AR+/ER-/PR-) alone (54%). We have also presented a detailed immunohistochemical analysis of breast apocrine lesions with a panel of antibodies against proteins which correspond to 10 genes selected from published transcriptomic signatures that currently characterize molecular apocrine subtype and shown that except for melanophilin that is overexpressed in benign apocrine lesions, these proteins were not specific for morphological apocrine differentiation in breast.

Complexities of androgen receptor signalling in breast cancer

While the clinical benefit of androgen-based therapeutics in breast cancer has been known since the 1940s, we have only recently begun to fully understand the mechanisms of androgen action in breast cancer. Androgen signalling pathways can have either beneficial or deleterious effects in breast cancer depending on the breast cancer subtype and intracellular context. This review discusses our current knowledge of androgen signalling in breast cancer, including the relationship between serum androgens and breast cancer risk, the prognostic significance of androgen receptor (AR) expression in different breast cancer subtypes and the downstream molecular pathways mediating androgen action in breast cancer cells. Intracrine androgen metabolism has also been discussed and proposed as a potential mechanism that may explain some of the reported differences regarding dichotomous androgen actions in breast cancers. A better understanding of AR signalling in this disease is critical given the current resurgence in interest in utilising contemporary AR-directed therapies for breast cancer and the need for biomarkers that will accurately predict clinical response.