Non-canonical AR activity facilitates endocrine resistance in breast cancer

Hormone Signaling in Breast Development and Cancer

Hormones control normal breast development and function. They also impinge on breast cancer (BC) development and disease progression in direct and indirect ways. The major ovarian hormones, estrogens and progesterone, have long been established as key regulators of mammary gland development in rodents and linked to human disease. However, their roles have been difficult to disentangle because they act on multiple tissues and can act directly and indirectly on different cell types in the breast, and their receptors interact at different levels within the target cell. Estrogens are well-recognized drivers of estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancers, and the ER is successfully targeted in ER+ disease. The role of progesterone receptor (PR) as a potential target to be activated or inhibited is debated, and androgen receptor (AR) signaling has emerged as a potentially interesting pathway to target on the stage.In this chapter, we discuss hormone signaling in normal breast development and in cancer, with a specific focus on the key sex hormones: estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone. We will highlight the complexities of endocrine control mechanisms at the organismal, tissue, cellular, and molecular levels. As we delve into the mechanisms of action of hormone receptors, their interplay and their context-dependent roles in breast cancer will be discussed. Drawing insights from new preclinical models, we will describe the lessons learned and the current challenges in understanding hormone action in breast cancer.

Regulatory mechanisms of steroid hormone receptors on gene transcription through chromatin interaction and enhancer reprogramming

Regulation of steroid hormone receptors (SHRs) on transcriptional reprogramming is crucial for breast cancer progression. SHRs, including estrogen receptor (ER), androgen receptor (AR), progesterone receptor (PR), and glucocorticoid receptor (GR) play key roles in remodeling the transcriptome of breast cancer cells. However, the molecular mechanisms by which SHRs regulate chromatin landscape in enhancer regions and transcription factor interactions remain largely unknown. In this review, we summarized the regulatory effects of 3 types of SHRs (AR, PR, and GR) on gene transcription through chromatin interactions and enhancer reprogramming. Specifically, AR and PR exhibit bi-directional regulatory effects (both inhibitory and promoting) on ER-mediated gene transcription, while GR modulates the transcription of pro-proliferation genes in ER-positive breast cancer cells. In addition, we have presented four enhancer reprogramming mechanisms (transcription factor cooperation, pioneer factor binding, dynamic assisted loading, and tethering) and the multiple enhancer-promoter contact models. Based on these mechanisms and models, this review proposes that the combination of multiple therapy strategies such as agonists/antagonists of SHRs plus endocrine therapy and the adoption of the latest sequencing technologies are expected to improve the efficacy of ER positive breast cancer treatment.

Androgen receptor and estrogen receptor variants in prostate and breast cancers

The androgen receptor (AR) and estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) are steroid receptor transcription factors with critical roles in the development and progression of prostate and breast cancers. Advances in the understanding of mechanisms underlying the ligand-dependent activation of these transcription factors have contributed to the development of small molecule inhibitors that block AR and ERα actions. These inhibitors include competitive antagonists and degraders that directly bind the ligand binding domains of these receptors, luteinizing hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) analogs that suppress gonadal synthesis of testosterone or estrogen, and drugs that block specific enzymes required for biosynthesis of testosterone or estrogen. However, resistance to these therapies is frequent, and is often driven by selection for tumor cells with alterations in the AR or ESR1 genes and/or alternatively spliced AR or ESR1 mRNAs that encode variant forms AR or ERα. While most investigations involving AR have been within the context of prostate cancer, and the majority of investigations involving ERα have been within the context of breast cancer, important roles for AR have been elucidated in breast cancer, and important roles for ERα have been elucidated in prostate cancer. Here, we will discuss the roles of AR and ERα in breast and prostate cancers, outline the effects of gene- and mRNA-level alterations in AR and ESR1 on progression of these diseases, and identify strategies that are being developed to target these alterations therapeutically.

The potential of epigenetic therapy to target the 3D epigenome in endocrine-resistant breast cancer

Three-dimensional (3D) epigenome remodeling is an important mechanism of gene deregulation in cancer. However, its potential as a target to counteract therapy resistance remains largely unaddressed. Here, we show that epigenetic therapy with decitabine (5-Aza-mC) suppresses tumor growth in xenograft models of pre-clinical metastatic estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast tumor. Decitabine-induced genome-wide DNA hypomethylation results in large-scale 3D epigenome deregulation, including de-compaction of higher-order chromatin structure and loss of boundary insulation of topologically associated domains. Significant DNA hypomethylation associates with ectopic activation of ER-enhancers, gain in ER binding, creation of new 3D enhancer-promoter interactions and concordant up-regulation of ER-mediated transcription pathways. Importantly, long-term withdrawal of epigenetic therapy partially restores methylation at ER-enhancer elements, resulting in a loss of ectopic 3D enhancer-promoter interactions and associated gene repression. Our study illustrates the potential of epigenetic therapy to target ER+ endocrine-resistant breast cancer by DNA methylation-dependent rewiring of 3D chromatin interactions, which are associated with the suppression of tumor growth.

Stranger Things: New Roles and Opportunities for Androgen Receptor in Oncology Beyond Prostate Cancer

The androgen receptor (AR) is one of the oldest therapeutic targets in oncology and continues to dominate the treatment landscape for advanced prostate cancer, where nearly all treatment regimens include some form of AR modulation. In this regard, AR remains the central driver of prostate cancer cell biology. Emerging preclinical and clinical data implicate key roles for AR in additional cancer types, thereby expanding the importance of this drug target beyond prostate cancer. In this mini-review, new roles for AR in other cancer types are discussed as well as their potential for treatment with AR-targeted agents. Our understanding of these additional functions for AR in oncology expand this receptor's potential as a therapeutic target and will help guide the development of new treatment approaches.

Pharmacological Targeting of Androgen Receptor Elicits Context-Specific Effects in Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer

Androgen receptor (AR) is expressed in 80% to 90% of estrogen receptor α-positive (ER+) breast cancers. Accumulated evidence has shown that AR is a tumor suppressor and that its expression is associated with improved prognosis in ER+ breast cancer. However, both a selective AR agonist (RAD140) and an AR inhibitor (enzalutamide, ENZ) have shown a therapeutic effect on ER+ breast cancer, so the potential for clinical application of AR-targeting therapy for ER+ breast cancer is still in dispute. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of ENZ and RAD140 in vivo and in vitro in AR+/ER+ breast cancer models, characterizing the relationship of AR and ER levels to response to AR-targeting drugs and investigating the alterations of global gene expression and chromatin binding of AR and ERα after ENZ treatment. In the AR-low setting, ENZ directly functioned as an ERα antagonist. Cell growth inhibition by ENZ in breast cancer with low AR expression was independent of AR and instead dependent on ER. In AR-high breast cancer models, AR repressed ERα signaling and ENZ promoted ERα signaling by antagonizing AR. In contrast, RAD140 activated AR signaling and suppressed AR-high tumor growth by deregulating ERα expression and blocking ERα function. Overall, analysis of the dynamic efficacies and outcomes of AR agonist, and antagonist in the presence of different AR and ERα levels reveals regulators of response and supports the clinical investigation of ENZ in selected ER+ tumors with a low AR/ER ratio and AR agonists in tumors with a high AR/ER ratio.

SIGNIFICANCE

The ratio of androgen receptor to estrogen receptor in breast cancer dictates the response to AR-targeted therapies, providing guidelines for developing AR-directed treatment strategies for patients with breast cancer.

Identification of hub genes in AR-induced tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer based on weighted gene co-expression network analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30% of patients with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (BC) exhibit intrinsic or recurrent resistance to tamoxifen (TAM) adjuvant endocrine therapy. The androgen receptor (AR) is expressed in about 90% of ER-positive patients. Our previous studies found that BC patients with an AR:ER expression ratio ≥ 2.0 are more susceptible to TAM resistance. However, the specific mechanism by which a high AR:ER ratio promotes TAM resistance remains unknown.

METHODS

RNA sequencing was performed on 10 cases of BC tissues with AR:ER ratios ≥ 2.0 and 3 cases with AR:ER ratios < 2.0. We then compared our data with the screened TAM-resistant and TAM-sensitive cases from the TCGA BC database. Bioinformatics methods were used to screen differentially expressed genes (DEGs) and to perform gene enrichment analysis. Weighted correlation network analysis (WGCNA) was used to screen hub genes in the AR-induced TAM resistance process.

RESULTS

PAM50 analysis showed that the molecular phenotype of BC patients with AR:ER ratios ≥ 2.0 was similar to that of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), whereas the BC samples with AR:ER ratios < 2.0 were classified as the luminal subtype. Among the AR:ER ratio ≥ 2.0 and AR:ER < 2.0 BC tumours, 1855 DEGs were identified. Gene enrichment analysis showed that DEGs were enriched mainly in proliferation-related molecular pathways, such as the cell cycle, necroptosis, metabolic pathways and DNA replication. WGCNA analysis showed that SEC14L2, RIIAD1, STC2 and MAGEA6 served as hub genes in AR-induced TAM resistance and were associated with BC survival prognosis in the TCGA cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

A high AR:ER expression ratio is a biomarker for patients who might develop TAM resistance, and AR expression seems to be a possible mechanism of resistance to endocrine therapy.

Correlation between Androgen Receptor Expression in Luminal B (HER-2 Negative) Breast Cancer and Disease Outcomes

(1) Background: Hormone receptor positive breast cancer is a subtype of breast cancer with relatively good prognosis, but luminal B (HER−2 negative) breast cancer has a higher risk of recurrence and metastasis. Patients with endocrine therapy resistance and chemotherapy insensitivity have poor prognosis. Androgen receptor (AR) is widely expressed in breast cancer, but there is no clear conclusion about its function and correlation with prognosis in luminal B breast cancer. Further research is needed to reveal the role of AR in luminal B (HER−2 negative) breast cancer. (2) Methods: Retrospectively analyzed patients with early−stage luminal B breast cancer. The correlation between AR and its associated indexes with long−term survival was determined. (3) Results: A total of 985 patients were included with 143 treated by neoadjuvant therapy. Of these, 83.5% of the patients had AR expression ≥65%. High AR expression was associated with good disease−free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). In the neoadjuvant population, AR/estrogen receptor (ER) > 1.06 and residual tumor Ki67 > 23% had significantly worse DFS. (4) Conclusion: Low AR (<65%) expression is associated with poor prognosis in luminal B (HER−2 negative) breast cancer patients. High AR/ER and residual tumor Ki67 were associated with poor DFS in neoadjuvant group with a cutoff value of AR/ER > 1.06 and residual tumor Ki67 > 23%.

Androgen and oestrogen receptor co-expression determines the efficacy of hormone receptor-mediated radiosensitisation in breast cancer

PURPOSE

Radiation therapy (RT) and hormone receptor (HR) inhibition are used for the treatment of HR-positive breast cancers; however, little is known about the interaction of the androgen receptor (AR) and estrogen receptor (ER) in response to RT in AR-positive, ER-positive (AR+/ER+) breast cancers. Here we assessed radiosensitisation of AR+/ER+ cell lines using pharmacologic or genetic inhibition/degradation of AR and/or ER.

METHODS

Radiosensitisation was assessed with AR antagonists (enzalutamide, apalutamide, darolutamide, seviteronel, ARD-61), ER antagonists (tamoxifen, fulvestrant) or using knockout of AR.

RESULTS

Treatment with AR antagonists or ER antagonists in combination with RT did not result in radiosensitisation changes (radiation enhancement ratios [rER]: 0.76-1.21). Fulvestrant treatment provided significant radiosensitisation of CAMA-1 and BT-474 cells (rER: 1.06-2.0) but not ZR-75-1 cells (rER: 0.9-1.11). Combining tamoxifen with enzalutamide did not alter radiosensitivity using a 1 h or 1-week pretreatment (rER: 0.95-1.14). Radiosensitivity was unchanged in AR knockout compared to Cas9 cells (rER: 1.07 ± 0.11), and no additional radiosensitisation was achieved with tamoxifen or fulvestrant compared to Cas9 cells (rER: 0.84-1.19).

CONCLUSION

While radiosensitising in AR + TNBC, AR inhibition does not modulate radiation sensitivity in AR+/ER+ breast cancer. The efficacy of ER antagonists in combination with RT may also be dependent on AR expression.

High cyclin E1 protein, but not gene amplification, is prognostic for basal-like breast cancer

Basal-like breast cancer (BLBC) has a greater overlap in molecular features with high-grade serous ovarian cancer (HGSOC) than with other breast cancer subtypes. Similarities include BRCA1 mutation, high frequency of TP53 mutation, and amplification of CCNE1 (encoding the cyclin E1 protein) in 6-34% of cases, and these features can be used to group patients for targeted therapies in clinical trials. In HGSOC, we previously reported two subsets with high levels of cyclin E1: those in which CCNE1 is amplified, have intact homologous recombination (HR), and very poor prognosis; and a CCNE1 non-amplified subset, with more prevalent HR defects. Here, we investigate whether similar subsets are identifiable in BLBC that may allow alignment of patient grouping in clinical trials of agents targeting cyclin E1 overexpression. We examined cyclin E1 protein and CCNE1 amplification in a cohort of 76 BLBCs and validated the findings in additional breast cancer datasets. Compared to HGSOC, CCNE1 amplified BLBC had a lower level of amplification (3.5 versus 5.2 copies) and lower relative cyclin E1 protein, a lack of correlation of amplification with expression, and no association with polyploidy. BLBC with elevated cyclin E1 protein also had prevalent HR defects, and high-level expression of the cyclin E1 deubiquitinase ubiquitin-specific protease 28 (USP28). Using a meta-analysis across multiple studies, we determined that cyclin E1 protein overexpression but not amplification is prognostic in BLBC, while both cyclin E1 overexpression and amplification are prognostic in HGSOC. Overall CCNE1 gene amplification is not equivalent between BLBC and HGSOC. However, high cyclin E1 protein expression can co-occur with HR defects in both BLBC and HGSOC, and is associated with poor prognosis in BLBC.

Androgen Receptor: A New Marker to Predict Pathological Complete Response in HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Trastuzumab Plus Pertuzumab Neoadjuvant Therapy

(1) Background: Neoadjuvant therapy is the main therapeutic strategy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive breast cancer patients, and the combination of trastuzumab and pertuzumab (HP) has become a routine treatment. How to predict and screen patients who are less likely to respond to neoadjuvant therapy is the focus of research. The androgen receptor (AR) is a biomarker that is widely expressed in all breast cancer subtypes and is probably related to treatment response and prognosis. In this study, we investigated the relationship between AR expression and treatment response in HER2-positive breast cancer patients treated with HP neoadjuvant therapy. (2) Methods: We evaluated early breast cancer patients treated with HP neoadjuvant therapy from Jan. 2019 to Oct. 2020 at Peking University First Hospital Breast Cancer Center. The inclusion criteria were as follows: early HER2-positive breast cancer patients diagnosed by core needle biopsy who underwent both HP neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. We compared the clinical and pathological features between pathological complete response (pCR) and non-pCR patients. (3) Results: We included 44 patients. A total of 90.9% of patients received neoadjuvant therapy of taxanes, carboplatin, trastuzumab and pertuzumab (TCHP), and the total pCR rate was 50%. pCR was negatively related to estrogen receptor (ER) positivity (OR 0.075 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.008–0.678], p = 0.021) and positively related to high expression levels of AR (OR 33.145 [95% CI 2.803–391.900], p = 0.005). We drew a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve to assess the predictive value of AR expression for pCR, and the area under the curve was 0.737 (95% CI 0.585–0.889, p = 0.007). The optimal cutoff of AR for predicting pCR was 85%. (4) Conclusion: AR is a potential marker for the prediction of pCR in HER2-positive breast cancer patients treated with HP neoadjuvant therapy.

Mechanisms behind context-dependent role of glucocorticoids in breast cancer progression

Glucocorticoids (GCs), mostly dexamethasone (dex), are routinely administered as adjuvant therapy to manage side effects in breast cancer. However, recently, it has been revealed that dex triggers different effects and correlates with opposite outcomes depending on the breast cancer molecular subtype. This has raised new concerns regarding the generalized use of GC and suggested that the context-dependent effects of GCs can be taken into potential consideration during treatment design. Based on this, attention has recently been drawn to the role of the glucocorticoid receptor (GR) in development and progression of breast cancer. Therefore, in this comprehensive review, we aimed to summarize the different mechanisms behind different context-dependent GC actions in breast cancer by applying a multilevel examination, starting from the association of variants of the GR-encoding gene to expression at the mRNA and protein level of the receptor, and its interactions with other factors influencing GC action in breast cancer. The role of GCs in chemosensitivity and chemoresistance observed during breast cancer therapy is discussed. In addition, experiences using GC targeting therapeutic options (already used and investigated in preclinical and clinical trials), such as classic GC dexamethasone, selective glucocorticoid receptor agonists and modulators, the GC antagonist mifepristone, and GR coregulators, are also summarized. Evidence presented can aid a better understanding of the biology of context-dependent GC action that can lead to further advances in the personalized therapy of breast cancer by the evaluation of GR along with the conventional estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) in the routine diagnostic procedure.

Diverse role of androgen action in human breast cancer

Breast cancer is a hormone-dependent cancer, and sex steroids play a pivotal role in breast cancer progression. Estrogens are strongly associated with breast cancers, and the estrogen receptor (estrogen receptor α; ERα) is expressed in 70-80% of human breast carcinoma tissues. Although antiestrogen therapies (endocrine therapies) have significantly improved clinical outcomes in ERα-positive breast cancer patients, some patients experience recurrence after treatment. In addition, patients with breast carcinoma lacking ERα expression do not benefit from endocrine therapy. The androgen receptor (AR) is also expressed in >70% of breast carcinoma tissues. Growing evidence supports this novel therapeutic target for the treatment of triple-negative breast cancers that lack ERα, progesterone receptor, and human EGF receptor 2, and ERα-positive breast cancers, which are resistant to conventional endocrine therapy. However, the clinical significance of AR expression is still controversial and the biological function of androgens in breast cancers is unclear. In this review, we focus on the recent findings concerning androgen action in breast cancers and the contributions of androgens to improved breast cancer therapy.

JMJD6 orchestrates a transcriptional program in favor of endocrine resistance in ER+ breast cancer cells

High expression of Jumonji domain containing protein 6 (JMJD6) is strongly associated with poor prognosis in estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer. We overexpressed JMJD6 in MCF7 cells (JOE cells) and performed RNA-seq analysis. 76% of differentially expressed genes (DEGs) overlapped with ER target genes. Pathway analysis revealed that JMJD6 upregulated a larger subset of genes related to cell proliferation as compared to ER. Interestingly, JOE cells showed a decrease in ER target gene expression prompting us to check ER levels. Indeed, JOE cells showed a significant decrease in both ESR1 and ER levels and JMJD6 siRNA transfection increased the expression of both. Additionally, JOE cells showed increased RET and ERK1 expression, events associated with resistance to endocrine therapy. Accordingly, JOE cells displayed lower sensitivity and survived better at higher doses of 4-hydroxy tamoxifen (Tam) as compared to parental MCF-7 cells. Conversely, LTED-I and TAM R that resist Tam induced death, showed high expression of JMJD6. Further, JMJD6 siRNA treatment decreased growth and improved Tam sensitivity in TAM R. Comparison of JOE DEGs with known Tam signature genes showed a substantial overlap. Overall, these data suggest that blocking ER alone in patients may not eradicate proliferation of JMJD6 expressing ER+ cells and JMJD6 may predispose and sustain endocrine therapy resistance. We propose that immunostaining for JMJD6 could be developed as a potential marker for predicting endocrine therapy resistance. Further, antagonizing JMJD6 action in women expressing higher amounts of this protein, may offer a greater clinical benefit than endocrine therapy.

Endocrine resistance in breast cancer: from molecular mechanisms to therapeutic strategies

Estrogen receptor-positive (ER +) breast cancer accounts for approximately 75% of all breast cancers. Endocrine therapies, including selective ER modulators (SERMs), aromatase inhibitors (AIs), and selective ER down-regulators (SERDs) provide substantial clinical benefit by reducing the risk of disease recurrence and mortality. However, resistance to endocrine therapies represents a major challenge, limiting the success of ER + breast cancer treatment. Mechanisms of endocrine resistance involve alterations in ER signaling via modulation of ER (e.g., ER downregulation, ESR1 mutations or fusions); alterations in ER coactivators/corepressors, transcription factors (TFs), nuclear receptors and epigenetic modulators; regulation of signaling pathways; modulation of cell cycle regulators; stress signaling; and alterations in tumor microenvironment, nutrient stress, and metabolic regulation. Current therapeutic strategies to improve outcome of endocrine-resistant patients in clinics include inhibitors against mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR), cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6, and the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) subunit, p110α. Preclinical studies reveal novel therapeutic targets, some of which are currently tested in clinical trials as single agents or in combination with endocrine therapies, such as ER partial agonists, ER proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs), next-generation SERDs, AKT inhibitors, epidermal growth factor receptor 1 and 2 (EGFR/HER2) dual inhibitors, HER2 targeting antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) and histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors. In this review, we summarize the established and emerging mechanisms of endocrine resistance, alterations during metastatic recurrence, and discuss the approved therapies and ongoing clinical trials testing the combination of novel targeted therapies with endocrine therapy in endocrine-resistant ER + breast cancer patients.

FOXA1: A Pioneer of Nuclear Receptor Action in Breast Cancer

The pioneering function of FOXA1 establishes estrogen-responsive transcriptomes in luminal breast cancer. Dysregulated FOXA1 chromatin occupancy through focal amplification, mutation, or cofactor recruitment modulates estrogen receptor (ER) transcriptional programs and drives endocrine-resistant disease. However, ER is not the sole nuclear receptor (NR) expressed in breast cancers, nor is it the only NR for which FOXA1 serves as a licensing factor. Receptors for androgens, glucocorticoids, and progesterone are also found in the majority of breast cancers, and their functions are also impacted by FOXA1. These NRs interface with ER transcriptional programs and, depending on their activation level, can reprogram FOXA1-ER cistromes. Thus, NR interplay contributes to endocrine therapy response and resistance and may provide a vulnerability for future therapeutic benefit in patients. Herein, we review what is known regarding FOXA1 regulation of NR function in breast cancer in the context of cell identity, endocrine resistance, and NR crosstalk in breast cancer progression and treatment.

Type 1 Nuclear Receptor Activity in Breast Cancer: Translating Preclinical Insights to the Clinic

The nuclear receptor (NR) family of transcription factors is intimately associated with the development, progression and treatment of breast cancer. They are used diagnostically and prognostically, and crosstalk between nuclear receptor pathways and growth factor signalling has been demonstrated in all major subtypes of breast cancer. The majority of breast cancers are driven by estrogen receptor α (ER), and anti-estrogenic therapies remain the backbone of treatment, leading to clinically impactful improvements in patient outcomes. This serves as a blueprint for the development of therapies targeting other nuclear receptors. More recently, pivotal findings into modulating the progesterone (PR) and androgen receptors (AR), with accompanying mechanistic insights into NR crosstalk and interactions with other proliferative pathways, have led to clinical trials in all of the major breast cancer subtypes. A growing body of evidence now supports targeting other Type 1 nuclear receptors such as the glucocorticoid receptor (GR), as well as Type 2 NRs such as the vitamin D receptor (VDR). Here, we reviewed the existing preclinical insights into nuclear receptor activity in breast cancer, with a focus on Type 1 NRs. We also discussed the potential to translate these findings into improving patient outcomes.

Genome-wide crosstalk between steroid receptors in breast and prostate cancers

Steroid receptors (SRs) constitute an important class of signal-dependent transcription factors (TFs). They regulate a variety of key biological processes and are crucial drug targets in many disease states. In particular, estrogen (ER) and androgen receptors (AR) drive the development and progression of breast and prostate cancer, respectively. Thus, they represent the main specific drug targets in these diseases. Recent evidence has suggested that the crosstalk between signal-dependent TFs is an important step in the reprogramming of chromatin sites; a signal-activated TF can expand or restrict the chromatin binding of another TF. This crosstalk can rewire gene programs and thus alter biological processes and influence the progression of disease. Lately, it has been postulated that there may be an important crosstalk between the AR and the ER with other SRs. Especially, progesterone (PR) and glucocorticoid receptor (GR) can reprogram chromatin binding of ER and gene programs in breast cancer cells. Furthermore, GR can take the place of AR in antiandrogen-resistant prostate cancer cells. Here, we review the current knowledge of the crosstalk between SRs in breast and prostate cancers. We emphasize how the activity of ER and AR on chromatin can be modulated by other SRs on a genome-wide scale. We also highlight the knowledge gaps in the interplay of SRs and their complex interactions with other signaling pathways and suggest how to experimentally fill in these gaps.

Steroid Ligands, the Forgotten Triggers of Nuclear Receptor Action; Implications for Acquired Resistance to Endocrine Therapy

PURPOSE

There is strong epidemiologic evidence indicating that estrogens may not be the sole steroid drivers of breast cancer. We hypothesize that abundant adrenal androgenic steroid precursors, acting via the androgen receptor (AR), promote an endocrine-resistant breast cancer phenotype.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

AR was evaluated in a primary breast cancer tissue microarray (n = 844). Androstenedione (4AD) levels were evaluated in serum samples (n = 42) from hormone receptor-positive, postmenopausal breast cancer. Levels of androgens, progesterone, and estradiol were quantified using LC/MS-MS in serum from age- and grade-matched recurrent and nonrecurrent patients (n = 6) before and after aromatase inhibitor (AI) therapy (>12 months). AR and estrogen receptor (ER) signaling pathway activities were analyzed in two independent AI-treated cohorts.

RESULTS

AR protein expression was associated with favorable progression-free survival in the total population (Wilcoxon, P < 0.001). Pretherapy serum samples from breast cancer patients showed decreasing levels of 4AD with age only in the nonrecurrent group (P < 0.05). LC/MS-MS analysis of an AI-sensitive and AI-resistant cohort demonstrated the ability to detect altered levels of steroids in serum of patients before and after AI therapy. Transcriptional analysis showed an increased ratio of AR:ER signaling pathway activities in patients failing AI therapy (t test P < 0.05); furthermore, 4AD mediated gene changes associated with acquired AI resistance.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance of examining the therapeutic consequences of the steroid microenvironment and demonstrable receptor activation using indicative gene expression signatures.

Androgen receptor signalling confers clonogenic and migratory advantages in urothelial cell carcinoma of the bladder

Bladder urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) incidence is about three times higher in men compared with women. There are several indications for the involvement of hormonal factors in the aetiology of UCC. Here, we provide evidence of androgen signalling in UCC progression. Microarray and qPCR analysis revealed that the androgen receptor (AR) mRNA level is upregulated in a subset of UCC cases. In an AR‐positive UCC‐derived cell line model, UM‐UC‐3‐AR, androgen treatment increased clonogenic capacity inducing the formation of big stem cell‐like holoclones, while AR knockdown or treatment with the AR antagonist enzalutamide abrogated this clonogenic advantage. Additionally, blockage of AR signalling reduced the cell migration potential of androgen‐stimulated UM‐UC‐3‐AR cells. These phenotypic changes were accompanied by a rewiring of the transcriptome with almost 300 genes being differentially regulated by androgens, some of which correlated with AR expression in UCC patients in two independent data sets. Our results demonstrate that AR signals in UCC favouring the development of an aggressive phenotype and highlights its potential as a therapeutic target for bladder cancer.

Obesity and Androgen Receptor Signaling: Associations and Potential Crosstalk in Breast Cancer Cells

Obesity is an increasing health challenge and is recognized as a breast cancer risk factor. Although obesity-related breast cancer mechanisms are not fully understood, this association has been linked to impaired hormone secretion by the dysfunctional obese adipose tissue (hyperplasic and hypertrophic adipocytes). Among these hormones, altered production of androgens and adipokines is observed, and both, are independently associated with breast cancer development. In this review, we describe and comment on the relationships reported between these factors and breast cancer, focusing on the biological associations that have helped to unveil the mechanisms by which signaling from androgens and adipokines modifies the behavior of mammary epithelial cells. Furthermore, we discuss the potential crosstalk between the two most abundant adipokines produced by the adipose tissue (adiponectin and leptin) and the androgen receptor, an emerging marker in breast cancer. The identification and understanding of interactions among adipokines and the androgen receptor in cancer cells are necessary to guide the development of new therapeutic approaches in order to prevent and cure obesity and breast cancer.

The androgen receptor is a tumor suppressor in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer

The role of the androgen receptor (AR) in estrogen receptor (ER)-α-positive breast cancer is controversial, constraining implementation of AR-directed therapies. Using a diverse, clinically relevant panel of cell-line and patient-derived models, we demonstrate that AR activation, not suppression, exerts potent antitumor activity in multiple disease contexts, including resistance to standard-of-care ER and CDK4/6 inhibitors. Notably, AR agonists combined with standard-of-care agents enhanced therapeutic responses. Mechanistically, agonist activation of AR altered the genomic distribution of ER and essential co-activators (p300, SRC-3), resulting in repression of ER-regulated cell cycle genes and upregulation of AR target genes, including known tumor suppressors. A gene signature of AR activity positively predicted disease survival in multiple clinical ER-positive breast cancer cohorts. These findings provide unambiguous evidence that AR has a tumor suppressor role in ER-positive breast cancer and support AR agonism as the optimal AR-directed treatment strategy, revealing a rational therapeutic opportunity.

Diagnostic and prognostic role of NR3C4 in breast cancer through a genomic network understanding

The androgen receptor (AR, NR3C4) is believed to participate in the development of breast cancer, but its molecular mechanism and role in prognosis is still controversial and opaque. This study aimed to explore the expression, associations with clinicopathologic features and underlying molecular mechanisms of AR in breast cancer. The present study investigated invasive breast carcinoma through comprehensive bioinformatics. The expression and mutation rate of AR in breast cancer was obtained from the TCGA database. Training survival prediction analysis was applied to the data extracted from the KM plotter database. The prediction of the survival cohort was validated using the bcGenExMiner database in breast cancer molecular subgroups. Represented immunohistochemical images of AR and its related expression with the molecular subtype status were generated. The underlying molecular mechanism for AR in breast cancer was analyzed with the GEO dataset and Gene Ontology. A protein-to-protein interaction network and core pathways were constructed to show the protein functions with AR. Our results show that AR expression was significantly higher in cancerous tissue than in normal breast tissue and differentially expressed in the clinical stages. AR would also generally be considered as a favorable prognostic biomarker when including the major molecular subtypes of breast cancer. AR IHC staining could be easily used in clinical applications. The major molecular functions for AR were regulating the cell cycle checkpoints and chromatin remodeling. Our investigation showed that AR expression level could be used as a favorable and independent prognostic prediction factor for the disease-free survival time in breast cancer, especially for the ER-positive subgroup. However, AR was not a sensitive prognostic biomarker for the prediction of overall survival time or for the PR and TBC subgroups. In terms of the underlying molecular mechanism, AR may mainly participate in the cell cycle checkpoints related to the G1/S transition of the mitotic cell cycle to control the subdivision of the epithelial terminal unit and chromatin remodeling in breast cancer.

Gene Expression Signatures of BRCAness and Tumor Inflammation Define Subgroups of Early-Stage Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

Patients with estrogen receptor- and/or progesterone receptor-positive, early breast cancer benefit from hormonal treatment, yet high global death burdens due to high prevalence and long-term recurrence risk call for biomarkers to guide additional treatment approaches.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

From a prospective, observational study of postmenopausal early breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors, gene expression analyses of 612 tumors was performed using the NanoString Breast Cancer 360 panel to interrogate 23 breast cancer pathways. Candidate signatures associated with disease subtype and event-free survival (EFS) were obtained by cluster analysis, Cox modeling, and conditional inference trees, and were independently tested in 613 patients from BreastMark. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) were assessed on tissue sections, and mutational burden was assessed in 36 tumors by whole-exome sequencing.

RESULTS

PAM50-derived classification distinguished lower-risk (Luminal A) from higher-risk subtypes (Luminal B, P = 0.04; HER2, P = 0.006; Basal, P = 0.008). In higher-risk patients, shorter EFS was associated with low androgen receptor [HR = 3.61; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.72-7.56; P = 0.001] or high BRCAness signature expression (HR = 3.58; 95% CI, 1.19-10.7; P = 0.023). BRCAness was independently confirmed as a predictor of shorter EFS (HR = 2.64; 95% CI, 1.31-5.34; P = 0.007). About 13%-15% of patients, enriched for high-grade, higher-risk subtypes (P ≤ 0.0001), had strong expression of the Tumor Inflammation Signature (TIS) suggestive of an inhibited antitumor immune response. TIS scores were strongly associated with TIL numbers (P < 1e-30) but not with tumor mutation status.

CONCLUSIONS

BRCA-related DNA repair deficiency and suppressed tumor immune responses may be clinically relevant predictors of endocrine therapy complementing treatment options in subgroups of hormone-sensitive early breast cancer.

ARe we there yet? Understanding androgen receptor signaling in breast cancer

The role of androgen receptor (AR) activation and expression is well understood in prostate cancer. In breast cancer, expression and activation of AR is increasingly recognized for its role in cancer development and its importance in promoting cell growth in the presence or absence of estrogen. As both prostate and breast cancers often share a reliance on nuclear hormone signaling, there is increasing appreciation of the overlap between activated cellular pathways in these cancers in response to androgen signaling. Targeting of the androgen receptor as a monotherapy or in combination with other conventional therapies has proven to be an effective clinical strategy for the treatment of patients with prostate cancer, and these therapeutic strategies are increasingly being investigated in breast cancer. This overlap suggests that targeting androgens and AR signaling in other cancer types may also be effective. This manuscript will review the role of AR in various cellular processes that promote tumorigenesis and metastasis, first in prostate cancer and then in breast cancer, as well as discuss ongoing efforts to target AR for the more effective treatment and prevention of cancer, especially breast cancer.

Constitutively active androgen receptor supports the metastatic phenotype of endocrine-resistant hormone receptor-positive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Hormone receptor positive (HR+) breast cancer (BCa) is the most frequently diagnosed subtype. Acquired and intrinsic resistance to conventional endocrine therapy (ET) commonly occurs and prompts incurable metastatic disease. Hence, ET-resistant (ET-R) HR+ BCa presents a therapeutic challenge. Previous studies show elevated androgen receptor (AR) that supports resistance to ET tamoxifen and correlates with HR+ BCa metastasis. Yet surprisingly, studies with AR-blocker enzalutamide (Enz) in ET-R HR+ BCa present conflicting results. We now report that a constitutively active, unique from canonical Enz-targeted, AR accumulates in endocrine resistant HR+ BCa cells.

METHODS

AR protein profiles in acquired and intrinsic ET-R HR + -BCa were defined with cell-free modification tests, in-house in-vivo SUMOylation assays, and PLA imaging. Genomic activity of native AR and modified-AR mimetic was tested with reporter assays and limited transcriptome analysis. Spheroid growth and migration studies were used to evaluate inhibitory actions of Enz and combinatorial therapy.

RESULTS

Sustained higher molecular weight SUMO-modified AR (SUMO-AR) persists in acquired and intrinsic ET-R BCa cell lines. Concurrently, SUMO isoforms and global SUMO-modified proteome also accumulates in the same cell lines. We identified AR as a novel substrate for the SUMO-E3 ligase HSPB1/Hsp27. Independent of ligand, SUMO-AR is resilient to ubiquitin-mediated proteasomal degradation, enriched in the nucleus, readily chromatin-bound, and transcriptionally active. Constitutive SUMO-AR initiates a gene-expression profile that favors epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Enz combined with a SUMO inhibitor attenuates migration and metastatic phenotype of ET-R HR+ BCa.

CONCLUSION

Targeting both unmodified and SUMO-modified AR prevents the metastatic progression of HR+ BCa with ET-R. Video abstract.

MDM2 inhibition in combination with endocrine therapy and CDK4/6 inhibition for the treatment of ER-positive breast cancer

Background

Resistance to endocrine therapy is a major clinical challenge in the management of oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. In this setting, p53 is frequently wildtype and its activity may be suppressed via upregulation of its key regulator MDM2. This underlies our rationale to evaluate MDM2 inhibition as a therapeutic strategy in treatment-resistant ER-positive breast cancer.

Methods

We used the MDM2 inhibitor NVP-CGM097 to treat in vitro and in vivo models alone and in combination with fulvestrant or palbociclib. We perform cell viability, cell cycle, apoptosis and senescence assays to evaluate anti-tumour effects in p53 wildtype and p53 mutant ER-positive cell lines (MCF-7, ZR75-1, T-47D) and MCF-7 lines resistant to endocrine therapy and to CDK4/6 inhibition. We further assess the drug effects in patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models of endocrine-sensitive and endocrine-resistant ER-positive breast cancer.

Results

We demonstrate that MDM2 inhibition results in cell cycle arrest and increased apoptosis in p53-wildtype in vitro and in vivo breast cancer models, leading to potent anti-tumour activity. We find that endocrine therapy or CDK4/6 inhibition synergises with MDM2 inhibition but does not further enhance apoptosis. Instead, combination treatments result in profound regulation of cell cycle-related transcriptional programmes, with synergy achieved through increased antagonism of cell cycle progression. Combination therapy pushes cell lines resistant to fulvestrant or palbociclib to become senescent and significantly reduces tumour growth in a fulvestrant-resistant patient-derived xenograft model.

Conclusions

We conclude that MDM2 inhibitors in combination with ER degraders or CDK4/6 inhibitors represent a rational strategy for treating advanced, endocrine-resistant ER-positive breast cancer, operating through synergistic activation of cell cycle co-regulatory programmes.