Differential requirements of androgen receptor in luminal progenitors during prostate regeneration and tumor initiation

  1. Chee Wai Chua
  2. Nusrat J Epsi
  3. Eva Y Leung
  4. Shouhong Xuan
  5. Ming Lei
  6. Bo I Li
  7. Sarah K Bergren
  8. Hanina Hibshoosh
  9. Antonina Mitrofanova
  10. Michael M Shen  Is a corresponding author
  1. Columbia University Medical Center, United States
  2. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, United States

Abstract

Master regulatory genes of tissue specification play key roles in stem/progenitor cells and are often important in cancer. In the prostate, androgen receptor (AR) is a master regulator essential for development and tumorigenesis, but its specific functions in prostate stem/progenitor cells have not been elucidated. We have investigated AR function in CARNs (CAstration-Resistant Nkx3.1-expressing cells), a luminal stem/progenitor that functions in prostate regeneration. Using genetically-engineered mouse models and novel prostate epithelial cell lines, we find that progenitor properties of CARNs are largely unaffected by AR deletion, apart from decreased proliferation in vivo. Furthermore, AR loss suppresses tumor formation after deletion of the Pten tumor suppressor in CARNs; however, combined Pten deletion and activation of oncogenic Kras results in AR-negative tumors with focal neuroendocrine differentiation. Our findings show that AR modulates specific progenitor properties of CARNs, including their ability to serve as a cell of origin for prostate cancer.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Chee Wai Chua

    Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Nusrat J Epsi

    Department of Health Informatics, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5363-075X
  3. Eva Y Leung

    Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Shouhong Xuan

    Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ming Lei

    Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Bo I Li

    Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Sarah K Bergren

    Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Hanina Hibshoosh

    Department of Pathology and Cell Biology, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Antonina Mitrofanova

    Department of Health Informatics, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Michael M Shen

    Department of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    mshen@columbia.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4042-1657

Funding

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (DK076602)

  • Michael M Shen

National Cancer Institute (CA1966692)

  • Michael M Shen

U.S. Department of Defense (Prostate Cancer Research Program PC101820)

  • Chee Wai Chua

U.S. Department of Defense (Prostate Cancer Research Program PC141064)

  • Bo I Li

Prostate Cancer Foundation

  • Michael M Shen

Rutgers SHP Dean's Intramural Grant

  • Antonina Mitrofanova

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Sean J Morrison, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All animal experiments were performed under protocol AAAR9408, which was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at Columbia University Medical Center.

Human subjects: Radical prostatectomy samples were obtained from consented patients under the auspices of an Institutional Review Board approved protocol AAAC4997 at Columbia University Medical Center.

Version history

  1. Received: May 18, 2017
  2. Accepted: January 12, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: January 15, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: February 9, 2018 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: February 15, 2018 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2018, Chua et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,988
    views
  • 506
    downloads
  • 24
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Chee Wai Chua
  2. Nusrat J Epsi
  3. Eva Y Leung
  4. Shouhong Xuan
  5. Ming Lei
  6. Bo I Li
  7. Sarah K Bergren
  8. Hanina Hibshoosh
  9. Antonina Mitrofanova
  10. Michael M Shen
(2018)
Differential requirements of androgen receptor in luminal progenitors during prostate regeneration and tumor initiation
eLife 7:e28768.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28768

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.28768

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Kevin Nuno, Armon Azizi ... Ravindra Majeti
    Research Article

    Relapse of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is highly aggressive and often treatment refractory. We analyzed previously published AML relapse cohorts and found that 40% of relapses occur without changes in driver mutations, suggesting that non-genetic mechanisms drive relapse in a large proportion of cases. We therefore characterized epigenetic patterns of AML relapse using 26 matched diagnosis-relapse samples with ATAC-seq. This analysis identified a relapse-specific chromatin accessibility signature for mutationally stable AML, suggesting that AML undergoes epigenetic evolution at relapse independent of mutational changes. Analysis of leukemia stem cell (LSC) chromatin changes at relapse indicated that this leukemic compartment underwent significantly less epigenetic evolution than non-LSCs, while epigenetic changes in non-LSCs reflected overall evolution of the bulk leukemia. Finally, we used single-cell ATAC-seq paired with mitochondrial sequencing (mtscATAC) to map clones from diagnosis into relapse along with their epigenetic features. We found that distinct mitochondrially-defined clones exhibit more similar chromatin accessibility at relapse relative to diagnosis, demonstrating convergent epigenetic evolution in relapsed AML. These results demonstrate that epigenetic evolution is a feature of relapsed AML and that convergent epigenetic evolution can occur following treatment with induction chemotherapy.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Ibtisam Ibtisam, Alexei F Kisselev
    Short Report

    Rapid recovery of proteasome activity may contribute to intrinsic and acquired resistance to FDA-approved proteasome inhibitors. Previous studies have demonstrated that the expression of proteasome genes in cells treated with sub-lethal concentrations of proteasome inhibitors is upregulated by the transcription factor Nrf1 (NFE2L1), which is activated by a DDI2 protease. Here, we demonstrate that the recovery of proteasome activity is DDI2-independent and occurs before transcription of proteasomal genes is upregulated but requires protein translation. Thus, mammalian cells possess an additional DDI2 and transcription-independent pathway for the rapid recovery of proteasome activity after proteasome inhibition.