Slug/SNAI2 regulates cell proliferation and invasiveness of metastatic prostate cancer cell lines.
ABSTRACT Many metastatic cancers recapitulate the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) resulting in enhanced cell motility and invasiveness. The EMT is regulated by several transcription factors, including the zinc finger protein SNAI2, also named Slug, which appears to exert additional functions during development and cancer progression. We have studied the function of SNAI2 in prostate cancer cells. Quantitative RT-PCR analysis showed strong SNAI2 expression particularly in the PC-3 and PC3-16 prostate carcinoma cell lines. Knockdown of SNAI2 by specific siRNA induced changes in EMT markers and inhibited invasion of both cell lines into a matrigel matrix. SNAI2 siRNA-treated cells did not tolerate detachment from the culture plates, likely at least in part due to downregulation of integrin alpha6beta4. SNAI2 knockdown disturbed the microtubular and actin cytoskeletons, especially severely in PC-3 cells, resulting in grossly enlarged, flattened, and sometimes multinuclear cells. Knockdown also decreased cell proliferation, with a prominent G0/G1 arrest in PC3-16. Together, our data imply that SNAI2 exerts strong effects on the cytoskeleton and adhesion of those prostate cancer cells that express it and is necessary for their proliferation and invasiveness.
- SourceAvailable from: Sumeet Uday Nayak[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Zinc finger E-box-binding protein 2 (ZEB2) is known to help mediate the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, and thereby it facilitates cancer metastasis. This study was initiated to explore whether ZEB2 expression differs in prostate cancer (PCa, n=7) and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH, n=7) tissues. In PCa tissues, the levels of both immunoreactive ZEB2 and androgen receptor (AR) were found to be significantly higher (P<0.05) when compared with BPH tissues. Co-regulation of AR and ZEB2 prompted us to investigate the role of androgenic stimuli in ZEB2 expression. ZEB2 expression was found to be significantly (P<0.05) upregulated after androgen stimulation and downregulated following AR silencing in LNCaP cells, an androgen-dependent PCa cell line. This finding suggested AR as a positive regulator of ZEB2 expression in androgen-dependent cells. Paradoxically, androgen-independent (AI) cell lines PC3 and DU145, known to possess low AR levels, showed significantly (P<0.05) higher expression of ZEB2 compared with LNCaP cells. Furthermore, forced expression of AR in PC3 (PC3-AR) and DU145 (DU-AR) cells led to reductions in ZEB2 expression, invasiveness, and migration. These cells also exhibited an increase in the levels of E-cadherin (a transcriptional target of ZEB2). Co-transfection of AR and ZEB2 cDNA constructs prevented the decline in invasiveness and migration to a significant extent. Additionally, ZEB2 downregulation was associated with an increase in miR200a/miR200b levels in PC3-AR cells and with a decrease in miR200a/miR200b levels in AR-silenced LNCaP cells. Thus, AR acts as a positive regulator of ZEB2 expression in androgen-dependent cells and as a negative regulator in AI PCa cells.Endocrine Related Cancer 04/2014; 21(3):473-86. DOI:10.1530/ERC-13-0514 · 4.91 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Prostate cancer that has progressed to metastatic disease remains largely untreatable. Nearly 90% of patients with advanced prostate cancer develop skeletal metastases, resulting in a substantial reduction in the quality of life and a drastic worsening of patient prognosis. The mechanisms involved in prostate cancer cell dissemination, however, remain poorly understood. We previously reported the identification of a highly tumorigenic E-cadherin positive prostate tumor stem cell subpopulation that expressed the embryonic stem cell markers SOX2 and OCT3/4. We herein demonstrate that this subpopulation is also highly invasive and, importantly, is capable of altering its E-cadherin expression during the process of invasion. The non-tumorigenic E-cadherin negative subpopulation which minimally expresses SOX2 or OCT3/4 was found to be poorly invasive. In addition, targeted knockdown of SOX2 or OCT3/4 markedly suppressed the invasion of prostate cancer cells. Taken together, these findings indicate that the expression of SOX2 or OCT3/4 is required for invasive cell capacity, but the ability to modulate E-cadherin is the key permissive factor enabling cancer stem cell invasion in vitro. We therefore propose a model in which the post-epithelial to mesenchymal transition phenotype progresses to a frank, aggressive, and invasive phenotype by a process requiring the acquisition of E-cadherin plasticity. Considering the clinical significance of the metastatic complications of prostate adenocarcinoma, the identification of factors that promote the dissemination of the malignant prostate phenotype is essential to establish effective therapies to combat this disease in future.American Journal of Cancer Research 01/2011; 1(1):71-84. · 3.97 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Glioblastoma is the most common type of astrocytoma in the brain. Due to its high invasiveness and chemoresistance, patients with advanced stage of glioblastoma have a poor prognosis. SNAI1, an important regulator of epithelial-mesenchymal transition, has been associated with metastasis in various carcinoma cells. However, its roles in glioblastoma cells have been poorly characterized. To examine roles of SNAI1 in glioblastoma cells, we knockdowned SNAI1 expression using siRNA. SNAI1 siRNA increased the expression level of E-cadherin and decreased that of vimentin. In the water-soluble tetrazolium salt (WST-1) assay, SNAI1 siRNA inhibited the proliferation of U87-MG and GBM05 glioblastoma cells. Moreover, in the Boyden chamber assay and Matrigel invasion assay, SNAI1 siRNA inhibited serum-induced migration and invasion of glioblastoma cells. These results suggested that SNAI1 is involved in the proliferation and migration of glioblastoma cells.Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology 04/2011; 31(3):489-96. DOI:10.1007/s10571-010-9643-4 · 2.20 Impact Factor