No abstract

Progesterone has biphasic effects on proliferation of breast cancer cells; it stimulates growth in the first cell cycle, then arrests cells at G 1 /S of the second cycle accompanied by up-regulation of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, p21. We now show that progesterone regulates transcription of the p21 promoter by an unusual mechanism. This promoter lacks a canonical progesterone response element. Instead, progesterone receptors (PRs) interact with the promoter through the transcription factor Sp1 at the third and fourth of six Sp1 binding sites located downstream of nucleotide 154. Mutation of Sp1 site 3 eliminates basal transcription, and mutation of sites 3 and 4 eliminates transcriptional up-regulation by progesterone. Progesterone-mediated transcription is further prevented by overexpression of E1A, suggesting that CBP/p300 is required. Indeed, in HeLa cells, Sp1 and CBP/p300 associate with stably integrated flagtagged PRs in a multiprotein complex. Since many signals converge on p21, cross-talk between PRs and other factors co-localized on the p21 promoter, may explain how progesterone can be either proliferative or differentiative in different target cells.Progesterone is a paradoxical hormone having either growth stimulatory effects or growth inhibitory and differentiative effects, depending on the tissue in question and the dose and treatment regimen (1, 2). In the uterus for example, progesterone inhibits epithelial growth and has differentiative effects (3). It is therefore used to counteract the proliferative and carcinogenic effects of unopposed estrogens in women prescribed hormone replacement therapy (4). In the breast, the role of progesterone is more complex. The hormone is required for terminal growth and differentiation of the mammary gland (2). Therefore, mice lacking progesterone receptors (PRs) 1 exhibit incomplete mammary gland ductal branching and failure of lobulo-alveolar development (5). In animal models of mammary carcinogenesis, progesterone, depending on the regimen used, can either inhibit or promote tumor formation (2). On the other hand, in animals with established PR-positive mammary tumors, progesterone is usually proliferative, and progesterone antagonists inhibit tumor growth (6). Despite this, in humans, second-line high dose progestin therapy effectively suppresses the growth of hormone-dependent PR-and estrogen receptorpositive breast cancers that have acquired resistance to the antiestrogen tamoxifen (6).How can these contradictory effects of progesterone be reconciled? Recent studies have dealt with the effects of progesterone on mitosis and key cell cycle regulatory proteins in cultured human breast cancer cells (1, 7-9). Treatment of such cells with progestins produces biphasic effects. Studies focusing on the initial growth stimulatory component show that progestin-induced entry of cells into S-phase is accompanied by transient increases of cyclin D1 and cyclin-dependent kinase 4 activity (1, 7). Indeed, cyclin D1 is a critical component of the mitogenic respon...

Depending on the tissue, progesterone is classified as a proliferative or a differentiative hormone. To explain this paradox, and to simplify analysis of its effects, we used a breast cancer cell line (T47D-YB) that constitutively expresses the B isoform of progesterone receptors. These cells are resistant to the proliferative effects of epidermal growth factor (EGF). Progesterone treatment accelerates T47D-YB cells through the first mitotic cell cycle, but arrests them in late G1 of the second cycle. This arrest is accompanied by decreased levels of cyclins D1, D3, and E, disappearance of cyclins A and B, and sequential induction of the cyclin-dependent kinase (cdk) inhibitors p21 and p27(Kip1). The retinoblastoma protein is hypophosphorylated and extensively down-regulated. The activity of the cell cycle-dependent protein kinase, cdk2, is regulated biphasically by progesterone: it increases initially, then decreases. This is consistent with the biphasic proliferative increase followed by arrest produced by one pulse of progesterone. A second treatment with progesterone cannot restart proliferation despite adequate levels of transcriptionally competent PR. Instead, a second progesterone dose delays the fall of p21 and enhances the rise of p27(Kip1), thereby intensifying the progesterone resistance in an autoinhibitory loop. However, during the progesterone-induced arrest, the cell cycling machinery is poised to restart. The first dose of progesterone increases the levels of EGF receptors and transiently sensitizes the cells to the proliferative effects of EGF. We conclude that progesterone is neither inherently proliferative nor antiproliferative, but that it is capable of stimulating or inhibiting cell growth depending on whether treatment is transient or continuous. We also suggest that the G1 arrest after progesterone treatment is accompanied by cellular changes that permit other, possibly tissue-specific, factors to influence the final proliferative or differentiative state.

High sodium diet was associated with increased urinary cortisol and its metabolites. Also, HS diet was associated with HT, insulin resistance, dyslipidaemia and hypoadiponectinaemia, even when adjusting by confounding variables. Further, we observed that high salt intake, IR and higher cortisol metabolites, alone or combined in a clinical simple model, accurately predicted MetS status, suggesting an additive mechanism in obesity-related metabolic disorders.

Recent reports have suggested that statins induce cell death in certain epithelial cancers and that patients taking statins to reduce cholesterol levels possess lower cancer incidence. However, little is known about the mechanisms of action of different statins or the effects of these statins in gynaecological malignancies. The apoptotic potential of two lipophilic statins (lovastatin and simvastatin) and one hydrophilic statin (pravastatin) was assessed in cancer cell lines (ovarian, endometrial and cervical) and primary cultured cancerous and normal tissues. Cell viability was studied by MTS assays and apoptosis was confirmed by Western blotting of PARP and flow cytometry. The expressions of key apoptotic cascade proteins were analysed. Our results demonstrate that both lovastatin and simvastatin, but not pravastatin, selectively induced cell death in dose- and time-dependent manner in ovarian, endometrial and cervical cancers. Little or no toxicity was observed with any statin on normal cells. Lipophilic statins induced activation of caspase-8 and -9; BID cleavage, cytochrome C release and PARP cleavage. Statin-sensitive cancers expressed high levels of HMG-CoA reductase compared with resistant cultures. The effect of lipophilic statins was dependent on inhibition of enzymatic activity of HMG-CoA reductase since mevalonate pre-incubation almost completely abrogated the apoptotic effect. Moreover, the apoptotic effect involved the inhibition of synthesis of geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate rather than farnesyl pyrophosphate. In conclusion, lipophilic but not hydrophilic statins induce cell death through activation of extrinsic and intrinsic apoptotic cascades in cancerous cells from the human female genital tract, which express high levels of HMG-CoA reductase. These results promote further investigation in the use of lipophilic statins as anticancer agents in gynaecological malignancies.