BackgroundEstrogen is formed by the enzyme aromatase (CYP19A1) and signals via three identified receptors ERα (ESR1), ERß (ESR2), and the G protein-coupled estrogen receptor (GPER). Understanding the relative contribution of each receptor to estrogenic signaling may elucidate the disparate effects of this sex hormone across tissues, and recent developments in PCR technology allow absolute quantification and direct comparison of multiple targets. We hypothesized that this approach would reveal tissue- and sex-specific differences in estrogen receptor mRNA.MethodsESR1, ESR2, GPER, and CYP19A1 were measured in four cardiovascular tissues (heart, aorta, kidney, and adrenal gland), three brain areas (somatosensory cortex, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex), and reproductive tissues (ovaries, mammary gland, uterus, testes) from six male and six female adult Sprague-Dawley rats.ResultsGPER mRNA expression was relatively stable across all tissues in both sexes, ranging from 5.49 to 113 copies/ng RNA, a 21-fold difference. In contrast, ESR1/ESR2 were variable across tissues although similar within an organ system. ESR1 ranged from 4.46 to 614 copies/ng RNA (138-fold difference) while ESR2 ranged from 0.154 to 83.1 copies/ng RNA (540-fold). Significant sex differences were broadly absent except for renal ESR1 (female 206 vs. male 614 copies/ng RNA, P < 0.0001) and GPER (62.0 vs. 30.2 copies/ng RNA, P < 0.05) as well as gonadal GPER (5.49 vs. 47.5 copies/ng RNA, P < 0.01), ESR2 (83.1 vs. 0.299 copies/ng RNA, P < 0.01), and CYP19A1 (322 vs. 7.18 copies/ng RNA, P < 0.01). Cardiovascular tissues showed a predominance of ESR1, followed by GPER. In contrast, GPER was the predominant transcript in the brain with similarly low levels of ESR1 and ESR2. CYP19A1 was detected at very low levels except for reproductive tissues and the hippocampus.ConclusionWhile the data indicates a lack of sex differences in most tissues, significant differences were found in the range of receptor gene expression across tissues as well as in the receptor profile between organ systems. The data provide a guide for future studies by establishing estrogen receptor expression across multiple tissues using absolute PCR quantification. This knowledge on tissue-specific estrogen receptor profiles will aid the development of hormonal therapies that elicit beneficial effects in specific tissues.

No abstract

No abstract

Solid tumor progression is significantly influenced by interactions between cancer cells and the surrounding extracellular matrix (ECM). Specifically, the cancer cell-driven changes to ECM fiber alignment and collagen deposition impact tumor growth and metastasis. Current methods of quantifying these processes are incomplete, require simple or artificial matrixes, rely on uncommon imaging techniques, preclude the use of biological and technical replicates, require destruction of the tissue, or are prone to segmentation errors. We present a set of methodological solutions to these shortcomings that were developed to quantify these processes in cultured, ex vivo human breast tissue under the influence of breast cancer cells and allow for the study of ECM in primary breast tumors. Herein, we describe a method of quantifying fiber alignment that can analyze complex native ECM from scanning electron micrographs that does not preclude the use of replicates and a high-throughput mechanism of quantifying collagen content that is non-destructive. The use of these methods accurately recapitulated cancer cell-driven changes in fiber alignment and collagen deposition observed by visual inspection. Additionally, these methods successfully identified increased fiber alignment in primary human breast tumors when compared to human breast tissue and increased collagen deposition in lobular breast cancer when compared to ductal breast cancer. The successful quantification of fiber alignment and collagen deposition using these methods encourages their use for future studies of ECM dysregulation in human solid tumors.

No abstract

Background Exogenous testosterone is vital to gender-affirming therapy for transmasculine individuals. Testosterone may be implicated in breast cancer (BCa) because it can activate androgen and estrogen receptors. To further explore this risk, we performed a systematic review to investigate the impact of exogenous testosterone on BCa risk in transmasculine individuals. Methods We searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Ovid/Embase for clinical and preclinical studies assessing BCa and testosterone therapy and screened 6125 articles independently. We ascertained level of evidence using a modified tool from Cook et al (Chest. 1992;102:305S–311S) and risk of bias using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute's Critical Appraisal Tool. Results Seventy-six studies were included. Epidemiological data suggested that BCa incidence was higher in transmasculine individuals compared with cisgender men but lower compared with cisgender women. Histological studies of transmasculine breast tissue samples also demonstrated a low incidence of precancerous lesions. Interestingly, cases demonstrated that BCa occurred at a younger average age in transmasculine individuals and was predominantly hormone receptor positive. The mechanism for BCa in transmasculine individuals may be related to androgen receptor stimulation or conversion to estradiol. Serum studies reported varied estradiol levels associated with exogenous testosterone. Animal and in vitro studies demonstrated that testosterone was growth inhibitory but may induce proliferation at higher doses or with low estradiol levels. Conclusions Plastic surgeons play a critical role in providing gender-affirming care for transmasculine patients. The limited studies available suggest that this patient population has decreased risk for BCa when compared with cisgender women; however, any BCa that does occur may have different clinical presentations and underlying mechanisms compared with cisgender women and men. Overall, the limitations for clinical studies and discrepancies among preclinical studies warrant further investigation.

No abstract

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease that accumulates signaling cues from cell intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Many of these cues are derived from the tumor microenvironment (TME). The TME modulates cellular proliferation, survival, and resistance to therapy in breast cancer. The TME is a bio-mechanical and biochemical reservoir for extracellular matrix and signaling factors (cytokines, growth factors, lipids, and hormones). In addition, the TME houses a diverse array of cell populations including adipocytes, vasculature, stem cells, immune cells, and cancer cells. Currently models do not reprpoduce the TME in vitro. The goal of this study was to develop a complex and dynamic micro-physiological 3D tumor model for pre-clinical studies using the native human breast environment. We developed a technique to maintain healthy human breast tissue (HBT) alive ex vivo for up to 8 weeks in the presence of breast cancer (BC) cells creating a breast cancer micro-physiological system (BC-MPS). In this study, we demonstrate alterations to lipid accumulation, matrix fiber remodeling, and cytokine profile in our BC-MPS system. We used RNA sequencing to detect breast cancer cell line signatures retained in the BC-MPS system. Results demonstrate retention of the breast cancer cell line transcriptome for a minimum of 14 days in vitro. In addition we identify alterations to genes associated with the TME, specifically the extracellular matrix and metabolism. Our novel model will allow for 1) real-time examination of BC-HBT interactions and 2) the isolation of BC-specific factors vs. patient-specific factors on the development and progression of BC. Citation Format: Frank H. Lau, C. Ethan Byrne, Loren Brown, Jake Fontenot, Rafael P. Tiongco, Rakesh R. Gurrala, Jonathan Cuccia, Andrew DiNardo, Matthew Burow, Elizabeth C. Martin. Breast cancer microphysiological systems based on human breast tissue [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 282.