Growth regulation of estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer cells transfected with complementary DNAs for estrogen receptor.

BACKGROUND

The growth of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer cells is hormonally regulated, but the majority of breast cancers are ER negative and unresponsive to hormonal therapy.

PURPOSE AND METHODS

To test whether hormonal control over replication can be re-established in ER-negative cells, we transfected ER-negative MDA-MB-231 (clone 10A) cells with sense and antisense constitutive ER expression vectors containing the gene for either wild-type or mutant ER linked to the gene for neomycin resistance aminoglycoside phosphotransferase (neo). A Northern blot analysis was done on total RNA from eight of the 10 transfectant clones produced to detect messenger RNA coding for ER and neo, and a Western blot analysis was done on protein extracted from the cells of one mutant and two wild-type ER sense transfectant clones to determine the molecular weight of the ER in transfectants. Levels of ER in transfectants were measured both by enzyme immunoassay and by ligand-binding methods. To ascertain whether the ER in wild-type and mutant sense transfectants was functional, we tested the effects of 17 beta-estradiol (E2) and/or an antiestrogen, ICI 164,384, on 1) ER-activated gene regulation (by transient transfection of these cells a second time with a reporter plasmid containing an estrogen response element linked to the chloramphenicol acetyl transferase [CAT] gene), 2) induction of progesterone receptor, 3) DNA replication, and 4) cell cycle kinetics.

RESULTS

Messenger RNA coding for ER and for neo was detectable in both sense and antisense transfectant clones. Sense transfectants (both mutant and wild-type) expressed ER protein with a molecular weight similar to that found in ER-positive control cells. By the ligand-binding method high levels of ER were detected in both wild-type and mutant transfectants, although by the enzyme immunoassay method lower levels were detected in mutant transfectants. ER from both wild-type and mutant sense transfectants appeared functional, since E2 stimulated the expression of reporter-linked CAT and of progesterone receptor in these transfectants. E2 inhibited DNA replication in wild-type sense transfectants at a concentration of 10(-10) M and mutant sense transfectants at a concentration of 10(-8) M, and ICI 164,384 blocked this effect.

CONCLUSION

ER-negative breast cancer cells stably transfected with either a mutant or wild-type ER gene regain hormonal responsiveness; however, E2 inhibits rather than stimulates cell growth.

IMPLICATION

Reactivation of quiescent ER may provide a novel therapeutic approach for controlling ER-negative breast cancers.