Affiliations of authors: C. L. Arteaga, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Vanderbilt Cancer Center, Department of Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Nashville, TN; K. M. Koli, T. C. Dugger, Department of Cell Biology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville; R. Clarke, Lombardi Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Correspondence to: Carlos L. Arteaga, M.D., Division of Medical Oncology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, 22nd Ave., S., 1956 TVC, Nashville, TN 37232-5536 (e-mail carlos.arteaga{at}mcmail.vanderbilt.edu).
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
RNA isolation and northern blot hybridization. Poly(A)+ RNA was purified from subconfluent monolayer cultures using oligo-dT cellulose chromatography as described (20). For northern blot analysis, 3 µg of messenger RNA (mRNA) was fractionated on 1.2% agarose gels containing formaldehyde and transferred to nylon membranes (Micron Separations Inc., Westboro, MA) by capillary transfer. Prehybridization and hybridization were performed at 42 °C in 50% formamide, 250 µg/mL single-stranded DNA, 1x Denhardt's solution, 50 µg/mL poly(A), 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), and 5x standard saline citrate. Complementary DNA (cDNA) probes for TGF-ß1 (21), TGF-ß2 (22), and cyclophilin (23) were labeled with [32P]deoxycytidine triphosphate (>3000 Ci/mmol; Amersham Life Science Inc., Arlington Heights, IL) using a Rediprime labeling kit (Amersham Life Science Inc.).
Preparation of cell-conditioned medium and TGF-ß radioreceptor assay. Secreted TGF-ß bioactivity was measured in serum-free IMEM conditioned for 24 hours by adherent breast cancer cells as described previously (24). To activate secreted latent TGF-ß, the conditioned medium was acidified with 1 N HCl to pH 1.5 for 1 hour at 4 °C and then neutralized with 1 N NaOH before testing in a TGF-ß radioreceptor assay (24) utilizing AKR-2B (84A) mouse fibroblasts. Binding was performed in six-well plates in 1 mL/well binding buffer (24) containing 0.25 ng/mL. 125I-TGF-ß1 (specific activity, 173 µCi/µg; Du Pont NEN, Boston, MA) competed with variable volumes of conditioned medium. Human recombinant TGF-ß1 (Genentech Inc.) was used to generate a standard curve from which the receptor binding activity of conditioned medium was calculated and then standardized to the number of cells from which the conditioned medium was collected. In this binding assay with AKR-2B (84A) cells, TGF-ß1 and TGF-ß2 are equipotent in displacing 125I-TGF-ß1 binding (25). Addition of 1 µM tamoxifen directly to the binding buffer had no effect on TGF-ß1 binding in this assay (Arteaga CL: unpublished data).
Natural killer (NK) and lymphokine-activated killer (LAK) cell cytotoxicity assays. Sparse adherent cultures of LCC1 or LCC2 target cells (104 cells per well in a 96-well plate) were labeled for 4-6 hours at 37 °C with approximately 200 µCi/mL 51Cr (specific activity, 400-1200 Ci/g; Du Pont NEN) in IMEM supplemented with 10% FCS. Unbound radioactivity was removed after two washes with growth medium before the addition of effector cells. Human peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs) from healthy volunteers were prepared by Ficoll-Hypaque gradient centrifugation. After two washes, variable numbers of NK effector cells were added to the 51Cr-labeled breast cancer cell targets in a final volume of 0.2 mL/well in quadruplicate. To generate LAK effector cells, PBLs were incubated for 5 days at 37 °C in 5% CO2 with 1000 U/mL human recombinant interleukin 2 (Chiron Therapeutics, Emeryville, CA) and then added in ratios ranging from 5 : 1 to 100 : 1 to freshly labeled tumor cell targets. Spontaneous 51Cr release and PBL-induced (experimental) 51Cr release were measured in both assays after an overnight coincubation, and percent cytotoxicity was calculated as described previously (26) by the formula: ([experimental release - spontaneous release]/total release) x 100.
Mouse studies. Five- to 8-week-old female athymic (nude) mice (Harlan Sprague-Dawley, Inc., Madison, WI) or NIH-III beige/nude mice (Taconic Farms, Inc., Germantown, NY) were inoculated subcutaneously just caudal to the forelimb with approximately 5 x 106 LCC1 or LCC2 tumor cells in 0.25 mL of serum-free IMEM via a 22-gauge needle. Variable times after tumor cell inoculation, 25-mg, 60-day release tamoxifen pellets (Innovative Research, Toledo, OH) were implanted subcutaneously in the back at a distant site from the tumor via a 10-gauge trocar. In some experiments, animals received daily intraperitoneal injections of 2G7 or 12H5 antibodies (100 µg each) in a 0.2-mL volume via a 26-gauge needle. Tumor diameters were measured serially with calipers, and tumor volume was calculated by the formula: volume = width2 x length/2. At the completion of the experiments, some tumors were removed, fixed in 10% formalin, and paraffin-embedded, and 5-µm-thick sections were cut, stained with hematoxylin-eosin, and subjected to light microscopy. Care of all mice used in these studies was in accord with institutional guidelines.
Effects of antisense TGF-ß2 oligonucleotides and immunoblotting of TGF-ß2 secreted in cell-conditioned medium. TGF-ß2 antisense phosphorothioate oligodeoxynucleotides as well as a nonsense oligonucleotide sequence of similar length and with the same GC content (used as control) were synthesized by and purchased from Ransom Hill Bioscience, Inc. (Ramona, CA), on the basis of a recent report (27). A search in the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) GenBank revealed no homologies between the 14-mer antisense sequence used in this study and the 5' coding region of any known gene sequence. For inhibition of TGF-ß2 expression, LCC2 cells were treated for 48 hours at 37 °C in serum-free IMEM with 3 µM antisense or nonsense oligonucleotides. Cell medium was then collected, cleared of cell debris by centrifugation, concentrated approximately 30-fold in a Centriprep 30 MW column (Millipore Corp., Bedford, MA), boiled in Laemmli sample buffer containing the reducing agent dithiothreitol (DTT), and resolved by 15% SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Following transfer to nitrocellulose, membranes were subjected to an immunoblot procedure that utilizes a TGF-ß2 polyclonal antiserum R & D Systems Inc., Minneapolis, MN). Detection of TGF-ß2 reactive bands in autoradiograms was performed with horseradish peroxidase-linked antirabbit immunoglobulins and enhanced chemiluminescence.
Statistical analyses. To analyze tumor growth curves, we used a repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) model with a serial correlation structure. The analysis was based on the logarithm of the tumor volume to stabilize the variance. To avoid strict assumptions about normality, the General Estimating Equation approach was used to fit the model, as implemented in SAS/PROC GENMOD software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC). The in vitro NK and LAK cytotoxicity data were analyzed using ANOVA, as implemented in SAS/PROC GLM software. For these cytotoxicity experiments, each data point represents the mean cpm of 51Cr released from labeled target cells in four wells. If the standard deviations of the quadruplicate determinations were less than 10% of the mean value (before the experimental release was subjected to the formula for calculating % cytotoxicity [above]), they were not included in the figures.
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
We first examined steady-state mRNA levels of TGF-ß1 and
TGF-ß2 in tamoxifen-sensitive and tamoxifen-resistant cells. LCC2
cells express similar low levels of TGF-ß1 mRNA (not shown) but
greater than 20-fold higher levels of TGF-ß2 mRNA relative to LCC1
cells (Fig. 1, A). Protein levels in serum-free
medium conditioned by LCC2 cells, as measured in a
125I-TGF-ß1 radioreceptor assay, were 6.8 ng of TGF-ß
equivalents/106 cells per 24 hours in the absence of acid
activation in vitro, whereas LCC1 cells only secreted lower
levels of latent TGF-ß activity (Fig. 1, B)
. A 24-hour incubation
with 1 µM tamoxifen up-regulated TGF-ß2 mRNA levels in
LCC2 cells but not in LCC1 cells (Fig 1, A)
. By radioreceptor assay of
serum-free cell medium, tamoxifen (1 µM) treatment for 24
hours increased the secretion of (active) TGF-ß activity to 13.9
ng/106 cells per 24 hours, whereas, in LCC1 cell medium, this
bioactivity remained undetectable. To test the paracrine effects of
TGF-ß2 overexpression in the context of a multicellular
experimental system, we measured NK and LAK sensitivity of
51Cr-labeled LCC1 and LCC2 cells. NK and LAK cells are
potently suppressed by exogenous TGF-ß1 and TGF-ß2
(28). Consistent with these data and the overexpression of
TGF-ß2, LCC2 cells were statistically more resistant to NK
cell-mediated lysis (P = .0001) and LAK cell-mediated lysis
(P = .0002) than tamoxifen-sensitive LCC1 cells (Fig.
2).
|
|
To study the role of TGF-ß2 in tamoxifen resistance of LCC2
cells, we utilized the anti-TGF-ß 2G7 IgG2 antibody, which
neutralizes all three TGF-ß mammalian isoforms (19).
Established subcutaneous LCC2 tumors in nude mice bearing
60-day-release, 25-mg subcutaneously implanted tamoxifen pellets were
randomized to 100 µg/day of 2G7 or the 12H5 non-neutralizing
anti-TGF-ß control IgG2 by intraperitoneal injection. These
systemic doses of 2G7 result in detectable and sustained plasma levels
of an activity that blocks TGF-ß receptor binding when tested
ex vivo (26). In animals treated with 2G7, but not with the
12H5 control antibody, tumor growth was arrested (Fig. 3, A),
suggesting that tumor cell TGF-ß2 was mediating tamoxifen
resistance in this experimental system. A second experiment yielded
similar results. By light microscopy, both groups of LCC2 tumors were
poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas with no major histologic
differences between them. In the absence of tamoxifen treatment, 2G7
had no effect on LCC2 xenograft growth relative to 12H5-treated tumors,
suggesting that tumor cell TGF-ßs had no effect on basal LCC2 tumor
growth (not shown).
|
To further support the hypothesis that tumor host mechanisms were
involved in the restoration of tamoxifen sensitivity by neutralizing
antibodies, we examined the effect of 2G7 in tamoxifen-treated LCC2
cells in vitro. In this cell-autonomous experimental system,
LCC2 colony formation in the presence of 1 or 10 µg/mL 2G7 antibody
was similar in the presence or absence of 1 µM tamoxifen
(Fig. 4). Tamoxifen stimulated LCC2 colony formation
approximately 25% above ethanol (solvent for tamoxifen, used as
control) in the presence of 1 or 10 µg/mL of the 12H5 control
monoclonal antibody.
|
Several published data [see(31)] indicate that
tamoxifen
can stimulate immune effector cellular mechanisms in the tumor host as
well as sensitize tumor cell targets to cytotoxicity independent of
ER expression. Therefore, we first examined in a multicellular
experimental system whether this sensitization to NK action was
different in the tamoxifen-sensitive LCC1 versus tamoxifen-resistant
LCC2 cells. Consistent with their phenotype in vivo,
coincubation of NK effector cells with target cells with tamoxifen
in vitro resulted in sensitization of the LCC1 cells
(P = .0001). On the contrary, addition of tamoxifen reduced
the lower level of NK-mediated 51Cr release from LCC2
cells even further (P = .001; Fig. 5).
|
|
|
To test whether both the growth-inhibitory effect and the
sensitizing effect of tamoxifen on tumor targets to NK effector cells
were related phenomena, we concurrently examined the inhibitory effect
of tamoxifen on LCC1 tumors in nude mice, which exhibit elevated NK
cell function (30), as well as in beige/nude mice. In these
animals, the beige mutation markedly reduces NK function
(30). Tamoxifen pellets were implanted 2 days after
subcutaneous tumor cell inoculation. Within 4 weeks, 100% of LCC1
tumors formed in both nude and beige/nude mice without the need for
estrogen supplementation and in the absence of tamoxifen treatment
(Table 1). Four weeks after tumor inoculation, there
were no detectable LCC1 xenografts in tamoxifen-treated nude mice.
Conversely, five of eight NK-deficient beige/nude animals treated with
tamoxifen exhibited subcutaneous tumors that measured more than 4 mm in
diameter (>100 mm3). The formation of LCC1 tumors
suggested that, in this tumor model, host NK function was, in part,
mediating the growth-inhibitory effect of tamoxifen (Table 1
). At 8
weeks, there were still no detectable LCC1 tumors in nude mice treated
with tamoxifen.
|
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
LCC2 tamoxifen-resistant cells markedly overexpress TGF-ß2 compared
with LCC1 tamoxifen-sensitive cells. Tamoxifen resistance in LCC2
tumors was abrogated by the coadministration of the antiestrogen with
neutralizing TGF-ß antibodies when tested in nude mice. This
response was not seen in beige/nude mice that lack NK activity.
Furthermore, tamoxifen sensitized the tamoxifen-sensitive LCC1 cells,
but not the resistant LCC2 cells, to NK effector cells in
vitro. Antisense oligonucleotide-mediated inhibition of TGF-ß2
secretion by LCC2 cells restored the ability of tamoxifen to sensitize
LCC2 cells to NK cell-induced cytolysis. Finally, tamoxifen exhibited a
greater antitumor effect against LCC1 tumor cells in NK-plus nude mice
compared with that seen in NK-deficient beige/nude mice. Taken
together, these data suggest that overexpression of TGF-ß2 by
breast tumor cells can mediate tamoxifen resistance in vivo.
Our results also suggest that host NK function is involved in the
antitumor effect of the antiestrogen tamoxifen and that overexpression
of potently immunosuppressive cytokines, like TGF-ß2, can
counteract this antiestrogenic effect in the host and thus contribute
to tamoxifen resistance. Of note, however, tamoxifen reduced the low
level of NK cell-mediated toxicity against LCC2 cells (Fig. 5). This
particular result may reflect the tamoxifen-mediated increase in
TGF-ß2 mRNA and the activation of secreted TGF-ß activity in
LCC2 cells (Fig. 1
), which in turn can block NK cell function.
Our results would seem at odds with the dogma that proposes antiestrogen-induced up-regulation of autocrine TGF-ßs in breast carcinoma cells and tumor tissues as a mediator of tamoxifen's antitumor action (8,9), and that loss of this autocrine pathway can contribute to tamoxifen resistance. The LCC1/LCC2 model we used argues against this hypothesis in that tamoxifen-sensitive LCC1 cells bind TGF-ß1 poorly and do not respond to exogenous TGF-ß1. On the other hand, the LCC2 resistant cells express all three TGF-ß receptors in high levels (data not shown) and exhibit responses to exogenous TGF-ß1 in culture (34). Furthermore, a more recent study by Koli et al. (10) also challenges this dogma, in that transfection of a suppressible dominant-negative truncated type II TGF-ß receptor into antiestrogen- and TGF-ß-sensitive MCF-7 cells abrogated TGF-ß responses but not tamoxifen-mediated growth inhibition.
A rise in either the plasma levels of TGF-ß2 (35) or the tumor levels of TGF-ß2 mRNA (36) has been observed in patients with metastatic breast tumors receiving tamoxifen therapy. In one of these studies, TGF-ß1 and TGF-ß3 expression in tumors was not altered by tamoxifen therapy (36), suggesting a TGF-ß isoform-specific effect of tamoxifen. It was proposed in these studies that up-regulation of TGF-ß2 expression is a marker of clinical response to tamoxifen. However, the great majority of tamoxifen-sensitive mammary tumors will progress to a tamoxifen-resistant state, suggesting the possibility of a subsequent temporal association between breast tumor TGF-ß2 overexpression and tamoxifen resistance. This is consistent with our findings in the LCC2 cells. TGF-ß1 overexpression has also been temporally associated with antiestrogen resistance in human breast cancer cell lines (11,12) and mammary tumor tissues (13,15).
The greater inhibition of tamoxifen-sensitive LCC1 tumors in nude mice, which have elevated NK and normal LAK activities, compared with that seen in beige/nude NK-deficient mice, suggests that the antiproliferative effect of tamoxifen and the sensitization to host NK (and possibly LAK) function are related phenomena. Natural cytotoxicity, mediated by NK cells, is believed to play an important role in host antitumor surveillance mechanisms. NK cells are predominantly large granular lymphocytes, the majority of which express CD16 and CD56 cell surface antigens and represent overall 5%-8% of PBLs (37). NK cells can mediate cytolysis in the absence of major histocompatibility complex class 1 and class 2 antigen expression in target cells (37,38). In patients with breast cancer and in experimental systems, tamoxifen has been shown to enhance NK function and/or increase the sensitivity of tumor cell targets in an ER-independent fashion (31,39-42). However, in one report by Gottardis et al. (43), prolonged treatment with tamoxifen inhibited NK function in nude mice and stimulated growth of tamoxifen-resistant MCF-7 tumors. Nonetheless, NK activity is inversely related to the clinical stage of disease and/or the presence of axillary lymph node metastases in patients with breast cancer (44-46), implicating host natural cytotoxicity in the control of cancer progression. Accumulation of NK cells in tumors was temporally associated with a clinical spontaneous remission in a patient with metastatic breast carcinoma (47). Other reports (48-50) indicate that pharmacologically achievable concentrations of tamoxifen enhance immune cytolysis of tumor targets mediated by LAK cells and cytotoxic T cells. Overall and except for the observation by Gottardis et al. (43), these reports and our results are consistent with the hypothesis that host immune function may play a role in the antitumor effect of triphenylethylene antiestrogens, independent of the ER status of the tumor cell target. These reports also suggest the possibility of synergistic antitumor effects of tamoxifen with anti-TGF-ß antibodies in other ER-negative neoplasms. This possibility remains to be tested.
In vitro, anti-TGF-ß antibodies failed to reverse tamoxifen resistance in LCC2 cells. This result suggests that the observed reversal in vivo may not involve ER signaling in LCC2 cells. Other non-ER mechanisms of antiestrogen-mediated tumor inhibition that involve paracrine mechanisms have been reported. For example, tamoxifen and pure ER antagonists inhibit endothelial cell proliferation within mammary tumors and promote the apoptosis of angiogenesis-dependent breast tumors (51,52). Moreover, MCF-7 tumors transfected with fibroblast growth factor (FGF)-4 and FGF-1 develop hematogenous metastases in vivo and are unresponsive to tamoxifen (53-55), suggesting a role for angiogenic factors in ER-independent resistance to tamoxifen. Of note, TGF-ßs are potent inductors of angiogenesis (2,56), thus leading to a possible causal association between overexpression of TGF-ßs, high intratumoral microvessel density, and a tamoxifen-resistant phenotype. Whether enhanced TGF-ß2-mediated angiogenesis is involved in the antiestrogen resistance of TGF-ß2-overexpressing LCC2 tumors will require further experiments.
In summary, we have described a novel mechanism of antiestrogen resistance, as well as a potentially important immunologic component in tamoxifen response and acquired resistance in human breast carcinoma cells. It is interesting that the in vitro selection of LCC2 cells against tamoxifen produced a resistance mechanism that functions through an effect on cells or mechanisms (NK function) not involved in the initial selection. However, the greater effect of tamoxifen against LCC1 tumors in NK-competent versus NK-deficient mice, as well as the TGF-ß2 antisense oligonucleotide-mediated sensitization of LCC2 cells to NK effectors in vitro in the presence of tamoxifen, strongly argues in favor of this immunologic component. In addition, the published effects of tamoxifen therapy on the expression or content of TGF-ßs in patients' tumors and tumor models (13,15,36) suggest that tamoxifen-induced overexpression of TGF-ßs can also occur in vivo. Several practical implications could be derived from these data. First, the effects of tamoxifen on tumor host (endothelial, immune) cells will be missed in cell-autonomous in vitro screens and potentially lead to false-negative preclinical models. Second, ER-positive tumors that overexpress TGF-ßs may be clinically unresponsive de novo to tamoxifen and/or escape antiestrogens early and would, therefore, be candidates to alternative molecular therapies aimed at down-regulating the overexpressed immunosuppressive (or angiogenic) cytokines. Future prospective clinicoepidemiologic studies in patients should clarify the practical implications of these data and address how predictably the overexpression of TGF-ßs by ER-positive breast tumors may determine clinical resistance to tamoxifen and other antiestrogens in general.
![]() |
NOTES |
---|
We thank Dr. John Hanfelt (Lombardi Cancer Center) for his helpful comments and consultation.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1 Roberts AB, Sporn MB. The transforming growth factor-ßs. In: Roberts AB, Sporn MB, editors. Handbook of experimental pharmacology. Heidelberg (Germany): Springer-Verlag; 1990. p. 419-72.
2 Moses HL. The biological action of transforming growth factor ß. In: Sara V, Hall K, Low H, editors. Growth factors from genes to clinical application. New York (NY): Raven Press; 1990. p. 141-55.
3 Shull MM, Ormsby I, Kier AB, Pawlowski S, Diebold RJ, Yin M, et al. Targeted disruption of the mouse transforming growth factor-ß1 gene results in multifocal inflammatory disease. Nature 1992;359:693-9.[Medline]
4
Sanford LP, Ormsby I, Gittenberger-de Groot AC, Sariola H,
Friedman F, Boivin GP, et al. TGFß2 knockout mice have multiple developmental defects
that are non-overlapping with other TGFß knockout phenotypes. Development 1997;
124:2659-70.
5 Proetzel G, Pawlowski SA, Wiles MV, Yin MY, Boivin GP, Howles PN, et al. Transforming growth factor-ß3 is required for secondary palate fusion. Nat Genet 1995;11:409-14.[Medline]
6 Koli KM, Arteaga CL. Complex role of tumor cell TGF-ßs on breast carcinoma progression. J Mammary Gland Biol Neopl 1996;1:373-80.[Medline]
7 Pierce DF, Johnson MD, Matsui Y, Robinson SD, Gold LI, Purchio AF, et al. Inhibition of mammary duct development but not alveolar outgrowth during pregnancy in transgenic mice expressing active TGF-ß1. Genes Dev 1993;7:2308-17.[Abstract]
8 Knabbe C, Lippman ME, Wakefield LM, Flanders KC, Kasid A, Derynck R, et al. Evidence that transforming growth factor-ß is a hormonally regulated negative growth factor in human breast cancer cells. Cell 1987;48:417-28.[Medline]
9 Butta A, MacLennan K, Flanders KC, Sacks NP, Smith I, McKinna A, et al. Induction of transforming growth factor ß1 in human breast cancer in vivo following tamoxifen treatment. Cancer Res 1992;52:4261-4.[Abstract]
10
Koli KM, Ramsey TT, Ko Y, Dugger TC, Brattain MG, Arteaga
CL. Blockade of transforming growth factor-ß signaling does not abrogate
antiestrogen-induced growth inhibition of human breast carcinoma cells. J Biol Chem 1997;272:8296-302.
11 Daly RJ, King RJB, Darbre PD. Interaction of growth factors during progression toward steroid independence in T-47-D human breast cancer cells. J Cell Biochem 1990;43:199-211.[Medline]
12 Hermann ME, Katzenellenbogen B. Alterations in transforming growth factor-ß production and cell responsiveness during the progression of MCF-7 human breast cancer cells to estrogen-autonomous growth. Cancer Res 1990;54:5867-74.[Abstract]
13 Thompson AM, Kerr DJ, Steel CM. Transforming growth factor ß1 is implicated in the failure of tamoxifen therapy in human breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1991;63:609-14.[Medline]
14 Arteaga CL, Carty-Dugger T, Moses HL, Hurd SD, Pietenpol JA. Transforming growth factor ß1 can induce estrogen-independent tumorigenicity of human breast cancer cells in athymic mice. Cell Growth Differ 1993;4:193-201.[Abstract]
15 Baillie R, Coombes RC, Smith J. Multiple forms of TGF-ß1 in breast tissues: a biologically active form of the small latent complex of TGF-ß1. Eur J Cancer 1996;32A:1566-73.
16 Gorsch SM, Memoli VA, Stukel TA, Gold LI, Arrick BA. Immunohistochemical staining for transforming growth factor ß1 associates with disease progression in human breast cancer. Cancer Res 1992;52:6949-52.[Abstract]
17 Brunner N, Boulay V, Fojo A, Freter CE, Lippman ME, Clarke R. Acquisition of hormone-independent growth in MCF-7 cells is accompanied by increased expression of estrogen-regulated genes but without detectable DNA amplifications. Cancer Res 1993;53:283-90.[Abstract]
18 Brunner N, Frandsen TL, Holst-Hansen C, Bei M, Thompson EW, Wakeling AE, et al. MCF-7/LCC2: a 4-hydroxytamoxifen resistant human breast cancer variant that retains sensitivity to the steroidal antiestrogen ICI 182,780. Cancer Res 1993; 192;3:3229-32.
19
Lucas C, Bald LN, Fendly BM, Mora-Worms M, Figari IS,
Patzer EJ, et al. The autocrine production of transforming growth factor ß1
during lymphocyte activation: A study with a monoclonal antibody-based ELISA. J
Immunol 1990;145:1415-22.
20 Sambrook J, Fritsch EF, Maniatis TE. Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbor (NY): Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; 1989.
21 Derynck R, Jarrett JA, Chen EY, Eaton DH, Bell JR, Assoian RK, et al. Human transforming growth factor-beta complementary DNA sequence and expression in normal and transformed cells. Nature 1985;316:701-5.[Medline]
22 Madisen L, Webb NR, Rose TM, Marquardt H, Ikeda T, Twardzik D, et al. Transforming growth factor-ß2: cDNA cloning and sequence analysis. DNA 1988;7:1-8.[Medline]
23 Danielson PE, Forss-Petter S, Brow MA, Calavetta L, Douglass J, Milner RJ, et al. p1B15: a cDNA clone of the rat mRNA encoding cyclophilin. DNA 1988;7:261-7.[Medline]
24 Arteaga CL, Coffey RJ Jr, Dugger TC, McCutchen CM, Moses HL, Lyons RM. Growth stimulation of human breast cancer cells with anti-transforming growth factor ß antibodies: evidence for negative autocrine growth regulation by transforming growth factor ß. Cell Growth Differ 1990;1:367-74.[Abstract]
25 Lyons RM, Miller DA, Graycar JL, Moses HL, Derynck R. Differential binding of transforming growth factor-ß1, -ß2, and -ß3 by fibroblasts and epithelial cells measured by affinity cross-linking of cell surface receptors. Mol Endocrinol 1991;2:1887-96.
26 Arteaga CL, Hurd SD, Winnier AR, Johnson MD, Fendly BM, Forbes JT. Anti-transforming growth factor (TGF)-ß antibodies inhibit breast cancer cell tumorigenicity and increase mouse spleen natural killer cell activity. Implications for a possible role of tumor cell/host TGF-ß interactions in human breast cancer progression. J Clin Invest 1993;92:2569-76.[Medline]
27 Jachimczak P, Bogdahn U, Schneider J, Behl C, Meixensberger J, Apfel R, et al. The effect of transforming growth factor-ß2-specific phosphorothioate-anti-sense oligodeoxynucleotides in reversing cellular immunosuppression in malignant glioma. J Neurosurg 1993;78:944-51.[Medline]
28 Ruscetti F, Varesio L, Ochoa A, Ortaldo J. Pleiotropic effects of transforming growth factor-ß on cells of the immune system. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1993;685:488-500.[Abstract]
29 Wallick SC, Figari IS, Morris RE, Levinson AD, Palladino MA. Immunoregulatory role of transforming growth factor ß (TGF-ß) in development of killer cells: comparison of active and latent TGF-ß1. J Exp Med 1990;172:1777-84.[Abstract]
30 Clarke R. Human breast cancer cell line xenografts as models of breast cancer. The immunobiologies of recipient mice and the characteristics of several tumorigenic cell lines. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1996;39:69-86.[Medline]
31 Baral E, Nagy E, Berczi I. The effect of tamoxifen on the immune response. In: Kellen JE, editor. Tamoxifen: beyond the antiestrogen. Boston (MA): Birkhauser; 1996. p. 137-78.
32 Wiebe VJ, Osborne CK, Fuqua SA, DeGregorio MW. Tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 1993;14:173-88.[Medline]
33 Clarke R, Brunner N. Acquired estrogen independence and antiestrogen resistance in breast cancer. Estrogen receptor driven phenotypes? Trends Endocrinol Metab 1996;7:25-35.
34 Arteaga CL, Dugger TC, Clarke R, Koli KM. Blockade of tumor cell transforming growth factor (TGF)-ßs restores tamoxifen (tam) sensitivity to tam-resistant human breast cancer cells. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1996;41:220A.
35 Kopp A, Schmahl M, Knabbe C. Transforming growth factor ß2 (TGF-ß2) levels in plasma of patients with metastatic breast cancer treated with tamoxifen. Cancer Res 1995;55:4512-5.[Abstract]
36 MacCallum J, Keen JC, Bartlett JMS, Thompson AM, Dixon JM, Miller WR. Changes in expression of transforming growth factor ß mRNA isoforms in patients undergoing tamoxifen therapy. Br J Cancer 1996;74:474-8.[Medline]
37 Trinchieri G. Biology of natural killer cells. Adv Immunol 1989;47:187-376.[Medline]
38 Liao N, Bix M, Zijistra M, Jaenisch R, Raulet DH. MHC class I deficiency: susceptibility to natural killer (NK) cells and impaired NK activity. Science 1991;253:199-202.[Medline]
39 Screpanti I, Santoni A, Gulino A, Herberman RB, Frati L. Estrogen and antiestrogen modulation of the levels of mouse natural killer activity and large granular lymphocytes. Cell Immunol 1987;106:191-202.[Medline]
40 Mandeville R, Ghali SS, Chausseau JP. In vitro stimulation of human NK activity by an estrogen antagonist (tamoxifen) [letter]. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1984;20:983-5.[Medline]
41 Berry J, Green BJ, Matheson DS. Modulation of natural killer cell activity by tamoxifen in stage I post-menopausal breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1987;23:517-20.[Medline]
42 Baral E, Nagy E, Berczi I. Modulation of natural killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity by tamoxifen and estradiol. Cancer 1995;75:591-9.[Medline]
43 Gottardis MM, Wagner RJ, Borden EC, Jordan VC. Differential ability of antiestrogens to stimulate breast cancer cell (MCF-7) growth in vivo and in vitro. Cancer Res 1989;49:4765-9.[Abstract]
44 An T, Sood U, Pietruk T, Cummings G, Hashimoto K, Crissman JD. In situ quantitation of inflammatory mononuclear cells in ductal infiltrating breast carcinoma. Relation to prognostic parameters.Am J Pathol 1987;128:52-60.[Abstract]
45 Akimoto M, Ishii H, Nakajima Y, Iwasaki H. Assessment of host immune response in breast cancer patients. Cancer Detect Prev 1987;9:311-7.
46 Horst HA, Horny HP. Characterization and frequency distribution of lymphoreticular infiltrates in axillary lymph node metastases of invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Cancer 1987;60:3001-7.[Medline]
47 Maiche AG, Jekunen A, Rissanen P, Virkkunen P, Halavaara J, Turunen JP. Sudden tumour regression with enhanced natural killer cell accumulation in a patient with stage IV breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1994;30A:1642-6.
48 Baral E, Nagy E, Berczi I. Modulation of lymphokine-activated killer cell-mediated cytotoxicity by estradiol and tamoxifen. Int J Cancer 1996;66:214-8.[Medline]
49 Baral E, Nagy E, Berczi I. Target cells are sensitized for cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-mediated destruction by estradiol and tamoxifen. Int J Cancer 1994;58:64-8.[Medline]
50 Albertini MR, Gibson DF, Robinson SP, Howard SP, Tans KJ, Lindstrom MJ, et al. Influence of estradiol and tamoxifen on susceptibility of human breast cancer cell lines to lysis by lymphokine-activated killer cells. J Immunother 1992;11:30-9.[Medline]
51 Gagliardi A, Collins DC. Inhibition of angiogenesis by antiestrogens. Cancer 1994;53:533-5.
52 Haran EF, Maretzek AF, Goldberg I, Horowitz A, Degani H. Tamoxifen enhances cell death in implanted MCF7 breast cancer by inhibiting endothelium growth. Cancer Res 1994;54:5511-4.[Abstract]
53 McLeskey SW, Kurebayashi J, Honig SF, Zwiebel J, Lippman ME, Dickson RB, et al. Fibroblast growth factor 4 transfection of MCF-7 cells produces cell lines that are tumorigenic and metastatic in ovariectomized or tamoxifen-treated athymic nude mice. Cancer Res 1993;53:2168-77.[Abstract]
54 Zhang L, Kharbanda S, Chen D, Bullocks J, Miller DL, Ding IY, et al. MCF-7 breast carcinoma cells overexpressing FGF-1 form vascularized, metastatic tumors in ovariectomized or tamoxifen-treated nude mice. Oncogene 1997;15:2093-108.[Medline]
55 Zhang L, Kharbanda S, Hanfelt J, Kern FG. Both autocrine and paracrine effects of transfected acidic fibroblast growth factor are involved in the estrogen-independent and antiestrogen-resistant growth of MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Cancer Res 1998;58:352-61.[Abstract]
56 Roberts AB, Sporn MB, Assoian RK, Smith JM, Roche NS, Wakefield LM, et al. Transforming growth factor type ß: rapid induction of fibrosis and angiogenesis in vivo and stimulation of collagen formation in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1986;83:4167-71.[Abstract]
Manuscript received February 5, 1998; revised October 28, 1998; accepted November 2, 1998.
This article has been cited by other articles in HighWire Press-hosted journals:
![]() |
||||
|
Oxford University Press Privacy Policy and Legal Statement |