Differences in protein kinase C and estrogen receptor alpha, beta expression and signaling correlate with apoptotic sensitivity of MCF-7 breast cancer cell variants.

  • Authors:
    • M E Burow
    • C B Weldon
    • T C Chiang
    • Y Tang
    • B M Collins-Burow
    • K Rolfe
    • S Li
    • J A McLachlan
    • B S Beckman
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: June 1, 2000     https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.16.6.1179
  • Pages: 1179-1266
Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

Widespread use of MCF-7 human breast cancer cells as a model system for breast cancer has lead to variations in these cells between different laboratories. Although several reports have addressed these differences in terms of proliferation and estrogenic response, differences in sensitivity to apoptosis have just begun to be described. Based on the possible differences in apoptotic sensitivity that may arise due to the existence of MCF-7 cell variants, we determined the relative sensitivity of MCF-7 cell variants from three established laboratories (designated M, L and N) to known inducers of apoptosis. Consistent with our previous studies we demonstrate that differences exist among these variants in regards to tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF)-induced cell death and inhibition of proliferation in a dose-dependent manner. To establish if the difference in apoptotic susceptibility was specific to TNF, the three MCF-7 cell variants were tested for their response to other known inducers of apoptosis: okadaic acid, staurosporine and 4-hydroxy-tamoxifen. Viability and DNA fragmentation analysis revealed a similar pattern of resistance to apoptosis by all agents in the MCF-7 M variant. The MCF-7 L variant was resistant to okadaic acid and 4-hydroxy-tamoxifen but not staurosporine. In contrast, MCF-7 N cells were sensitive to induction of apoptosis by all agents. The role of both protein kinase C (PKC) and estrogen signaling in the regulation of cell survival prompted investigation of these pathways as a mechanism for differential sensitivity of MCF-7 cell variants to apoptosis. While both estrogen receptor alpha (ERalpha) and ERbeta were expressed in MCF-7 M and N cells, the absence of ERbeta in MCF-7 L cells correlated with decreased estrogen responsiveness of the L variant. Variations in estrogenic responsiveness and PKC isoform expression may account for the enhanced susceptibility of both the L and N variants to staurosporine.

Related Articles

Journal Cover

Jun 2000
Volume 16 Issue 6

Print ISSN: 1019-6439
Online ISSN:1791-2423

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Burow M, Weldon C, Chiang T, Tang Y, Collins-Burow B, Rolfe K, Li S, McLachlan J and Beckman B: Differences in protein kinase C and estrogen receptor alpha, beta expression and signaling correlate with apoptotic sensitivity of MCF-7 breast cancer cell variants.. Int J Oncol 16: 1179-1266, 2000
APA
Burow, M., Weldon, C., Chiang, T., Tang, Y., Collins-Burow, B., Rolfe, K. ... Beckman, B. (2000). Differences in protein kinase C and estrogen receptor alpha, beta expression and signaling correlate with apoptotic sensitivity of MCF-7 breast cancer cell variants.. International Journal of Oncology, 16, 1179-1266. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.16.6.1179
MLA
Burow, M., Weldon, C., Chiang, T., Tang, Y., Collins-Burow, B., Rolfe, K., Li, S., McLachlan, J., Beckman, B."Differences in protein kinase C and estrogen receptor alpha, beta expression and signaling correlate with apoptotic sensitivity of MCF-7 breast cancer cell variants.". International Journal of Oncology 16.6 (2000): 1179-1266.
Chicago
Burow, M., Weldon, C., Chiang, T., Tang, Y., Collins-Burow, B., Rolfe, K., Li, S., McLachlan, J., Beckman, B."Differences in protein kinase C and estrogen receptor alpha, beta expression and signaling correlate with apoptotic sensitivity of MCF-7 breast cancer cell variants.". International Journal of Oncology 16, no. 6 (2000): 1179-1266. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.16.6.1179