Characterization of MCF mammary epithelial cells overexpressing the Arylhydrocarbon receptor (AhR)
© Wong et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009
Received: 19 June 2008
Accepted: 15 July 2009
Published: 15 July 2009
Recent reports indicate the existence of breast cancer cells expressing very high levels of the Arylhydrocarbon receptor (AhR), a ubiquitous intracellular receptor best known for mediating toxic action of dioxin and related pollutants. Positive correlation between the degree of AhR overexpression and states of increasing transformation of mammary epithelial cells appears to occur in the absence of any exogenous AhR ligands. These observations have raised many questions such as why and how AhR is overexpressed in breast cancer and its physiological roles in the progression to advanced carcinogenic transformation. To address those questions, we hypothesized that AhR overexpression occurs in cells experiencing deficiencies in normally required estrogen receptor (ER) signaling, and the basic role of AhR in such cases is to guide the affected cells to develop orchestrated cellular changes aimed at substituting the normal functions of ER. At the same time, the AhR serves as the mediator of the cell survival program in the absence of ER signaling.
We subjected two lines of Michigan Cancer Foundation (MCF) mammary epithelial cells to 3 different types ER interacting agents for a number of passages and followed the changes in the expression of AhR mRNA. The resulting sublines were analyzed for phenotypical changes and unique molecular characteristics.
MCF10AT1 cells continuously exposed to 17-beta-estradiol (E2) developed sub-lines that show AhR overexpression with the characteristic phenotype of increased proliferation, and distinct resistance to apoptosis. When these chemically selected cell lines were treated with a specific AhR antagonist, 3-methoxy-4-nitroflavone (MNF), both of the above abnormal cellular characteristics disappeared, indicating the pivotal role of AhR in expressing those cellular phenotypes. The most prominent molecular characteristics of these AhR overexpressing MCF cells were found to be overexpression of ErbB2 and COX-2. Furthermore, we could demonstrate that suppression of AhR functions through anti-AhR siRNA or MNF causes the recovery of ERalpha functions.
One of the main causes for AhR overexpression in these MCF breast cancer cells appears to be the loss of ERalpha functions. This phenomenon is likely to be based on the mutually antagonistic relationship between ER and AhR.
The arylhydrocarbon receptor (AhR), a ubiquitous basic Helix-Loop-Helix (bHLH) receptor expressed in various tissues in vertebrate species, is best known for its role in mediating the toxic actions of dioxin. On the molecular level it is known that: (a) dioxin binds to AhR, which exists in cytosol as a complex with a number of chaperone proteins, (b) the resulting dioxin-bound AhR migrates into nucleus where it forms a dimer with ARNT, another bHLH protein, (c) it is this dimer, which binds to the dioxin response element (DRE) on the promoters of the dioxin target genes, and (d) thereby causes induction of a number of detoxification enzymes. Tremendous efforts have been made in the past 25 years in elucidating the intricate molecular mechanisms through which this receptor accomplishes its tasks of inducing a number of detoxification enzymes and related proteins, particularly in the liver upon biding of dioxin and related environmental pollutants [1–3].
Recently, a surprising discovery has been made by David H. Sherr and his colleagues at Boston University that the AhR is overexpressed in DMBA-induced tumors in vivo in rats  as well as in mice . Furthermore, the same group discovered that several in vitro cultured mouse as well as human breast cancer cell lines show high levels of expression of AhR . In all these cases, the cells studied show the typical characteristics of advanced transformation. These scientists consider that in these cases, AhR itself must be playing the important tumor promoting roles in the development of mammary tumors even without the aid of its exogenous ligand . Indeed artificial expression of AhRR, a specific "negative regulator" protein of AhR profoundly suppresses the growth of human mammary tumor cells as well as that of primary cultures of human thereby supporting the above notion that the presence of functionally-active AhR itself is the primary engine for these cells to maintain aggressive proliferation [8–10]. These landmark observations naturally have raised a new set of important toxicological questions; for instance, what the main cause for overexpression of AhR, how the overexpressed AhR contributes to those cellular changes even in the absence of its ligands, and how it contributes to malignant progression of those cells? These questions have prompted us to undertake the current investigation.
It is important to point out first that little is known about the natural physiological roles of AhR, which is defined as its active functions occurring in cells without the aid of exogenously introduced ligands, despite the colossal amounts of information available on the action of dioxins to activate AhR. Most of the clues for the possible physiological roles of AhR come from several studies on AhR-null (knockout) mice. It was originally reported from Chris Bradfield's group  that neonates of AhR-null mice develop liver abnormalities (e.g. in terms of reduced weight, and transient microvesicular fatty metamorphosis). Gonzalez et al.  have reported that their strain of AhR-null mice also show liver abnormalities which are accompanied with increased rates of apoptosis and increased production of TGF-β, probably due to excess retinoic acid accumulation. In the case of developing mammary epithelial tissues, it was reported by Hushka et al  that AhR-null mice show 50% reduction in the formation of terminal end buds (TEBs) in their mammary glands during estrous-stimulated growth and branding of ductal structures in the process of forming the lobule. Together, these observations implicate that there is a natural role of the AhR in coordinating animal development, cell growth, signaling of hormone receptors, and cytokine/growth factor production.
While the above observations on AhR-null mice have been helpful in demonstrating some of the consequences of AhR absence particularly during the development of animals, they by themselves do not indicate consequences of AhR overexpression in those mammary tumor cells. In this regard, one concrete example of the direct consequence of AhR overexpression has been provided by Andersson et al., who produced a transgenic mouse strain that expresses a constitutively active AhR, and found that those mice developed distinct stomach tumors. This finding demonstrates that artificial overexpression of AhR is directly related to one type of tumor formation.
Based on the above observations, all implicating possible contribution of AhR on carcinogenesis, we have set our major objectives of this study as follows: first to identify at least a major cause for mammary epithelial cells to overexpress AhR, and second, to determine at least one essential role of AhR in those cells in expressing the phenotypic sign of advanced state of cell transformation.
Human recombinant EGF, serum and other media supplies were obtained from Gibco BRL (Gaithersburg, MD). [y-32P]ATP (4000 Ci/mmol) was purchased from ICN (Costa Mesa, CA). TCDD (>99.9% purity) was originally obtained from Dow Chemicals Co. 17-β-Estradiol (E2), and 4-OH-Tamoxifen (Tam) were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich Chemical Co. (St. Louis, MO). β-hexachlorocyclohexane (β-HCH) was purchased from Chem Service (Westchester, PA), Parthenolide, Resveratrol, and AG879 were obtained from Calibiochem (San Diego, CA). 3xERE-TATA-luciferase cDNA was a kind gift from D. McDonnell (Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 3'-Methoxy-4'-nitroflavone (MNF) was a kind gift from Dr. Josef Abel (University of Düsseldorf, Institute of Environmental Research, Germany)
Cell culture conditions for MCF10AT1 cell lines
MCF10AT1 cells were obtained from the Michigan Cancer Foundation, maintained in phenol red free Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium with F12 nutrient mixtures (DMEM/F12; Gibco, BRL) and supplemented with 2.5% heat treated equine serum, 20 ng/mL EGF, 100 U/mL penicillin, and 100 μg/mL streptomycin at 37°C under 5% CO2 conditions. Cell culturing/selection was accomplished by seeding 1,000,000 cells (approximately 2.5% of a near confluent plate) into a 100 mm plate containing the above media and chemicals. In addition, selection chemicals (E2, 1 nM; Tam 10 nM; and β-HCH 1 μM final concentration) were added to the plates. Media and chemicals were refreshed twice a week and the plates were reseeded when plates reached 80–90 percent confluency (on average every 10–14 days). For the quantification of our long-term studies, each reseeding event constituted one passage.
Proliferation test assay for MCF10AT1 cell lines
After 20 passages, cells were reseeded for cell proliferation assays. Cells were trypsinized from a starter plate and seeded at a concentration of approximately 50,000 cells per well in a 12 well plate. After 24 hours, the media was changed and one set of wells were trypsinized and counted with a hemocytometer to determine starting concentration of cells. It must be noted that none of the selection chemicals (i.e. E2, Tam or β-HCH were added to the cell culture media used during this assay). After an additional 48 hours, cells were trypsinized and counted with a hemocytometer. Trypan blue exclusion (0.08% dye) was used to determine viable cells (normally >96% of total cells).
mRNA analysis of gene expression for MCF10AT1 cell lines
Cells that have been selected for 20 passages in our test chemicals were trypsinized and reseeded (500,000) into 60 mm dishes in our culture media. Note: no additional selection chemicals (i.e. E2, Tamoxifen, β-HCH) were added to the media during this analysis. After 24–48 hours, the media was refreshed with serum free media. For serum-free ("starved") media studies – following an additional 24 hours, test chemicals were added for an additional 3 hours and the mRNA was extracted from the cells. For "fresh" serum containing studies- following 21 hours from the last serum free media change, the cells were refreshed selection media described above, and chemicals were added 3 hours latter. The mRNA from these samples were then extracted 3 hours after chemical addition. For all cases mRNA extraction were completed using the Qiagen (Valencia, CA) RNAeasy kit. cDNA was prepared from the extracted mRNA using the Omniscript Reverse Transcriptase Kit (Qiagen) and analyzed by real-time PCR on a Roche lightcycler.
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assays (EMSA)
Nuclear extracts were isolated from MCF10AT1 cells as described by to Dennler et al . In brief, MCF10AT1 cells were washed and harvested in Dulbecco's PBS containing 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (PMSF) and 0.05 μg/μl aprotinin. After centrifugation the cell pellets were gently resuspended in 1 ml of hypotonic buffer (20 mM HEPES, 20 mM NaF, 1 mM Na3VO4, 1 mM Na4P2O7, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM EGTA, 0.5 mM PMSF, 0.13 μM okadaic acid, 1 mM dithiolthreitol, pH 7.9, and 1 μg/ml each leupeptin, aprotinin, and pepstatin). The cells were allowed to swell on ice for 15 min and then homogenized by 25 strokes of a Dounce homogenizer. After centrifugation for 1 min at 16,000 g, nuclear pellets were resuspended in 300 μl of ice-cold high salt buffer (hypotonic buffer with 420 mM NaCl and 20% glycerol). The samples were passed through a 21-gauge needle and stirred for 30 min at 4°C. The nuclear lysates were microcentrifuged at 16,000 g for 20 min, aliquoted, and stored at -70°C. Protein concentrations were determined by the method of Bradford . For EMSA, a double-stranded oligonucleotide corresponding to the DRE binding site or end-labeled using [y-32P]ATP (Amersham Life Sciences) and T4 polynucleotide kinase (Promega, Madison, WI) according to the standard methods. DNA-protein-binding reactions were carried out in a total volume of 20 μl containing 15 μg of nuclear protein, 40,000 cpm of DNA oligonucleotide, 25 mM Tris buffer, pH 7.5, 50 mM NaCl, 1 mM MgCl2, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM dithiolthreitol, 5% glycerol, and 1 μg of poly (dI-dC). Supershift analysis was performed by adding 2 μg of monoclonal ARNT, polyclonal RelB (Active Motif), or polyclonal AhR (Novus Biologicals) antibodies to the reaction mixtures. Competition experiments were performed in the presence of a 100-fold molar excess of unlabeled DNA fragments. The samples were incubated at room temperature for 20 min. Protein-DNA complexes were resolved on a 5% non-denaturating polyacrylamide gel and visualized by exposure of the dehydrated gels to x-ray films. In all cases each EMSA test was repeated more than two times to ascertain the reproducibility of the overall pattern of nuclear protein binding to the labeled oligonucleotides.
Antibodies and Western blotting
A polyclonal anti-human AhR (SC-5579), a polyclonal antibody against human ACTIN (SC-1616), a horseradish peroxidase conjugated secondary antibody, and pre-stained standard markers (SC-2361) were obtained from Santa Cruz Biotechnology (Santa Cruz, CA). Whole cell lysates (30 μg) were separated on a 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel and blotted onto a PVDF membrane (Immuno-Blot, Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA). The antigen-antibody complexes were visualized using the chemiluminescence substrate SuperSignal®, West Pico (Pierce, Rockford, IL) as recommended by the manufacturer. For quantitative analysis, respective bands were quantified using a ChemiImager™ 4400 (Alpha Innotech Corporation, San Leandro, CA).
For transient transfection experiments, cells were plated in 6-well culture plates (5 × 104/well). After 24 hrs, cells were washed once with PBS, and 1.6 ml of fresh serum/phenol red free growth medium was added before transfection complexes were applied drop by drop to the cells. Cells were transiently transfected for 16 hrs by using 10 μl per well Effectene (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) with 0.5 μg per well of respective luciferase reporter constructs of the 3 xERE-TATA promoter according to the manufacturer's instructions. The serum and phenol-red free media was then refreshed. After an additional 24 h incubation period, the cells were washed twice with PBS and lysed with 300 μl of passive lysis buffer. Luciferase activities were measured with the Luciferase Reporter Assay System (Promega, Madison, MI) using a luminometer (Berthold Lumat LB 9501/16, Pittsburgh, PA). Relative light units were normalized to protein concentration, using a Bradford dye assay (Bio-Rad). Experiments were repeated three times and three wells of cells were analyzed per experiment.
Apoptosis Detection by Annexin V Staining
Cells were seeded at 1 × 105 cells in 60 mm culture dishes in 2 ml medium after 24 hrs media was refreshed. After 21 hrs, cells were treated with various inhibitors and incubated for and additional 3 hrs. Apoptosis was induced by UV light (100 μJ/cm2) for 100 seconds and incubated at 37°C for 4 hrs. All media except for 200 μl was removed from each plate. Afterwards, 2 μl CaCl2(20 mM), 2 μl annexin V-fluorescein isothiocyanate (50 μg/ml, Sigma) and 2 μl of propidium iodide (PI) solution (50 μg/ml) were added directly to each plate. The cells were gently mixed and incubated for 10 minutes at room temperature in the dark. Apoptotic cells were counted directly by using the fluorescence microscope (Leitz, Wetzlar, Germany). In each experiment, ten representative fields were counted for apoptosis assay. Both annexin V-positive and annexin V-PI-double-positive cells were considered to be apoptotic.
All quantitative experiments were repeated a minimum of three times and results are expressed as means ± standard deviations. Data were evaluated statistically by one-way ANOVA followed by Student's t test at the significant level of P < 0.05.
Genesis of AhR over-expressing MCF cells and their characterization
Effects of inhibitors on the cell proliferation of MCF10AT1 sub-lines selected in the presence of 17-β-estradiol (E2), Tam and β-Hexachlorohexane (β-HCH) *p < 0.05 vs. control ap < 0.05 vs. no chemicals.
100 ± 6.8
100 ± 5.0
100 ± 12.1
100 ± 11.9
After 48 hours:
787 ± 65
1274 ± 61*
1456 ± 56.9*
1378 ± 138*
263 ± 16
1025 ± 51*
283 ± 13.a
535 ± 12* a
810 ± 60
850 ± 4.3a
1355 ± 52.2*
1425 ± 125*
Comparison of selected MCF10AT1 cells to similarly selected MCF-7 cells
In the case of ErbB2 mRNA, both E2-selected and 1 μM β-HCH-selected cells in both cell lines showed high expression ErbB2 (= c-Neu or HER2). Of great interest to this study was the differential upregulation of AhR and ErbB2 in cell lines selected by E2, 4-OH-tamoxifen and β-HCH respectively. The differences among them might represent different routes through which MCF10AT1 cells could be affected by these chemicals to develop transformation. An interim conclusion we have reached from this follow-up study are: (a) E2 selection resulted in the greatest up-regulation of AhR mRNA expression, (b) β-HCH, on the other hand, greatly increases mostly ErbB2 mRNA expression, and (c) 4-OH-tamoxifen produces an intermediate type of cells showing modest increases in the expression of both of these markers. These findings support our notion that AhR overexpression is a likely result of alteration of the status of the estrogen receptor as a result of exposure to excess E2 or to 4-OH-tamoxifen.
Effects of chemical and siRNA suppressors of the function of AhR, and ErbB2 on proliferation of P20E cells in comparison to P20C cells
Proliferation in MCF10AT1 cell sublines selected over 20 passages in 17-β-Estradiol (P20E2) or the ethanol vehicle (P20C).
100 ± 10
224 ± 11
+ Resveratrol (20 μM)
91 ± 15
123 ± 12*;
+ Parthenolide (10 μM)
98 ± 15
183 ± 8.5*
+ MNF (10 nM)
103 ± 6.3
178 ± 8.8*
+ HRG (1 ng/ml)
108 ± 8.0
295 ± 12a
+ HRG + MNF
108 ± 7.4
184 ± 9.2
Effect of AhR and β-Catennin siRNA on proliferation in MCF10AT1 cell sub-lines selected over 20 passages in 17-β-Estradiol (p20 E2) or the ethanol vehicle (p20 C).
100 ± 6.3
195 ± 10.1* a
60 ± 4.2a
103 ± 12.5* a
63 ± 4.2a
86 ± 8.7* a
Studies on the contribution of the over expressed AhR on resistance to induced apoptosis in P20E cells compared to P20C cells
Tests on the AhR-dependency of expression of selected mRNA markers
Effect of serum starvation of P20C and P20E cells on the expression of selected marker mRNAs.
Studies on the influence of the overexpressed AhR on the mRNA expression of selected inflammation markers in P20E cells as compared to P20C cells
mRNA expression of selected inflammatory and oxidatives markers under "Fresh serum" conditions (see methods).
Electromobility Shift Assay (EMSA) study on AhR binding to the dioxin response element (DRE) in P20E in comparisons to P20C cells
Western blotting studies on the protein expression of AhR in P20E and P20C cells
Studies on the effect of AhR on the expression of ERE-target genes through the use of ERE-Luc reporter plasmid
Our main strategy for the current study has been first to identify the most likely cause for these MCF breast cancer cells to overexpress AhR by checking the effectiveness of three estrogenic agents in stimulating the expression of AhR for a number of passages, and second to identify phenotypic signs of transformation along the process of selecting those cells by these agents. This approach has yielded two major tangible results: (a) in our main study cell lines, MCF10AT1 (i.e. P20E) as well as in MCF-7(P35E) cells, E2 was the most effective agent, among tested in terms of eliciting AhR overexpression, and (b) E2 selection resulted in transformed cells with a phenotypic expression of the increased cell proliferation in both cell lines. The above finding suggests that the estrogen receptor (ER) is likely involved in this process of AhR up-regulation at least in these cell lines under our test conditions. In the case of MCF-7 cells we found the mRNA expression of ERα itself in E2-selected cells (P35E) is totally suppressed. On the other hand in the case of E2-selected MCF10AT1 cells (P20E) the extent of down-regulation of expression of ERα mRNA, in comparison to P20C cells, was not relatively modest. Instead we found that the level of mRNA expressions of progesterone receptor (PR) and PS2, both estrogen receptor element (ERE) controlled proteins, were very low, indicating possibly that the function of the ERα is impaired in P20E as a result of its overexpression of AhR. In this regard, the results of ERE-Luciferase (ERE-Luc) assays (Figure 9) were most helpful in confirming the above diagnosis, since both siRNA treatments aimed at reducing the expression of AhR caused the restoration of ERE-Luc activity in both cell lines. This indicates that there is definitely a good possibility of the existence of an antagonistic influence of AhR on the expression of genes promoted by ERE. Furthermore, even in the absence of siRNA, the level of ERE-dependent gene expression in P20C was found to be significantly higher than that in P20E. One unexplainable question remaining is why the extent of the effect of those siRNA treatments in recovering ERE-dependent gene expression is more pronounced in P20C than in P20E: i.e. if the degree of AhR dependency of ERE-suppression is higher in P20E than P20C, the expected outcome of suppression of AhR would be more in the former. One possibility, which we consider likely to explain this observation, is that this phenomenon is due likely to the incompleteness of this siRNA treatment (estimated to be effective in suppressing 70% of AhR mRNA expression). In other words, even the remaining AhR still expressed in P20E cells is powerful enough to keep the expression of the ERE-target genes suppressed. An alternate possibility is that there is another factor other than AhR which makes the functional activation of ERE less effective in P20E cells than in P20C. The third possibility, which is even less likely, is that the transfection efficiency of these cells with the ERE-Luc plasmid was compromised due to molecular differences between the two sublines. Nevertheless, the main conclusion derived from these experiments that the functions of ERα and ERE are reduced in P20E cells in comparison to P20C is still firm, clearly supporting our conclusion.
The second major objective has been to find the effect of the overexpressed AhR on the increased expression of at least one phenotype indicating the AhR-dependent progression to more advanced state of transformation. It must be noted that MCF-7 P35E line, in comparison to its matched control P35C line, has already been shown to exhibit several phenotypic characteristics of further advanced state of transformation such as accelerated anchorage-independent growth in soft agar, increased invasiveness, as judged by matrigel invasion tests, and cell proliferation . These changes were accompanied with marked suppression of expressions of ERα and significant increase in that of MMP-9 both at protein and enzymatic levels . Since much less is known about MCF10AT1 derived P20E cells than those selected from MCF-7 (i.e. P35E versus P35C cells), we decided to study MCF10AT1 as our main cellular model in examining this phenomenon of AhR overexpression in more detail. In this regard, the most noticeable finding of the current study has been that AhR overexpression through E2-selection is accompanied with increased cell proliferation in both MCF cells lines. This observation merits special attention, since increased cell proliferation is clearly one of the major phenotypic expressions of advanced transformation of mammary epithelial cells. The most significant pieces of evidence procured for the critical contribution of AhR in helping P20E cells to express the above transformation characteristics were first, the effectiveness of MNF, a specific blocker of AhR and second, that of siRNA against AhR in effectively suppressing cell proliferation of P20E cells. Thus, by this approach we could satisfactorily meet the second objective of this project to unequivocally show, at least in one case, that AhR indeed contributes significantly to the progression of transformation of mammary epithelial cells. To support the above diagnosis of the influence of AhR on progression of cellular transformation, we have further conducted the apoptosis resistance study, which clearly showed that AhR overexpression is intimately associated with the phenotypic expression of apoptosis resistance in P20E cells.
The third topic needing discussion is the relationship between AhR overexpression in these cells and their inflammatory status. The extent of contribution AhR on the expression of these inflammation markers was assessed by the effectiveness of MNF in reducing the mRNA expression of those markers (Table 4). However, the extent of suppression achieved by MNF was not complete in all cases. Judging by the effectiveness of parthenolide, an anti-inflammatory agent, in reducing the proliferation difference between P20E and P20C, on the other hand (Table 2), there is likely possibility that inflammation itself is contributing to the expression of this phenotype. Nevertheless, at this early stage of investigation, the contribution of the overexpressed AhR on the increased expression of the inflammation status in P20E cells is still based on this circumstantial evidence only, and therefore this subject still remains to be resolved in the future.
One final topic needing a brief discussion is how the elevated AhR in MCF cells becomes functionally activated even without addition of exogenous ligands. It must be pointed out that we avoided the use of typical ligands such as TCDD throughout this study (except in Figure 7A). Yet, the result of this current study indicates unambiguously that overexpressed AhR in P20E cells are functionally active even without exogenous ligands (e.g. see Figure 7 and 9). Therefore, while we could not address this specific question in this study, this topic deserves a serious attention in the future.
We could clearly establish in the current study that E2-selection causes induction of AhR overexpression in two MCF breast cancer cell lines, and that such a phenomenon is accompanied with increased cell proliferation that is significantly dependent on the presence of AhR. The evidence suggests that the basic cause for up-regulation of AhR by E2-selection is related to the E2-induced down-regulation of either expression of ERα as in the case of MCF-7 cells, or the loss of the function of estrogen responsiveness in MCF10AT1 cells.
Arylhydrocarbon nuclear transferase
dioxin response element
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay
- E2 :
Estrogen Response Element
Michigan Cancer Foundation
quantitative-Real-Time – Polymerize Chain Reaction
This work is supported by a NIH Kirschstein fellowship (#1F43ES012106-01A1 to PSW), research grants R-01ES07284, R01-ES05233 and P30-ES05707 from the National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina and the Susan G. Komen for the cure grant #FAS0703859
- Fisher JM, Jones KW, Whitlock JP: Activation of transcription as a general mechanism of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin action. Mol Carcinog. 1989, 1 (4): 216-21. 10.1002/mc.2940010403.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hankinson O: Role of coactivators in transcriptional activation by the aryl hydrocarbon receptor. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2005, 433 (2): 379-86. 10.1016/j.abb.2004.09.031.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Poland A, Knutson JC: 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin and related halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons: examination of the mechanism of toxicity. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1982, 22: 517-54. 10.1146/annurev.pa.22.040182.002505.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Trombino AF, Near RI, Matulka RA, et al: Expression of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor/transcription factor (AhR) and AhR-regulated CYP1 gene transcripts in a rat model of mammary tumorigenesis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2000, 63 (2): 117-31. 10.1023/A:1006443104670.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Currier N, Solomon SE, Demicco EG, et al: Oncogenic signaling pathways activated in DMBA-induced mouse mammary tumors. Toxicol Pathol. 2005, 33 (6): 726-37. 10.1080/01926230500352226.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Shin SR, Sanchez-Velar N, Sherr DH, Sonenshein GE: 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene treatment of a c-rel mouse mammary tumor cell line induces epithelial to mesenchymal transition via activation of nuclear factor-kappaB. Cancer Res. 2006, 66 (5): 2570-5. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-3056.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schlezinger JJ, Liu D, Farago M, et al: A role for the aryl hydrocarbon receptor in mammary gland tumorigenesis. Biol Chem. 2006, 387 (9): 1175-87. 10.1515/BC.2006.145.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Tsuchiya Y, Nakajima M, Itoh S, Iwanari M, Yokoi T: Expression of aryl hydrocarbon receptor repressor in normal human tissues and inducibility by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in human tumor-derived cell lines. Toxicol Sci. 2003, 72 (2): 253-9. 10.1093/toxsci/kfg022.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yang X, Liu D, Murray TJ, et al: The aryl hydrocarbon receptor constitutively represses c-myc transcription in human mammary tumor cells. Oncogene. 2005, 24 (53): 7869-81. 10.1038/sj.onc.1208938.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zudaire E, Cuesta N, Murty V, et al: The aryl hydrocarbon receptor repressor is a putative tumor suppressor gene in multiple human cancers. J Clin Invest. 2008, 118 (2): 640-50.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Schmidt JV, Bradfield CA: Ah receptor signaling pathways. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol. 1996, 12: 55-89. 10.1146/annurev.cellbio.12.1.55.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gonzalez FJ, Fernandez-Salguero P: The aryl hydrocarbon receptor: studies using the AHR-null mice. Drug Metab Dispos. 1998, 26 (12): 1194-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Hushka LJ, Williams JS, Greenlee WF: Characterization of 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzofuran-dependent suppression and AH receptor pathway gene expression in the developing mouse mammary gland. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1998, 152 (1): 200-10. 10.1006/taap.1998.8508.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Andersson P, McGuire J, Rubio C, et al: A constitutively active dioxin/aryl hydrocarbon receptor induces stomach tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2002, 99 (15): 9990-5. 10.1073/pnas.152706299.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Dennler S, Itoh S, Vivien D, ten Dijke P, Huet S, Gauthier JM: Direct binding of Smad3 and Smad4 to critical TGF beta-inducible elements in the promoter of human plasminogen activator inhibitor-type 1 gene. Embo J. 1998, 17 (11): 3091-100. 10.1093/emboj/17.11.3091.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Bradford MM: A rapid and sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram quantities of protein utilizing the principle of protein-dye binding. Anal Biochem. 1976, 72: 248-54. 10.1016/0003-2697(76)90527-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Zou E, Matsumura F: Long-term exposure to beta-hexachlorocyclohexane (beta-HCH) promotes transformation and invasiveness of MCF-7 human breast cancer cells. Biochem Pharmacol. 2003, 66 (5): 831-40. 10.1016/S0006-2952(03)00394-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Wong PS, Matsumura F: Promotion of breast cancer by beta-hexachlorocyclohexane in MCF10AT1 cells and MMTV-neu mice. BMC Cancer. 2007, 7: 130-10.1186/1471-2407-7-130.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Casper RF, Quesne M, Rogers IM, et al: Resveratrol has antagonist activity on the aryl hydrocarbon receptor: implications for prevention of dioxin toxicity. Mol Pharmacol. 1999, 56 (4): 784-90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ciolino HP, Daschner PJ, Yeh GC: Resveratrol inhibits transcription of CYP1A1 in vitro by preventing activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor. Cancer Res. 1998, 58 (24): 5707-12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Le Corre L, Chalabi N, Delort L, Bignon YJ, Bernard-Gallon DJ: Resveratrol and breast cancer chemoprevention: molecular mechanisms. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2005, 49 (5): 462-71. 10.1002/mnfr.200400094.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Park S, Matsumura F: Characterization of anti-apoptotic action of TCDD as a defensive cellular stress response reaction against the cell damaging action of ultra-violet irradiation in an immortalized normal human mammary epithelial cell line, MCF10A. Toxicology. 2006, 217 (2–3): 139-46. 10.1016/j.tox.2005.09.002.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Matsumura F: On the significance of the role of cellular stress response reactions in the toxic actions of dioxin. Biochem Pharmacol. 2003, 66 (4): 527-40. 10.1016/S0006-2952(03)00157-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vogel CF, Matsumura F: A new cross-talk between the aryl hydrocarbon receptor and RelB, a member of the NF-kappaB family. Biochem Pharmacol. 2009, 77 (4): 734-45. 10.1016/j.bcp.2008.09.036.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Vogel CF, Sciullo E, Li W, Wong P, Lazennec G, Matsumura F: RelB, a new partner of aryl hydrocarbon receptor-mediated transcription. Molecular endocrinology (Baltimore, Md. 2007, 21 (12): 2941-55. 10.1210/me.2007-0211.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Vogel CF, Sciullo E, Matsumura F: Involvement of RelB in aryl hydrocarbon receptor-mediated induction of chemokines. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2007, 363 (3): 722-6. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2007.09.032.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/9/234/prepub
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.