| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Regular Articles |




From the Department of Pathology,* New York University Medical Center, New York, New York; the Laboratory of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology,
Rockefeller University, New York, New York; and the Department of Cancer Biology,
University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Altered expression of nuclear hormone receptor co-factors has been implicated in the genesis and progression of breast cancers. Increased expression of TIF2, CBP, and steroid receptor RNA activator has been observed in breast tumor tissues.24-26 Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-binding protein (PBP/TRAP220) and SRC3/AIB1 genes are frequently amplified and overexpressed in breast tumors.27,28 In comparison, however, little is known about the possibility of abnormal expression of co-factors in prostate cancer. Recently, Fujimoto and colleagues40 found that the expression levels of ARA55 and SRC1 were higher in cancer specimens with a poor response to endocrine therapy than in those with a good response to endocrine therapy. To explore this question, we analyzed the levels of expression of both relatively AR-selective co-factors (TMF1/ARA160, ELE1/ARA70, ARA55, ARA54, Ran/ARA24, and PIAS1) and more general co-factors (SRC1, TRAP220) in human prostate cancer tissue by quantitative in situ hybridization. Among the tested co-factors, PIAS1 and RAN/ARA24 showed significantly higher expression levels in cancer tissue compared with benign tissue. In contrast, expression of ELE1/ARA70 was dramatically decreased in primary prostate tumor tissues. A subsequent analysis has demonstrated suppression of LNCaP cell growth by ELE1/ARA70. Collectively, these results imply that these co-factors likely play important but contrasting roles in prostate cancer differentiation and tumorigenesis.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Prostate cancer and normal control tissues were derived from radical prostatectomy specimens of 43 prostate cancer patients treated at New York University Medical Center. The study protocol was approved by Institutional Review Board of New York University Medical Center. Tissues were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin and embedded in paraffin. Sections of tissue (4 µm) were cut and mounted on Superfrost Plus adhesion slides and used for histology, immunohistochemistry, and in situ hybridization. Prostate cancer foci were categorized as well differentiated (combined Gleason score 2 to 4; n = 9), moderately differentiated (combined Gleason score 5 to 6; n = 17), and poorly differentiated (combined Gleason score 7 and 8 to 10; n = 17). The histological features and the Gleason score of each individual specimen were confirmed by two pathologists (JM and PL).
Immunohistochemistry
The immunohistochemical staining was performed on an automated Ventana machine. Before staining, antigen retrieval was performed by heating the specimens in a microwave oven for 30 minutes in citrate buffer (pH 8.0) after dewaxing. A rabbit polyclonal anti-AR antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA) was applied to the sections at a 1:100 dilution, and sections were then incubated overnight at 4°C. A streptavidin-biotin peroxidase detection system was used according to the manufacturers instruction (DAKO, Carpinteria, CA), with 3,3'-diaminobenzidine as substrate.
In Situ Hybridization
The expression sequence tag (EST) cDNA clones of interest were obtained from Research Genetics, Inc (Carlsbad, CA). Oligonucleotides were designed to bear T7 promoter sequences on one end and T3 promoter sequences on the opposite end (Table 1)
such that the sense and anti-sense probes were specified by the polymerase used. Fragments of corresponding genes (
500-bp DNA) were amplified using polymerase chain reaction. High-specific-activity 33P-labeled RNA probes were synthesized by incubation of DNA with T7 or T3 RNA polymerase; 500 µmol/L of GTP, ATP, and CTP; 3 µmol/L of UTP; and 100 µCi
-33P-UTP (6000 Ci/mmol) at 37°C for 45 minutes followed by DNase treatment for 15 minutes at 37°C. The probes were purified by chromatography on a Sephadex G-50 column. The yield and quality of the probes were assessed by trichloroacetic acid precipitation and scintillation counting, as well as by agarose gel electrophoresis and autoradiography.
|
Image and Statistical Analyses
The benign and malignant tissue components were compared on the same section to eliminate tissue-to-tissue and slide-to-slide variations of grain signals. We first examined the consistency of quantification of a given case by analyzing randomly selected areas of nonneoplastic and cancer foci in the cancer specimens for five cases. The results from block to block were comparable in all cases (data not shown). These results validated the in situ hybridization approach with formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissues for analyzing the expression of AR and its co-factors. Slides were evaluated under a microscope (Nikon Eclipse E400) equipped with a digital camera (Princeton Scientific Instruments, Inc., Monmouth Junction, NJ) interfaced to a computer with IPLab software. The specimens were categorized into four groups according to degree of differentiation by Gleason score; Gleason score 4, Gleason score 5 to 6, Gleason score 7, and Gleason score 8 to 10. The grain (in situ signal) numbers from the areas of interest (cancer, prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, and normal) were captured and counted using IPLab software, and divided by the number of cells to quantify as grain number/cell. An average of 30 to 50 cells were analyzed for each case. Differences in expression levels of the genes of interest among these four groups were subjected to nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance analyses. Results were further grouped according to changes in RNA levels (malignant versus benign tissue) of less than twofold and greater than twofold and analyzed by the chi-square test.
Assays of Cell Growth Suppression
LNCaP cells were plated in six-well plates (35-mm wells) and grown in RPMI 1640 medium to
70% confluency for transfection with plasmid DNA (pcDNA3.1 and pcDNA-ELE/ARA70) and 6 µl of lipofectamine (Invitrogen Life Technologies, Carlsbad, CA). Two days later, cells were selected with G418 at 0.8 µg/ml. After 4 weeks of selection with the medium change every 3 days, the cells were rinsed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), fixed with 2% formaldehyde in PBS for 15 minutes, stained with 0.5% crystal violet in PBS for 15 minutes, rinsed once or twice with distilled water, dried, and stored for subsequent quantification of colonies.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A large number of co-factors that regulate AR-driven transcription has been identified.4
To determine possible relationships to prostate tumorigenesis and prostate cancer progression, we investigated the expression levels of various AR co-factors in normal and tumor prostate tissues by in situ hybridization. To validate the in situ hybridization results, we performed both in situ hybridization and immunohistochemical analysis for AR with the same set of slides from the formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue blocks. Strong and uniform immunostaining of AR was observed in the nuclei of both epithelial and stromal cells in the benign areas of each of the 43 specimens (Figure 1G)
. Consistently, AR mRNA expression levels were high in epithelial cells and lower in stromal cells revealed by in situ hybridization (Figure 1, A and B)
. As a negative control, only background signals were detected with the sense AR probe (Figure 1C)
, indicating that the signals obtained with the anti-sense AR probe were specific.
|
In the 43 cases studied, the expression levels and overall expression patterns of AR did not differ significantly (less than twofold) between normal prostate tissue (from the same section of and adjacent to the prostate cancer region) and prostate cancer tissue. There was no apparent relationship between the amount of AR and the degree of tumor differentiation. These results are in accordance with previous reports that AR is highly expressed in a variety of normal and malignant human prostate tissues.31
Expression levels of a panel of eight proteins described as modulators of AR function were then analyzed in the 43 prostate tumor samples. Two of these co-factors, SRC1 and TRAP220, interact with a broad spectrum of different nuclear receptors. The other six co-factors studied [the members of the ARA group (TMF1/ARA160, ELE1/ARA70, ARA55, ARA54 and Ran/ARA24) and PIAS1] are relatively specific for AR. The in situ hybridization results are summarized in Table 2
. Expression of SRC1 and TRAP220 was detected in both stromal cells and epithelial cells, whereas expression of ARA54 was observed predominantly in epithelial cells. The expression levels of these mRNAs did not differ significantly between normal and tumor tissues. Although ARA55 mRNA was moderately expressed in stromal cells, it was undetectable in glandular epithelial cells (Figure 1, D and E)
, implying that ARA55 might regulate AR function in prostate stroma. Immunohistochemical staining with anti-ARA55 antibody on the same prostate tissues further confirmed that ARA55 was only expressed in stromal cells (Figure 1F)
. This is consistent with results of the previous study that ARA55 was detected only in cell lines derived from prostate stroma.32
In most of the 43 specimens studied, the expression level of ARA55 was lower in the stroma in regions of cancerous foci however quantification was not possible because of the scanty nature of stroma in cancerous foci.
|
The 24-kd protein Ran/ARA24 belongs to the superfamily of GTP-binding proteins that use a structurally conserved G domain as a molecular switch for cycling between the GDP- and GTP-bound states.33
Ran/ARA24 has been clearly implicated in the two-way traffic of macromolecules between the nucleus and the cytoplasm34
and in microtubule assembly and spindle formation in cells in M phase. Recently, it has been shown that Ran/ARA24 physically interacts with the polyglutamine region of AR and enhances AR-dependent transcription.35
Our in situ hybridization results for normal tissue showed only a low level of Ran/ARA24 mRNA expression that was present mainly in epithelial cells (Figure 2, A and B)
. Comparison of Ran/ARA24 expression in normal and tumor tissues found overexpression (Figure 2, C and D versus A and B
; Table 3
) in 81% of the tumor specimens, with an average increase of 4.6(±1.1)-fold and no change in 19% of the specimens. More dramatic changes (more than fivefold) were observed in 35% of the tumor specimens (Table 3)
. However, these changes did not correlate with prostate tumor grade (Gleason score) by nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance analysis and by the chi-square test when cases were further grouped according to changes of less than twofold and greater than twofold.
|
|
Lower Expression of ELE1/ARA70 in Prostate Cancer
ELE1/ARA70 was identified first as a factor involved in the activation of the RET proto-oncogene in thyroid neoplasia39
and later as a ligand-dependent transcriptional co-factor for AR.17
Our in situ RNA hybridization assays showed that ELE1/ARA70, like AR, is expressed at high levels (and predominantly in epithelial cells) in normal tissue (Figure 3, A and B)
. However, ELE1/ARA70 expression was dramatically lower in prostate tumor tissues (Figure 3, C and D versus A and B)
. Expression was decreased twofold to fivefold in 42% of the cases and 5- to 30-fold in 38% of cases (Table 3)
, with an average decrease of 7.5(±1.4)-fold. We further observed that, in cases with increased expression of RAN/ARA24 and reduced expression of ELE1/ARA70, 70% of the cases showed reciprocal changes, indicating opposite effects of these co-activators in cancer. No obvious correlation between ELE1/ARA70 expression and prostate tumor grade was observed by nonparametric Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance analysis or by the chi-square test when cases were grouped according to changes less than twofold and greater than twofold.
|
HGPIN is thought to be a prostate cancer precursor lesion as a result of abundant evidence based on morphological, topographical, immunohistochemical, and molecular studies. HGPIN was identified in the majority of our cases (40 of 43 cases), either within or away from cancerous foci. A comparative analysis of AR co-factor expression patterns in HGPIN located adjacent to the prostate cancer region showed changes similar to those observed in prostate cancer. These changes included enhanced Ran/ARA24 expression (Figure 2, E and F versus A and B)
and decreased ELE1/ARA70 expression (Figure 3, E and F versus A and B)
. We did not observe a significant difference in co-activator expression according to location of HGPIN. These results support the concept that HGPIN is a precursor of prostate cancer and further indicate that abnormal expression of Ran/ARA24 and ELE1/ARA70 may be involved in prostate tumor initiation.
Suppression of Human Prostate Cancer Cell Proliferation and Colony Formation by ELE1/ARA70
The decreased expression of ELE1/ARA70 in prostate cancer suggest that this co-factor might negatively regulate prostate cell growth and proliferation. We therefore tested the ability of ELE1/ARA70 gene to suppress the growth of prostate tumor cells, using the metastatic prostate cancer cell line LNCaP, which expresses reduced levels of ELE1/ARA70 compared with normal primary prostate epithelial cells.41
Colony formation was suppressed by ELE1/ARA70 but not by the vector control (Figure 4)
. The colonies were small (containing a few cells), even after 1 month of G418 selection (data not shown). These results indicate that ELE1/ARA70 suppresses tumor cell proliferation and colony formation and suggest that it may be a tissue differentiation factor or a potential tumor suppressor.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
AR and Some Co-Factors Are Relatively Constant in Benign and Malignant Prostate Tissues
Enhanced AR activity has been correlated with prostate cancer formation and progression.43 It also has been proposed that either AR gene mutation or AR gene amplification may enhance AR activity, thus promoting tumorigenesis or leading to androgen-independent prostate cancer.1,44 However, the relatively low incidence of AR mutation and amplification in primary prostate cancer suggests other causes. Consistent with this possibility, our in situ analyses have revealed that the levels and patterns of AR expression do not change significantly in primary prostate tumors of different grades. Down-regulation of SRC1, one of general nuclear receptor co-factors, is associated with tamoxifen resistance in breast neoplasms.45 However, we did not detect a significant change in expression of SRC1 mRNA in prostate tumor tissue relative to normal tissue. TRAP220 was expressed in both epithelial and stromal cells, and the levels were not different in prostate cancer and benign prostate tissues. This might reflect rather broad functions of TRAP220 for various nuclear receptors and other activators.42
Changed Expression of AR Co-Factors in Prostate Tumor
Recent studies have shown that various co-activators can bind to AR and augment the AR transcription activity in a ligand-dependent manner.1,2 Therefore, the activity of co-factors might contribute to enhanced AR activity in primary prostate cancer. Our study shows that expression levels of Ran/ARA24 and PIAS1 are significantly higher in prostate tumor tissue compared with nonneoplastic prostate tissue. The higher levels of Ran/ARA24 and PIAS1 may contribute to overproliferation of prostate tumor cells. PIAS1 belongs to a family of PIAS proteins that, consistent with present results, are able to co-activate steroid receptor-dependent transcription.37,38 In contrast to increased expression of RAN/ARA24 in 81% of prostate tumor cases, enhanced expression of PIAS1 was observed only in 33% of the cases. These differences may reflect the involvement of different pathways for Ran/ARA24 and PIAS1 as well as the relative efficiencies in contribution to cancer formation.
Interestingly, PIAS1 was first cloned as a protein that inhibited Stat1,38 which has been suggested to have an anti-oncogenic effect.46 This correlates with our findings that the level of PIAS1 is increased, possibly to revert the proapoptotic activity of Stat1, in prostate tissue. Further investigations will be needed to determine whether high levels of PIAS1 promote prostate cell proliferation through the Stat1 pathway, the AR pathway, or both pathways. Similar to PIAS1, Ran/ARA24 is also involved in nuclear translocation and chromatin organization. It is however unclear which pathways are affected by the enhanced expression of RAN/ARA24.
Previous studies demonstrated that ELE1/ARA70 can serve as a co-activator of AR, ER, PR, and peroxisome proliferator activated receptor gamma (PPAR
).17,29,47,48
Here we report a down-regulation of ELE1/ARA70 expression in prostate cancer compared with levels expressed in nonneoplastic prostate tissues. Consistent with our observations, ELE1/ARA70 expression is reduced in prostate cancer cell lines relative to primary cells from benign prostate epithelium primary cells.41
These observations suggest that ELE1/ARA70 may be involved in the development or progression of prostate cancer, particularly with respect to loss of androgen responsiveness. Overexpression of ELE1/ARA70 in a prostate cancer cell line suppresses cell proliferation and colony formation, suggesting that it might be a tumor suppressor or involved in the expression of genes required for prostate cell differentiation. AR in LNCaP cell harbors a mutation (codon 877, Thr to Ala) in the hormone-binding domain. This mutation confers an altered ligand-binding specificity.
The study of co-factor expression in prostate cancer should be of great importance for understanding AR function in prostate tumorigenesis and progression. A shift in the levels of various AR co-factors may influence the state of differentiation or proliferation of the prostate, possibly through the regulation of different AR responsive genes.
| Acknowledgements |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Supported partly by a CaP CURE award to (to R. G. R. and Z. W.), a grant from the United States Department of the Army (DAMS 17-01-1-0097 to Z. W.), and by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Cancer Research Institute (to X. Y.).
Accepted for publication July 15, 2002.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Kaulfuss, M. Grzmil, B. Hemmerlein, P. Thelen, S. Schweyer, J. Neesen, L. Bubendorf, A. G. Glass, H. Jarry, B. Auber, et al. Leupaxin, a Novel Coactivator of the Androgen Receptor, Is Expressed in Prostate Cancer and Plays a Role in Adhesion and Invasion of Prostate Carcinoma Cells Mol. Endocrinol., July 1, 2008; 22(7): 1606 - 1621. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Ornish, M. J. M. Magbanua, G. Weidner, V. Weinberg, C. Kemp, C. Green, M. D. Mattie, R. Marlin, J. Simko, K. Shinohara, et al. Changes in prostate gene expression in men undergoing an intensive nutrition and lifestyle intervention PNAS, June 17, 2008; 105(24): 8369 - 8374. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.-H. Tan and M. T Nevalainen Signal transducer and activator of transcription 5A/B in prostate and breast cancers Endocr. Relat. Cancer, June 1, 2008; 15(2): 367 - 390. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Peng, F. Chen, J. Melamed, L. Chiriboga, J. Wei, X. Kong, M. Mcleod, Y. Li, C. X. Li, A. Feng, et al. Distinct nuclear and cytoplasmic functions of androgen receptor cofactor p44 and association with androgen-independent prostate cancer PNAS, April 1, 2008; 105(13): 5236 - 5241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Peng, C. X. Li, F. Chen, Z. Wang, M. Ligr, J. Melamed, J. Wei, W. Gerald, M. Pagano, M. J. Garabedian, et al. Stimulation of Prostate Cancer Cellular Proliferation and Invasion by the Androgen Receptor Co-Activator ARA70 Am. J. Pathol., January 1, 2008; 172(1): 225 - 235. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. Harada, R. Yasunaga, Y. Higashimura, R. Yamaji, K. Fujimoto, J. Moss, H. Inui, and Y. Nakano Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate Dehydrogenase Enhances Transcriptional Activity of Androgen Receptor in Prostate Cancer Cells J. Biol. Chem., August 3, 2007; 282(31): 22651 - 22661. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Kikuchi, C. Uchida, T. Hattori, T. Isobe, Y. Hiramatsu, K. Kitagawa, T. Oda, H. Konno, and M. Kitagawa ARA54 is involved in transcriptional regulation of the cyclin D1 gene in human cancer cells Carcinogenesis, August 1, 2007; 28(8): 1752 - 1758. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Valentini, M. Biancolella, F. Amati, P. Gravina, R. Miano, G. Chillemi, A. Farcomeni, S. Bueno, G. Vespasiani, A. Desideri, et al. Valproic Acid Induces Neuroendocrine Differentiation and UGT2B7 Up-Regulation in Human Prostate Carcinoma Cell Line Drug Metab. Dispos., June 1, 2007; 35(6): 968 - 972. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Vijayvargia, M. S. May, and J. D. Fondell A Coregulatory Role for the Mediator Complex in Prostate Cancer Cell Proliferation and Gene Expression Cancer Res., May 1, 2007; 67(9): 4034 - 4041. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Zhou, H. Wu, P. Lee, and Z. Wang Roles of the androgen receptor cofactor p44 in the growth of prostate epithelial cells. J. Mol. Endocrinol., October 1, 2006; 37(2): 283 - 300. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. R. Logan, L. Gaughan, S. R. C. McCracken, V. Sapountzi, H. Y. Leung, and C. N. Robson Human PIRH2 Enhances Androgen Receptor Signaling through Inhibition of Histone Deacetylase 1 and Is Overexpressed in Prostate Cancer. Mol. Cell. Biol., September 1, 2006; 26(17): 6502 - 6510. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. D. Heitzer and D. B. DeFranco Hic-5/ARA55, a LIM Domain-Containing Nuclear Receptor Coactivator Expressed in Prostate Stromal Cells. Cancer Res., July 15, 2006; 66(14): 7326 - 7333. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Gao, H. Wang, P. Lee, J. Melamed, C. X Li, F. Zhang, H. Wu, L. Zhou, and Z. Wang Androgen receptor and prostate apoptosis response factor-4 target the c-FLIP gene to determine survival and apoptosis in the prostate gland. J. Mol. Endocrinol., June 1, 2006; 36(3): 463 - 483. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S.-Y. Park, Y.-J. Kim, A. C. Gao, J. L. Mohler, S. A. Onate, A. A. Hidalgo, C. Ip, E.-M. Park, S. Y. Yoon, and Y.-M. Park Hypoxia increases androgen receptor activity in prostate cancer cells. Cancer Res., May 15, 2006; 66(10): 5121 - 5129. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. J. Pienta and D. Bradley Mechanisms underlying the development of androgen-independent prostate cancer. Clin. Cancer Res., March 15, 2006; 12(6): 1665 - 1671. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. M. Lee, C. B. Fuhrman, V. Planelles, M. R. Peltier, D. K. Gaffney, A. P. Soisson, M. K. Dodson, H. D. Tolley, C. L. Green, and K. A. Zempolich Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase Inhibition by LY294002 Radiosensitizes Human Cervical Cancer Cell Lines Clin. Cancer Res., January 1, 2006; 12(1): 250 - 256. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Li, C. N. Cavasotto, T. Cardozo, S. Ha, T. Dang, S. S. Taneja, S. K. Logan, and M. J. Garabedian Androgen Receptor Mutations Identified in Prostate Cancer and Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome Display Aberrant ART-27 Coactivator Function Mol. Endocrinol., September 1, 2005; 19(9): 2273 - 2282. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Gao, P. Lee, H. Wang, W. Gerald, M. Adler, L. Zhang, Y.-F. Wang, and Z. Wang The Androgen Receptor Directly Targets the Cellular Fas/FasL-Associated Death Domain Protein-Like Inhibitory Protein Gene to Promote the Androgen-Independent Growth of Prostate Cancer Cells Mol. Endocrinol., July 1, 2005; 19(7): 1792 - 1802. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z Culig, H Steiner, G Bartsch, and A Hobisch Mechanisms of endocrine therapy-responsive and -unresponsive prostate tumours Endocr. Relat. Cancer, June 1, 2005; 12(2): 229 - 244. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. B. Wetherill, N. L. Fisher, A. Staubach, M. Danielsen, R. W. de Vere White, and K. E. Knudsen Xenoestrogen Action in Prostate Cancer: Pleiotropic Effects Dependent on Androgen Receptor Status Cancer Res., January 1, 2005; 65(1): 54 - 65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Azuma, T. Sasada, H. Takedatsu, H. Shomura, M. Koga, Y. Maeda, A. Yao, T. Hirai, A. Takabayashi, S. Shichijo, et al. Ran, a Small GTPase Gene, Encodes Cytotoxic T Lymphocyte (CTL) Epitopes Capable of Inducing HLA-A33-restricted and Tumor-Reactive CTLs in Cancer Patients Clin. Cancer Res., October 1, 2004; 10(19): 6695 - 6702. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y.-C. Hu, S. Yeh, S.-D. Yeh, E. R. Sampson, J. Huang, P. Li, C.-L. Hsu, H.-J. Ting, H.-K. Lin, L. Wang, et al. Functional Domain and Motif Analyses of Androgen Receptor Coregulator ARA70 and Its Differential Expression in Prostate Cancer J. Biol. Chem., August 6, 2004; 279(32): 33438 - 33446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Cheng, D. Wang, Z. Wang, and E. T. H. Yeh SENP1 Enhances Androgen Receptor-Dependent Transcription through Desumoylation of Histone Deacetylase 1 Mol. Cell. Biol., July 1, 2004; 24(13): 6021 - 6028. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. S. Taneja, S. Ha, N. K. Swenson, I. P. Torra, S. Rome, P. D. Walden, H. Y. Huang, E. Shapiro, M. J. Garabedian, and S. K. Logan ART-27, an Androgen Receptor Coactivator Regulated in Prostate Development and Cancer J. Biol. Chem., April 2, 2004; 279(14): 13944 - 13952. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
|