| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Perspectives |
Authors' Affiliations: 1 Laboratory of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, Maryland and 2 Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland
Requests for reprints: Nancy H. Colburn, Laboratory of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute, Building 576, Room 101, Frederick, MD 21702-1201. Phone: 301-846-1342; Fax: 301-846-6907; E-mail: Colburn{at}ncifcrf.gov.
 |
 TOP  Disclosure of Potential...References |
|---|
A number of oncogenic transcription factors such as activator protein 1 (AP-1), nuclear factor 
B (NF-B), and signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT)-3/STAT5 are overactivated in human cancer and thus may present promising targets for cancer prevention (see Tables 1–3 for partial listings; refs. 5–11). Mouse skin carcinogenesis is inhibited by targeting AP-1 in a dominant negative jun (K14-TAM67)–expressing mouse. This targeting is effective whether carcinogenesis is induced by 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene/12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate, UVB, or human papilloma virus oncogenes (11–13). Also in this issue of the journal, Shen et al. present the first in vivo extension of AP-1 targeting by TAM67 beyond skin carcinogenesis to now address mammary carcinogenesis (14). These investigators show the effectiveness of targeting AP-1 transactivation for attenuation of ER-negative mammary carcinogenesis in a trigenic mouse model. In this model, induced expression of the AP-1 inhibitor dominant negative jun produced a 44% decrease in tumor incidence and a substantial increase in tumor-free survival in MMTV-ErbB2 mice. AP-1 blockade also attenuated the development of premalignant lesions (hyperplasia and mammary intraepithelial neoplasia, which is similar to human ductal carcinoma in situ) and invasive mammary tumors, showing that blockade of AP-1 suppresses early and late stages of carcinogenesis. AP-1 is thereby implicated as a critical transducer of erbB2 and a rational target for the development of drugs to prevent ER-negative breast cancer. The importance of AP-1–dependent gene expression is further underscored by the observation that the mammary tumors and ductal carcinoma in situ that do develop have lost expression of the TAM67 transgene. Although the transgene is intact, revealing the mechanism by which expression is down-regulated calls for further studies. This observation suggests that combination chemoprevention to achieve AP-1 blockade and at the same time prevent inactivation of the AP-1 blocking agent may be indicated.
|
|
80% suppressed by TAM67 without inhibition of cell proliferation or tumor promoter–induced hyperproliferation (11). In contrast, in cell lines derived from erbB2 transgenic mammary tumors, the induction of (previously uninduced) TAM67 is accompanied by inhibition of cell proliferation. This and other observations of Shen et al. implicate cell cycle mediators as operative targets of TAM67 for breast, whereas genes associated with inflammation and invasion may be important targets in the case of skin carcinogenesis (11, 12).
Although a few tumor-suppressing transcription factors such as p53 and Rb are known to be underactivated (Table 1) in human cancer, much less is known about the possibility of activating or stabilizing tumor-suppressing transcription factors. Despite decades of effort directed to exploiting p53 for cancer treatment or prevention, progress has been minimal. Perhaps targeting a transcription factor such as Nrf2 that is less fundamental than is p53 to cell proliferation and cell survival may prove more tractable. Nrf2, in contrast to p53, is an important modifier of susceptibility, but no cancer-prone phenotypes are observed in the absence of carcinogen challenge to Nrf2-deficient mice. Several hundred genes are transcriptionally controlled by Nrf2 through the antioxidant response element (1). The corresponding enzymatic gene products enhance glutathione biosynthesis, increase production of reducing equivalents, facilitate oxidant detoxication and electrophile conjugation, and elevate many subunits of the proteasome, thereby restricting the levels of oxygen radicals and, indirectly, nitrogen radicals, and consequently preventing overactivation of oncogenic events. These radical species are known to activate oncogenic transcription factors such as AP-1 and NF-B (15) that have been shown in mouse models to be required for carcinogenesis in the skin and/or other cancer sites (11–13).
Nrf2 contrasts with AP-1, which drives both early and late stages of carcinogenesis and responds to blockade with attenuation of both early and later stages (4, 14). A puzzling feature of Nrf2 is its apparent operation as a double-edged sword. Nrf2 is overactivated in human non–small cell lung, head and neck, and breast cancers, often as a result of alterations in its negative regulator, Keap1 (2, 3). This overactivation may contribute to chemotherapeutic drug export, drug resistance, and, consequently, tumor cell survival. Yet because Nrf2 deficiency in mice confers increased susceptibility to chemical carcinogenesis, Nrf2 loss, not gain, may contribute to tumorigenesis. Up-regulation of Nrf2 activity in mice and humans by various chemopreventive agents suggests that basal Nrf2 activity is insufficient to protect against carcinogenesis. Nrf2 seems to function as a suppressor of tumorigenesis but not of tumor survival. Whether it can function as a suppressor of tumor progression (adenoma to adenocarcinoma) not only in mice but also in humans is not clear.
If COX-2 and 5-LOX elevation or NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 and UDP-glucuronosyl transferase 1A down-regulation are operative mediators of the Nrf2 deficiency, then blocking COX/LOX or activating NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1/heme oxygenase 1 may counteract the oncogenic activity of Nrf2 deficiency in double knockouts, double transgenics, or knockout/transgenic models. More likely, if the implicated inflammation/carcinogenesis prevention activities of Nrf2 are not restricted to the regulation of a small number of genes such as those measured by Khor et al. (4), activating Nrf2 itself may prove to be a better strategy, particularly in light of the difficulties with COX-2 inhibitors. A number of chemopreventive food factors including curcumin/turmeric, isothiocyanates/sulforaphane/broccoli, dithiolethiones, and triterpenoids have been shown to stimulate Nrf2 expression (9). Recent studies indicate that not only is sensitivity to chemical carcinogenesis increased but also the chemopreventive efficacy of these food factors is lost in Nrf2-deficient mice (16).
Does Nrf2 indirectly suppress transcription of COX-2 and 5-LOX? Cross talk between COX-2, Nrf2, and apoptosis pathways is beginning to be revealed (17). What about inducible nitric oxide synthase, is it also associated with inflammation and reactive oxygen and nitrogen stress? How does deficiency of Nrf2 work to increase expression of these genes? When Nrf2 directly activates transcription of NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 and UDP-glucuronosyl transferase 1A, do these enzymes suppress steps upstream or downstream of redox-sensitive transcription factors AP-1 or NF-B or others implicated in inflammation-associated carcinogenesis such as STAT3/STAT5 or β-catenin? It would be interesting to measure levels of activated AP-1 and NF-B in the azoxymethane-dextran sodium sulfate–treated colon and tumors as a function of Nrf2 deficiency.
It would be interesting to know just how early in the carcinogenesis process the altered Nrf2-dependent gene expression is seen. Can Nrf2-regulated antioxidant genes be implicated in blocking early stages before colon polyp (adenoma) formation? Blocking dextran sodium sulfate–induced aberrant crypt foci was reported, but there is some uncertainty about whether aberrant crypt foci constitute an obligatory pre-polyp stage. If Nrf2 is important for early-stage colon carcinogenesis, this would suggest that it might serve not only as a molecular target but also as a useful biomarker for identifying individuals likely to respond to a Nrf2-targeted intervention to prevent polyp recurrence.
In conclusion, the findings of Khor et al. (4) and others—increased carcinogen-induced colon tumor yield and decreased downstream protective gene expression in Nrf2-null mice—implicate Nrf2 as a promising molecular target for cancer prevention. Targeting tumor suppressors such as Nrf2, however, presents challenges that are quite different from those involved in targeting an oncogenic transcription factor such as AP-1. It seems to be more difficult to up-regulate a beneficial target than it is to suppress a harmful target. Oncogenic factors frequently can be targeted directly (18), whereas tumor suppressors require indirect targeting or stabilization.
|
Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest |
|---|
|
TOP Disclosure of Potential...References |
|---|
|
Received for publication March 3, 2008.
Accepted March 4, 2008
|
References |
|---|
|
TOP Disclosure of Potential...References |
|---|
2. Singh A, Misra V, Thimmulappa RK et al . Dysfunctional KEAP1-2 interaction in non-small-cell lung cancer. PLoS Med 2006;3:e420.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Stacy DR, Ely K, Massion PP et al . Increased expression of nuclear factor E2 p45-related factor 2 (NRF2) in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Head Neck 2006;28:813–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
4. Khor T, Huang M-T, Prawan A. Increased susceptibility of Nrf-2-knock-out mice to colitis-associated colorectal cancer. Cancer Prev Res 2008In press.
5. Aggarwal BB, Shishodia S, Sandur SK, Pandey MK, Sethi G. Inflammation and cancer: how hot is the link? Biochem Pharmacol 2006;72:1605–21.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Bharti AC Aggarwal BB. Nuclear factor-B and cancer: its role in prevention and therapy. Biochem Pharmacol 2002;64:883–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Chan KS, Sano S, Kiguchi K et al . Disruption of Stat3 reveals a critical role in both the initiation and the promotion stages of epithelial carcinogenesis. J Clin Invest 2004;114:720–8.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Greten FR, Eckmann L, Greten TF et al . IKKβ links inflammation and tumorigenesis in a mouse model of colitis-associated cancer. Cell 2004;118:285–96.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Kelloff GJ, Lippman SM, Dannenberg AJ et al . Progress in chemoprevention drug development: the promise of molecular biomarkers for prevention of intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer-a plan to move forward. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:3661–97.
10. Xu C, Huang MT, Shen G et al . Inhibition of 7,12-dimethylbenz(a)anthracene-induced skin tumorigenesis in C57BL/6 mice by sulforaphane is mediated by nuclear factor E2-related factor 2. Cancer Res 2006;66:8293–6.
11. Young MR, Li JJ, Rincon M et al . Transgenic mice demonstrate AP-1 (activator protein-1) transactivation is required for tumor promotion. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999;96:9827–32.
12. Matthews CP, Birkholz AM, Baker AR et al . Dominant-negative activator protein 1 (TAM67) targets cyclooxygenase-2 and osteopontin under conditions in which it specifically inhibits tumorigenesis. Cancer Res 2007;67:2430–8.
13. Young MR, Yang HS, Colburn NH. Promising molecular targets for cancer prevention: AP-1, NF-B and Pdcd4. Trends Mol Med 2003;9:36–41.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Shen Q, Uray IP, Li Y et al . Targeting the AP-1 transcription factor for the prevention of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative mammary tumors. Cancer Prev Res 2008In press.
15. Korashy H El-Kadi A. The role of redox-sensitive transcription factors NF-B and AP-1 in the modulation of the Cyp1a1 gene by mercury, lead, and copper. Free Radic Biol Med 2008;44:795–806.[CrossRef][Medline]
16. Ramos-Gomez M, Kwak MK, Dolan PM et al . Sensitivity to carcinogenesis is increased and chemoprotective efficacy of enzyme inducers is lost in nrf2 transcription factor-deficient mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001;98:3410–5.
17. Healy ZR, Lee NH, Gao X et al . Divergent responses of chondrocytes and endothelial cells to shear stress: cross-talk among COX-2, the phase 2 response, and apoptosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:14010–5.
18. Darnell JE Jr. Transcription factors as targets for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer 2002;2:740–9.[CrossRef][Medline]
Key Article
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
