Reagents
17β−estradiol (E2) was purchased from Abcam (US). The MEK1/2 inhibitor U0126, the Src inhibitor PP2, the EGFR inhibitor AG1478 were purchased from Sigma Chemical Co (US). pSrc-Y416, pSrc-Y527, β-tubulin, p-ERK, ERK, p-P38 and P38 antibodies purchased from Cell Signaling Technology (US); Anti-ER-α and ER-β purchased from abcam; CyclinD1, CyclinE, CyclinB, GAPDH, CDK4, EGFR and Src antibodies purchased from Proteintech (Wuhan, China); KI67 antibody purchased from Zhongshan Goldenbridge Biotechnology (Beijing, China). anti-ER-α36 antibody, ER-α36 expression vector and ER-α36 shRNA were from Dr. Wang ZY (Creighton University Medical School).
Tumor specimens and Immunohistochemistry
Thirty-one formalin-fixed paraffin embedded glioma tissue specimens (five low grade and twenty-six high grade glioma specimens) were retrieved from the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University. The patients were ages between 25-83 with infiltrative glioma. No patients received any radiation, chemotherapy, or endocrine therapy before surgical resection. Their relatives gave written informed consent which was approved by the Ethics Committee on the Use of Human Subjects. Immunohistochemical assay for ER-α36, ER-α66 and ER-β were performed using the commercially available detection kits (Zhongshan Goldenbridge Biotechnology) and DAB staining procedures (Solarbio, Beijing, China).
Cell culture, Treatment and Growth Assay
Glioblastoma cells U251 were obtained from Shanghai Cell Bank (Shanghai, China). Likely glioblastoma cell line U87 obtained from ATCC (Shanghai, China). These cells were maintained in DMEM with 10% fetal calf serum (FBS) at 37°C in a 5% CO2 incubator. For MAPK and EGFR/Src signaling activation, cells were maintained in phenol red-free media (Gibco, US) with 2.5% charcoal-stripped fetal calf serum (HyClone, Logan, UT) for 72 h, and then in serum free medium for 12 hours and then E2 treatment. To test the effects of U0126, PP2, AG1478, all inhibitors were added 10 min before E2 treatment.
To assess cell growth, cells were treated with different concentrations of E2, or vehicle (ethanol) as a control. The cells were seeded at 1 X 104 cells per well in 6 well plates and were maintained in phenol red-free media with 2.5% charcoal-stripped fetal calf serum. The cell numbers were determined using the cell counting methods after 8 days. Three wells were used for each treatment and experiments were repeated three times.
Establishment of Stable Cell Lines
Glioblastoma U251 cells were maintained in the culture medium containing increasing concentrations of TAM for several weeks until all cells grew well in the medium containing 10 µM TAM. The established TAM resistant U251 cell line was named U251/TAM.
Transfection
The cells were seeded at 3 X 105 in 6 well plates. Cells were cultured for 24 h before transfection (Cell confluence reaches 90%). 1 µg ER-α36 shRNA and 4 µg ER-α36 expression vector was mixed with Lipofectamine 2000 reagent (Thermo Fisher Scientific, US ) and incubated for 20 min at room temperature before added into cultured cells. The cells were changed normal medium after 4 h. The efficiency of shRNA knock-down was assessed with Western blot and qPCR analysis.
Western blotting
Cells were harvested and then lysed in a cold lysis buffer (20 mmol L–1 Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 70 mmol L–1 NaCl, 0.1% SDS, 1% sodium deoxycholate, 1% Triton X-100 and 1% PMSF) to extract protein. The concentration of total protein was determined by the Bradford method. The protein samples were then subjected to 10% SDS-PAGE. After electrophoresis, protein bands were transferred to a polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) membrane, and then blocked in PBS-T (pH 7.4) containing 5% dried skim milk. Then the PVDF membrane was probed with the specified primary antibody, followed by the appropriate secondary antibody, and finally visualized using the ECLTM which is a Western blotting chemiluminescent reagent kit (Amersham biosciences) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Immunoblot data were quantified using ImageJ software (NIH, Bethesda, MD). The region of interest was marked and measured in every lane, and the background was subtracted to give the final band intensity [35, 36].
Immunofluorescence
For ER-α36, KI67 and EGFR detection in glioma tissues, slides were deparaffinized with xylene, rehydrated with ethanol, and then antigen retrieval in 10 mM citrate buffer (pH, 6.0) at 120 0C for 5 min. After blocking, the samples were then incubated with anti-ER-α36 (1:300), anti-EGFR (1:100) and KI67 (1:100) at 4 0C overnight, followed by incubation with fluorescein-conjugated goat anti-mouse antibodies (1:200, Zhongshan Goldenbridge Biotechnology, Beijing, China) or Rhodamine-conjugated goat anti-rabbit antibodies (1:200, Zhongshan Goldenbridge Biotechnology, Beijing, China). Nuclei were stained with DAPI (Solarbio, Beijing, China). The fluorescent signals were detected and photographed with a fluorescence microscope (Olympus IX73, Japan).
RNA purification and qPCR
Total RNA was prepared with the TRIzol RNA purification reagent (Invitrogen, US). A total of 1 µg RNA
was reversely transcribed using the RT-PCR kit (Promega, US). RT-PCR analysis of ER-α36, EGFR and GAPDH was performed using gene specific primers as the following. ER-α36: forward primer: 5’-TTTTCTCACTTCCCTCACTCCTTC; reverse primer: 5’-TCCCTGCCATTCTCCTTATCC-3’; EGFR: forward primer: 5’-TCCTGCTCCTCAACCTCCTC-3’; reverse primer: 5’-TTATCTGCTCCTTACGCCCTTC-3’
GAPDH :5’-GGCACAGTCAAGGCTGAGAATG-3’; reverse primer:5’-ATGGTGGTGAAGACGCCAGTA-3’. PCR procedure was carried out as SYBR green II kit (Tarkara, Dalian, China).
Cell cycle and cell death analysis
The cells were fixed with 70% ethanol. Ethanol-fixed cells were treated with 50 mg/ml PI (propidiumiodide) in dark for 30 min at room temperature. Flow cytometry analysis of cell cycle distribution (BD-Biosciences, C6). Cell death was detected using the annexinV-FITC apoptosis kit (BD-Biosciences) according to the manufacturer's instruction. Data acquisition was analyzed with the ModFitsoftware.
Statistical analysis
Data were summarized as the mean ± standard error (SE) using the GraphPad InStat software program. Unpaired Student’s t-test was used to test for statistical significance between the control and test groups. Comparisons of multiple groups were analyzed using a one- or two-way ANOVA followed by post hoc Tukey’s test. Significance was determined for P<0.05.
Estrogen receptors are differentially expressed in human glioma specimens
The expression of ER-α and ER-β are low or negative in GBM [37]. ER- α36 is overexpressed in glioblastoma cells line U87 cells. However, their role in the pathogenesis of GBM is unclear. We examined the expression of ER-α66 and ER-β in 10 cases of glioma and found that six of ten exhibited ER-α66 expression. ER-β was expressed in all glioma cases. The expression of ER-α66 and ER-β is lower than WHO grade I and grade II and predominantly stained in a cytoplasmic and nuclear pattern (Figure 1A). Contrary to ER-α66 and ER-β expression patterns, ER-α36 was over-expressed in 25 of 26 (96.3%) of the glioma samples and was barely detectable in grade I tumors brain [38]. In this study, we found have no difference in ER-α36 between male and female patients (P=0.2) (Figure 1B-1D).
Previous studies suggested that EGFR and ER- α36 may interact in a positive feedback loop to promote tumor development [27]. In this study, we tested whether this may occur in human glioblastoma specimens. We found that both ER- α36 and EGFR have lower expression levels in grade I glioma compared to high grade glioma. Furthermore, in high grade glioma specimens showed the co-expression ER-α36 and EGFR is65.4 % (Figure 2A). To test the effect of ER-α36 expression on proliferation, we performed immunofluorescence staining of ER-α36 and the proliferation marker KI67 on human glioma specimens. We found that the rate of KI67 positive cells is 40% in ER-α36 positive glioma cells, suggesting that ER-α36 may be related to GBM cells proliferation (Figure 2B and 2C).
Low concentration Estrogen stimulated glioblastoma cells proliferation through ER-α36
Our lab has reported ER-α36 expression is lower in U251 cells than U87 cells [22]. To determine the function of E2 on glioblastoma cells proliferation, we first determined the proliferation rate of U87 and U251 in response to different concentrations of E2. The U87 cells treated with low concentrations (<10 nM) E2β exhibited an increased growth rate compared with cells treated with vehicle, and the best concentration is 1nM (Figure 3A). The U251 cells treated with E2, showed that10 nM E2 increased cells proliferation and low concentrations slightly increased cell proliferation but no significance (Figure 3C). We found Cyclin D1, Cyclin E and Cyclin B expression increased and CDK 4 have no difference in the U87 cells treated with 1nM E2 (Figure 3B). 1 nM E2 could not increase Cyclin D1 and CDK 4 expression but increased Cyclin B expression in the U251 cells (Figure 3D). Knockdown of ER-α36, Ε2 could not stimulate cell growth at any concentration in U87 cells (Figure 3E). The cell cycle protein also has no change after E2 treatment (Figure 3F). These results suggested that E2 exhibited a biphasic pattern in ER- α36 over-expression cells U87; increasing concentrations initially stimulated cell growth but failed to do so at higher concentration.
ER-α36 mediates mitogenic estrogen signaling
To test whether ER-α36 mediated mitogenic estrogen pathway signaling in glioblastoma cells, we treated U87 cells with varying concentrations of E2 across different time periods. Figure 4A-4C illustrates that E2 induced ERK phosphorylation within 10 mins after E2 treatment, peaked at 45 mins, declined at 60 mins. E2 induced p38 phosphorylation within 30 mins after E2 treatment, declined at 45 mins, then exhibited another more sustained activation at 60 mins, and subsequently declined at 120 mins. ERK phosphorylation was induced after 10 mins following treatment with 1 and 10 nM E2. At very high concentrations (10 nM, 100 nM), E2 did not elicit ERK or P38 phosphorylation (p=0.089 ) (Figure 4D-4F). In U87/36KD glioblastoma cells, which have a low expression of ER-α36, 1 nM E2 did not induce ERK or P38 phosphorylation (p=0.3)(Figure 4G-4H).
In this study, 1 nM E2 were used to treated U251 cells for 10 min, and found that it could not stimulate phosphorylation of MAPK (p=0.071)(Figure 5A-5C). However, following ER-α36 overexpression via transfection with ER-α36 vector, U251 cells responded to E2 and showed increased ERK phosphorylation (p=0.002) and p38 phosphorylation (p=0.031) (Figure 5D-5F). In a previous study, we established a TAM-resistant U251 cell line which overexpressed ER- α36. In this cell line, treatment with 1 nM of E2 promoted ERK phosphorylation (p=0.0012) and p38 phosphorylation (p=0.02)(Figure 5G and 5H).
EGFR relationship with ER-α36 in glioblastoma cells
To determine if ER- α36 influences EGFR expression, we first examined the expression of ER- α36 and EGFR in U87 and U251 glioblastoma cell lines. Both ER-α36 (p=0.009) and EGFR(p=0.0076) are lower in U251 cells compared to U87 cells (Figure6A and 6B). Following ER-α36 overexpression via ER-α36 expression vector in U251 cells, EGFR was upregulated (p=0.0032) (Figure 6C and 6D). Conversely, EGFR was reduced in U87 cells following knockdown via shRNA (p=0.0013) (Figure 6E and 6F). We also observed significant changes in the mRNA expression of EGFR in these cells through Qpcr method (Figure 6G and 6H). Cumulatively, these results suggest that ER-α36 regulates EGFR expression in human glioblastoma.
SRC/EGFR is involved in estrogen induced cell cycle regulation
We next tested whether ER-α36 is involved in SRC/EGFR signaling by inhibiting SRC and EGFR signaling with the inhibitors PP2 and AG1478 for 24 hours. We found that SRC/EGFR inhibition resulted in reduced ER-α36 protein expression in U87 cells, while EGFR expression was stable. The MAPK inhibitor U0126 reduced EGFR expression (p=0.0043) (Figure 7A-7C). Next, we tested if the mitogenic effects of E2 were facilitated by the SRC/EGFR pathway. We found that the increases in Cyclin D1 and B expression following 1 nM E2 treatment were ablated with SRC/EGFR inhibition by PP2 and AG1478 (Fig. 7D-7F). We use flow cytometry to isolate cell cycle fractions. Consistent with increases in cyclin expression, U87 cells treated with E2 showed an enrichment in the S phase of the cell cycle. After inhibition with U0126, PP2, or AG1478, the fraction of cells in the S phase was reduced after E2 stimulation (Figure 8A and 8B). However, in U251 cells which have low expression of ER-α36, E2 stimulation failed to increase the percentage of cells in the S phase, and AG1478 could not reduced the number of S phase cells (Figure 8C and 8D).
SRC/EGFR is involved in estrogen signaling
Next, we tested whether SRC is directly involved in E2 signaling. We first examined the phosphorylation levels of Src-Y416 and Src-Y527 in cells treated with 1 nM E2 for 10 min. In U87 cells, E2 treatment elicited SRC-Y416 phosphorylation (p=0.028) and reduced SRC-Y527 phosphorylation (p=0.034)(Figure 9A and 9B). Conversely, in U251 cells, E2 exposure did not increase SRC-Y416 phosphorylation (p=0.2), but did increase SRC-Y527 phosphorylation (p=0.031) (Figure 9C and 9D). In TAM resistant U251 cells, E2 failed to reduce SRC-Y527 phosphorylation, however, SRC-Y416 phosphorylation was increased (p=0.0025) (Figure 9E and 9F). In U251 cells overexpressing ER-α36, E2 treatment increase SRC-Y416 phosphorylation and reduced SRC-Y527 phosphorylation (p=0.0067) (Figure 9G and 9H).
We continued to dissect the effects of E2 on EGFR signaling. Following inhibition with PP2 and AG1478 and E2 exposure for 10 mins, E2-induced ERK activation was reduced in both U87 and TAM resistant U251 cells (Figure 10). Furthermore, PP2 treatment reduced phosphorylation of both SRC-Y416 and SRC-Y527 in both U87 and U251/TAM cells, while AG1478 increased SRC-Y527 phosphorylation and reduced SRC-Y416 phosphorylation (Figure10E-H).