
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
1 Department of Urology, Molecular Biology Institute (RER), Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, CA
Requests for reprints: Robert E. Reiter, 66-128 Center for the Health Sciences, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90095. Phone: (310) 794-7224; Fax: (310) 206-5343. E-mail:rreiter{at}mednet.ucla.edu
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The relationship between the three prostate epithelial cell types is poorly understood. One hypothesis proposes that basal cells are the precursors of secretory and neuroendocrine cells (7, 8). This hypothesis is based on reports of the differential loss of secretory cells following castration and the ability of basal cells to give rise to secretory cells in vivo and in vitro on administration of androgen (9, 10). Further evidence for a precursor-progeny relationship between basal and secretory cells comes from in vitro and in vivo identification of cells in the basal and luminal compartments that are immunophenotypically intermediate (i.e., transit-amplifying cells) between basal and secretory cells (1113). Cells with mixed basal and neuroendocrine expression patterns have also been reported, implying that one phenotype might be derived from the other (7). Conversely, other investigators have suggested that basal and secretory cells may represent separate lineages, based on animal data demonstrating the persistence of both basal and secretory cells following castration and the ability of both pools of cells to proliferate in response to androgen replacement (14, 15).
The involvement of the different prostate cell types in prostate carcinogenesis remains unclear. Although prostate cancers are phenotypically and behaviorally similar in many respects to secretory cells (e.g., they express PSA, AR, and are androgen dependent), recent studies suggest that prostate cancer may arise from a more immature cell type located within the basal or luminal cell layer (13, 1618). Evidence suggestive of this hypothesis comes from the identification of basal cell-associated cytokeratins and genes in prostate cancer, particularly androgen-independent tumors (1822). In addition, it is hypothesized that prostate cancers, like other epithelial and nonepithelial cancers, must arise from stem or progenitor cells, rather than from a terminally differentiated cell type (17). However, the identity and localization of such cell types within the prostate is not known.
The study of normal and neoplastic prostate development has been hindered by a lack of cell surface markers analogous to those used to characterize hematopoiesis. Recently, prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA) has been identified in the prostate epithelium as a GPI-anchored cell surface antigen, related to the Ly-6/Th-1 superfamily (23). Its closest homologue, stem cell antigen 2 (SCA-2), is a marker of immature thymic lymphocytes. In humans, PSCA expression is largely restricted to the prostate, bladder, and stomach. In the prostate, PSCA mRNA expression is heterogeneous and restricted predominantly to a subset of basal cells, although secretory staining has also been reported (23, 24). PSCA is expressed in almost all cases of high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia and is overexpressed in
40% of local and as many as 100% of bone metastatic prostate cancers (25). A murine homologue of PSCA shows a similar pattern of expression (26). In normal murine prostate, mPSCA expression is restricted to a subset of epithelial cells (
20%) and its expression diminishes with age. The percentage and intensity of mPSCA-positive cells increases dramatically in murine models of prostate cancer [e.g., transgenic adeno of themouseprostate (TRAMP) and PTEN heterozygotes] (2628). As in the human disease, mPSCA is widely expressed in mouse high-grade prostate intraepithelial neoplasia, the putative precursor of invasive disease, suggesting that up-regulation of PSCA is an early event in carcinogenesis. These results suggest that PSCA may mark a unique subpopulation of prostate epithelial cells associated with transformation.
The present study was undertaken to define the phenotype and growth characteristics of PSCA-positive human prostate epithelial cells, our hypothesis being that delineation of this cell type might provide new insights into normal and neoplastic prostate growth. Primary prostate epithelial cells (PrEC) were derived and passaged from cultured prostate tissue explant, and assayed for PSCA expression as well as other known prostate epithelial markers. Consistent with previous reports of primary PrEC, virtually all cells coexpress basal and secretory cell cytokeratins, suggesting that they may represent an intermediate, transit-amplifying population. A subset of these cells expresses PSCA and the percentage of PSCA-positive cells increases with the number of passages in culture. We show that PSCA-negative cells give rise to PSCA-positive ones, indicative of a precursor-progeny relationship, and that the latter have a longer doubling time than PSCA-negative cells. PSCA-positive cells have a more differentiated morphology than negative ones and tend to grow above the monolayer. Immunofluorescence and RNA expression analyses of PSCA-positive versus -negative cells demonstrated that PSCA-positive cells retain expression of basal cell markers such as cytokeratin (K)5/14 and CD44, but lose expression of the basal and putative stem cell marker p63. In contrast to PSCA-negative PrEC, PSCA-positive cells also had detectable levels of PSA and AR mRNA. Together, these results suggest that PSCA may mark a population of late intermediate (transit-amplifying) cells in transition to a more differentiated phenotype.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Because the percentage of PSCA-positive cells varied between different lines of commercially or surgically derived PrEC, we asked whether this subpopulation changed over time in culture. PrEC were maintained in culture, and samples from successive passages were analyzed by FACS for PSCA expression. As shown inFig. 1A , the percentage of PSCA-positive cells increased with passage numbers (from 17% in passage 2 to 46% in passage 5). Analysis of PSCA mRNA expression by semiquantitative reverse transcription (RT)-PCR (Fig. 1B) confirmed this observation. This increasing trend was consistently observed in several different batches of PrEC, including commercially obtained cells. These results demonstrate that cultured PrEC are phenotypically heterogeneous and suggest that PSCA marks a subpopulation that changes over time.
|
|
|
|
Signoretti et al. (4) and Parsons et al. (29) have recently reported that p63 is a basal cell marker expressed by a majority of PrEC in tissue culture. They also showed that p63 is never expressed in prostate cancer. To test the hypothesis that PSCA positivity marks an early transition of PrEC from a basal to secretory cell phenotype, we stained PrEC for both p63 and PSCA. As shown inFig. 4E, PSCA-positive cells were the only PrEC that did not express p63, suggesting that PSCA-positive cells are the earliest p63-negative cells in the prostatic epithelium. We also stained PrEC for CD44, another basal cell marker (Fig. 4F) (1). All PrEC expressed CD44, a subset of which was positive for PSCA. In contrast, the luminal secretory cell marker CD57 was not detected in PrEC (1). Collectively, these results suggest a transition in the cytokeratin and cell surface expression pattern as PrEC progress from a basal to secretory cell phenotype. PSCA appears to mark an intermediate, transitional cell population in which pure basal cell markers such as p63 are down-regulated.
Gene Expression in PSCA-Positive Cells
To examine the phenotype of PSCA-positive and -negative cells further, the two populations were separated by flow cytometry (Fig. 5A
), processed for RNA, and analyzed for selected gene expression by semiquantitative RT-PCR (Fig. 5B). GAPDH was used for normalization. As predicted, PSCA was only detected in the positively sorted population. The inverse relationship of p63 and PSCA noted above was confirmed. Similarly, CD44 was detected in both populations, although expression decreased somewhat in the positive population. This is consistent with the transition of PSCA-positive cells to a more differentiated state. Interestingly, AR and PSA mRNA were detectable at low levels in PSCA-positive cells (although AR and PSA protein were not detectable), indicating that secretory cell genes are starting to be expressed in PSCA-positive cells. We also assayed expression of notch 1 and its ligand jagged 1, hypothesizing that these genes, which are associated with maintenance of a less differentiated state, might be down-regulated as PrEC matured (30). Notch expression has also been localized to a small population of basal cells in mouse prostate (31). As seen inFig. 5B, expression of both notch 1 and jagged 1 is absent in PSCA-positive cells. Together, these observations are consistent with a model in which PSCA expression is associated with a transition of PrEC to a differentiated phenotype.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
PSCA-positive and -negative cells are distinguishable not only on morphologic and phenotypic grounds, but also on proliferative ones. These results are reminiscent of and complement studies performed by Hudson et al. (32), in which they performed clonogenic assays on epithelial cells obtained from prostate biopsies. These investigators identified three cell types, which could be distinguished by both phenotype and proliferative capacity. A K14-positive subpopulation formed large colonies (840,000 cells) in culture and doubled every 24 h. A CK8-positive subpopulation formed small colonies (
32 cells) and had virtually no proliferative capacity. A third subpopulation coexpressed K14 and K18 and had an intermediate proliferative capacity. This third population is characteristic of the majority of PrEC in our study. Our results suggest that PSCA expression can further subdivide these intermediate cells into ones characterized by higher and lower proliferative rates.
A third feature of PSCA-positive cells is that they arise from PSCA-negative cell, indicating a direct precursor-progeny relationship. Hudson et al. (32) showed that K14-positive cells could give rise to K18-positive cells. Similarly, van Leenders et al. (34, 35) and Hudson et al. (32) have shown that prostate epithelial cells coexpressing K5/14/18 could give rise to cells with predominant expression of K18. Taken together, these results support a stem cell model of prostate epithelial development in which luminal cells are the progeny of basal cells. In this model, a putative K5/14-positive stem cell gives rise sequentially to K5/14/18 and K5/18/PSCA+ transit-amplifying cells, which eventually differentiate into K18-positive luminal cells (Fig. 6).
A notable finding in this study is that the PSCA-positive population expressed PSA and AR transcripts, indicating early differentiation, but not PSA or AR protein. The lack of PSA and AR protein expression in tissue culture has been noted by other investigators and could be indicative of a failure to differentiate completely in culture. A number of investigators have speculated that the absence of PSA and AR protein is due to the absence of specific factors (e.g., andromedins, stroma, testosterone) in tissue culture systems (1, 36, 37). Indeed, when PrEC were propagated in matrigel, the cells formed into spheroids and AR was detectable in the lumen of the structure (32). Expression of AR protein in such three-dimensional system was also noted elsewhere (38), but only in the presence of stroma, serum, and testosterone. In this context, the PrEC cultured in this study does not represent the terminally differentiated prostate epithelium, which is marked by AR and PSA protein expression, but rather a precursor cell population capable of expressing PSCA independently of androgen and AR protein. The question of whether PrEC and PSCA expression are sensitive to androgen needs to be explored further in three-dimensional culture.
Expression of PSCA in the absence of AR protein suggests that PSCA expression is androgen independent and is consistent with studies of the PSCA promoter showing androgen-independent activity (39). At the same time, the PSCA promoter has been shown to be androgen responsive and we have recently found a functional androgen response element in the PSCA promoter (40). The ability to grow in the absence of, but respond to, androgen is a reputed characteristic of prostate transit-amplifying cells (5, 17). The androgen-independent expression of PSCA is also consistent with its expression in hormone refractory cancers (25).
Our finding that PSCA marks a late intermediate (transit-amplifying) population of prostate epithelial cells is consistent with previous studies by our group of PSCA promoter-driven green fluorescent protein (GFP) expression in transgenic mice (39). Prostatic GFP expression in these mice was associated with periods of rapid growth and differentiation. GFP expression diminished after castration, expanded following androgen replacement, and then became increasingly restricted to ductal tips once glandular growth ceased. These results suggested a model in which PSCA expression (manifested by GFP) marked a population of cells in transition between a stem cell (persisting after castration) and a terminally differentiated cell (lining the mature ducts). Similarly, GFP-positive cells in PSCA-GFP transgenic mice expressed a mixture of basal and secretory cell markers, such as CD44 and probasin, much as human PSCA-positive cells coexpress CD44 and PSA. These results complement each other and suggest that PSCA may be a useful marker for studies of prostate epithelial development in mice and men.
The relationship of PSCA-positive cells to carcinogenesis is not known. Human and murine PSCA are up-regulated in a significant percentage of prostate cancers (25, 26). Similarly, tumors resulting from the cross of PSCA-GFP and TRAMP transgenic mice express high levels of GFP compared to nontransgenic littermates (i.e., those not carrying the T antigen of TRAMP mice) (39). One possibility is that PSCA expression is related to prostate tumorigenesis in general. Another possibility is that the increase in PSCA expression in cancer is related to the expansion of the PSCA-positive cell population identified in this study. In support of the latter hypothesis, PSCA-positive cells are the first identifiable population of PrEC that do not express p63. A number of groups have reported that p63 expression is lost in all prostate cancers and have proposed loss of p63 as a diagnostic marker for the disease (4, 29). Although it is possible that p63 is down-regulated on transformation, it is also possible that slowly proliferating PSCA-positive, p63-negative cells are the targets of transformation in human and murine prostate cancer. Notch expression has been reported to be absent in human prostate cancer cells and forced expression of activatednotch inhibited the growth of various prostate cancer cell lines (31).
The hypothesis that a PSCA-positive cell population is the target of prostate transformation is consistent with reports demonstrating the presence of transit-amplifying cells (characterized by cytokeratin and c-MET expression) in prostate cancer (13, 41). Likewise, De Marzoet al. (17) hypothesized that proliferating, p63-negative cells localized in the secretory cell layer or in inflammatory lesions may be the targets of transformation. Proof that PSCA is a marker of the cellular target of carcinogenesis in the prostate will require direct demonstration that these cells can be transformed. This is currently being explored in both tissue culture and transgenic model systems.
In summary, this study demonstrates that PSCA is a cell surface marker, which can distinguish among early and late transit-amplifying prostate epithelial cells in tissue culture. PSCA marks the transition of prostate epithelial cells from a highly proliferative to a more differentiated state and may identify a unique subpopulation of cells susceptible to transformation during prostate carcinogenesis.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
![]() |
Antibodies
Monoclonal mouse anti-human PSCA IgG1, clone 1G8, was raised in our laboratory. FITC-labeled mouse anti-human cytokeratin 18 (Cy-90), and quantum red-conjugated mouse anti-human CD57/HNK-1 (VC1.1) were obtained from Sigma (St. Louis, MO). PE-conjugated mouse anti-human CD44 and mouse anti-p63 were from PharMingen (BD Biosciences, San Diego, CA). Mouse anti-human cytokeratin 5/14 (high molecular weight, 34ßE12) was obtained from DAKO Corp., Carpinteria, CA, whereas rabbit polyclonal anti-Ki67 was from Novocastra Laboratories Ltd. (Newcastle, United Kingdom). Secondary-conjugated antibodies (goat anti-rabbit and goat anti-mouse Alexa 488, goat anti-mouse Alexa 594, and Alexa 350) were obtained from Molecular Probes (Eugene, OR).
Flow Cytometry
PrEC at 80% confluence were detached from tissue culture plates in prewarmed PBS containing 1% glucose/2 mM EDTA, washed once in PBS/1% FCS, and incubated with primary PSCA antibody 1G8 (1/100) in PBS/1% FCS for 1 h on ice. Cells were washed and incubated with secondary antibody Alexa 488 (green fluorescence) for an extra 30 min on ice. Subsequently, cells were washed and either fixed in 1% paraformaldehyde for analysis using a FACScan (Becton Dickinson, San Jose, CA), or immediately subjected to cytometric sorting into PSCA-positive and -negative populations using a FACVantage (Becton Dickinson). Cells treated with isotype-specific immunoglobulins served as controls. For direct labeling with a fluorescence-conjugated primary antibody, cells were not reincubated in secondary antibody, but fixed after washing and then subjected to FACS analysis.
For CFSE analysis, PrEC were harvested in trypsin, washed, and collected by centrifugation, then labeled with CFSE using the Vybrant CFDA SE Cell Tracer kit (Molecular Probes). The cells were incubated in 2 µM CFSE for 15 min at 37°C, then repelleted by centrifugation, and seeded into tissue culture plates. Subsequently, at designated time points, cell samples were harvested in PBS/glucose/EDTA, labeled with 1G8, followed by PE-conjugated secondary antibody (Molecular Probes), and immediately subjected to FACS analysis.
Immunofluorescent Microscopy
Cells were seeded onto glass coverslips coated with poly-D-lysine (Becton Dickinson Labware, Bedford, MA) and grown for 2 days. For tricolor staining, cells were first fixed in 2% paraformaldehyde, stained with 1G8 for PSCA in PBS/0.2% BSA, followed by secondary antibody Alexa 594 (red). After extensive washing, cells were fixed for 5 min in 2% paraformaldehyde, then permeabilized in 0.2% Triton X-100, and stained with 34ßE12 for cytokeratin 5/14, followed by secondary antibody Alexa 350 (blue). After further washing, cells were refixed in 2% paraformaldehyde for 5 min and then stained with FITC-conjugated Cy-90 (green) for cytokeratin 18. Cells were mounted on glass slides with FluoroGuard (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA), and images were acquired using a fluorescent microscope Leica DM IRB/E (Meyer Instruments, Houston, TX) or a laser scanning confocal microscope LSM 310 (Carl Zeiss, Minneapolis, MN). For dual staining of 1G8 and a nuclear antigen, cells were fixed in cold methanol at -20°C for 10 min, air-dried, and incubated with 1G8, then Alexa 594 (red), followed by either Ki67 and then goat anti-rabbit Alexa 488 (green), or p63 and then goat anti-mouse Alexa 488 (green).
RT-PCR Analysis
RNA was isolated from cultured cells using the Ultraspec RNA isolation system (Biotecx, Houston, TX). For RNA from unsorted PrEC, RT-PCR was performed using the GeneAmp system (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). For postsorted PrEC, due to very low yield of RNA from each sorted cell population (PSCA positive and PSCA negative), each RNA sample was first amplified into double-stranded cDNA using the Smart PCR cDNA Synthesis Kit (Clontech Laboratories, Inc., Palo Alto, CA). Subsequently, PCR was performed on each cDNA pool for detection of expression of various genes. The PCR conditions are as follow: denature 95°C 40 s, cycles 95°C 40 s/60°C 40 s/72°C 40 s, end 72°C 3 min then 4°C. All primer sequences are listed below:
|
| Acknowledgements |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Notes |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Received June 5, 2002; revised September 20, 2002; accepted October 4, 2002.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. Mimeault, P. P. Mehta, R. Hauke, and S. K. Batra Functions of Normal and Malignant Prostatic Stem/Progenitor Cells in Tissue Regeneration and Cancer Progression and Novel Targeting Therapies Endocr. Rev., April 1, 2008; 29(2): 234 - 252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Xin, R. U. Lukacs, D. A. Lawson, D. Cheng, and O. N. Witte Self-Renewal and Multilineage Differentiation In Vitro from Murine Prostate Stem Cells Stem Cells, November 1, 2007; 25(11): 2760 - 2769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Jiao, S. Wang, R. Qiao, I. Vivanco, P. A. Watson, C. L. Sawyers, and H. Wu Murine Cell Lines Derived from Pten Null Prostate Cancer Show the Critical Role of PTEN in Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer Development Cancer Res., July 1, 2007; 67(13): 6083 - 6091. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Zhou, A. Flesken-Nikitin, and A. Yu. Nikitin Prostate Cancer Associated with p53 and Rb Deficiency Arises from the Stem/Progenitor Cell-Enriched Proximal Region of Prostatic Ducts Cancer Res., June 15, 2007; 67(12): 5683 - 5690. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P Singh, A Uzgare, I Litvinov, S R Denmeade, and J T Isaacs Combinatorial androgen receptor targeted therapy for prostate cancer. Endocr. Relat. Cancer, September 1, 2006; 13(3): 653 - 666. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
I. V. Litvinov, D. J. Vander Griend, Y. Xu, L. Antony, S. L. Dalrymple, and J. T. Isaacs Low-Calcium Serum-Free Defined Medium Selects for Growth of Normal Prostatic Epithelial Stem Cells. Cancer Res., September 1, 2006; 66(17): 8598 - 8607. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Zheng, C. Cai, J. Omwancha, S.-Y. Chen, T. Baslan, and L. Shemshedini SUMO-3 Enhances Androgen Receptor Transcriptional Activity through a Sumoylation-independent Mechanism in Prostate Cancer Cells J. Biol. Chem., February 17, 2006; 281(7): 4002 - 4012. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Wang, A. J. Garcia, M. Wu, D. A. Lawson, O. N. Witte, and H. Wu Pten deletion leads to the expansion of a prostatic stem/progenitor cell subpopulation and tumor initiation PNAS, January 31, 2006; 103(5): 1480 - 1485. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. A. Watson, K. Ellwood-Yen, J. C. King, J. Wongvipat, M. M. LeBeau, and C. L. Sawyers Context-Dependent Hormone-Refractory Progression Revealed through Characterization of a Novel Murine Prostate Cancer Cell Line Cancer Res., December 15, 2005; 65(24): 11565 - 11571. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. T. Collins, P. A. Berry, C. Hyde, M. J. Stower, and N. J. Maitland Prospective Identification of Tumorigenic Prostate Cancer Stem Cells Cancer Res., December 1, 2005; 65(23): 10946 - 10951. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. A. Sartorius, D. M.E. Harvell, T. Shen, and K. B. Horwitz Progestins Initiate a Luminal to Myoepithelial Switch in Estrogen-Dependent Human Breast Tumors without Altering Growth Cancer Res., November 1, 2005; 65(21): 9779 - 9788. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Dalrymple, L. Antony, Y. Xu, A. R. Uzgare, J. T. Arnold, J. Savaugeot, L. J. Sokoll, A. M. De Marzo, and J. T. Isaacs Role of Notch-1 and E-Cadherin in the Differential Response to Calcium in Culturing Normal versus Malignant Prostate Cells Cancer Res., October 15, 2005; 65(20): 9269 - 9279. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D M Peehl Primary cell cultures as models of prostate cancer development Endocr. Relat. Cancer, March 1, 2005; 12(1): 19 - 47. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. X. Fu, S. R. Schwarze, M. L. Kenowski, S. LeBlanc, J. Svaren, and D. F. Jarrard A Loss of Insulin-like Growth Factor-2 Imprinting Is Modulated by CCCTC-binding Factor Down-regulation at Senescence in Human Epithelial Cells J. Biol. Chem., December 10, 2004; 279(50): 52218 - 52226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. N. Alam, M. J. O'Hare, I. Laczko, A. Freeman, F. Al-Beidh, J. R. Masters, and D. L. Hudson Differential Expression of CD44 During Human Prostate Epithelial Cell Differentiation J. Histochem. Cytochem., August 1, 2004; 52(8): 1083 - 1090. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Zhigang and S. Wenlv Prostate Stem Cell Antigen (PSCA) Expression in Human Prostate Cancer Tissues: Implications for Prostate Carcinogenesis and Progression of Prostate Cancer Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol., July 1, 2004; 34(7): 414 - 419. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X.-D. Wang, J. Shou, P. Wong, D. M. French, and W.-Q. Gao Notch1-expressing Cells Are Indispensable for Prostatic Branching Morphogenesis during Development and Re-growth Following Castration and Androgen Replacement J. Biol. Chem., June 4, 2004; 279(23): 24733 - 24744. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
|