You're using an outdated browser. Please upgrade to a modern browser for the best experience.
RKIP-Derived Suppression of Prostate Cancer: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Vicky Zhou and Version 1 by Damu Tang.

Despite an intensive research effort in the past few decades, prostate cancer (PC) remains a top cause of cancer death in men, particularly in the developed world. The major cause of fatality is the progression of local prostate cancer to metastasis disease. Treatment of patients with metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) is generally ineffective. Based on the discovery of mPC relying on androgen for growth, many patients with mPC show an initial response to the standard of care: androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). However, lethal castration resistant prostate cancers (CRPCs) commonly develop. It is widely accepted that intervention of metastatic progression of PC is a critical point of intervention to reduce PC death. Accumulative evidence reveals a role of RKIP in suppression of PC progression towards mPC.

  • prostate cancer
  • metastasis
  • RKIP
  • signaling events

1. Introduction

In the developed world, prostate cancer (PC) is the most frequently diagnosed male malignancy and a major cause of cancer death in men [1]. The disease is initiated from prostate epithelial cells as high-grade prostatic intra-epithelial neoplasia (HGPIN) lesions that evolve to invasive prostate adenocarcinoma or PC which can progress to metastasis [2]. PCs are graded based on Gleason scores (GS) or GS-based World Health Organization (WHO) grading system which categorizes PC into WHO grade group 1–5 [3,4,5][3][4][5].
Prostate cancers are characterized with a high degree of disparity in terms of its prognosis. While tumors with GS ≤ 6 or WHO grade group 1 are generally indolent, others possess high-risk of progression. Local PCs are managed with watchful waiting (active surveillance) and curative therapies: radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiation therapy (RT) [6,7,8,9][6][7][8][9]. Approximately 30% of patients will experience disease relapse or biochemical recurrence (BCR) based on increases in serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) [10]. BCR is defined with elevations of serum PSA > 0.2 ng/mL after RP or > 2 ng/mL above the nadir following RT [11]. Relapsed tumors elevated risks of metastasis; 24–34% of patients following BCR will develop metastatic PC (mPC) [12,13][12][13].
Built on the androgen-dependence nature of PC discovered in 1940s, current standard of care for mPCs remains androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) [14,15][14][15]. Despite remarkable initial response in more than 80% of patients with mPC, ADT is essentially a palliative care as metastatic castration-resistant PCs (mCRPCs) commonly develop [16,17][16][17]. Owing to extensive research efforts, multiple options are available to manage CRPCs, including taxane-based chemotherapy, anti-androgens targeted therapy involving either abiraterone or enzalutamide [17[17][18][19],18,19], and immunotherapy [20,21][20][21]. However, these therapies only offer modest survival benefits [17,22][17][22]. From this perspective, interventions targeting early-stage progressions of BCR and metastasis are more desirable than treating CRPC or mCRPC.
Metastasis contributes to more than 90% of cancer deaths [23[23][24],24], and is regulated by complex networks. Epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) is critical in promoting metastasis; EMT increases cancer cell’s migratory and invasion capacities, which are essential properties in facilitating the establishment of cancer cells at the secondary organs from primary site [25,26][25][26]. EMT is a major contributor to cancer stem cells [27], including prostate cancer stem cells (PCSCs) [28]. PCSCs are a major source of PC metastasis [28]. Other processes contributing to PC metastasis include cell proliferation regulated by Raf-MEK-ERK and PI3K-AKT-mTOR pathways [29,30][29][30], the EZH2 polycomb protein [31[31][32][33],32,33], and NFκB [34,35][34][35]. Intriguingly, all these processes are connected to a suppressor of PC metastasis, Raf kinase inhibitor protein (RKIP) (Figure 1) [36,37][36][37].

2. RKIP as a Tumor Suppression of Prostate Cancer (PC)

Consistent with RIKP’s potential role in molecular events relevant to tumor suppression, RKIP downregulations, and RKIP’s associations with cancer progression, RKIP-derived tumor suppressive activities have been reported in multiple cancer types, including urogenital cancers (bladder cancer [84][38], clear cell renal cell carcinoma [85[39][40][41],86,87], and PC [88,89][42][43]), breast cancer [90][44], pancreatic cancer [91][45], hepatoma [92][46], non-small cell lung cancer [93][47], gastric cancer [94][48], and others [95][49].

2.1. RKIP-Mediated Suppression of PC Tumorigenesis and Metastasis

2.1.1. Facilitation of PC Initiation and Metastasis via Downregulation of RKIP at the Protein Level

The first evidence for RKIP as a metastatic suppressor of PC started with the identification of RKIP downregulation in LNCaP cells-derived metastatic C4-2B cells compared to their parental cells [96][50]; functionally, downregulation of RKIP elevated metastatic potential of C4-2B cells [88][42]. Specifically, restoration of RKIP expression in C4-2B cells to a comparable level in LNCaP cells reduced C4-2B cells’ invasion ability in vitro and the cells’ ability to produce lung metastasis in an orthotopic PC model without affecting its ability in forming primary tumors [88][42]. Downregulation of RKIP at the protein level was observed following PC progression from low grade (low Gleason score) to high grade and the downregulation was particularly evident in metastatic PCs (n = 22) [88][42]. In comparison to LNCaP cells, C4-2B cells displayed an increase in ERK activation, and inhibition of ERK activation with PD098059 decreased C4-2B cell invasion capacity in vitro.
Further analysis of RKIP expression in a tissue microarray containing non-tumor prostate tissues (n = 57), primary PCs (n = 79), and metastatic CRPC (n = 55), RKIP downregulation was detected in 48% of primary (or local) PCs and 89% of mCRPCs respectively [89][43]. RKIP downregulation in primary PCs stratifies the risk of PC recurrence (biochemical recurrence) following surgery and remains an independent risk factor of relapse after adjusting for Gleason score, maximal tumor diameter, pathological stage, surgical margin status, digital rectal examination, PSA, and gland weight [89][43].
The RKIP downregulations in primary PC compared to non-cancerous prostate tissues and its further downregulation in mPC vs. primary PC also occurred following PC progression in TRAMP mice [97][51]. While systemic knockout of RKIP had minimal impact on mouse health [98][52], RKIP deficiency significantly enhanced PC formation and metastasis in TRAMP mice [97][51]. Collectively, clinical and transgenic mouse (functional) studies support RKIP’s action in suppressing PC tumorigenesis and metastasis. However, whether decreases in PC metastasis in RKIP−/−;TRMAP mice were a direct result of reductions in primary PC formation requires additional investigations. Major limitations of the above studies include lack of analyses of RKIP expression at the mRNA level and utilization of more targeted transgenic model such as prostate-specific RKIP−/− mice.

2.1.2. No Apparent Reduction of RKIP mRNA Expression Following PC Pathogenesis

The number of publications related to RKIP reductions following PC evolution remains limited. This might be in part attributed to the highly heterogenous nature of PC and challenges in studying RKIP downregulation at the protein level. With advances in DNA sequencing (Next-generation sequencing), an ever-increasing number of cancer genetics and gene expression data have been accumulated and made available. Using TCGA RNA-seq data on prostate tissue (n = 52) and PC samples (n = 497) available from the UALCAN platform (ualcan.path.uab.edu/home, accessed on 6 October 2021) [99][53], we did not find apparent downregulation of RKIP in PC, high grade PCs, and lymph node metastasis (Figure 41A–C). Similar observations could be obtained using the GEPIA2 platform [100][54] with more prostate tissues (n = 152) (Figure 41D). Furthermore, using the Sawyers microarray dataset [101][55] within the R2: Genomics Analysis and Visualization platform (http://r2.amc.nl, accessed on 3 December 2021), RKIP mRNA was not significantly expressed at reduced levels in mPCs compared to primary PCs (Figure 2E). This strongly suggests the RKIP downregulation observed in PC occurs at least in part at post-mRNA levels. Future research should explore these mechanisms.
Cancers 13 06388 g004
Figure 41. No apparent downregulation of RKIP mRNA expression in PC. (A–C) Images were generated using the UALCAN platform. (D) The graph was produced using the GEPIA2 platform. TPM: transcript per million. (E) RKIP mRNA expression in distant metastases (Mets) and primary PCs. The image was generated using the Sawyers dataset within the R2: Genomics Analysis and Visualization platform.

2.2. Regulation of RKIP Expression in PC Cells

2.2.1. RKIP as a Target of Androgen Receptor (AR)

Androgen signaling plays dominant roles in PC initiation, progression, and CRPC development [28,102,103][28][56][57]. This knowledge implies a relationship between AR and RKIP, which is supported by experimental evidence. In immortalized and non-tumorigenic human prostate epithelial RWPE-1 cells [104][58], dihydrotestosterone (DHT) upregulated RKIP transcription which was blocked by antiandrogen bicalutamide [105][59]. Androgen response element (ARF), an AR-binding DNA motif, was identified in the RKIP promoter region between nucleotide −571 and −548. A RKIP promoter fragment (−2206 to −26) encompassing this region mediated reporter expression in response to DHT in RWPE-1 cells [105][59]. Castration of C57BL/6 mice significantly reduced RKIP mRNA expression in prostate, providing a physiological relevance of RKIP as an AR target.
The relationship between AR and RKIP in PC pathogenesis and progression might be complex. AR signaling is required for prostate development, evident by the lack of prostate in AR−/− mice [106][60] and humans with AR mutations being completely insensitive to androgen [107,108][61][62]. In adults, AR function is essential for the maintenance of luminal secretory epithelial cells [108][62]. Alterations in AR signaling are the major mechanism underlying all aspects of PC pathogenesis, including CRPC development [28,102,103,108][28][56][57][62]. These alterations may lead to changes in AR targets in normal prostate epithelial cells, prostate cancer, and following PC progression. In this regard, RKIP expression is reversely correlated with PSA expression, a typical AR target [109][63], in PCs [110][64]; serum PSA is the only clinically used biomarker assessing PC relapse and disease severity [10,111,112][10][65][66]. The selective expression of PSA over RKIP in PC is consistent with the concept that loss of AR targets with tumor suppression activities contributes to AR-promoted PC initiation and progression. This concept is consistent with AR’s complex actions in PC: inhibiting c-Met and AKT activation (both promoting PC progression) in PC [113,114,115][67][68][69] and attenuation of PC3 cell proliferation [116][70]. It thus would be interesting to determine the impact on PC by enforcing RKIP as an AR target in PC, for instance placing RKIP under the control of PSA promoter.

2.2.2. Mutual Regulation of RKIP and the EMT Machinery

As a suppressor of metastasis, RKIP preferentially inhibits LNCaP, C4-2B, and PC-3M cells invasion but not proliferation in vitro [88,117][42][71]. This is not unique in PC cells; similar observations were also reported in clear cell renal cell carcinoma A498 cells [86][40]. EMT plays a major role in enhancing cancer cell invasion capacity in vitro and metastasis in vivo [25,26][25][26]. In a HEK-293 cells-based study, RKIP downregulates Snail and Slug expression via stabilization of GSK3β [81][72]. Both Snail and Slug are major transcription factors of EMT [118,119][73][74]. Snail increases LNCaP cell migration in vitro through facilitating degradation of the SPOP tumor suppressor [120][75]; EMT plays a major role in the generation of prostate cancer stem cells which contribute to PC metastasis and CRPC development [17,28][17][28]. In accordance with this evidence, Snail inhibits RKIP expression in metastatic and AR-negative PC3 and DU145 PC cells [121][76]; this inhibition occurs at the transcription level through an E-box located in the RKIP promoter [121][76]. A reverse correlation between Snail and RKIP mRNA expressions was observed in primary PCs [121][76]. The connection between Snail and RKIP likely has a functional impact on PC. Downregulation of Snail sensitized DU145 PC cells to TRAIL- and CDDP (Cisplatin)-induced apoptosis via upregulation of RKIP and knockdown of RKIP reversed the sensitization [122][77].
Evidence presented above suggests a mutual inhibition between RKIP and Snail. While RKIP can downregulate Snail in HEK-499 (a derivative of HEK-293 cells) cells [81][72], whether this occurs in PC cells remains to be demonstrated. Nonetheless, RKIP may inhibits PC cell invasion and migration independent of the core transcriptional factors of EMT. RKIP inhibits PC-3M cell migration and invasion in vitro via modulating extracellular matrix by downregulating MMP-2 and MMP-9 (matrix metalloproteinases) [117][71].

2.2.3. Non-Coding RNA-Mediated Downregulation of RKIP in PC Cells

It is an emerging concept that long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) sponge microRNAs (miRNAs or miRs) and thus facilitate mRNA expression [123,124][78][79]. In this regard, miR-543 was reported to downregulate RKIP in PC and thus promote PC cell proliferation and EMT [125][80]. In LNCaP and C4-2B cells, downregulation of RKIP and upregulation of miR-543 occur concurrently in C4-2B cells [125][80]. The presence of miR-543 target sequence was detected in the 3′UTR (untranslated region) of RKIP mRNA and expression of miR-543 but not its negative control reduces RKIP mRNA expression in LNCaP cells, supporting RKIP as a direct target of miR-543 [125][80]. Ectopic expression of miR-543 enhances LNCaP cell proliferation, invasion, and xenograft formation along with evidence of EMT; conversely, these events were reduced upon knockdown of miR-543 in C4-2B cells [125][80], supporting a likely functional impact of miR-543 in inhibition of RKIP. Additionally, a reverse correlation between miR-543 and RKIP expression was demonstrated in a PC cohort consisting of n = 28 local tumors and n = 14 metastatic PCs [125][80].
The same group also reported a regulation between lncRNA XIST and RKIP expression in PC. Specifically, XIST sustains RKIP expression through binding to miR-23a. In clinical samples, concurrent downregulation of XIST and RKIP occurs in primary PC vs. normal prostate and mPC vs. primary PCs [126][81]. Ectopic expression of XIST in DU145 cells increases RKIP expression, decreases cell proliferation, and attenuates xenograft formation [126][81]. In a reverse manner, knockdown of XIST in LNCaP cells, which express a high level of endogenous XIST, downregulates RKIP along with an enhancement in cell proliferation [126][81]. In support of this investigation, miR-23c, a close relative of miR-23a, was suggested to target RKIP [127][82].
MiRNA likely has many targeted genes or mRNAs; for instance, miR-130b has approximately 600 target genes [128][83]. MiRNA thus affects complex network alterations. In this regard, miR-543 and XIST-miR-23a likely impact PC progression with multiplex mechanisms in addition to regulating RKIP expression. This inference is supported by miR-543-derived tumor-promotion in lung cancer [129,130][84][85] and tumor-inhibition in colorectal and cervical cancers [131,132][86][87]. Even in PC, downregulation of miR-543 was reported in primary PC with bone metastasis (n = 20) compared to primary PCs without bone metastasis (n = 15), and in bone mPCs compared to the paired primary PCs; the reported target of miR-543 in this investigation was endothelial nitric oxidase (eNOS) [133][88]. In PC3 cells, miR-543 downregulates eNOS and inhibits PC3 migration [133][88]. On the other hand, miR-543 can also enhance PC cell oncogenic properties via stimulating the AKT/mTOR pathway [134][89] and enhancing prostate cancer stem cell traits [135][90]. While modulations of miR-543 [125][80] and XIST [126][81] leading to RKIP downregulation were associated with increases in PC cell proliferation, direct downregulation of RKIP did not affect PC cell proliferation [88,117][42][71]. Collectively, miR-543 and XIST likely impact PC cell oncogenic properties via multiple targets, including RKIP.

2.3. RKIP-Derived Sensitization of PC Cells to Treatment In Vitro

Accumulative investigations present a consistent message for RKIP as tumor suppressor and/or metastatic suppressor of PC. This concept is further supported by RKIP’s action in sensitization of PC cells to multiple cytotoxic treatments in vitro.
RKIP contributes to DU145 cell response to TRAIL- and cisplatin-induced apoptosis; this sensitization was reversed upon inhibition of RKIP expression by Snail [122][77]. Similarly, nitric oxide (NO) inhibits EMT in PC3 and DU145 cells via RKIP upregulation and Snail downregulation. RKIP upregulation in this setting makes a major contribution to EMT inhibition caused by Snail downregulation [136][91].
RKIP plays a role in PC cell’s sensitivity to photodynamic therapy (PDT) in response to NO levels produced during PDT. In PC3 cells treated with PDT, optimized treatment condition led to the production of a high level of NO, which inhibits NFκB and YY1 (Yin Yang 1) transcription factor. As a result, RKIP is upregulated and resulted in cytotoxicity [137,138][92][93]. Sub-optimal PDT treatment produces low levels of NO, a condition that activates NFκB-mediated YY1 expression. YY1 subsequently inhibits RKIP, contributing to EMT and the activation of PI3/AKT [137,138][92][93]. YY1 promotes PC via EMT development and contributes to therapy resistance [139][94]. In addition to the NFκB-YY1-RKIP connection, high and low NO levels can also modulate EMT and drug resistance in PC3 cells via NFκB-RKIP-GSK3β-NRF2, where high NO inhibits NFκB, leading to RKIP upregulation, GSK3β stabilization and NRF2 downregulation along with inhibition of EMT and sensitization to drug treatment. Low NO produces the opposite actions [140][95].
Evidence suggests a contribution of RKIP to genotoxic agent 9-nitrocamptothecin (9NC)-induced apoptosis in PC cells [141][96]. 9NC triggers DNA damage response and apoptosis along with RKIP upregulation in DU145 cells but not in 9NC-resistant RC1 cells which were derived from DU145 cells. Sensitivity of PC cells to 9NC-induced apoptosis was reduced or increases with RKIP downregulation and overexpression respectively [141][96]. It was indicated that NFκB contributed to RKIP expression alteration and RKIP sensitized PC cells to DNA damage-induced apoptosis [141][96]. This investigation was supported by a report that radiation upregulated RKIP in C4-2B cells [142][97]. RKIP overexpression and knockdown sensitized and reduced C4-2B cell apoptosis in vitro in response to radiation [142][97]. In mice bearing tumors produced by C4-2B cells with RKIP knockdown, radiation was substantially less effective in inhibiting tumor growth compared to tumors generated by wild type C4-2B cells [142][97]. Collectively, evidence supports RKIP playing a role in PC cell response to genotoxic treatment. As radiation is clinically used in treating PC, whether RKIP is a major contributor to the therapy response needs further investigation.
Docetaxel is commonly used in treating CRPC [143,144][98][99]. It was observed that in PC3 cells, a PC cell line that does not require androgen for survival, RKIP overexpression sensitized the cells to docetaxel-induced inhibition of cell proliferation [145][100]. While this report shows a potential for clinical implication, more work is required to further explore this potential.

3. Conclusions

The research activities in the past 20 years collectively demonstrated RKIP as a tumor suppressor of PC tumorigenesis and metastasis. This knowledge is supported by (1) functional evidence derived from in vitro, in vivo (xenograft and transgenic mouse models), and clinical studies as well as (2) mechanistic pathways contributing to RKIP-derived suppression of PC. Future research should explore the functionality and underlying mechanisms for RKIP mediated suppression of PC using more refined transgenic models, including mice with prostate-specific expression of RKIP and its mutants. The latter may help to define the regulations relevant to RKIP tumor suppressive actions; this is important, as RKIP can be switched to promote tumorigenesis following its phosphorylation at S153 (Figure 2). Additionally, mechanisms leading to RKIP downregulation in PC and RKIP’s involvement in other aspects of PC progression should also be investigated (see Section 5 for details).

References

  1. Ferlay, J.; Soerjomataram, I.; Dikshit, R.; Eser, S.; Mathers, C.; Rebelo, M.; Parkin, D.M.; Forman, D.; Bray, F. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: Sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int. J. Cancer 2015, 136, E359–E386.
  2. Heidenreich, A.; Bastian, P.J.; Bellmunt, J.; Bolla, M.; Joniau, S.; van der Kwast, T.; Mason, M.; Matveev, V.; Wiegel, T.; Zattoni, F.; et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part II: Treatment of advanced, relapsing, and castration-resistant prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 2014, 65, 467–479.
  3. Egevad, L.; Delahunt, B.; Srigley, J.R.; Samaratunga, H. International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading of prostate cancer—An ISUP consensus on contemporary grading. APMIS Acta Pathol. Microbiol. Immunol. Scand. 2016, 124, 433–435.
  4. Gordetsky, J.; Epstein, J. Grading of prostatic adenocarcinoma: Current state and prognostic implications. Diagn. Pathol. 2016, 11, 25.
  5. Epstein, J.I.; Zelefsky, M.J.; Sjoberg, D.D.; Nelson, J.B.; Egevad, L.; Magi-Galluzzi, C.; Vickers, A.J.; Parwani, A.V.; Reuter, V.E.; Fine, S.W.; et al. A Contemporary Prostate Cancer Grading System: A Validated Alternative to the Gleason Score. Eur. Urol. 2016, 69, 428–435.
  6. Mottet, N.; Bellmunt, J.; Bolla, M.; Briers, E.; Cumberbatch, M.G.; De Santis, M.; Fossati, N.; Gross, T.; Henry, A.M.; Joniau, S.; et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur. Urol. 2017, 71, 618–629.
  7. Bill-Axelson, A.; Holmberg, L.; Garmo, H.; Rider, J.R.; Taari, K.; Busch, C.; Nordling, S.; Haggman, M.; Andersson, S.O.; Spangberg, A.; et al. Radical prostatectomy or watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2014, 370, 932–942.
  8. Hayes, J.H.; Ollendorf, D.A.; Pearson, S.D.; Barry, M.J.; Kantoff, P.W.; Lee, P.A.; McMahon, P.M. Observation versus initial treatment for men with localized, low-risk prostate cancer: A cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann. Intern. Med. 2013, 158, 853–860.
  9. Godtman, R.A.; Holmberg, E.; Khatami, A.; Stranne, J.; Hugosson, J. Outcome following active surveillance of men with screen-detected prostate cancer. Results from the Goteborg randomised population-based prostate cancer screening trial. Eur. Urol. 2013, 63, 101–107.
  10. Zaorsky, N.G.; Raj, G.V.; Trabulsi, E.J.; Lin, J.; Den, R.B. The dilemma of a rising prostate-specific antigen level after local therapy: What are our options? Semin. Oncol. 2013, 40, 322–336.
  11. Cornford, P.; Bellmunt, J.; Bolla, M.; Briers, E.; De Santis, M.; Gross, T.; Henry, A.M.; Joniau, S.; Lam, T.B.; Mason, M.D.; et al. EAU-ESTRO-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer. Part II: Treatment of Relapsing, Metastatic, and Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. Eur. Urol. 2017, 71, 630–642.
  12. Pound, C.R.; Partin, A.W.; Eisenberger, M.A.; Chan, D.W.; Pearson, J.D.; Walsh, P.C. Natural history of progression after PSA elevation following radical prostatectomy. JAMA 1999, 281, 1591–1597.
  13. Boorjian, S.A.; Thompson, R.H.; Tollefson, M.K.; Rangel, L.J.; Bergstralh, E.J.; Blute, M.L.; Karnes, R.J. Long-term risk of clinical progression after biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy: The impact of time from surgery to recurrence. Eur. Urol. 2011, 59, 893–899.
  14. Lytton, B. Prostate cancer: A brief history and the discovery of hormonal ablation treatment. J. Urol 2001, 165, 1859–1862.
  15. Wong, Y.N.; Ferraldeschi, R.; Attard, G.; de Bono, J. Evolution of androgen receptor targeted therapy for advanced prostate cancer. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2014, 11, 365–376.
  16. Semenas, J.; Allegrucci, C.; Boorjian, S.A.; Mongan, N.P.; Persson, J.L. Overcoming drug resistance and treating advanced prostate cancer. Curr. Drug Targets 2012, 13, 1308–1323.
  17. Ojo, D.; Lin, X.; Wong, N.; Gu, Y.; Tang, D. Prostate Cancer Stem-like Cells Contribute to the Development of Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. Cancers 2015, 7, 2290–2308.
  18. de Bono, J.S.; Logothetis, C.J.; Molina, A.; Fizazi, K.; North, S.; Chu, L.; Chi, K.N.; Jones, R.J.; Goodman, O.B., Jr.; Saad, F.; et al. Abiraterone and increased survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011, 364, 1995–2005.
  19. Scher, H.I.; Fizazi, K.; Saad, F.; Taplin, M.E.; Sternberg, C.N.; Miller, K.; de Wit, R.; Mulders, P.; Chi, K.N.; Shore, N.D.; et al. Increased survival with enzalutamide in prostate cancer after chemotherapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 367, 1187–1197.
  20. Chaturvedi, S.; Garcia, J.A. Novel agents in the management of castration resistant prostate cancer. J. Carcinog. 2014, 13, 5.
  21. Drake, C.G. Prostate cancer as a model for tumour immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2010, 10, 580–593.
  22. Mei, W.; Gu, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Major, P.; Tang, D. Circulating cell-free DNA is a potential prognostic biomarker of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer for taxane therapy. AME Med. J. 2018, 3, 1–5.
  23. Weigelt, B.; Peterse, J.L.; van ‘t Veer, L.J. Breast cancer metastasis: Markers and models. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2005, 5, 591–602.
  24. Gupta, G.P.; Massague, J. Cancer metastasis: Building a framework. Cell 2006, 127, 679–695.
  25. De Craene, B.; Berx, G. Regulatory networks defining EMT during cancer initiation and progression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2013, 13, 97–110.
  26. Tsai, J.H.; Yang, J. Epithelial-mesenchymal plasticity in carcinoma metastasis. Genes Dev. 2013, 27, 2192–2206.
  27. Shibue, T.; Weinberg, R.A. EMT, CSCs, and drug resistance: The mechanistic link and clinical implications. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2017, 14, 611–629.
  28. Mei, W.; Lin, X.; Kapoor, A.; Gu, Y.; Zhao, K.; Tang, D. The Contributions of Prostate Cancer Stem Cells in Prostate Cancer Initiation and Metastasis. Cancers 2019, 11, 434.
  29. Yan, C.; Theodorescu, D. RAL GTPases: Biology and Potential as Therapeutic Targets in Cancer. Pharmacol. Rev. 2018, 70, 1–11.
  30. Makwana, V.; Rudrawar, S.; Anoopkumar-Dukie, S. Signalling transduction of O-GlcNAcylation and PI3K/AKT/mTOR-axis in prostate cancer. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. Mol. Basis Dis. 2021, 1867, 166129.
  31. Wu, X.; Scott, H.; Carlsson, S.V.; Sjoberg, D.D.; Cerundolo, L.; Lilja, H.; Prevo, R.; Rieunier, G.; Macaulay, V.; Higgins, G.S.; et al. Increased EZH2 expression in prostate cancer is associated with metastatic recurrence following external beam radiotherapy. Prostate 2019, 79, 1079–1089.
  32. Liu, Q.; Wang, G.; Li, Q.; Jiang, W.; Kim, J.S.; Wang, R.; Zhu, S.; Wang, X.; Yan, L.; Yi, Y.; et al. Polycomb group proteins EZH2 and EED directly regulate androgen receptor in advanced prostate cancer. Int. J. Cancer 2019, 145, 415–426.
  33. Zhao, Y.; Ding, L.; Wang, D.; Ye, Z.; He, Y.; Ma, L.; Zhu, R.; Pan, Y.; Wu, Q.; Pang, K.; et al. EZH2 cooperates with gain-of-function p53 mutants to promote cancer growth and metastasis. EMBO J. 2019, 38, e99599.
  34. Ren, D.; Yang, Q.; Dai, Y.; Guo, W.; Du, H.; Song, L.; Peng, X. Oncogenic miR-210-3p promotes prostate cancer cell EMT and bone metastasis via NF-kappaB signaling pathway. Mol. Cancer 2017, 16, 117.
  35. Kaltschmidt, C.; Banz-Jansen, C.; Benhidjeb, T.; Beshay, M.; Forster, C.; Greiner, J.; Hamelmann, E.; Jorch, N.; Mertzlufft, F.; Pfitzenmaier, J.; et al. A Role for NF-kappaB in Organ Specific Cancer and Cancer Stem Cells. Cancers 2019, 11, 655.
  36. Keller, E.T.; Fu, Z.; Brennan, M. The biology of a prostate cancer metastasis suppressor protein: Raf kinase inhibitor protein. J. Cell Biochem. 2005, 94, 273–278.
  37. Keller, E.T.; Fu, Z.; Yeung, K.; Brennan, M. Raf kinase inhibitor protein: A prostate cancer metastasis suppressor gene. Cancer Lett. 2004, 207, 131–137.
  38. Zaravinos, A.; Chatziioannou, M.; Lambrou, G.I.; Boulalas, I.; Delakas, D.; Spandidos, D.A. Implication of RAF and RKIP genes in urinary bladder cancer. Pathol. Oncol. Res. POR 2011, 17, 181–190.
  39. Moon, A.; Park, J.Y.; Sung, J.Y.; Park, Y.K.; Kim, Y.W. Reduced expression of Raf-1 kinase inhibitory protein in renal cell carcinoma: A significant prognostic marker. Pathology 2012, 44, 534–539.
  40. Hill, B.; De Melo, J.; Yan, J.; Kapoor, A.; He, L.; Cutz, J.C.; Feng, X.; Bakhtyar, N.; Tang, D. Common reduction of the Raf kinase inhibitory protein in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Oncotarget 2014, 5, 7406–7419.
  41. Papale, M.; Vocino, G.; Lucarelli, G.; Rutigliano, M.; Gigante, M.; Rocchetti, M.T.; Pesce, F.; Sanguedolce, F.; Bufo, P.; Battaglia, M.; et al. Urinary RKIP/p-RKIP is a potential diagnostic and prognostic marker of clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 40412–40424.
  42. Fu, Z.; Smith, P.C.; Zhang, L.; Rubin, M.A.; Dunn, R.L.; Yao, Z.; Keller, E.T. Effects of raf kinase inhibitor protein expression on suppression of prostate cancer metastasis. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2003, 95, 878–889.
  43. Fu, Z.; Kitagawa, Y.; Shen, R.; Shah, R.; Mehra, R.; Rhodes, D.; Keller, P.J.; Mizokami, A.; Dunn, R.; Chinnaiyan, A.M.; et al. Metastasis suppressor gene Raf kinase inhibitor protein (RKIP) is a novel prognostic marker in prostate cancer. Prostate 2006, 66, 248–256.
  44. Dangi-Garimella, S.; Yun, J.; Eves, E.M.; Newman, M.; Erkeland, S.J.; Hammond, S.M.; Minn, A.J.; Rosner, M.R. Raf kinase inhibitory protein suppresses a metastasis signalling cascade involving LIN28 and let-7. EMBO J. 2009, 28, 347–358.
  45. Wang, X.; Wang, S.; Tang, X.; Zhang, A.; Grabinski, T.; Guo, Z.; Hudson, E.; Berghuis, B.; Webb, C.; Zhao, P.; et al. Development and evaluation of monoclonal antibodies against phosphatidylethanolamine binding protein 1 in pancreatic cancer patients. J. Immunol. Methods 2010, 362, 151–160.
  46. Lee, H.C.; Tian, B.; Sedivy, J.M.; Wands, J.R.; Kim, M. Loss of Raf kinase inhibitor protein promotes cell proliferation and migration of human hepatoma cells. Gastroenterology 2006, 131, 1208–1217.
  47. Wang, Q.; Wu, X.; Wu, T.; Li, G.M.; Shi, Y. Clinical significance of RKIP mRNA expression in non-small cell lung cancer. Tumour. Biol. 2014, 35, 4377–4380.
  48. Zhang, X.M.; Gu, H.; Yan, L.; Zhang, G.Y. RKIP inhibits the malignant phenotypes of gastric cancer cells. Neoplasma 2013, 60, 196–202.
  49. Lamiman, K.; Keller, J.M.; Mizokami, A.; Zhang, J.; Keller, E.T. Survey of Raf kinase inhibitor protein (RKIP) in multiple cancer types. Crit. Rev. Oncog. 2014, 19, 455–468.
  50. Fu, Z.; Dozmorov, I.M.; Keller, E.T. Osteoblasts produce soluble factors that induce a gene expression pattern in non-metastatic prostate cancer cells, similar to that found in bone metastatic prostate cancer cells. Prostate 2002, 51, 10–20.
  51. Escara-Wilke, J.; Keller, J.M.; Ignatoski, K.M.; Dai, J.; Shelley, G.; Mizokami, A.; Zhang, J.; Yeung, M.L.; Yeung, K.C.; Keller, E.T. Raf kinase inhibitor protein (RKIP) deficiency decreases latency of tumorigenesis and increases metastasis in a murine genetic model of prostate cancer. Prostate 2015, 75, 292–302.
  52. Theroux, S.; Pereira, M.; Casten, K.S.; Burwell, R.D.; Yeung, K.C.; Sedivy, J.M.; Klysik, J. Raf kinase inhibitory protein knockout mice: Expression in the brain and olfaction deficit. Brain Res. Bull. 2007, 71, 559–567.
  53. Chandrashekar, D.S.; Bashel, B.; Balasubramanya, S.A.H.; Creighton, C.J.; Ponce-Rodriguez, I.; Chakravarthi, B.; Varambally, S. UALCAN: A Portal for Facilitating Tumor Subgroup Gene Expression and Survival Analyses. Neoplasia 2017, 19, 649–658.
  54. Tang, Z.; Kang, B.; Li, C.; Chen, T.; Zhang, Z. GEPIA2: An enhanced web server for large-scale expression profiling and interactive analysis. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019, 47, W556–W560.
  55. Taylor, B.S.; Schultz, N.; Hieronymus, H.; Gopalan, A.; Xiao, Y.; Carver, B.S.; Arora, V.K.; Kaushik, P.; Cerami, E.; Reva, B.; et al. Integrative genomic profiling of human prostate cancer. Cancer Cell 2010, 18, 11–22.
  56. Mitsiades, N. A road map to comprehensive androgen receptor axis targeting for castration-resistant prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 2013, 73, 4599–4605.
  57. Mateo, J.; Smith, A.; Ong, M.; de Bono, J.S. Novel drugs targeting the androgen receptor pathway in prostate cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2014, 33, 567–579.
  58. Bello, D.; Webber, M.M.; Kleinman, H.K.; Wartinger, D.D.; Rhim, J.S. Androgen responsive adult human prostatic epithelial cell lines immortalized by human papillomavirus 18. Carcinogenesis 1997, 18, 1215–1223.
  59. Zhang, H.; Wu, J.; Keller, J.M.; Yeung, K.; Keller, E.T.; Fu, Z. Transcriptional regulation of RKIP expression by androgen in prostate cells. Cell. Physiol. Biochem. Int. J. Exp. Cell. Physiol. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2012, 30, 1340–1350.
  60. Yeh, S.; Tsai, M.Y.; Xu, Q.; Mu, X.M.; Lardy, H.; Huang, K.E.; Lin, H.; Yeh, S.D.; Altuwaijri, S.; Zhou, X.; et al. Generation and characterization of androgen receptor knockout (ARKO) mice: An in vivo model for the study of androgen functions in selective tissues. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 13498–13503.
  61. Quigley, C.A.; De Bellis, A.; Marschke, K.B.; el-Awady, M.K.; Wilson, E.M.; French, F.S. Androgen receptor defects: Historical, clinical, and molecular perspectives. Endocr. Rev. 1995, 16, 271–321.
  62. Heinlein, C.A.; Chang, C. Androgen receptor in prostate cancer. Endocr. Rev. 2004, 25, 276–308.
  63. Kim, J.; Coetzee, G.A. Prostate specific antigen gene regulation by androgen receptor. J. Cell Biochem. 2004, 93, 233–241.
  64. Ben Jemaa, A.; Bouraoui, Y.; Sallami, S.; Nouira, Y.; Oueslati, R. A comparison of the biological features of prostate cancer with (PSA+, PSMA+) profile according to RKIP. Biomed. Res. Int. 2013, 2013, 409179.
  65. Roehl, K.A.; Han, M.; Ramos, C.G.; Antenor, J.A.; Catalona, W.J. Cancer progression and survival rates following anatomical radical retropubic prostatectomy in 3478 consecutive patients: Long-term results. J. Urol. 2004, 172, 910–914.
  66. Freedland, S.J.; Humphreys, E.B.; Mangold, L.A.; Eisenberger, M.; Dorey, F.J.; Walsh, P.C.; Partin, A.W. Risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality following biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. JAMA 2005, 294, 433–439.
  67. Verras, M.; Lee, J.; Xue, H.; Li, T.H.; Wang, Y.; Sun, Z. The androgen receptor negatively regulates the expression of c-Met: Implications for a novel mechanism of prostate cancer progression. Cancer Res. 2007, 67, 967–975.
  68. Carver, B.S.; Chapinski, C.; Wongvipat, J.; Hieronymus, H.; Chen, Y.; Chandarlapaty, S.; Arora, V.K.; Le, C.; Koutcher, J.; Scher, H.; et al. Reciprocal feedback regulation of PI3K and androgen receptor signaling in PTEN-deficient prostate cancer. Cancer Cell 2011, 19, 575–586.
  69. Mulholland, D.J.; Tran, L.M.; Li, Y.; Cai, H.; Morim, A.; Wang, S.; Plaisier, S.; Garraway, I.P.; Huang, J.; Graeber, T.G.; et al. Cell autonomous role of PTEN in regulating castration-resistant prostate cancer growth. Cancer Cell 2011, 19, 792–804.
  70. Marcelli, M.; Haidacher, S.J.; Plymate, S.R.; Birnbaum, R.S. Altered growth and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 production in PC3 prostate carcinoma cells stably transfected with a constitutively active androgen receptor complementary deoxyribonucleic acid. Endocrinology 1995, 136, 1040–1048.
  71. Xinzhou, H.; Ning, Y.; Ou, W.; Xiaodan, L.; Fumin, Y.; Huitu, L.; Wei, Z. RKIp inhibits the migration and invasion of human prostate cancer PC-3M cells through regulation of extracellular matrix. Mol. Biol. 2011, 45, 1004–1011.
  72. Al-Mulla, F.; Bitar, M.S.; Al-Maghrebi, M.; Behbehani, A.I.; Al-Ali, W.; Rath, O.; Doyle, B.; Tan, K.Y.; Pitt, A.; Kolch, W. Raf kinase inhibitor protein RKIP enhances signaling by glycogen synthase kinase-3beta. Cancer Res. 2011, 71, 1334–1343.
  73. Lamouille, S.; Xu, J.; Derynck, R. Molecular mechanisms of epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2014, 15, 178–196.
  74. Cho, E.S.; Kang, H.E.; Kim, N.H.; Yook, J.I. Therapeutic implications of cancer epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT). Arch. Pharm Res. 2019, 42, 14–24.
  75. Lv, W.; Huan, M.; Yang, W.; Gao, Y.; Wang, K.; Xu, S.; Zhang, M.; Ma, J.; Wang, X.; Chen, Y.; et al. Snail promotes prostate cancer migration by facilitating SPOP ubiquitination and degradation. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2020, 529, 799–804.
  76. Beach, S.; Tang, H.; Park, S.; Dhillon, A.S.; Keller, E.T.; Kolch, W.; Yeung, K.C. Snail is a repressor of RKIP transcription in metastatic prostate cancer cells. Oncogene 2008, 27, 2243–2248.
  77. Baritaki, S.; Yeung, K.; Palladino, M.; Berenson, J.; Bonavida, B. Pivotal roles of snail inhibition and RKIP induction by the proteasome inhibitor NPI-0052 in tumor cell chemoimmunosensitization. Cancer Res. 2009, 69, 8376–8385.
  78. Salmena, L.; Poliseno, L.; Tay, Y.; Kats, L.; Pandolfi, P.P. A ceRNA hypothesis: The Rosetta Stone of a hidden RNA language? Cell 2011, 146, 353–358.
  79. Lopez-Urrutia, E.; Bustamante Montes, L.P.; Ladron de Guevara Cervantes, D.; Perez-Plasencia, C.; Campos-Parra, A.D. Crosstalk Between Long Non-coding RNAs, Micro-RNAs and mRNAs: Deciphering Molecular Mechanisms of Master Regulators in Cancer. Front. Oncol. 2019, 9, 669.
  80. Du, Y.; Liu, X.H.; Zhu, H.C.; Wang, L.; Ning, J.Z.; Xiao, C.C. MiR-543 Promotes Proliferation and Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Prostate Cancer via Targeting RKIP. Cell. Physiol. Biochem. Int. J. Exp. Cell. Physiol. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2017, 41, 1135–1146.
  81. Du, Y.; Weng, X.D.; Wang, L.; Liu, X.H.; Zhu, H.C.; Guo, J.; Ning, J.Z.; Xiao, C.C. LncRNA XIST acts as a tumor suppressor in prostate cancer through sponging miR-23a to modulate RKIP expression. Oncotarget 2017, 8, 94358–94370.
  82. Ahmed, M.; Lai, T.H.; Zada, S.; Hwang, J.S.; Pham, T.M.; Yun, M.; Kim, D.R. Functional Linkage of RKIP to the Epithelial to Mesenchymal Transition and Autophagy during the Development of Prostate Cancer. Cancers 2018, 10, 273.
  83. Aakula, A.; Kohonen, P.; Leivonen, S.K.; Makela, R.; Hintsanen, P.; Mpindi, J.P.; Martens-Uzunova, E.; Aittokallio, T.; Jenster, G.; Perala, M.; et al. Systematic Identification of MicroRNAs That Impact on Proliferation of Prostate Cancer Cells and Display Changed Expression in Tumor Tissue. Eur. Urol. 2016, 69, 1120–1128.
  84. Wang, D.; Cai, L.; Tian, X.; Li, W. MiR-543 promotes tumorigenesis and angiogenesis in non-small cell lung cancer via modulating metastasis associated protein 1. Mol. Med. 2020, 26, 44.
  85. Wang, S.; Jiang, W.; Zhang, X.; Lu, Z.; Geng, Q.; Wang, W.; Li, N.; Cai, X. LINC-PINT alleviates lung cancer progression via sponging miR-543 and inducing PTEN. Cancer Med. 2020, 9, 1999–2009.
  86. Su, D.W.; Li, X.; Chen, J.; Dou, J.; Fang, G.E.; Luo, C.J. MiR-543 inhibits proliferation and metastasis of human colorectal cancer cells by targeting PLAS3. Eur. Rev. Med. Pharmacol. Sci. 2020, 24, 8812–8821.
  87. Liu, X.; Gan, L.; Zhang, J. miR-543 inhibites cervical cancer growth and metastasis by targeting TRPM7. Chem. Biol. Interact. 2019, 302, 83–92.
  88. Fu, Q.; Liu, X.; Liu, Y.; Yang, J.; Lv, G.; Dong, S. MicroRNA-335 and -543 suppress bone metastasis in prostate cancer via targeting endothelial nitric oxide synthase. Int. J. Mol. Med. 2015, 36, 1417–1425.
  89. Wang, Y.C.; He, W.Y.; Dong, C.H.; Pei, L.; Ma, Y.L. lncRNA HCG11 regulates cell progression by targeting miR-543 and regulating AKT/mTOR pathway in prostate cancer. Cell Biol. Int. 2019, 43, 1453–1462.
  90. Wang, X.; Yang, J.Y.; Cai, J.; Zhang, D.J.; Zhao, L.; Luo, L.H.; Xiong, Y.; Zhang, T.; Jin, M. MiR-543/Numb promotes proliferation, metastasis, and stem-like cell traits of prostate cancer cells. Am. J. Transl. Res. 2021, 13, 617–631.
  91. Baritaki, S.; Huerta-Yepez, S.; Sahakyan, A.; Karagiannides, I.; Bakirtzi, K.; Jazirehi, A.; Bonavida, B. Mechanisms of nitric oxide-mediated inhibition of EMT in cancer: Inhibition of the metastasis-inducer Snail and induction of the metastasis-suppressor RKIP. Cell Cycle 2010, 9, 4931–4940.
  92. Della Pietra, E.; Simonella, F.; Bonavida, B.; Xodo, L.E.; Rapozzi, V. Repeated sub-optimal photodynamic treatments with pheophorbide a induce an epithelial mesenchymal transition in prostate cancer cells via nitric oxide. Nitric Oxide 2015, 45, 43–53.
  93. Rapozzi, V.; Varchi, G.; Della Pietra, E.; Ferroni, C.; Xodo, L.E. A photodynamic bifunctional conjugate for prostate cancer: An in vitro mechanistic study. Investig. New Drugs 2017, 35, 115–123.
  94. Kashyap, V.; Bonavida, B. Role of YY1 in the pathogenesis of prostate cancer and correlation with bioinformatic data sets of gene expression. Genes Cancer 2014, 5, 71–83.
  95. D’Este, F.; Della Pietra, E.; Badillo Pazmay, G.V.; Xodo, L.E.; Rapozzi, V. Role of nitric oxide in the response to photooxidative stress in prostate cancer cells. Biochem. Pharmacol. 2020, 182, 114205.
  96. Chatterjee, D.; Bai, Y.; Wang, Z.; Beach, S.; Mott, S.; Roy, R.; Braastad, C.; Sun, Y.; Mukhopadhyay, A.; Aggarwal, B.B.; et al. RKIP sensitizes prostate and breast cancer cells to drug-induced apoptosis. J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279, 17515–17523.
  97. Woods Ignatoski, K.M.; Grewal, N.K.; Markwart, S.M.; Vellaichamy, A.; Chinnaiyan, A.M.; Yeung, K.; Ray, M.E.; Keller, E.T. Loss of Raf kinase inhibitory protein induces radioresistance in prostate cancer. Int. J. Radiat Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2008, 72, 153–160.
  98. Tannock, I.F.; de Wit, R.; Berry, W.R.; Horti, J.; Pluzanska, A.; Chi, K.N.; Oudard, S.; Theodore, C.; James, N.D.; Turesson, I.; et al. Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2004, 351, 1502–1512.
  99. Berthold, D.R.; Pond, G.R.; Soban, F.; de Wit, R.; Eisenberger, M.; Tannock, I.F. Docetaxel plus prednisone or mitoxantrone plus prednisone for advanced prostate cancer: Updated survival in the TAX 327 study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2008, 26, 242–245.
  100. Zhu, C.X.; Li, W.Z.; Guo, Y.L.; Chen, L.; Li, G.H.; Yu, J.J.; Shu, B.; Peng, S. Tumor suppressor RKIP inhibits prostate cancer cell metastasis and sensitizes prostate cancer cells to docetaxel treatment. Neoplasma 2018, 65, 228–233.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Academic Video Service
Feedback