PMCCPMCCPMCC

Search tips
Search criteria 

Advanced

 
Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
 
Mol Cell Endocrinol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2013 May 6.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC3249013
NIHMSID: NIHMS322813

Actions of Estrogens and Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals on Human Prostate Stem/Progenitor Cells and Prostate Cancer Risk

Abstract

Estrogen reprogramming of the prostate gland as a function of developmental exposures (aka developmental estrogenization) results in permanent alterations in structure and gene expression that leads to an increased incidence of prostatic lesions with aging. Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) with estrogenic activity have been similarly linked to an increased prostate cancer risk. Since it has been suggested that stem cells and cancer stem cells are potential targets of cancer initiation and disease management, it is highly possible that estrogens and EDCs influence the development and progression of prostate cancer through reprogramming and transforming the prostate stem and early stage progenitor cells. In this article, we review recent literature highlighting the effects of estrogens and EDCs on prostate cancer risk and discuss recent advances in prostate stem/progenitor cell research. Our laboratory has recently developed a novel prostasphere model using normal human prostate stem/progenitor cells and established that these cells express estrogen receptors (ERs) and are direct targets of estrogen action. Further, using a chimeric in vivo prostate model derived from these normal human prostate progenitor cells, we demonstrated for the first time that estrogens initiate and promote prostatic carcinogenesis in an androgen-supported environment. We herein discuss these findings and highlight new evidence using our in vitro human prostasphere assay for perturbations in human prostate stem cell self-renewal and differentiation by natural steroids as well as EDCs. These findings support the hypothesis that tissue stem cells may be direct EDC targets which may underlie life-long reprogramming as a consequence of developmental and/or transient adult exposures.

Keywords: Estrogen, endocrine disrupting chemicals, endocrine disruptors, prostate stem cells, prostate progenitor cells, prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is the most common non-cutaneous cancer and the second leading cause of cancer deaths in North American men (Jemal et al., 2008). It is known that steroids play a role in the initiation and progression of prostate cancer, which is the basis for hormonal treatment strategies that include androgen ablation and androgen receptor (AR) blockade (Eisenberger et al., 1998, Huggins and Hodges, 1941). Increasing evidence indicates that in addition to androgens, estrogens play key roles in prostate carcinogenesis and progression, although the mechanisms are not fully understood (Ellem and Risbridger, 2007, Hu et al., 2011, Leung et al., 2010, Nelles et al., 2011, Prins et al., 2007, Prins and Korach, 2008). In men, chronically elevated estrogens have been associated with increased risk of prostate cancer (Modugno et al., 2001) while in rodents, estrogens in combination with androgens induce prostate cancer (Bosland, 1996). It is recognized that age, race, genetics (family history), diet, and environmental factors can impact prostate cancer risk (Reuben et al., 2010). Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are a class of environmental toxicants that interfere with endocrine signaling pathways. In addition to direct effects in adults, strong evidence indicates that developing tissues are particularly sensitive to EDCs and that early-life EDC exposures promote specific disorders in adults (Foran et al., 2002, Heindel, 2005), a phenomenon referred to as the developmental basis of adult disease.

Recent advances in stem cell research indicate that stem cells and early stage progenitor cells may be direct carcinogenic targets and the cells of origin in cancer initiation and progression. Together with our previous findings in animal models which show that early-life exposures to natural and environmental estrogens increase susceptibility to prostate carcinogenesis through structural and epigenomic reorganization (Ho et al., 2006, Prins, 1992, Prins and Birch, 1994, Prins et al., 1996, Prins and Ho, 2010, Prins et al., 2008, Prins et al., 1993, Prins et al., 2011), we hypothesize that developmental reprogramming of the prostate gland by EDCs may involve epigenomic alterations in prostate stem/progenitor cells during early gland formation, thus predisposing to prostate cancer upon aging. At present, there is a critical need to determine whether early life estrogenic reprogramming of prostate cells similarly occurs in humans. To meet this current need, we have recently developed novel in vitro and in vivo models using stem and early stage progenitor cells isolated from normal human prostates and used these to initiate hormonal carcinogenesis (Hu et al., 2011). Importantly, these in vitro prostasphere and in vivo chimeric prostate models with carcinogenic induction can serve as suitable models for examining stem cell perturbations and carcinogenic actions of EDCs on human prostate cells. In the current review, we will briefly assess available evidence for EDCs and increased prostate cancer risks, discuss recent advances in prostate stem cell research, and present evidence for reprogramming of human prostate stem/progenitor cells by estrogens and EDCs using our novel human prostasphere and chimeric prostate models.

Endocrine Disruptors and Prostate Cancer Risk

In the human population, direct connections between EDCs and prostate cancer are primarily limited to epidemiology studies and in vitro analysis using cancer cell lines (Prins, 2008). These findings are supported by in vivo studies in animal models that suggest associations between EDCs and prostate cancer, carcinogenesis and/or susceptibility. Herein we will highlight the evidence on EDCs with estrogenic actions. For the sake of simplicity, we here refer to environmental estrogens as molecules with identified estrogenic activity, mostly through activation of ERs or altered estrogen metabolism.

The most compelling data in humans to link prostate cancer with environmental chemicals comes from the established occupational hazard of farming and increased prostate cancer rates which is believed to be a function of chronic or intermittent pesticide exposures (Alavanja et al., 2003, Meyer et al., 2007, Morrison et al., 1993, Van Maele-Fabry et al., 2006). This is supported by a large epidemiology study (Agricultural Health Study) in a collaborative effort between the NCI, NIEHS and EPA (www.aghealth.org) that evaluated >55,000 pesticide applicators in North Carolina and Iowa since 1993 and revealed a direct link between methyl bromide exposure, a fungicide with unknown mode of action, and increased prostate cancer rates (Alavanja et al., 2003). Further, six pesticides (chlorpyrifos, fonofos, coumaphos, phorate, permethrin and butylate) out of 45 common agricultural pesticides showed correlation with exposure and increased prostate cancer in men with a familial history, suggesting gene-environment interactions (Alavanja et al., 2003, Mahajan et al., 2006). Significantly, chlorpyrifos, fonofos, coumaphos, phorate, permethrin are thiophosphates with acetylcholine esterase inhibitor action as well as significant capacity as p450 enzyme inhibitors. In particular, chlorpyrifos, fonofos and phorate strongly inhibit CYP1A2 and CYP3A4 which are the major p450s that metabolize estradiol (E2), estrone and testosterone in the liver (Usmani et al., 2006, Usmani et al., 2003). This raises the possibility that exposure to these compounds may interfere with steroid hormone metabolism and disturb hormonal balance which in turn contributes to increased prostate cancer risk. A similar mechanism of endocrine disruption in vivo has been identified for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and polyhalogenated aromatic hydrocarbons (including dioxins, BPA and dibenzofurans) through potent inhibition of estrogen sulfotransferase which effectively elevates bioavailable estrogens in target organs (Kester et al., 2000, Kester et al., 2002).

Bisphenol A (BPA) is a high volume synthetic monomer used in the production of polycarbonate plastics, epoxy linings of food and beverage cans, and in numerous common household and consumer products. Significant levels of BPA have been found in the urine of 93% of US individuals (Calafat et al., 2008) with highest levels found in infants and children (Calafat et al., 2009, Eddington and Ritter, 2009, Kuroda et al., 2003, Lee et al., 2008). BPA was initially synthesized in the 1890s, however, its estrogenic actions of BPA were identified in 1936 (Dodds and Lawson, 1936). Although its relative binding affinity and activation of nuclear ERα and ERβ are ~1,000 to 10,000 fold lower than E2 or diethylstilbestrol (Kuiper et al., 1998b, Lemmen et al., 2004), BPA activates membrane ERs through non-genomic signaling pathways with an EC50 equivalent to E2 (Song et al., 2002, Walsh et al., 2005). Effects of BPA with regards to carcinogenic potential, including the prostate gland, have been reviewed by an expert panel (Keri et al., 2007). In short, there is evidence from rodent models and human prostate cell lines that BPA can influence carcinogenesis, modulate prostate cancer cell proliferation and for some tumors with AR mutations, stimulate progression. Using rodent models, our laboratory has shown that transient, early-life exposure to low-doses of BPA increased susceptibility to adult-onset precancerous lesions and hormonal carcinogenesis. Specifically, neonatal Sprague–Dawley rats exposure to 10 μg BPA/kg BW on post-natal days 1, 3 and 5 significantly increased the incidence and score of adult estrogen-induced prostate intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN), the precursor lesion for prostate cancer, as to compared to control rats (Ho et al., 2006, Prins et al., 2008, Prins et al., 2011). This model of sensitivity to hormonal carcinogenesis is relevant to humans in that relative E2 levels increase in the aging male and may contribute to prostate disease risk (Kaufman and Vermeulen, 2005). Furthermore, these studies identified alterations in DNA methylation patterns in multiple cell signaling genes in BPA-exposed prostates which suggest that environmentally relevant doses of BPA reprogram the developing prostate through epigenetic alterations (Ho et al., 2006, Prins et al., 2008).

PCBs are a class of synthetic, lipophilic, and persistent compounds widely used in the mid-20th century. Although now banned, the general population continues to be exposed to PCBs due to persistence, ubiquity in the environment, and bioaccumulation up the food chain. Measurable levels of serum PCBs are found in the majority of the general population (Patterson et al., 2009). Many PCBs have estrogenic or anti-androgenic activity and may perturb male reproductive activity. An analysis of adipose tissue concentrations of PCBs in Swedish men with and without prostate cancer revealed a significant association between PCB levels in the higher quandrants and prostate cancer odds ratio with the most marked associations for PCB153 and trans-chlordane (Hardell et al., 2006). An epidemiologic study of capacitor manufacturing plant workers highly exposed to PCBs revealed a strong exposure–response relationship for prostate cancer mortality (Prince et al., 2006). This supports previous findings of correlations between PCB 153 and 180 and prostate cancer risk in electric utility workers (Charles et al., 2003, Ritchie et al., 2003). While these studies suggested an association between PCB exposure and prostate cancer, no association was reported between PCBs and prostate cancer in a recent Canadian study (Aronson et al.). Further investigation is thus warranted for PCBs and prostate cancer risk.

Cadmium is classified as a human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the National Toxicology Program. While some large epidemiologic reports have indicated a relationship between cadmium exposure and prostate cancer rates, others have refuted these findings (Parent and Siemiatycki, 2001, Waalkes, 2000). The basic metal cationic portion of cadmium is responsible for both toxic and carcinogenic activity, and the mechanism of carcinogenicity appears to be multifactorial (Huff et al., 2007). Cadmium is known to ligand to ERs and function as an estrogenic mimic. Cadmium has proliferative action with human prostate cells in vitro through an ER-dependent mechanism (Benbrahim-Tallaa et al., 2007a). Since cadmium bioaccumulates, further epidemiologic analysis of cadmium and prostate cancer risk is warranted, particularly in men with occupational exposures.

Inorganic arsenic is a metalloid ubiquitously distributed in nature. Environmental inorganic arsenic was first associated with prostate cancer in Taiwanese men in the late 1980s (Chen et al., 1988) and several subsequent studies revealed an association between inorganic arsenic exposure and prostate cancer mortality or incidence (Benbrahim-Tallaa and Waalkes, 2008, Lewis et al., 1999). Importantly, it has been documented that arsenic may mediate some of these effects through endocrine disruption, specifically through interaction with ERs and activation of estrogen-regulated genes (Davey et al., 2007). In this context, there is a recent report that arsenic can induce malignant transformation of prostate epithelial cells in vitro and drive them toward an androgen-independent state (Benbrahim-Tallaa et al., 2007b). Since these actions were mediated through Ras-MAPK pathways, it is likely that membrane ERs are involved.

Dioxins [polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs)], resist degradation and are thus considered persistent organic pollutants (POPs). 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) is the most toxic dioxin and causes a variety of effects, including immunotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, teratogenicity, and tumor promotion (Kuroda et al., 2005). Changes in gene expression induced by TCDD and related chemicals are initiated by binding to the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) (Kuroda et al., 2005) and crosstalk between AhR and ERα is well established. Activated AhR inhibits ER activity through several mechanisms, whereas ERα has a positive role in AhR signaling (Matthews and Gustafsson, 2006). Additionally, an inverse relation was found between serum TCDD levels and serum testosterone in chemical production workers (Egeland et al., 1994). Adult TCDD exposure at general population levels is associated with a decreasing risk of BPH with higher exposure levels (Gupta et al., 2006a, Gupta et al., 2006b). Further, TCDD increased tumor-free survival in transgenic TRAMP mice that spontaneously develop prostate cancer while AhR activation decreased lymph node metastasis suggesting that TCDDs may protect against prostate cancer in adulthood (Vezina et al., 2009). In contrast, in utero exposure to TCDD in mice interferes with prostate bud patterning and is associated with hyperplastic lesions in aged animals. Together, these findings suggest that timing of TCDD exposures may dictate their effects on subsequent prostate disease (Vezina et al., 2009).

Prostate stem/progenitor cells

Primary prostate epithelial cells include small number of stem/progenitor cells

The prostate gland contains a simple columnar epithelium with three differentiated cell types - basal, luminal, and neuroendocrine cells - that are embedded in a fibro-muscular stroma (Isaacs et al., 1981, Wang et al., 2001). The major epithelial cell population is luminal secretory cells which express cytokeratins (CK) 8/18 and AR and are androgen-dependent for growth, survival and production of secretory proteins such as prostate specific antigen (PSA). Basal epithelial cells are interspersed along the basement membrane and express p63 and CK5 but are largely AR negative and androgen-independent. The scarce population of neuroendocrine cells are scattered within the basal layer and are identified by the expression of chromogranin A and synaptophysin. Strong evidence now exists for the presence of a rare population of adult stem cells within the human prostate gland that are capable of self-renewal as well as differentiation into early progenitor cells that give rise to the 3 differentiated epithelial cell populations (Burger et al., 2005, De Marzo et al., 1998, Leong et al., 2008, Miki and Rhim, 2008, Wang et al., 2009). Rare intermediate cells positive for combinations of CK5 and CK8/18 and prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA) are thought to represent the progenitor or transit amplifying cells (Garraway et al., 2003, van Leenders et al., 2000, Wang et al., 2001).

It is widely accepted that adult stem cells are involved in normal tissue replenishment throughout life while cancer stem cells support cancer growth (Presnell et al., 2002, Smith et al., 2007). Although the cell(s) of origin for prostate cancer may include luminal, basal, neuroendocrine, progenitor and stem cells (Kasper, 2008, Wang et al., 2009), it is increasingly evident that the resultant prostate cancers contain cancer stem cells that continuously seed and maintain tumor growth (Gu et al., 2007, Kasper, 2008, Kasper, 2009). Even though conventional therapies for prostate cancer eradicate the majority of cells within a tumor, most patients with advanced cancer eventually progress to androgen-independent, metastatic disease that remains essentially incurable by current treatment strategies. Recent evidence has shown that cancer stem cells are a subset of tumor cells that appear to be therapy-resistant and are responsible for maintaining cancer growth which may be the underlying cause of disease relapse (Lawson and Witte, 2007, Maitland and Collins, 2008). Thus understanding the regulation of both normal stem cells and cancer stem cells may provide new insight into the origin and treatment of prostate cancer.

Primary prostate epithelial cell culture is an essential and initial step in isolating prostate stem/progenitor cells from normal and diseased human prostate tissues (Figure 1A). Fresh prostate tissue from normal organ donors and patients undergoing prostatectomy for prostate cancer or other diseases can be digested, dispersed into single cells and established as primary epithelial cell cultures according to methods characterized by Pheel and others (Peehl, 2003). Immunocytochemical staining using vimentin and cytokeratin markers are typically used for characterization of the established epithelial cultures. Under prescribed conditions, primary prostate epithelial cell cultures can be passaged 3-4 times before they loose their survival and growth potential. With advances in stem cell isolation, new approaches are available to isolate stem cell populations with enhanced self-renewal capabilities from primary prostate epithelial cell cultures that contain mixed cell populations. Of these, flow cytometry and 3-D prostasphere culture are the primary techniques employed (Lukacs et al., 2010a, Xin et al., 2007). Flow cytometry is widely used for cell sorting by labeling cells with surface CD markers. Many molecules have been identified as prostate stem cell markers including Sca-1, CD133, CD44, CD117, CD49f and trop2 (Collins et al., 2001, Goldstein et al., 2008, Leong et al., 2008, Richardson et al., 2003, Vander Griend et al., 2008, Xin et al., 2005), and the number continues to grow. Typically, combinations of multiple stem cell markers are used to isolate prostate stem/progenitor cells by cell sorting. Of note, the markers used to isolate prostate stem/progenitor cells are not fully conserved between human and rodent. In the human prostate, stem/progenitor cells have been enriched based on the expression of integrin α2/β1, CD44, or CD133. Murine prostate stem cells have been isolated by expression of stem cell antigen-1 (Sca-1), integrin α6/CD49f, as well as CD44, CD133. Leong et al. first identified CD117 as a prostate stem cell marker in mice and human and a single murine prostate stem cell defined by the phenotype Lin-Sca-1+CD133+CD44+CD117+ generated a prostate after mixing with urogenital sinus mesenchyme (UGM) and transplantation in vivo (Leong et al., 2008). Goldstein et al. reported that Trop2 enriched for sphere-forming cells from the mouse and human prostate in vitro and that Lin-Sca-1+CD49fhiTrop2hi mouse prostate cells gave rise to basal, luminal and neuroendocrine cells in vivo (Goldstein et al., 2008). While widely used for the prostate stem cell research, there are several disadvantages of cell sorting including a relative low cell yield, need of multiple stem cell markers, and cell damage following labeling and sorting.

Figure 1
Isolation of prostate stem/progenitor cells from primary human prostate epithelial cells

In terms of functional analysis, prostate stem/progenitor cells can also be assessed using FACS side population analysis. The stem cell side population was first identified in hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) that were enriched amongst heterogeneous cell populations based upon their unique ability to actively efflux Hoechst 33342 (Brown et al., 2007, Goodell et al., 1996). ABCG2 is a member of the ATP binding cassette (ABC) transporters, also know as BCRP (breast cancer resistance protein), which can pump a wide variety of endogenous and exogenous compounds out of cells including Hoechst 33342. Widely expressed in a variety of stem cells, ABCG2 is found to be a molecular determinant of the side population phenotype and is recognized as a universal marker of stem cells (Ding et al., 2010, Zhou et al., 2001). The Hoechst exclusion-based side population assay has proven to be a valuable technique for identifying and sorting stem and early stage progenitor cells in a variety of tissues and species. Importantly, prostate stem/progenitor cells and prostate cancer stem cells are defined by expression of ABCG2, consequently, the side-population assay can be used for the isolation and characterization of putative prostatic stem/progenitor cells from heterogeneous cell populations as shown for 2-D prostate epithelial cell cultures in Figure 2.

Figure 2
Hoechst 33342 dye efflux fluorescence activated flow cytometry analysis reveals a side population gated as R1 in human prostate epithelial cells

A separate approach for isolating stem cells from mixed epithelial cell cultures utilizes a three dimensional (3-D) cell culture system wherein only stem-like cells are capable of survival and proliferation, forming spheroid structures of stem and early-stage progenitor cells. First used to isolate neural stem cells, this model system has now been expanded for the culture of other adult stem cells including the prostate with resultant spheroids referred to as prostaspheres (Hu et al., 2011, Hudson, 2003, Lang et al., 2001, Lukacs et al., 2010b, Xin et al., 2007). Using a matrigel-slurry culture system in our laboratory, only ~0.2%-1% of 2-D cultured primary epithelial cells from normal prostate tissues form free-floating prostaspheres that are clonal in origin (Hu et al., 2011). Direct comparison with stem cells sorted by flow cytometry has shown that only prostate stem cells that express Trop2, CD44, and CD49f markers exhibit sphere-forming capacity in a 3D culture system (Garraway et al., 2010). The major advantages of the prostasphere assay are the functional isolation of prostate stem/progenitor cells and the expansion capability of the stem/progenitor cells number in vitro which provides multiple research opportunities including analysis of growth and differentiation regulation. For example, Bisson, et al has shown that Wnt/β-catenin activation increases prostasphere size and the self-renewal capacity of prostate cancer cells with stem cell characteristics (Bisson and Prowse, 2009). Many key variables contribute to the number and cellular composition of the prostaspheres that form in culture including the age of donor, cell density, culturing techniques and passage number of parental cell lines. At early stages of formation, the prostaspheres consist of committed epithelial stem cells that are actively proliferating but have not yet differentiated into cell lineages. Prostaspheres ~30 μm in diameter and consisting of 20 to 40 cells are visible at day 4 of culture (Figure 1B) and through continuous proliferation, continue to grow with diameters reaching ~80 μm at day 7 (Figure 1C). Labeling of prostaspheres at day 7 using a number of stem cell markers including CD117, CD49f, Trop2 and ABCG2 confirms their stem cell – early progenitor cell status at this early stage (Figure 3). With continued culture through day 10, cells located in the spheroid center begin to differentiate into a luminal cell phenotype (CK8/18+) with basal-type cells (p63+) in the periphery, forming double-layered prostaspheres 100~150 μm in diameter (Figure 1D).

Figure 3
Day 7 prostasphere (PS) cells express prostate stem/progenitor cell markers and ERs

Self-renewal ability and differentiation capacity are two properties of stem cells. Since dysregulation of stem cell differentiation could be the early event of cell transformation and carcinogenesis, a prostate stem cell differentiation assay would be a useful model for studying the carcinogenic potential of EDCs. The features of prostate stem/progenitor cells include quiescence, high proliferative potential and the ability of single cells to give rise to ductal structures that contain both basal and luminal cells. The regeneration ability of normal human prostasphere cells was evidenced by the formation of chimeric prostatic gland tissue in vivo following tissue recombination with inductive rat UGM and grafting under the renal capsule of nude mice (Hu et al., 2011). The differentiation of prostate stem/progenitor cells can be achieved in the in vitro prostashpere assay system using several different conditions that includes extension of culture for up to 30 days, co-culture with stromal cells and treatment with differentiating factors such as 10 nM dihydrotestosterone (DHT) or 25 ng/ml hepatocyte growth factor (HGF). Using these approaches, our laboratory has been able to drive prostaspheres towards a differentiated phenotype as characterized by CK8/18 and Nkx3.1 labeling of inner cells, detection of AR and PSA gene expression by RT-PCR, CK5 and p63 labeling of peripheral cells, and formation of ductal branches as well as lumen-like structures, thus recapitulating events in early prostate growth and differentiation (Hu et al., 2011).

Most recently, we have also found that retinoic acid can directly drive prostate stem/progenitor cells into differentiation pathways. Retinoids and retinoic acids are derivatives of vitamin A and are potent regulators of cell proliferation and differentiation through the activation of retinoic acid receptors (RARs) (Dolle et al., 1990, Metallo et al., 2008). Retinoic acid and bone morphogenetic protein signaling synergize to efficiently direct epithelial differentiation of human embryonic stem cells through activation of HNF-3α (Jacob et al., 1994). In addition to ERs, we have found that human prostate stem/progenitor cells express high levels of RARs and RXRs and thus are potential retinoid targets. In our human prostasphere culture system derived from normal human prostate epithelial cells, all-trans retinoic acid (100 nM) markedly augmented the differentiation of prostate stem/progenitor cells towards the luminal epithelial phenotype as indicated by the formation of double layered prostasphere structure as early as days 6-7 (Figure 4). Further, retinoic acid strongly upregulated expression of CK 18 and HOXB13, which are involved in luminal epithelial cells differentiation, while repressing p63 expression in the inner spheroid cells (Figure 4). These findings support the multiple studies on the usefulness of retinoids in chemoprevention and treatment for prostate cancer (Huss et al., 2004, Schenk et al., 2009) and suggest that their actions may, in part, be mediated through direct actions on prostate stem cells, driving differentiation and limiting self-renewal. Thus we predict that chemicals which either augment or interfere with retinoid signaling will have the capacity to directly alter human prostate stem cell differentiation capacity with potentially beneficial or detrimental outcomes with regards to prostate health.

Figure 4
In vitro differentiation of day 7 normal prostaspheres driven by 100 nM all-trans retinoic acid (RA) treatment

Estrogens and EDCs action on human prostate stem/progenitor cells

As the property of self-renewal allows for a long life span of stem cells, undifferentiated stem/progenitor cells are highly susceptible to environmental injuries over time and have the capacity to transmit their “injury memory” to the differentiated progeny (Cheng et al., 2008). Since the prostate gland is most susceptible to environmental insults during early development, it is reasonable to predict that prostate stem and early stage progenitor cells may be the primary targets of estrogenic exposures throughout life (Hu et al., 2011). Although there is accumulating evidence to suggest a central role for estrogens in prostate cancer, direct evidence that estrogens initiate prostate cancer in humans has been elusive. A rising E2:T ratio in aging men (Mollard et al., 2000), association of estrogen metabolizing gene polymorphisms and elevated urine hydroxy-estrone ratios with a higher prostate cancer risk (Kuiper et al., 1998a, Lemmen et al., 2004), a progressive increase in aromatase expression in prostate cancers upon advancement to metastatic disease (Song et al., 2002), and marked alterations in ER expression with cancer progression (Lowsley, 1912, Steiner and Pound, 2003) support the hypothesis that estrogens are involved in the etiology and progression of this disease. Further, tissue recombinant experiments using pre-initiated, human prostate BPH-1 cells have shown that elevated E2 and testosterone can promote these cells into invasive cancers (Wang et al., 2001, Ricke et al., 2006). Multiple studies over the past several decades using animal models have provided strong evidence of a carcinogenic role for estrogens in the prostate (Fouse et al., 2008, Henderson et al., 1982, Henderson et al., 1988, Walsh et al., 2005), but whether this is directly applicable to the human prostate had not been clarified.

Using the human prostasphere model described above, our laboratory recently discovered (Hu et al., 2011) that although negative for AR mRNA and protein, normal human prostate stem/ progenitor cells express robust levels of all known ERs, including ERα, ERβ, and GPR30 (Figure 3). Of note, the ER mRNA expression levels were markedly higher in normal prostate progenitor cells relative to the androgen-dependent prostate cancer cell line LNCaP and more closely resembled the steroid receptor profiles of the androgen-independent cancer lines PC-3 and DU145 with elevated ER expression, minimal progesterone receptor (PR), and no AR mRNA (Hu et al., 2011). Importantly, normal human prostaspheres exhibited a proliferative response to 1 nM 17β-estadiol resulting in increased sphere numbers and size at day 7 of culture. New studies using side-population FACS analysis of primary prostate epithelial cell cultures (Hoechst 33342 exclusion with and without verapamil) show a dose-dependent increase in stem cell numbers after 4 days of culture in 10-1000 nM E2 (Figure 5A). Together, these results demonstrate that normal human prostate progenitor cells are responsive to estrogens with increased rates of self-renewal, implicating them as direct estrogen targets.

Figure 5
Effects of E2, BPA, arsenite and dioxin on prostate stem/progenitor cell proliferation evaluated by side population analysis and prostasphere assay

Using the prostate in vitro stem cell assays described above, we are currently testing several EDCs with potential estrogenic action to determine if they too may be capable of affecting prostate stem cell self-renewal and/or differentiation capability. Treatment of primary prostate epithelial cells with 10 nM BPA increased the percentage of side population of prostate stem/progenitor cells (Figure 5B) similar to the E2 exposures. Dioxin (100 ng/ml) markedly increased side population numbers in a 2-D prostate epithelial cell cultures indicating a stimulation of stem cell self-renewal (Figure 5C). In contrast, 3-D culture of prostate epithelial cells in sodium arsenite markedly decreased the prostasphere number and size in a dose-dependent manner (0.5, 5, 50 μM) (Figure 5D). Although preliminary, these examples suggest that estrogens and EDCs with estrogenic-type actions may have diverse effects on prostate stem/progenitor cells self-renewal, perhaps mediated through divergent ERs and other molecular signaling pathways. Since stem cell alterations are long lasting, such perturbations may contribute to prostate cancer risk throughout life.

To address the carcinogenic potential of estrogens on normal human prostate epithelial cells, we developed an experimental in vivo chimeric prostate model using normal human prostate progenitor cells from prostaspheres recombined with rat UGM engrafted under the renal capsule of nude mice (Hu et al., 2011). After one month of growth, the chimeric grafts formed normal prostate-like tissue with human epithelium that expressed CK8/18, p63, CK14, AR, PSA and human nuclear antigen (Figure 6A,B,C) (Hu et al., 2011). Subsequent exposure of the host mice to elevated E2 levels in an androgen-supported milieu was capable of driving multiple prostate lesions including epithelial hyperplasia, squamous metaplasia and initiation of prostate carcinogenesis with progression to locally invasive adenocarcinoma (Figure 6D,E,F) (Hu et al., 2011). Thus, by starting with human prostate stem/progenitor cells from young, disease-free organ donors, our study demonstrates for the first time that E2 is sufficient to initiate human prostate transformation and promote adenocarcinoma to a locally invasive phenotype. Support that estrogens are the culprit steroids in prostatic hormonal carcinogenesis comes from control grafts without T+E2 or with T implants alone that showed no evidence of prostate pathology after 3 months of growth (Hu et al., 2011). Together with the in vitro prostasphere data, our findings raise the intriguing possibility that stem and early progenitor cell populations in human prostate tissues might be susceptible targets of elevated E2 during the induction of hormonal carcinogenesis in aging males. This is particularly appealing in light of the recent evidence that transformation of prostate stem cells is sufficient for prostate cancer initiation in rodent and human models (Goldstein et al., 2010, Lawson et al., 2010).

Figure 6
Characterization of chimeric prostate tissue from normal human prostate progenitor cells and prostate cancer in chimeric grafted tissue induced by T+E2

In the above in vivo estrogen-initiated carcinogenesis model, the total lesion incidence in the chimeric grafts over 4 months was 43% epithelial hyperplasia, 31% high grade PIN and 11% adenocarcinoma (Hu et al., 2011). The relatively low cancer incidence in this novel system will permit the direct assessment of whether EDCs exposure are capable of increasing susceptibility of estrogen-induced PIN lesions and prostate cancer in human prostate tissue. Thus, through evaluation from both in vitro and in vivo assays, the new information gained will be of high value to the medical and regulatory communities in terms of providing strong and compelling evidence for negative effects of EDCs in humans. In addition, these models can be used as a basis for studies in other target organs and contribute to long-term growth in the research enterprise on endocrine disruptors. If cancers are seeded by transformed stem cells as the stem cell theory for cancer development posits, an increased number of stem and progenitor cells in response to chronic and/or elevated estrogens and EDCs would increase prostate cancer risk by the shear presence of more cells available for transformation. Furthermore, it is possible that elevated estrogens and EDC exposures, acting through ER signaling pathways in the adult prostate progenitor cells, may directly reprogram or transform these cells, thus rendering them with tumor initiating capacity. Evidence in support of this comes from our studies in rodent models, where developmental estrogen exposures reprogram the prostate, leading to increased basal cell numbers and differentiation defects of the adult epithelium that predispose to dysplasia (Prins et al., 2001). Recent studies indicate that epigenetic mechanisms underlie developmental reprogramming of end organs by estrogens and EDCs (Ho et al., 2006, Newbold et al., 2006) and ongoing studies in our laboratories are underway to investigate epigenetic modifications in the human prostate stem/progenitor cells. In summary, studies using the novel human model systems described herein have the potential to provide direct evidence for an effect of early-life EDCs exposures on adult human prostate health and disease.

Highlights

  • Early-life estrogens and EDC exposures heighten susceptibility for prostate carcinogenesis with aging.
  • Human prostate epithelial stem and early stage progenitor cells express ERs and are direct targets for estrogenic actions.
  • Estrogens, retinoids and EDCs modulate human prostate stem cell self-renewal and differentiation capabilities.
  • This is the first evidence to demonstrate that prostate stem/progenitor cells are EDC targets which may underlie life-long increased carcinogenic risk.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by NIH grants RC2 ES018758, R01 ES015584 and R03 CA136023.

Abbreviations

E2
estradiol
EDCs
endocrine disrupting chemicals
AR
androgen receptor
ER
estrogen receptor
PIN
prostate intraepithelial neoplasia
PCBs
Polychlorinated biphenyls
PCDDs
polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins
POPs
persistent organic pollutants
TCDD
2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin
AhR
aryl hydrocarbon receptor
PSA
prostate specific antigen
PSCA
prostate stem cell antigen
ABCG2
a member of the ATP binding cassette (ABC) transporters
BCRP
breast cancer resistance protein
HSC
hematopoietic stem cells
DHT
dihydrotestosterone
HGF
hepatocyte growth factor
PR
progesterone receptor

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  • Alavanja MC, Samanic C, Dosemeci M, Lubin J, Tarone R, Lynch CF, Knott C, Thomas K, Hoppin JA, Barker J, Coble J, Sandler DP, Blair A. Use of agricultural pesticides and prostate cancer risk in the Agricultural Health Study cohort. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;157:800–814. [PubMed]
  • Aronson KJ, Wilson JW, Hamel M, Diarsvitri W, Fan W, Woolcott C, Heaton JP, Nickel JC, Macneily A, Morales A. Plasma organochlorine levels and prostate cancer risk. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 20:434–45. [PubMed]
  • Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Liu J, Webber MM, Waalkes MP. Estrogen signaling and disruption of androgen metabolism in acquired androgen-independence during cadmium carcinogenesis in human prostate epithelial cells. Prostate. 2007a;67:135–45. [PubMed]
  • Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Waalkes MP. Inorganic arsenic and human pro state cancer. Envir Hlth Prospect. 2008;116:158–164. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Webber MM, Waalkes MP. Mechanisms of acquired androgen independence during arsenic-induced malignant transformation of human prostate epithelial cells. Environ Health Perspect. 2007b;115:2. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Bisson I, Prowse DM. Wnt signaling regulates self-renewal and differentiation of prostate cancer cells with stem cell characteristics. Cell Research. 2009 e-pub ahead of print. [PubMed]
  • Bosland MC. Chemical and hormonal induction of prostate cancer in animal models. Urol Oncol. 1996;2:103–110. [PubMed]
  • Brown MD, Gilmore PE, Hart CA, Samuel JD, Ramani VA, George NJ, Clarke NW. Characterization of benign and malignant prostate epithelial Hoechst 33342 side populations. Prostate. 2007;67:1384–96. [PubMed]
  • Burger PE, Xiong X, Coetzee S, Salm SN, Moscatelli D, Goto K, Wilson EL. Sca-1 expression identifies stem cells in the proximal region of prostatic ducts with high capacity to reconstitute prostatic tissue. PNAS. 2005;102:180–5. [PubMed]
  • Calafat AM, Weuve J, Ye X, Jia LT, Hu H, Ringer S, Huttner K, Hauser R. Exposure to bisphenol A and other phenols in neonatal intensive care unit premature infants. Envir Hlth Perspect. 2009;117:639–44. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Calafat AM, Ye X, Wong LY, Reidy JA, Needham LL. Exposure of the U.S. population to bisphenol A and 4-tertiary-octylphenol: 2003-2004. Envir Hlth Prospect. 2008;116:39–44. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Charles LE, Loomis D, Shy CM, Newman B, Millikan R, Nylander-French LA, Couper D. Electromagnetic fields, polychlorinated biphenyls, and prostate cancer mortality in electric utility workers. Am J Epidemiology. 2003;157:683–91. [PubMed]
  • Chen CJ, Kuo T, Wu M. Aresenic and cancers. Lancet. 1988;1:414–415. [PubMed]
  • Cheng AS, Culhane AC, Chan MW, Venkataramu CR, Ehrich M, Nasir A, Rodriguez BA, Liu J, Yan PS, Quackenbush J, Nephew KP, Yeatman TJ, Huang TH. Epithelial progeny of estrogen-exposed breast progenitor cells display a cancer-like methylome. Can Research. 2008;68:1786–96. [PubMed]
  • Collins AT, Habib FK, Maitland NJ, Neal DE. Identification and isolation of human prostate epithelial stem cells based on alpha(2)beta(1)-integrin expression. J Cell Science. 2001;114:3865–72. [PubMed]
  • Davey JC, Bodwell JE, Gosse JA, Hamilton J. Arsenic as an endocrine disruptor: effects of arsenic on estrogen receptor-mediated gene expression in vivo and in cell culture. Toxicol Sci. 2007;98:75–86. [PubMed]
  • De Marzo A, Nelson W, Meeker A, Coffey D. Stem cell features of benign and malignant prostate epithelial cells. J Urol. 1998;160:2381–2392. [PubMed]
  • Ding XW, Wu JH, Jiang CP. ABCG2: a potential marker of stem cells and novel target in stem cell and cancer therapy. Life Sci. 2010;86:631–7. [PubMed]
  • Dodds EC, Lawson W. Synthetic oestrogenic agents without phenanthrene nucleus. Nature. 1936;137:996–997.
  • Dolle P, Ruberte E, Leory P, Morriss-Kay G, Chambon P. Retinoic acid receptors and cellular retinoid binding proteins I. A systematic study of their differential pattern of transcription during mouse organogenesis. Development. 1990;110:1133–1151. [PubMed]
  • Eddington AN, Ritter L. Predicting plasma concentrations of bisphenol A in children younger than 2 years of age after typical feeding schedules, using a physiologically based toxicokinetic model. Envir Hlth Perspect. 2009;117:645–52. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Egeland GM, Sweeney MH, Fingerhut MA, Wille KK, Schnorr TM, Halperin WE. Total serum testosterone and gonadotropins in workers exposed to dioxin. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;139:272–81. [PubMed]
  • Eisenberger MA, Blumenstein BA, Crawford ED, Miller G, McLeod DG, Loehrer PJ, Wilding G, Sears K, Culkin DJ, Thompson IM, Jr, Bueschen AJ, Lowe BA. Bilateral orchiectomy with or without flutamide for metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1036–42. [PubMed]
  • Ellem SJ, Risbridger GP. Treating prostate cancer: A rationale for targeting local oestrogens. Nature Reviews. 2007;7:621–627. [PubMed]
  • Foran CM, Peterson BN, Benson WH. Transgenerational and developmental exposure of Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes) to ethinylestradiol results in endocrine and reproductive differences in the response to ethinylestradiol as adults. Toxicol Sci. 2002;68:389–402. [PubMed]
  • Fouse SD, Shen Y, Pellegrini M, Cole S, Meissner A, Van Neste L, Jaenisch R, Fan G. Promoter CpG methylation contributes to ES cell gene regulation in parallel with Oct4/Nanog, PcG complex, and histone H3 K4/K27 trimethylation. Cell Stem Cell. 2008;2:160–169. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Garraway IP, Sun W, Tran CP, Perner S, Zhang B, Goldstein AS, Hahm SA, Haider M, Head CS, Reiter RE, Rubin MA, Witte ON. Human prostate sphere-forming cells represent a subset of basal epithelial cells capable of glandular regeneration in vivo. Prostate. 2010;70:491–501. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Garraway LA, Lin D, Signoretti S, Waltregny D, Dilks J, Bhattacharya N, Loda M. Intermediate basal cells of the prostate: in vitro and in vivo characterization. Prostate. 2003;55:206–18. [PubMed]
  • Goldstein AS, Huang J, Guo C, Garraway IP, Witte ON. Identification of a cell of origin for human prostate cancer. Science. 2010;329:568–71. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Goldstein AS, Lawson DA, Cheng D, Sun W, Garraway IP, Witte ON. Trop2 identifies a subpopulation of murine and human prostate basal cells with stem cell characteristics. PNAS. 2008;105:20882–20887. [PubMed]
  • Goodell MA, Brose K, Paradis G, Conner AS, Mulligan RC. Isolation and functional properties of murine hematopoietic stem cells that are replicating in vivo. J Exp Med. 1996;183:1797–806. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Gu G, Yuan J, Wills M, Kasper S. Prostate cancer cells with stem cell characteristics reconstitute the original human tumor in vivo. Cancer Research. 2007;67:4708–4715. [PubMed]
  • Gupta A, Ketchum N, Roehrborn CG, Schecter A, Aragaki CC, Michalek JE. Serum dioxin, testosterone, and subsequent risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a prospective cohort study of Air Force veterans. Environ Health Perspect. 2006a;114:1649–54. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Gupta A, Schecter A, Aragaki CC, Roehrborn CG. Dioxin exposure and benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Occup Environ Med. 2006b;48:708–14. [PubMed]
  • Hardell L, Andersson SO, Carlberg M, Bohr L, van Bavel B, Lindström G, Björnfoth H, Ginman C. Adipose tissue concentrations of persistent organic pollutants and the risk of prostate cancer. J Occup Environ Med. 2006;48:700–7. [PubMed]
  • Heindel JJ. The fetal basis of adult disease: Role of environmental exposures--introduction. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2005;73:131–2. [PubMed]
  • Henderson B, Ross R, Pike M, Casagrande J. Endogenous hormones as a major factor in human cancer. Cancer Res. 1982;42:3232–3239. [PubMed]
  • Henderson BE, Bernstein L, Ross RK, Depue RH, Judd HL. The early in utero oestrogen and testosterone environment of blacks and whites: potential effects on male offspring. Br J Cancer. 1988;57:216–218. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Ho SM, Tang WY, Belmonte J, Prins GS. Developmental exposure estradiol and bisphenol A (BPA) increases susceptibility to prostate carcinogenesis and epigenetically regulates phosphodiesterase type 4 variant (PDE4D4) in the rat prostate. Cancer Research. 2006;66:5624–5632. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Hu WY, Shi GB, Lam HM, Hu DP, Ho SM, Madueke IC, Kajdacsy-Balla A, Prins GS. Estrogen-initiated transformation of prostate epithelium derived from normal human prostate stem-progenitor cells. Endocrinology. 2011;152:2150–63. [PubMed]
  • Hudson DL. Prostate epithelial stem cell culture. Cytotechnology. 2003;41:189–96. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Huff J, Lunn RM, Waalkes MP, Tomatis L, Infante PF. Cadmium-induced cancers in animals and in humans. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2007;13:202–12. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Huggins C, Hodges CF. Studies on prostatic cancer. I. The effect of castration, of estrogen, and of androgen injection on serum phosphatases in metastic carcinoma of the prostate. Can Res. 1941;1:293–297. [PubMed]
  • Huss JJ, Lai L, Barrios RJ, Hirschi KK, Greenberg NM. Retionoic acid slows progression and promotes apoptosis of spontaneous prostate cancer. Prostate. 2004;61:142–152. [PubMed]
  • Isaacs JT, Barrack ER, Isaacs WB, Coffey DS. The Prostatic Cell: Structure and Function. Part A. Alan R Liss, Inc; New York: 1981. The relationship of cellular structure and function: the matrix system; pp. 1–24. [PubMed]
  • Jacob A, Budhiraja S, Qian X, Clevidence D, Costa RH, Reichel RR. Retinoic acid-mediated activation of HNF-3α during EC stem cell differentiation. Nuc Acids Res. 1994;22:2126–2133. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Hao Y, Xu J, Murray T, Thun MJ. Cancer Statistics, 2008. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008;58:71–96. [PubMed]
  • Kasper S. Exploring the origins of the normal prostate and prostate cancer stem cell. Stem Cell Reviews. 2008;4:193–201. [PubMed]
  • Kasper S. Identification, characterization, and biological relevance of prostate cancer stem cells from clinical specimens. Urol Oncol. 2009;27:301–3. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Kaufman JM, Vermeulen A. The decline of androgen levels in elderly men and its clinical and therapeutic implications. Endocrine Reviews. 2005;26:833–876. [PubMed]
  • Keri R, Ho SM, Hunt PA, Knudsen KE, Soto AM, Prins GS. An Evaluation of Evidence for the Carcinogenic Activity of Bisphenol A: Report of NIEHS Expert Panel on BPA. Reproductive Toxicology. 2007;24:240–252. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Kester MH, Bulduk S, Tibboel D, Meinl W, Glatt H, Falany CN, Coughtrie MW, Bergman A, Safe SH, Kuiper GG, Schuur AG, Brouwer A, Visser T. Potent inhibition of estrogen sulfotransferase by hydroxylated PCB metabolites: a novel pathway explaining the estrogenic activity of PCBs. Endocrinology. 2000;141:1897–900. [PubMed]
  • Kester MH, Bulduk S, van Toor H, Tibboel D, Meinl W, Glatt H, Falany CN, Coughtrie MW, Schuur AG, Brouwer A, Visser TJ. Potent inhibition of estrogen sulfotransferase by hydroxylated metabolites of polyhalogenated aromatic hydrocarbons reveals alternative mechanism for estrogenic activity of endocrine disrupters. J Clin Endo Metab. 2002;87:1142–50. [PubMed]
  • Kuiper GG, Lemmen JG, Carlsson B, Corton JC, Safe SH, van der Saag PT, van der Burg B, Gustafsson JA. Interaction of estrogenic chemicals and phytoestrogens with estrogen receptor beta. Endocrinology. 1998a;139:4252–63. [PubMed]
  • Kuiper GGJM, Lemmen JG, Carlsson B, Corton JC, Safe SH, van der Saag PT, van der Burg B, Gustaffsson JA. Interaction of estrogenic chemicals and phytoestrogens with estrogen receptor β Endocrinology. 1998b;139:4252–4263. [PubMed]
  • Kuroda M, Oikawa K, Ohbayashi T, Yoshida K, Yamada K, Mimura J, Matsuda Y, Fujii-Kuriyama Y, Mukai K. A dioxin sensitive gene, mammalian WAPL, is implicated in spermatogenesis. FEBS Lett. 2005;579:167–72. [PubMed]
  • Kuroda N, Kinoshita Y, Sun Y, Wada M, Kishikawa N, Nakashima K, Makino T, Nakazawa H. Measurement of bisphenol A levels in human blood serum and ascitic fluid by HPLC using a fluorescent labeling reagent. J Pharm Biol Anal. 2003;30:1743–49. [PubMed]
  • Lang SH, Stark M, Collins A, Paul AP, Stower MJ, Maitland NJ. Experimental prostate morphogenesis in response to stroma and three dimensional matrigel culture. Cell Growth and Differentiation. 2001;12:631–640. [PubMed]
  • Lawson DA, Witte ON. Stem cells in prostate cancer initiation and progression. J Clin Invest. 2007;117:2044–50. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lawson DA, Zong Y, Memarzadeh S, Xin L, Huang J, Witte ON. Basal epithelial stem cells are efficient targets for prostate cancer initiation. PNAS. 2010;107:2610–15. [PubMed]
  • Lee YJ, Ryu HY, Kim HK, Min CS, Lee JH, Kim E, Nam BH, Park JH, Jung JY, Jang DD, Park EY, Lee KH, Ma JY, Won HS, Im MW, Leem JH, Hong YC, Yoon HS. Maternal and fetal exposure to bisphenol A in Korea. Repro Toxicology. 2008;25:413–19. [PubMed]
  • Lemmen JG, Arends RJ, van der Saag PT, van der Burg B. In vivo imaging of activated estrogen receptors in utero by estrogens and bisphenol A. Envir Hlth Perspect. 2004;112:1544–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Leong KG, Wang BE, Johnson L, Gao WQ. Generation of a prostate from a single cell. Nature. 2008;456:804–8. [PubMed]
  • Leung YK, Lam HM, Wu S, Song D, Levin L, Cheng L, Wu CL, Ho SM. Estrogen receptor beta2 and beta5 are associated with poor prognosis in prostate cancer, and promote cancer cell migration and invasion. Endoccrine Related Cancer. 2010;17:675–89. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lewis DR, Southwick JW, Ouellet-Hellstrom R, J R, Calderon R. Drinking water aresenic in Utah: A cohort mortality study. Envir Hlth Prospect. 1999;107:359–365. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lowsley OS. The development of the human prostate gland with reference to the development of other structures at the neck of the urinary bladder. Am J Anat. 1912;13:299–348.
  • Lukacs RU, Goldstein AS, Lawson DA, Cheng D, Witte ON. Isolation, cultivation and characterization of adult murine prostate stem cells. Nature Protocols. 2010a;5:702–13. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Lukacs RU, Goldstein AS, Lawson DA, Cheng D, Witte ON. Isolation, cultivation and characterization of adult murine prostate stem cells. Nat Protoc. 2010b;5:702–13. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Mahajan R, Bonner MR, Hoppin JA, Alavanja MC. Phorate exposure and incidence of cancer in the agricultural health study. Environ Health Perspect. 2006:8. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Maitland NJ, Collins AT. Prostate cancer stem cells: a new target for therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:2862–70. [PubMed]
  • Matthews J, Gustafsson JA. Estrogen receptor and aryl hydrocarbon receptor signaling pathways. Nucl Recept Signal. 2006;4:e016. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Metallo CM, Ji L, de Pablo JJ, Palecek SP. Retinoic acid and bone morphogenetic protein signaling synergize to efficiently direct epithelial differentiation of human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells. 2008;26:372–80. [PubMed]
  • Meyer TE, Coker AL, Sanderson M, Symanski E. A case-control study of farming and prostate cancer in African-American and Caucasian men. Occup Environ Med. 2007;64:155–160. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Miki J, Rhim J. Prostate cell cultures as in vitro models for the study of normal stem cells and cancer stem cells. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2008;11:32–9. [PubMed]
  • Modugno F, W JL, Trump DL, Zmuda JM, Shea P, Cauley JA, Ferrell RE. Allelic variants of aromatase and androgen and estrogen receptors: toward a multigenic model of prostate cancer risk. Clinical Cancer Research. 2001;7:3092–3096. [PubMed]
  • Mollard R, Shyselinck N, Wendling O, Chamson P, Mark M. Stage-dependent responses of the developing lung to retinoic acid signaling. Int J Dev Biol. 2000;44:457–462. [PubMed]
  • Morrison H, Savitz D, Semenciw R, Hulka B, Mao Y, Morison D, Wigle D. Farming and prostate cancer mortality. Am J Epidemiol. 1993;137:270–280. [PubMed]
  • Nelles JL, Hu W-Y, Prins GS. Estrogen action and prostate cancer. Expert Review of Endocrinology and Metabolism. 2011;6:437–451. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Newbold RR, Padilla-Banks E, Jefferson WN. Adverse effects of the model environmental estrogen diethylstilbestrol are transmitted to subsequent generations. Endocrinology. 2006;147:S11–17. [PubMed]
  • Parent ME, Siemiatycki J. Occupation and prostate cancer. Epidemiology Reviews. 2001;23:138–43. [PubMed]
  • Patterson DG, Jr, Wong LY, Turner WE, Caudill SP, Dipietro ES, McClure PC, Cash TP, Osterloh JD, Pirkle JL, Sampson EJ, Needham LL. Levels in the U.S. population of those persistent organic pollutants (2003-2004) included in the Stockholm Convention or in other long range transboundary air pollution agreements. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43:1211–8. [PubMed]
  • Peehl DM. Growth of prostatic epithelial and stromal cells in vitro. In: Russell PJ, Kingsley EA, editors. Prostate Cancer Methods and Protocols. Humana Press; Totowa, NJ: 2003. pp. 41–57.
  • Presnell SC, Petersen B, Heidaran M. Stem cells in adult tissues. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2002;13:369–76. [PubMed]
  • Prince MM, Ruder AM, Hein MJ, Waters MA, Whelan EA, Nilsen N, Ward EM, Schnorr TM, Laber PA, Davis-King KE. Mortality and exposure response among 14,458 electrical capacitor manufacturing workers exposed to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) Environ Health Perspect. 2006;114:1508–14. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Prins GS. Neonatal estrogen exposure induces lobe-specific alterations in adult rat prostate androgen receptor expression. Endocrinology. 1992;130:3703–3714. [PubMed]
  • Prins GS. Endocrine disruptors and prostate cancer risk. Endocrine Related Cancer. 2008;16:649–653. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Prins GS, Birch L. Neonatal estrogen up-regulates estrogen receptor in prostatic smooth muscle cells and increases extracellular TGFβ1. Program of the 76th Annual Meeting of the Endocrine Society; Anaheim, CA. 1994. p. 496.
  • Prins GS, Birch L, Habermann H, Chang WY, Tebeau C, Putz O, Bieberich C. Influence of neonatal estrogens on rat prostate development. Reprod Fertil Dev. 2001;13:241–252. [PubMed]
  • Prins GS, Birch L, Tang WY, Ho SM. Developmental estrogen exposures predispose to prostate carcinogenesis with aging. Reproductive Toxicology. 2007;23:374–382. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Prins GS, Birch L, Ye SH, Ray V. Estrogen exposure leads to prostate lobe-specific dysplasia and adenomas in the aging rat. American Society of Andrology; Minneapolis, MN: 1996. p. 52.
  • Prins GS, Ho SM. Early life estrogens and prostate cancer in an animal model. Journal of Developmental Origins of Health and Disease. 2010:365–370. online Nov 9, 2010.
  • Prins GS, Korach KS. The Role of Estrogens and Estrogen Receptors in Normal Prostate Growth and Disease. Steroids. 2008;73:233–244. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Prins GS, Tang WY, Belmonte J, Ho SM. Perinatal Exposure to Oestradiol and Bisphenol A Alters the Prostate Epigenome and Increases Susceptibility to Carcinogenesis. Basic and Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology. 2008;102:134–138. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Prins GS, Woodham C, Lepinske M, Birch L. Effects of neonatal estrogen exposure on prostatic secretory genes and their correlation with androgen receptor expression in the separate prostate lobes of the adult rat. Endocrinology. 1993;132:2387–2398. [PubMed]
  • Prins GS, Ye SH, Birch L, Ho SM, Kannan K. Serum Bisphenol A Pharmacokinetics and Prostatic Responses following Oral and Subcutaneous Exposures in Neonatal Sprague-Dawley Rats. Repro Toxicology. 2011;31:1–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Reuben SH, LaSalle DL, Jr, Kripke ML. The President’s Cancer Panel. National Institutes of Health; Bethesda, MD: 2010. Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What we can do now; pp. 1–147.
  • Richardson GD, Robson CN, Lang SH, Neal DE, Maitland NJ, Collins AT. CD133, a novel marker for human prostatic epithelial stem cells. J Cell Science. 2003;117:3539–45. [PubMed]
  • Ricke W, Ishii K, Ricke EA, Simko J, Wang Y, Hayward SW, Cunha GR. Steroid hormones stimulate human prostate cancer progression and metastasis. Int J Cancer 52. 2006;118:2123–2131. [PubMed]
  • Ritchie JM, Vial SL, Fuortes LJ, Guo H, Reedy VE, Smith EM. Organochlorines and risk of prostate cancer. J Occup Environ Med. 2003;45:692–702. [PubMed]
  • Schenk JM, Riboli E, Chatterjee N, Leitzmann MF, Ahn J, Albanes D, Reding DJ, Wang Y, Friesen MD, Hayes RB, Peters U. Serum retinol and prostate cancer risk: a nested case-control study in the prostate, lung, colorectal, and ovarian cancer screening trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18:1227–31. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Smith S, Neaves W, Teitelbaum S. Adult Versus Embryonic Stem Cells: Treatments. Science. 2007;316(5830) [PubMed]
  • Song KH, Lee K, Choi HS. Endocrine disruptor bisphenol A induces orphan nuclear receptor Nur77 gene expression and steroidogenesis in mouse testicular Leydig cells. Endocrinology. 2002;143:2208–15. [PubMed]
  • Steiner MS, Pound CR. Phase IIA clinical trial to test the efficacy and safety of Toremifene in men with high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Clin Prostate Cancer. 2003;2:24–31. [PubMed]
  • Usmani KA, Cho TM, Rose RL, Hodgson E. Inhibition of the human liver microsomal and human cytochrome P450 1A2 and 3A4 metabolism of estradiol by deployment-related and other chemicals. Drug Metab Dispos. 2006;34:1606–14. [PubMed]
  • Usmani KA, Rose RL, Hodgson E. Inhibition and activation of the human liver microsomal and human cytochrome P450 3A4 metabolism of testosterone by deployment-related chemicals. Drug Metab Dispos. 2003;31:384–391. [PubMed]
  • van Leenders G, Dijkman H, Hulsbergen-van de Kaa C, Ruiter D, Schalken J. Demonstration of intermediate cells during human prostate epithelial differentiation in situ and in vitro using triple-staining confocal scanning microscopy. Lab Invest. 2000;80:1251–8. [PubMed]
  • Van Maele-Fabry G, Libotte V, Willems J, Lison D. Review and meta-analysis of risk estimates for prostate cancer in pesticide manufacturing workers. Cancer Causes Control. 2006;17:353–73. [PubMed]
  • Vander Griend DJ, Karthaus WL, Dalrymple S, Meeker A, DeMarzo AM, Isaacs JT. The role of CD133 in normal human prostate stem cells and malignant cancer-initiating cells. Cancer Research. 2008;68:9703–11. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Vezina CM, Lin TM, Peterson RE. AHR signaling in prostate growth, morphogenesis, and disease. Biochem Pharmacol. 2009;77:566–76. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Waalkes MP. Cadmium carcinogenesis in review. J Inorg Biochem. 2000;79:241–4. [PubMed]
  • Walsh DE, Dockery P, Doolan CM. Estrogen receptor independent rapid non-genomic effects of environmental estrogens on [Ca2+]i in human breast cancer cells. Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2005;230:23–30. [PubMed]
  • Wang X, Kruithof-de Julio M, Economides KD, Walker D, Yu H, Halili MV, Hu YP, Price SM, Abate-Shen C, Shen MM. A luminal epithelial stem cell that is a cell of origin for prostate cancer. Nature. 2009;461:495–500. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Wang Y, Hayward SW, Cao M, Thayer K, Cunha GR. Cell differentiation lineage in the prostate. Differentiation. 2001;68:270–279. [PubMed]
  • Xin L, Lawson DA, Witte ON. The Sca-1 cell surface marker enriches for a prostate-regenerating cell subpopulation that can initiate prostate tumorigenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102:6942–7. [PubMed]
  • Xin L, Lukacs RU, Lawson DA, Cheng D, Witte ON. Self-renewal and multilineage differentiation in vitro from murine prostate stem cells. Stem Cells. 2007;25:2760–9. [PubMed]
  • Zhou S, Schuetz JD, Bunting KD, Colapietro AM, Sampath J, Morris JJ, Lagutina I, Grosveld GC, Osawa M, Nakauchi H, Sorrentino BP. The ABC transporter Bcrp1/ABCG2 is expressed in a wide variety of stem cells and is a molecular determinant of the side-population phenotype. Nat Med. 2001;7:1028–34. [PubMed]