Long-term administration of prolactin or testosterone induced similar precancerous prostate lesions in rats

Among all types of tumors in men, prostate cancer (CaP) is the second most common worldwide (≈ 15%) [1]. Every year, hundreds of thousands of new cases of CaP are detected and up to 6.6% of them result in death [1]. The etiology of the disease is diverse, and may include family history, age (> 65) [2], race (> canadian pharmacy yaz african-ancestry) [3], diet (> high-fat products) [4], obesity (body mass index (BMI) > 25) [5], and bad habits, such as smoking [6]. For that reason, treatments are also diverse and may include surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, vaccines, or hormone treatments. The latter is mainly focused on the androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), and it is perhaps, the first choice therapy [7].

The goal of ADT is to reduce the levels of androgens that reach the prostate. ADT can slow down the growth of the gland and may decrease its size. CaP has been classically associated with androgens not only because they induce cell division, but also because they are associated with spontaneous mutations that result in more and abnormal cells within the gland [8, 9]. Paradoxically, by the age of 65 the blood levels of androgens, i.e. testosterone (T) decrease by more than 50% as compared to the levels observed at age 20 [10–13], and other hormones such as prolactin (PRL) increase by at least 30% above normal levels in elderly [14]. A similar shift in the concentrations of those hormones is observed in studies of the prostate of laboratory rats. For instance, treatment with dopamine blockers results in a twofold increase of serum PRL in males, but also results in a twofold decrease in T [15]. PRL has both direct and indirect effects on the gland, and interacts with androgens in normal and abnormal processes [16, 17]. In fact, CaP patients express higher blood levels of PRL and less T [18], as compared to healthy people of the same age [19–21].

Animal models and cell lines support the idea that PRL, via its receptor (PRLR), activates the Jak2-Stat5a/b pathway that may result in tumorige­nesis [22]. So far, studies on laboratory rats have shown that treatment with PRL results in enlargement of the prostate [17, 23], suggesting that high levels participate in the histological alterations in the gland. However, the timed progression and the specific histological alterations caused by high levels of PRL during long periods have not been described yet. Thus, in the present study we assessed the effects of treatment with PRL during 4; 12 or 24 weeks on laboratory rats in comparison with treatment with T alone, or PRL + T combination. We hypothesized that PRL would induce prostatic precancerous lesions as severe as those induced by T. In addition, we hypothesized that PRL + T combination would induce more severe alterations than either of the two hormones given alone.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Animals. Fifty-four Wistar male rats were used (Rattus norvegicus albinus). They were purchased from a certified animal supplier in Mexico (Rismart^®) and were 12 weeks old at the start of the study. The rats were housed in large plexiglas cages (50 × 30 × 20 cm), and kept in a colony room at the Center for Brain Research, University of Veracruz in a 12–12 h reverse Light-Dark cycle (lights off at 8:00 h). Water and commercial feed (Rismart^® rat chow) were provided ad libitum. All the experimental procedures were approved by an admission committee of the graduate program in neuroetho­logy, following the Official Mexican Norm NOM-062-ZOO-1999 for use and care of laboratory animals.

Hormone treatments. Rats were randomly organized in 5 groups, depending on the hormone treatment they received. 1) The PRL group received intraperitoneal (i.p.) injections of ovine PRL (SIGMA^®), of a dose of 1.7 IU diluted in 100 ml of injectable grade water, equivalent to 50 µg/100 ml of PRL every 12 h. 2) The T group received a subcutaneous (s.c.) silastic implant in the back (Dow Corning Corp^®. 062X0125 ID); filled with T propionate (100 mg/kg of body weight). The implant allowed the T propionate (T) to be constantly released, which maintained high plasma levels of the hormone as previously shown [24]. 3) The PRL + T group received both treatments. 4). The control group was injected with saline solution (0.9%) 100 µl, i.p. every 12 h, and received an empty s.c. implant in the back. 5) The intact group comprised the animals that received no treatment, but were handled during the same time as experimental animals. Each group was further divided in 3 subgroups, depending on the number of weeks they received treatment (4; 12, or 24).

Prostate samples and histology. One day after the end of hormone treatment of each group, the rats were deeply anesthetized with sodium pentobarbital (35 mg/kg i.p.). Then, the accessory sexual organs were carefully removed and placed into a container with isotonic saline solution. Anesthetized rats were then sacrificed with a second overdose of pentobarbital. The prostate was identified under a dissecting microscope (MEJI, EMZ-TR^®), and was further divided into ventral (VP) and dorsolateral (DLP) portions. The VP and DLP were immersed in formol 10% during 24 h, then dehydrated in alcohol 70% and 80% (1 h each), 95% (3×2 h each), and ethanol 100% overnight, and two more changes (1 h each) the following day, and finally in xylene (3×1 h each). The tissue was then embedded in paraffin wax 2×2 h each), sliced (5 μm thick) with a microtome (RM 2125RT Leica^®), mounted on slides in a bath at 52 °C (containing pork skin-based gelatin 2.5 mg/100 ml) and then processed for Hematoxylin-Eosin dye technique as follows: 1 h at 57 °C, deparaffinization in xylene (3×5 min each), rehydrated in alcohol/xylene (1:1) 5 min, ethanol 96% 3 min, hematoxylin (10 min), water (30 s), acid alcohol (quick immersion), water (10 s), lithium carbonate (30 s), water (10 s), and eosin (4 quick immersions). Dehydration occurred in ethanol 96% (3 min), ethanol 100% (2 min), ethanol/xylene 1:1 (2 min), and xylene (5 min). Then, permount was added and slides were coverslipped, air dried, and observed under a light microscope (Olympus Ax70). Photomicrographs were taken at × 40 magnification and analyzed by the cialisdosage-storeonline same experimenter (DH).

RESULTS

A thorough analysis did not demonstrate any histological abnormalities in rats from groups 4 and 5 (control and intact, respectively) after 4; 12 or 24 weeks. In the DLP of intact rats the epithelium was cubic, homogeneous in size, with scarce papillae. The interstitial space was homogeneous and contained collagen-like eosinophilic reticular areas. The cell nuclei were homogeneous in size, had a polar position towards the base with a nucleus-cytoplasm ratio (N:C) of 1:4, and chromatins were homogeneous and dispersed. The myoepithelium was euplasic and the pattern observed at low magnification was tubular (Fig. 1, a, e, i and Table 1). The VP of intact rats was also normal at 4; 12 or 24 weeks of observation. The epithelium was columnar, homogeneous in size, and formed scarce papillae. The interstitial space was homogeneous and contained collagen-like eosinophilic reticular areas. Nuclei were homogeneous in size, with a polar position location towards the base, with a N:C ratio of 1:4, and the chromatins were homogeneous. The myoepithelium was euplasic and the pattern observed at low magnification was tubular (Fig. 2, a, e, i and Table 2).

Fig. 1. Dorsolateral prostate (× 40). Rats were treated during 4; 12 or 24 weeks with prolactin (PRL), testosterone (T), both (PRL + T), or served as controls. Histological abnormalities were observed as early as 4 weeks of treatment (see Table 1 for details). Bar indicates 50 µm

Fig. 2. Ventral prostate (×40). Rats were treated during 4; 12 or 24 weeks with prolactin (PRL), testosterone (T), both (PRL+T), or served as controls. Histological abnormalities were observed as early as 4 weeks of treatment (see Table 2 for details). Bar indicates 50 µm

Unlike the rats from the intact or control groups, those treated with PRL, T or PRL + T displayed histological abnormalities in the DLP and VP as early as in 4 weeks of treatment, but the degree of malignancy in the lesions increased after 12 or 24 weeks. For instance, after 4 weeks of treatment with PRL alone, the epithelium of the DLP was not longer cubic, but columnar (metaplasic). There was hyperthrophy and hyperplasia, the interstitial space was not longer observable, but was rather compressed, and the cell nuclei were heterogeneous in size (anisokaryiosis) [25, 26]. Other features such as myoepithelium, pattern, lumen content and chromatin were apparently normal at 4 weeks of treatment, but were abnormal after 12 or 24 weeks. Specifically, after 12 or 24 weeks of treatment with PRL alone the epithelium showed dysplasia, there were many papillae, the interstice contained many mononuclear cells, there was anisokaryosis, the nuclei were not longer polar, the N:C ratio was abnormal 1:1, the chromatin was compact, and the myoepithelim was proplastic (Fig. 1, b, f, j and see Table 1). In the VP similar abnormalities were observed after 12 weeks of PRL (Fig. 2, b, f, j and see Table 2). The effects of treatment with T were identified ahead of those induced by PRL treatment. For example, with only four weeks of treatment rats that received T or PRL + T expressed more severe histological alterations than both the DLP and VP rats treated with PRL alone. The epithelium showed dysplasia (with T) or severe dysplasia (with PRL + T) within the first month. In addition, the N:C ratio was 1:1 in T or PRL + T groups, and the polarity of the nucleus was completely lost. Altogether, these data indicate that PRL alone was sufficient to induce precancerous alterations in the prostate of rats. The lesions were similar to those caused by T alone at 12 or 24 weeks, but the latter induced more alterations during the first 4 weeks. In addition, the combination of PRL + cialis soft tabs T increased the degree of malignancy, even after 4 weeks of treatment (Fig. 1, c, d, g, h, k, l and 2, c, d, g, h, k, l).

DISCUSSION

Normal levels of PRL contribute to the growth and functioning of the prostate [27]. PRL and its receptor (PRLR) are present in the gland during both fetal development and adulthood [22, 28–30], and they are needed to maintain a normal weight and functions of the prostate. In one study with pup rats the low levels of PRL (reduced with injections of a rabbit anti-rat PRL serum) resulted in significant reduction of the weights of the prostate and seminal vesicles [31]. By contrast, abnormal high PRL levels result in an enlargement of the prostate [17, 23, 24, 32]. Earlier we have reported that prostate enlarges in rats when PRL in blood during two continuous weeks reaches chronic steady levels of about 40 ng/ml [33] exceeding only by 5% the normal highest PRL levels expressed in every circadian cycle (12–38 ng/ml) [24]. Human patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) have higher blood levels of PRL, and the same occurs in patients with CaP [21]. Prostate may not depend on pituitary PRL for its growth since the gland itself can produce PRL by its secretory epithelium [29]. Furthermore, high levels of PRL are also found in obese individuals, suggesting that the adipose tissue itself may function as an endocrine organ [34–36]. Interestingly, the expression of PRLR is reduced in prostate of the patients with the high grade cancer (>4 in Gleason scale) [28]. However, it has been argued that such reduction of PRLR may be associated with the presence of poorly differentiated prostatic cells, which express less PRLR [28].

Our results indicate that in rats, high levels of PRL during periods of 4 weeks or more result in histological alterations of the prostate that may be considered as precancerous. The PRL-induced lesions are very similar to those induced by T alone, but the combination of both hormones results in more severe histological alterations after 4 weeks. Anysokaryosis, polarity and alterations in N:C ratio indicate the changes in chromosome organization, which in turn can affect gene expression [37] resulting in dysplasia. In addition, the myoepithelium was proplastic, and the chromatin was compact, which indicate that both hormone treatments did activate cell division. In addition, the presence of mononuclear cells in the interstice and the absence of the luminal content (see Tables 1, 2), suggest the activation of inflammation mechanisms as well. The combination of PRL + T resulted in similar, but more severe alterations. These results also indicate a synergistic effect of two hormones in the development of prostate pathology.

Therefore, according to the present study and ­others [22, 38–40], individuals with chronic high levels of PRL for 4 weeks or more may express abnormal precancerous histological features in the prostate. Altogether, the data support the idea that regardless of the source of PRL (e.g. systemic, pituitary, prostatic, or adipose) it may be responsible of histological alterations of the prostate that may become precancerous, even in individuals with low levels of androgens. In the last decade, some preclinical trials have also contri­buted to understanding the positive effect of anti-PRL treatment on CaP [41–44]. However, better outcomes have been found with the combined suppression of androgens and PRL together [45]. Further research is needed to understand the specific role of these hormones in the development and maintenance of prostate pathologies including cancer [46, 47].

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Mexican Council for Science and Technology (CONACyT) to DHC (No. 35258), to MEHA (No. 106531) and by academic group UV-CA-304 (Neuroquímica) from the Center for Brain Research, University of Veracruz. The authors want to give special thanks to MVZ Esp. Juan Rosales Raya for his assistance with the histological descriptions.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

REFERENCE

1. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: IARC Cancer Base No. 11. 2013, GLOBOCAN (http:\\globocan.iarc.fr).
2. Williams TH. Occult carcinoma and benign hypertrophy of the prostate in men over fifty years of age. Treat Serv Bull 1954; 9: 201–16.
3. Hoffman RM, Gilliland FD, Eley JW, et al. Racial and ethnic differences in advanced-stage prostate cancer: the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93: 388.
4. Chang SN, Han J, Abdelkader TS, et al. High animal fat intake enhances prostate cancer progression and reduces glutathione peroxidase 3 expression in early stages of TRAMP mice. Prostate 2014; 74: 1266–77.
5. Haque R, Van Den Eeden SK, Wallner LP, et al. Association of body mass index and prostate cancer mortality. Obes Res Clin Pract 2014; 8: e374–81.
6. Roman MD, Niclis C, Tumas N, et al. Tobacco smoking patterns and differential food effects on prostate and breast cancers among smokers and nonsmokers in Cordoba, Argentina. Eur J Cancer Prev 2014; 23: 310–8.
7. Sartor O, Silberstein J. Prostate cancer: primary ADT monotherapy not suitable for localized disease. Nat Rev Urol 2014; 11: 309–10.
8. Agoulnik IU, Krause WC, Bingman WE, et al. Repressors of androgen and progesterone receptor action. J Biol Chem 2003; 278: 31136–48.
9. Noble RL. Sex steroids as a cause of adenocarcinoma of the dorsal prostate in Nb rats, and their influence on the growth of transplants. Oncology 1977; 34: 138–41.
10. Gray A, Feldman HA, McKinlay JB, et al. Age, disease, and changing sex hormone levels in middle-aged men: results of the Massachusetts Male Aging Study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1991; 73: 1016–25.
11. Harman SM, Metter EJ, Tobin JD, et al. Longitudinal effects of aging on serum total and free testosterone levels in healthy men. Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2001; 86: 724–31.
12. Araujo AB, Esche GR, Kupelian V, et al. Prevalence of symptomatic androgen deficiency in men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007; 92: 4241–7.
13. Wu FC, Tajar A, Pye SR, et al. Hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis disruptions in older men are differentially linked to age and cialis bathtub ad modifiable risk factors: the European Male Aging Study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2008; 93: 2737–45.
14. Vekemans M, Robyn C. Influence of age on serum prolactin levels in women and men. Br Med J 1975; 4: 738–9.
15. Sluczanowska-Glabowska S, Laszczynska M, Wylot M, et al. The expression of androgen receptors in the epithelial cells of the rat prostate lateral lobe in experimental hyper­prolactinaemia: a morphological and immunohistochemical study. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2003; 62: 501–3.
16. Kindblom J. Actions of prolactin in the prostate gland, in Endocrine Updates. ND Horseman, ed. Springer US: Cincinnati, 2001.
17. Van Coppenolle F, Slomianny C, Carpentier F, et al. Effects of hyperprolactinemia on rat prostate growth: evidence of androgeno-dependence. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2001; 280: E120–9.
18. Mearini L, Zucchi A, Nunzi E, et al. Low serum testosterone levels are predictive of prostate cancer. World J Urol 2013; 31: 247–52.
19. Webber M. Polypeptide hormones and the prostate, in The Prostate Cell: structure and function. GP Murphy, AA Sandberg, JP Karr, eds. Alan R. Liss: New York, 1981.
20. Harper ME, Peeling WB, Cowley T, et al. Plasma steroids. Acta Endocrinol (Copenh) 1976; 81: 409–26.
21. Saroff J, Kirdoni RY, Chu TM, et al. Measurements of prolactin and androgens in patients with prostatic disease. Oncology 1980; 37: 46–52.
22. Goffin V, Hoang DT, Bogorad RL, et al. Prolactin regulation of the prostate gland: a female player in a male game. Nat Rev Urol 2011; 8: 597–607.
23. Negro-Vilar A, Saad WA, McCann SM. Evidence for a role of prolactin in prostate and seminal vesicle growth in immature male rats. Endocrinology 1977; 100: 729–37.
24. Hernandez ME, Soto-Cid A, Rojas F, et al. Prostate response to prolactin in sexually active male rats. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2006; 4: 28.
25. Webster M, Witkin KL, Cohen-Fix O. Sizing up the nucleus: nuclear shape, size and nuclear-envelope assembly. J Cell Sci 2009; 122: 1477–86.
26. Zink D, Fischer AH, Nickerson JA. Nuclear structure in cancer cells. Nat Rev Cancer 2004; 4: 677–87.
27. Mena F, Aguayo D, Hummelt G, et al. Regulación y control de la secreción de prolactina en la rata. Rev Fac Med UNAM 1992; 35: 115–23.
28. Leav I, Merk FB, Lee KF, et al. Prolactin receptor expression in the developing human prostate and in hyperplastic, dysplastic, and neoplastic lesions. Am J Pathol 1999; 154: 8.
29. Nevalainen MT, Valve EM, Ingleton PM, et al. Prolactin and prolactin receptors are expressed and functioning in the human prostate. J Clin Invest 1997; 99: 618–27.
30. Kruger TH, Haake P, Haverkamp J, et al. Effects of acute prolactin manipulation on sexual drive and function in males. J Endocrinol 2003; 179: 357–65.
31. Hostetter MW, Piacsek BE. The effect of prolactin deficiency during sexual maturation in the male rat. Biol Reprod 1977; 17: 574–7.
32. McPherson SJ, Wang H, Jones ME, et al. Elevated androgens and prolactin in aromatase-deficient mice cause enlargement, but not malignancy, of the prostate gland. Endocrinology 2001; 142: 2458–67.
33. Rodríguez S, Herrera D, Becerra P, et al. Prolactin and prostate cancer. Rev Med UV 2007; 7: 26–31.
34. McGown C, Birerdinc A, Younossi ZM. Adipose tissue as an endocrine organ. Clin Liver Dis 2014; 18: 41–58.
35. Carre N, Binart N. Prolactin and adipose tissue. Biochimie 2014; 97: 16–21.
36. Brandebourg T, Hugo E, Ben-Jonathan N. Adipocyte prolactin: regulation of release and putative functions. Diabetes Obes Metab 2007; 9: 464–76.
37. He S, Dunn KL, Espino PS, et al. Chromatin organization and nuclear microenvironments in cancer cells. J Cell Biochem 2008; 104 (6): 2004–15.
38. Sethi BK, Chanukya GV, Nagesh VS. Prolactin and cancer: Has the orphan finally found a home? Indian J Endocrinol Metab 2012; 16 (Suppl 2): S195–8.
39. Sackmann-Sala L, Chiche A, Mosquera-Garrote N, et al. Prolactin-induced prostate tumorigenesis links sustained STAT5 signaling with the amplification of basal/stem cells and emergence of putative luminal progenitors. Am J Pathol 2014; 184: 3105–19. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpath.2014.07.020.
40. Fernandez I, Touraine P, Goffin V. Prolactin and human tumourogenesis. J Neuroendocrinol 2010; 22: 771–7.
41. Lissoni P, Vaghi M, Pescia S, et al. Biological response modifiers of cancer-related neuroendocrine disorders: efficacy of the long-term dopaminergic agonist cabergoline in the treatment of breast cancer-induced hyperprolactinemia. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents 2004; 18: 291–4.
42. Lissoni P, Vigano P, Vaghi M, et al. A phase II study of tamoxifen in hormone-resistant metastatic prostate cancer: possible relation with prolactin secretion. Anticancer Res 2005; 25: 3597–9.
43. Colao A, Vitale G, Di Sarno A, et al. Prolactin and prostate hypertrophy: a pilot observational, prospective, case-control study in men with prolactinoma. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2004; 89: 2770–5.
44. Horti J, Figg WD, Weinberger B, et al. A phase II study of bromocriptine in patients with androgen-independent prostate cancer. Oncol Rep 1998; 5: 893–6.
45. Rana A, Habib FK, Halliday P, et al. A case for synchronous reduction of testicular androgen, adrenal androgen and prolactin for the treatment of advanced carcinoma of the prostate. Eur J Cancer 1995; 31A: 871–5.
46. Walker AM. Prolactin receptor antagonists. Curr Opin Investig Drugs 2005; 6: 378–85.
47. Gonzalez-Lucano LR, Munoz-Valle JF, Ascencio-Cedillo R, et al. Increased expression of the prolactin receptor is associated with malignant laryngeal tumors. Exp Ther Med 2012; 3: 603–7.

No Comments » Add comments