Related Experiment Videos
Differentially expressed genes in two LNCaP prostate cancer cell lines reflecting changes during prostate cancer
M H Vaarala1, K Porvari, A Kyllönen
1Biocenter Oulu, World Health Organization Collaborating Centre for Research on Reproductive Health, Finland.
Abstract:
Prostate cancer tends to become transformed to androgen-independent disease over time when treated by androgen-deprivation therapy. We used two variants of the human prostate cancer cell line LNCaP to study gene expression differences during prostate cancer progression to androgen-independent disease. Production of prostate-specific antigen was regarded as a marker of androgen-dependence and loss of prostate-specific antigen was regarded as a marker of androgen-independence. mRNA from both cell lines was used for cDNA microarray screening. Differential expression of several genes was confirmed by Northern blotting. Monoamine oxidase A, an Expressed Sequence Tag (EST) similar to rat P044, and EST AA412049 were highly overexpressed in androgen-dependent LNCaP cells. Tissue-type plasminogen activator, interferon-inducible protein p78 (MxB), an EST similar to galectin-1, follistatin, fatty acid-binding protein 5, EST AA609749, annexin I, the interferon-inducible gene 1-8U, and phospholipase D1 were highly overexpressed in androgen-independent LNCaP cells. All studied genes had low or no expression in PC-3 cells. The EST similar to rat P044, the EST similar to galectin-1, follistatin, annexin I, and the interferon-inducible gene 1-8U were also expressed in benign prostatic hyperplasia tissue. The Y-linked ribosomal protein S4, Mat-8, and EST AA307912 were highly expressed in benign prostatic hyperplasia tissue. Additionally, both confirmation of differential expression in Northern blots and in situ hybridization were carried out for monoamine oxidase A, the EST similar to rat P044, the EST similar to galectin-1, fatty acid-binding protein 5, and the interferon-inducible gene 1-8U. We identified several potential prostate cancer markers, indicating that the method used is a useful tool for the screening of cancer markers, but other methods, such as in situ hybridization, are needed to further investigate the observations.