Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 May 20.
Published in final edited form as: Drug News Perspect. 2009 Sep;22(7):369–381. doi: 10.1358/dnp.2009.22.7.1405072

EPIGENETIC TARGETING IN BREAST CANCER: THERAPEUTIC IMPACT AND FUTURE DIRECTION

MB Lustberg 1, B Ramaswamy 1,*
PMCID: PMC3658161  NIHMSID: NIHMS460860  PMID: 19890494

SUMMARY

Breast carcinogenesis is a multistep process involving both genetic and epigenetic changes. Epigenetics is defined as a reversible and heritable change in gene expression that is not accompanied by alteration in gene sequence. DNA methylation and histone modifications are the two major epigenetic changes that influence gene expression in cancer. The interaction between methylation and histone modification is intricately orchestrated by the formation of repressor complexes. Several genes involved in proliferation, antiapoptosis, invasion and metastasis have been shown to be methylated in various malignant and premalignant breast neoplasms. The histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDi) have emerged as an important class of drugs to be used synergistically with other systemic therapies in the treatment of breast cancer. Since epigenetic changes are potentially reversible processes, much effort has been directed toward understanding this mechanism with the goal of finding novel therapies as well as more refined diagnostic and prognostic tools in breast cancer.

PRINCIPLES OF EPIGENETICS

Introduction

Growing evidence in the last several decades has documented the pivotal role of epigenetics in the development and progression of various malignancies including breast cancer. It is now widely accepted that genetic changes alone do not fully account for the initiation and propagation of malignancy. Carcinogenesis is a multistep process involving genetic and epigenetic changes. Epigenetics was classically defined as the heritable changes in gene expression by mechanisms that do not cause changes in DNA sequences.1,2 A new definition proposed by Adrian Bird questions whether heritability should be mandatory in a contemporary view of epigenetics.3 He argues that some histone modifications are transient and under current definition would not be considered an epigenetic change and hence puts forth an alternative unifying definition of epigenetics as a structural adaptation of chromosomal regions, so as to register, signal or perpetuate altered activity states. Such epigenetic changes would include modification of the DNA, noncoding RNA and proteins such as histones.2 Since epigenetic changes are potentially reversible processes, much effort has been directed toward understanding this epigenetic mechanism with the goal of finding novel therapies that can relieve transcriptional repression of key genes and improve outcomes. Furthermore, epigenetic alterations may serve as bio-markers for diagnosis, and for predicting prognosis and response to therapies.

DNA methylation and DNA methyltransferases

The role of DNA methylation in epigenetic regulation of human breast cancer has been well characterized. CpG dinucleotide-rich regions located in the 5′-end region of the genes are called CpG islands. Methylation of CpG islands, predominantly present in promoter regions, is the most commonly studied epigenetic change in human cancer.4 Most CpG islands are unmethylated in noncancerous cells, which promotes active gene transcription. In cancer cells, CpG islands become hypermethylated, leading to inactivation of tumor suppressor genes.2 Poorly differentiated breast tumors have more methylated CpG islands than moderately or well-differentiated breast tumors.5

The methylation of CpG islands is mediated by the action of DNA methyltransferases (Dnmt). There are three active DNA methyltransferases: Dnmt1, Dnmt3a and Dnmt3b. Dnmt1 is the most common and active DNA methyltransferase and functions as a “maintenance” Dnmt by replicating the methylation pattern from the parental to daughter strand during cell division. Dnmt3a and 3b are “de novo methyltransferases” and are upregulated in aging cells.6 Although Dnmt1 seems to be the key regulator maintaining abnormal promoter methylation in cancer, recent studies suggest that the cooperation between Dnmt1 and Dnmt3b is vital to this process and the removal of both is needed to disrupt methylation.7 Data also suggest that Dnmt1 levels may be upregulated in poorly differentiated tumors irrespective of the methylation status of the genes studied and were indeed shown to be an independent prognostic factor in non-small cell lung cancer.8 In addition, Nass et al. showed that high Dnmt levels in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer cell lines were associated with increased S-phase and estrogen-independent growth, without methylation-mediated silencing of ERα, suggesting that high Dnmt levels may be a marker for proliferation.9,10 The exact role of a fourth Dnmt member, Dnmt2, has yet to be determined but it may be involved in RNA methylation.11

There is an overall increase in Dnmt activity in malignant cells12 and, in particular, both Dnmt1 and 3b show increased expression in breast cancer.6 Dnmts contribute to gene silencing through routes other than promoter methylation. This includes direct interaction with and recruitment of histone deacetylases (HDs) and the methyl-CpG-binding domain (MBD) family of proteins to the promoter regions to form a repressive transcription complex. Dnmt1 through its N-terminus binds to HD2 and a Dnmt1-associated protein called DNMAP1 to form a complex at replication foci.13 This complex is important in the conversion of acetylated histones to the deacetylated inactive form and highlights the interplay between methylation and acetylation processes in epigenetic regulation.

Methyl-CpG-binding domain family of proteins

Along with the Dnmts, the MBD family of proteins plays an important role in epigenetic silencing of tumor suppressor genes.14 The MBD family of proteins has five members: MeCP2 and MBD1, MBD2, MBD3 and MBD4. They all share a methyl-binding domain that allows them to bind to hypermethylated promoters of CpG islands of tumor suppressor genes and mediate the interaction between histone modification and methylation. Ballestar et al. showed that MBDs were present in hypermethylated promoters in breast cancer cell lines MCF7 and MDA-MB-231. The presence of MBDs was associated with histone deacetylation and lysine 9 histone H3 methylation. MBD2 binds to the largest number of CpG islands in breast cancer cells.15 MBD2 also mediates glutathione S-transferase P (GSTP1) silencing associated with hypermethylated CpG islands in MCF7 cells.16 There is ongoing research regarding the role of MBDs in the formation of various transcription repression complexes.1719 The extent of the involvement of MBDs in breast carcinogenesis is still under investigation. Higher expression of MeCP2 RNA has been found in neoplastic breast tissue compared to normal tissue and higher MeCP2 expression was also shown in ER-positive tumors.20

Histone modification and repressor complexes

Epigenetic regulation of gene transcription relies on the cooperative mechanisms of DNA methylation and histone acetylation. Two universal markers of histone modification in malignancy are loss of acetylation of lysine 16 and trimethylation of lysine 20 in histone H4.21 Histone modification and overall chromatin structure are governed by balanced counteractivity of histone acetyltransferases (HAT) and HDs. Acetylation places an acetyl group on the NH2-terminal lysine residue on histones leading to neutralization of positive charges resulting in a looser, less compact, transcriptionally active chromatin. In contrast, deacetylated histones have a condensed, inactive chromatin structure. There is a dynamic relationship between acetylation of histones and methylation patterns; methylated inactive genes are associated with underacetylated histones, whereas unmethylated active genes are associated with acetylated histones and a more open chromatin.22

The mechanistic interaction between methylation and acetylation is intricately orchestrated by the formation of repressor complexes. Dnmt1 forms a repressive transcription complex with HD2 and DNMAP1. Dnmt1 can also form a complex with retinoblastoma-associated protein (Rb), transcription factor E2F1 and HD1 and repress transcription from E2F–responsive promoters.13,23 There are three class I HD-containing co-repressor complexes. These are HD1/HD2-containing Sin3, Mi2/NuRD and HD3/N-CoR complexes.2426 The NuRD complex contains metastasis-associated proteins (MTAs) and the N-CoR complex interacts with the silencing mediator of thyroid hormone and retinoic acid receptor (SMRT)-modulating ER activity.27,28 The tamoxifen-bound ER interacts with N-CoR complexes leading to chromatin condensation and gene silencing.29

Post-translational modification of histones resulting in gene silencing is not restricted to acetylation alone but also involves methylation of the histone residues. Two major histone methylation patterns have been identified: methylation of lysine residue 9 of the core histone protein H3 results in gene silencing, whereas methylation of lysine 4, and recently lysine 27, of H3 are signs of activated genes.30,31 In breast cancer, methylation of lysine residue 9 is evident in the regulation of the MUC1 promoter32 as well as in the transforming growth factor β signaling pathway genes.33 Recently, the loss of trimethylation of lysine 27 of H3 (H3K27) has been shown to be a negative prognostic indicator in several cancers including breast cancer.31

Epigenetic modification of microRNAs in breast cancer

Epigenetic changes are not limited to CpG islands and histones but also encompass the regulation of microRNAs (miRNAs). miRNAs are small noncoding RNAs involved in the regulation of gene expression and can be either oncogenes or tumor suppressors in breast cancer.34,35 Hypermethylation has been described as one of the ways by which the miRNA regulatory mechanism is disrupted in malignant cells. MIR126 was the first miRNA that was shown to be deregulated in breast cancer resulting in increased proliferation of MCF7 breast cancer cell lines.36,37 Subsequent studies have shown aberrant hypermethylation of miRNA classes of MIR9-1, MIR124-3, MIR148, MIR152 and MIR663 in 71 primary breast tumor specimens.38 Treatment with 5-azacytidine (5-aza, a DNA-demethylating agent), resulted in increased expression of MIR9-1 with corresponding gene demethylation.38 Hypermethylation of MIR9-1 was seen in preinvasive intraductal lesions in addition to the primary tumors, suggesting that hypermethylation may be an early step in breast carcinogenesis. MIR335 and MIR126 have recently been identified as metastasis suppressor miRNAs in human breast cancer and the loss of their expression is associated with poor metastasis-free survival.39 Furthermore, recent studies have examined the role of miRNAs in the hormonal regulation of breast cancer which will be paramount for improving the current understanding of endocrine resistance in breast cancer.40,41 Whether epigenetic mechanisms may be involved in the suppression or overexpression of these miRNAs in breast cancer will need to be further investigated.

Global genomic and promoter hypomethylation

Although hypermethylation has been presented thus far as the predominant mode of epigenetic modification, it is important to point out that global genomic hypomethylation has also been noted outside of promoter regions in the genome of cancer cells. Genomes of MCF7 breast cancer cell lines have mega-base pair regions of hypomethylated zones.42 The impact of hypomethylation on carcinogenesis has been attributed to chromosomal instability, reactivation of transposable elements and loss of imprinting.43 Furthermore, although a certain pattern of hypermethylated promoters is generally observed in most tumors including breast cancer, some genes are actually activated by hypomethylation. One such example of hypomethylation includes the γ synuclein gene CpG island (SNCG gene). This oncogene’s promoter is activated by hypomethylation and overexpression of SNCG promotes breast cancer proliferation and metastasis.44 The intricate epigenetic regulatory mechanisms in breast cancer are only partially understood to date and our current understanding will be summarized in the next section.

KNOWN EPIGENETIC CHANGES IN BREAST CANCER

Epigenetic targets

DNA methylation with corresponding silencing of several key genes involved in breast carcinogenesis has been reported. Investigators have analyzed breast cancer methylation patterns in various ways. Some have reported methylation patterns of a panel of genes associated with certain biological features of the tumor such as HER2/NEU overexpression45 or hormone receptor status.46 Yet others have tried to associate methylation of certain specific genes such as ESR1, BRCA1, RARB, CCND2, etc., with clinical outcomes. Hypermethylation has also been used as a diagnostic tool to distinguish between normal and malignant tissue and more recently epigenotyping of the peripheral blood cell DNA has been evaluated as a measure of breast cancer risk.4749 To discuss all of the reported alterations of genes in breast cancer would be too exhaustive for this review but a summary of the currently characterized breast cancer epigenetic changes is presented in Table 1. The epigenetic targets affect all six capabilities that malignant cells acquire as described by Hanahan: 1) limitless replicative potential; 2) self-sufficiency in growth signals; 3) insensitivity to growth-inhibitory signal; 4) evasion of programmed cell death; 5) sustained angiogenesis; and 6) tissue invasion and metastasis.5051 Furthermore, cancer cells and stem cells share these characteristics of self-renewal, migration and division suggesting that all types of cancer originate in the organ- or tissue-specific stem cells present in a particular organ. Another hallmark is genetic instability in relation to aneuploidy, and telomere erosion may occur in tumor stem cells.52,53 Such genetic instability may be associated with epigenetic modifications.54 Recently, renewed efforts have delineated the role of a shift in glucose metabolism from oxidative phosphorylation to glycolysis as one of the biochemical hallmarks of tumor cells. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) instability may play a key role in this metabolic shift. In the past decade, point mutations and deletions of the mtDNA has been reported, but thus far no definitive epigenetic modifications of mtDNA in humans have been found.55 We will focus our review on the epigenetic changes of some of the key genes involved in breast cancer and their clinical implications.

Table I.

Epigenetic targets in breast cancer50

Gene Function Clinical implications Ref.
CDKN2A (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A) Cell cycle regulation, tumor suppressor Prognostic 59, 147149
NOEY2 (ras homolog gene family member 1) Cell cycle regulation Prognostic 150
TGFBR2 (transforming growth factor β receptor II) Cell cycle regulation ER-positive breast
cells insensitive to TGFβRII
become sensitized after treatment
with 5-azacytidine (5-aza)
151
RARB (retinoic acid receptor β) Differentiation and regulation of cell growth Chemoprevention potential
of retinoids
92,152 153
BRCA1 DNA repair, cell cycle regulation Potential target to
identify chemosensitivity
96
SRBC (serum deprivation response factor [sdr]-related
gene product that binds to c-kinase)
Interacts with BRCA1 Breast carcinogenesis? Prognostic 154
CCND2 (cyclin-D2) Cell cycle regulator Promoter hypermethylation
seen in DCIS suggesting early event
in carcinogenesis
155, 156
SFN (stratifin/14-3-3 protein σ) Cell cycle regulator Hypermethylation detected in ductal
carcinoma in situ and atypical
hyperplasia in addition to invasive
carcinomas
157, 158
Wnt Pathway (inhibitory factor1 and promoter) Cell growth and regulation Aberrant in cancer stem cells.
Potential target
111, 159
ESR1 (estrogen receptor) Growth signal Restoration of ER expression
with demethylating agents
or HDAC inhibitors
78, 85, 160
PGR (progesterone receptor) Growth signal Response to endocrine therapy 74, 85
HIN1 Tumor suppressor Hypermethylation present in situ
lesions in addition to invasive lesions
161
NES1 Tumor suppressor PrognosticLoss in DCIS increases
probability of invasive component
6264
RUNX3 Tumor suppressor Breast carcinogenesis
Early event DCIS? Prognostic
60, 61, 162
RIZ (retinoblastoma protein-interacting zinc
finger protein)
Tumor suppressor 5-aza treatment activated RIZ
expression; may be a downstream
modulator of ER
163, 164
FHIT (fragile histidine triad protein) Tumor suppressor Prognostic 165
LATS1 and LATS2 Tumor suppressor Prognostic 166
CST6 Tumor suppressor Breast carcinogenesis? Prognostic 69, 167
BRMS1 (breast cancer metastasis-suppressor 1) Tumor suppressor Prognostic 168
Human SRBC Tumor suppressor Breast carcinogenesis 154
PTPRO Candidate tumor suppressor Estrogen responsive gene?
Related to tamoxifen resistance
169
PROX1 Candidate tumor suppressor Prognostic 170
RASSF1 (ras association domain-containing protein 1) Apoptosis; growth inhibition Breast carcinogenesis prognosis 171, 172
SYK (spleen tyrosine kinase) Growth inhibition Prognostic 173
HOXA5 (homeobox protein Hox-A5) Apoptosis; p53 upregulation HOXA5 has a role in PR regulation;
Dnmt inhibitors can restore
expression of HOXA5
174, 175
TMS1 (target of methylation-induced silencing 1) Apoptosis Breast carcinogenesis 176
MUC1 (mucin-1) Apoptosis Triple negative breast cancers
and response to therapy including
vaccines
32
TWIST Transcription factor growth and invasion Involved in epithelial mesenchymal
transition in breast cancer
177
ZAC (pleomorphic adenoma-like protein) Apoptosis/tumor suppressor Treatment with 5-aza induced ZAC
expression in breast cancer cell lines
178
SERPINB5 (protease inhibitor 5, maspin) Inhibitor of angiogenesis Reactivated in by treatment with
demethylating agent
179
THBS1 (thrombospondin-1) Inhibition of angiogenesis Promotes tumor cell
migration/proangiogenic
180
CDH1 (e-cadherin) Suppresses invasion and metastasis Treatment with 5-aza
increases expression
10, 181
CDH13 (h-cadherin) Suppresses invasion Treatment with 5-aza
increases expression
182
BCSG1 (breast cancer-specific gene 1 protein) Invasion Prognostic 183
APC Invasion, apoptosis, regulation of cell cycle Treatment with 5-aza increases
APC expression
184, 185
TIMP3 (tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases 3) Suppresses invasion and angiogenesis Treatment with 5-aza increases
TIMP3 expression
186
SATB1 Tumor growth and metastasis Prognostic? Potential target 187
Metastasis-associated genes (MTAs) Invasion Prognostic 188
microRNAs 148a, 34b/c and 9 Invasion and metastasis Prognostic? Potential target 189
TERT (telomere reverse transcriptase) Synthesis of telomere ends
(cell immortalization)
Estrogen-activated telomerase
by interactions with TERT promoter
190, 191
GSTP1 (glutathione S-transferase P) Carcinogen detoxification GSTP1 is hypermethylated in
ER-positive GSTP1 nonexpressing
cell lines but undermethylated
in ER-negative GSTP1
expressing cell lines
192, 193
TGM2 (transglutaminase-2) Function in chemosensitivity Marker for chemosensitivity 141

Early epigenetic events in breast cancer

Local hypermethylation of key promoter regions, leading to silencing of tumor suppressors, is one of the key processes regulating early disease. Aberrant methylation has been identified in over 100 CpG islands in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and stage I breast tumors.56 High levels of certain hypermethylated genes can be detected in ductal lavage and nipple aspirates of patients with DCIS, mammary epithelial hyperplasia and intraductal papillomas.57,58 Increased methylation of the CpG islands of the tumor suppressor p16INK4a and a corresponding increase in cyclin-D1 were seen in intraductal proliferative lesions of the breast, with highest levels in DCIS.59 Other promoter hypermethylation patterns have been described including increased hypermethylation of the promoter of the tumor suppressor RUNX3 in DCIS, as well as invasive ductal carcinomas, compared to normal breast tissues.60 A higher frequency of RUNX3 hypermethylation is seen with estrogen and progesterone expression.60,61 The significance of this association is not currently well understood. NES1 is another tumor suppressor that is hypermethylated in DCIS and may serve as a predictive marker for invasive carcinoma at the time of definitive surgery.6264

The tumor microenvironment may also undergo epigenetic changes that regulate the transition of in situ to invasive breast cancer. Myoepithelial cells and stromal fibroblasts undergo epigenetic modifications in early breast cancer carcinogenesis.65,66 Increasing evidence suggests that signals from the stromal microenvironment, including the breast cancer-associated fibroblasts, may serve as triggers for the initiation of epigenetic modifications which promote early disease progression.6769 Distinct epigenetic changes are present in the stromal cells of breast cancers.66 Promoter hypermethylation of the cystatin-M (CST6) tumor suppressor due to aberrant AKT activation is one of the epigenetic changes that occur when breast epithelial cells are co-cultured with cancer fibroblasts.69 Additional studies are ongoing to investigate other triggers of epigenetic silencing in the tumor microenvironment.

Epigenetic regulation of estrogen receptor

The mechanisms surrounding the epigenetic regulation of the ER have been a focus of considerable research in breast cancer. Approximately one-third of primary breast cancers are ER-negative and genetic changes in DNA sequence alone cannot explain loss of ER expression in these breast cancers.70 ER expression is controlled by transcription in ER-negative cells and not by other mechanisms such as degradation or abnormal nuclear transport.71 Response to hormonal therapy is largely determined by ER expression. Many ER-positive tumors lose ER expression as breast cancer progresses. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms governing the regulation of the ER is of crucial importance both for prognosis and treatment decisions. There are two distinct ER receptors, α and β. Most research to date has centered on ERα and our understanding of the role of ERβ in the pathogenesis of breast cancer is evolving.

The epigenetic regulation of ERα is mediated though the recruitment of multimolecular complexes containing HD1 and Dnmt1 that are recruited to the promoter region, as well as other members including N-CoR and SMRT.28,72,73 Higher expression levels of DNMT1 exist in ER-negative cells.9 Treatment of ER-negative human breast cancer cells with the methyltransferase inhibitor 5-aza led to partial demethylation of the ER CpG island, re-expression of ER messenger RNA and synthesis of functional ER protein.74,75 Inhibition of DNMT1 by antisense, oligo or short interfering RNA (siRNA) may increase estrogen responsiveness in ER-negative breast cancer cells and increase responsiveness to 5-aza.75,77 Studies determining the levels of Dnmt in estrogen-dependent ER-positive cell lines, estrogen-independent ER-positive cell lines and ER-negative cell lines show that the Dnmt levels correlated tightly with the S-phase of ER-positive cell lines, while ER-negative cells expressed DNMT throughout the cell cycle.9 This study also showed that the estrogen-independent phenotype of MCF7 cells, even in conjunction with increased Dnmt levels, was not accompanied by aberrant methylation of the ER gene, suggesting that multiple steps are required for de novo methylation of the ER gene. Subsequent studies have shown that the interaction of deacetylated histones with the methylated ER gene promoter is a prerequisite for its inactivation.75,78 The role of the pRb/p130 complex with HD1 and Dnmt1 in the regulation of ERα transcription has been shown.72

Preclinical research on whether ER-negative breast cancer cells can be sensitized to respond to estrogen or to selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) has been investigated by many different groups. The HD inhibitor trichostatin sensitizes ER-negative breast cancer cells to tamoxifen treatment78,79 and may upregulate ERβ activity leading to sensitization of ERα-negative breast cancer cells to tamoxifen.80 Transcriptional activation of ERα by trichostatin was achieved without alteration in CpG island methylation, suggesting that histone deacetylation was a key component of ER gene silencing in human breast cancer.75 After sensitizing ER-negative cell lines to tamoxifen via 5-aza and trichostatin, ER-responsive genes are repressed by the tamoxifen-bound, reactivated ER. This suggests that the reactivated ER is indeed functional. The association of ERα with HD1 resulted in suppression of its transcriptional activity. Thus, HD1 may also be a therapeutic target for some ER-negative breast cancers to induce sensitivity to endocrine therapy.75,81 Selective inhibition of HD2 by siRNA downregulated both ER and progesterone receptor (PR) expression and potentiated the effects of tamoxifen in ER-positive breast tumor cells.82 Collectively, these preclinical data give proof of principle that the inhibition of histone acetylation may induce sensitivity to SERMs and has led to the clinical testing of these strategies by combining tamoxifen and HD inhibitors.

A recent study by Subramanian et al. has shown that ERα is regulated by SETD7 histone-lysine N-methyltransferase in human breast cancer cells.83 SETD7 is a histone methyltransferase that is known to monomethylate H3K4 resulting in transcriptional activation. It was demonstrated to induce K302 methylation, resulting in stabilization of the ERα protein, which in turn resulting in increased sensitivity to estrogens, enhancing the transcription of estrogen response elements.83 This reinforces other studies suggesting that post-translational modification of ERα may play a role in hormone response.

Loss of ER signaling also leads to epigenetic silencing of downstream ERα targets.84 A study by Leu et al. showed that abrogation of ER signaling resulted in recruitment of polycomb repressors and HDs to the promoters of the target genes and was then followed by DNA methylation of the promoters.84 This study demonstrated that epigenetic silencing of ER target genes is crucial to the development of ERα-independent growth.

Epigenetic regulation of progesterone receptor

The regulatory mechanisms of ERα transcription may impact the regulation of the PR. The majority of breast tumors that express the ER also express the PR. A CpG island is located in the first exon of the PR gene and is hypermethylated in 40% of tumors that are PR expression-negative.85 Demethylation of the progesterone CpG island is not required for PR expression.74 However, demethylation of the CpG island is required for ERα binding to this regulatory sequence.86 DNA demethylation is also necessary for re-expression of ERα target genes. In ER-negative tumors, silencing of the ERα gene also affects downstream estrogen-regulated gene expression including PR expression.86 Epigenetic regulation of PR may also be controlled in part by the interaction with retinoic acid receptors, which are discussed in the next section.87

Epigenetic regulation of the retinoid receptor

Retinoic acid resistance in breast cancer has been documented in association with down-regulation of retinoic acid receptor β (RARβ) expression.8789 Retinoic acid-induced apoptosis and growth inhibition has been characterized in human breast cancer cells and the loss of this tumor suppressor gene, RARβ, in breast cancers is well established.89 Estrogen can reverse RARβ downregulation in ER-positive breast cancer cell lines but not in ER-negative cell lines.90 RARB expression is controlled by two promoters in the regulatory region. The transcription of the RARB2 promoter is a multistep process which involves the recruitment of RARα and RARβ and formation of a transcription complex with HATs and HDs.91

Epigenetic modifications play a role in the transcription of the RARB2 promoter. Hypermethylation of the promoter has been shown in both breast cancer cell lines and many primary breast tumors.92 Treatment with the Dnmt inhibitor 5-aza or the HD inhibitor trichostatin led to re-expression of RARB92 and reactivation of the epigenetically silenced receptor by retinoic acid.93 Additional studies with the combination of HD inhibitors and retinoic acid metabolism-blocking agents (RAMBA) are under way.94 VN/14-1 is one of the novel RAMBA that has shown promising activity in vitro in letrozole-insensitive breast cancer cells.95 Additional understanding of the epigenetic regulation of the retinoic receptor may elucidate additional therapeutic targets for overcoming resistance.

Epigenetic regulation of BRCA genes

There is evidence for epigenetic regulation of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in both sporadic and hereditary breast cancers. Promoter hypermethylation of BRCA1 and resulting gene inactivation occurs in a minority of sporadic cancers but is more common with loss of heterozygosity and in certain tumor subtypes such as medullary and mucinous carcinomas.96,97 BRCA2 promoter methylation has been shown in 4% of sporadic ovarian cancers.98 Conflicting data are reported regarding promoter methylation of BRCA2 in breast cancer.99 The more predominant mode of epigenetic regulation of BRCA2 is via formation of repressor complexes and chromatin remodeling.84 The Tudor domain ‘Royal Family’, epigenetic repressor family of chromatin remodeling factors has been shown to interact with BRCA2 in sporadic cancers.85

Hereditary breast and ovarian cancers have variable penetrance even in family members with identical mutations.100102 Modifications of risk by single nucleotide polymorphisms103, as well as by epigenetic alterations, including hypermethylation of the promoter CpG island, have been reported.104 In a recent study, BRCA1 promoter hypermethylation was present at a low frequency of 5% in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers with and without breast cancer as well in healthy controls in an Israeli Jewish study population.104 The results of this study, if confirmed by others, would suggest that BRCA promoter methylation is not a definitive risk modifier in hereditary breast cancers and a more complex epigenetic cascade may yet need to be elucidated. Epigenetic and genomic changes that impact the X chromosome stability in BRCA1 and basal-like tumors have been investigated.105109 The role of X inactive-specific transcript RNA coating, or XIST RNA, in BRCA1 tumors and its contribution to epigenetic instability have been debated. Earlier work on small numbers of BRCA1 tumors showed decreased XIST in these tumors,105107 although a more recent study showed that XIST RNA coating of the unaffected X chromosome is not affected by the BRCA1 mutation.109 Additional studies are needed to further clarify the epigenetic regulation and sequelae of BRCA mutations in hereditary cancer.

Epigenetic silencing in (Wnt) pathway

The wingless and integration site growth factor (Wnt) pathway is one of the deregulated pathways in breast cancer.110 Hypermethylation is the predominant mechanism of Wnt pathway aberrancy in breast cancer. Epigenetic silencing of Wnt antagonist genes including SFRP has been shown in breast cancer with a corresponding loss of function resulting in activation of Wnt signaling in breast carcinogenesis111, and is associated with an unfavorable prognosis.112 Larger studies are needed to confirm if activation of this pathway could be used as a prognostic marker and perhaps could serve as a target for epigenetic therapies.

PRECLINICAL STUDIES WITH HD INHIBITORS AND DEMETHYLATING AGENTS IN BREAST CANCER

Mechanism of action of HD inhibitors

HD inhibitors (HDi) have been shown to have antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects in many different cell lines. There are four main groups of HDi which are classified based on their structure. These are hydroxamic acids, cyclic peptides, aliphatic acids and benzamides. The most well-studied HDi include trichostatin and suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA, vorinostat), both of which belong to the hydroxamate group.4 For a more complete review of HDi, please see a recent review by Marchion and Munster.113

HDi promote hyperacetylation of histones which leads to the transcriptional upregulation of proapoptotic genes and cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors such as p21 and p27.114 The net result is cell cycle growth arrest and apoptosis of cancer cells along with in vivo regression of tumors.115 In addition, HDi increase acetylation of the chaperone complex of heat shock protein 90 (Hsp90) leading to the destabilization of the complex with corresponding inhibition of chaperone function.116 In preclinical models, the estrogen receptor is one of the Hsp90 client proteins that is most sensitive to Hsp90 inhibition.117 Hsp90 chaperone activity is regulated by HD6 and inhibition of HD6 leads to Hsp90 hyperacetylation causing separation from p23 and the corresponding loss of chaperone activity.118,119 As a result, proteosome targeting and degradation of multiple client proteins including HER2, ER, AKT and cRaf are increased.117,120 Downstream effects of client protein degradation affect a myriad of pathways including dose-dependent increase of proapoptotic proteins BAK (Bcl-2 homologous antagonist/killer) and Bcl-2-like protein 11 and attenuation of antiapoptic proteins Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL.119 HDi also target angiogenesis pathways.121,122

Preclinical studies of HDi, SAHA and LAQ-824

By attenuating these downstream signaling pathways, HDi may sensitize breast cancer cells to endocrine and cytototoxic therapy. LAQ-824 (dacinostat) and SAHA are part of the hydroxamic acid family of HDi. These drugs have in vitro antiproliferative activity.123,124 Munster et al. showed that vorinostat inhibits the proliferation of both ER-positive and -negative human breast cancer cell lines and also promotes differentiation as evidenced by expression of the MFGM protein and milk fat globulin protein.125 Exposure to these drugs resulted in downregulation of p-AKT, AKT and cRaf, and sensitized ERα-positive breast cancer cells to tamoxifen.126 The combination of vorinostat with trastuzumab or docetaxel is synergistic in breast cancer cells with attenuated levels of cRaf and AKT119 Synergistic interaction of vorinostat with either trastuzumab or docetaxel has been shown in human breast cancer cell lines that amplify HER2119 and prolonged exposure to vorinostat sensitized breast cancer cells to topoisomerase inhibitors.127 Similarly, LAQ-824 sensitizes human breast cancer cells to trastuzumab and various chemotherapeutic agents.124 Based on the promising preclinical data, there are multiple clinical trials in breast cancer investigating the effects of vorinostat in combination with endocrine therapy and cytotoxic agents.

Preclinical studies with valproic acid

Valproic acid, a commonly used antiepileptic drug, is in the aliphatic acid family of HDi and has been shown to target histone deacetylase in a variety of cancer lines.128,129 The combination of valproic acid with all-trans retinoic acid and 5-aza restores expression of RARB2 in breast cancer cells.130 Interestingly, valproic acid alone, without concurrent 5-aza, did not restore the expression of RARB2. Histone acetylation was increased as a result of this combination in the RARB2 promoter of MCF7 breast cancer cells. This preclinical study was one of the earliest to show that valproic acid may be an effective drug in combination therapy in breast cancer.

Preclinical data with demethylating agent 5-aza in breast cancer

Multiple studies have utilized the methyltransferase inhibitor 5-aza to investigate epigenetic regulation in breast cancer. Treatment of ER-negative breast cancer cell lines with 5-aza causes partial demethylation of the ER CpG island and leads to expression of functional ER.78 The activity of 5-aza is enhanced when coupled with antisense oligonucleotide targeting of DNMT1.77 Studies have shown that combination therapy of 5-aza with HDi (trichostatin and scriptaid) was more effective than either agent alone in inducing ER expression in ER-negative breast cancer cell lines.78,131 Additional studies in retinoid-resistant cell lines have shown that 5-aza promotes reexpression of RARβ92 and reactivation of the epigenetically silenced receptor by retinoic acid.93 A phase I multicenter trial of 5-aza in patients with advanced solid tumor malignancies including breast cancer who had failed standard therapy was recently completed.132 Results of the trial are not yet available.

CLINICAL TRIALS

HDi trials

In a phase I trial, vorinostat administered intravenously in patients with solid tumor and hematological malignancies was well tolerated. Post-therapy tumor biopsies showed accumulation of acetylated histones.133 No partial or complete responses were seen but there was radiographic evidence of tumor regression in two patients with lymphoma and two patients with bladder cancer. A subsequent phase I trial using oral vorinostat was completed showing responses in six patients.134 Histone acetylation was seen in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and lasted beyond the half-life of vorinostat. Vorinostat was relatively well tolerated with the most common toxicities being nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Based on these two trials, studies with vorinostat as a single agent and in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents are ongoing.

In breast cancer, several trials are ongoing including a multicenter phase I/II trial with the addition of vorinostat to paclitaxel and bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer.135 The results from this trial are very encouraging and will lead to testing of additional combinations with vorinostat in breast cancer. Vorinostat has been shown to downregulate Hsp90 and its client protein HER2 and ERα. Hence the combination with trastuzumab136 and endocrine therapies is also being tested in the metastatic and neoadjuvant settings.137 A phase I trial of valproic acid followed by the topoisomerase II inhibitor epirubicin was conducted in advanced heavily pretreated solid tumors. This combination was well tolerated and had antitumor activity.138 Currently, sponsored by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a phase II trial of valproic acid with FEC100 (5-fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide) in advanced breast cancer is ongoing.139

DIAGNOSTIC AND PROGNOSTIC IMPLICATIONS IN EPIGENETIC ALTERATIONS IN BREAST CANCER

Epigenetic changes in breast cancer have been investigated to improve diagnosis and prognostication. Identification of DNA hypermethylation in breast biopsy samples from BRCA carriers may be useful when there is diagnostic uncertainty.47 Epigenetic changes have also been investigated as prognostic markers in breast cancer. For example, DNA hypermethylation of PITX2 is a marker of poor prognosis in node-negative hormone receptor-positive breast cancer after adjuvant tamoxifen therapy.140 The role of epigenetic changes as potential markers for chemotherapy sensitivity has also been investigated.141 Promoter methylation of NEUROD1, a member of the stem cell polycom group target genes, is a marker for chemosensitivity in the neoadjuvant setting.142

Diagnostic and prognostic implications of hypermethylated genes in breast ductal lavage and random periareolar fine needle aspiration (RPFNA) have been investigated. As a diagnostic tool in high-risk asymptomatic women, ductal lavage cytology has low sensitivity and high specificity in cancer detection,143 although novel biomarker identification with proteomic analysis can improve sensitivity.144 Identification of epigenetic alterations in ductal fluid may also improve diagnostic yield of ductal lavage.48 Utilization of quantitative multiplex methylation-specific PCR on a nine-gene panel including RASSF1, TWIST and HIN1 on ductal lavage from women undergoing mastectomy doubled sensitivity compared to cytology.48 Similarly, epigenetic changes in RPFNA have included RARB2 promoter methylation.145 Determination of epigenetic changes using these techniques remains investigational and is not routinely used.

Epigenetic changes in serum DNA from breast cancer patients is currently under investigation as a tool for earlier detection of cancer. Paired analysis of serum and tumor DNA for RASSF1 and RARB from patients with invasive ductal carcinoma showed high sensitivity and specifity.146 Most recently, investigators from Europe reported on the first large-scale epigenotyping study of peripheral blood DNA and demonstrated that DNA methylation provides a good prediction of breast cancer risk, which was not completely independent of traditional risk factors for breast cancer.49 Lack of peripheral blood DNA methylation of the estrogen target gene ZNF217 was significantly associated with ERα bioreactivity in a functional assay, suggesting that methylation was a marker of estrogen exposure.49 This is a proof-of-principle trial and will lead to further studies that may establish DNA methylation patterns as a link between the environment and the genome.

FUTURE DIRECTION

Despite the exhaustive data regarding the extent of epigenetic changes in breast cancer, many uncertainties remain. These uncertainties revolve around the following key questions: 1) Does the epigenetic change actually initiate the gene silencing leading to tumor initiation or is it a downstream change or a response pattern resulting from a more fundamental problem? (a chicken and egg question); 2) Demethylating agents and HDi are likely to induce expression of many genes while we only focus on the key target genes. Would this lead to reactivation of genes that could potentially promote tumor growth?; and 3) Does the methylation pattern change as the tumor progresses and could the methylation of a specific gene in the primary tumor therefore be an irrelevant target in the metastatic setting? Moreover, in the clinical setting, questions that still need to be resolved include those regarding dose, duration and treatment schedules for these agents that will result in an ideal pharmaco-dynamic endpoint, as we know that the epigenetic changes induced by these agents are only transient and reversible. Furthermore, the biomarkers that can be used to confirm the biological endpoint require adequate tissue sampling which is not readily available in patients with solid tumors. However, great strides have been made in all these areas as evidenced by the fact that there are currently at least 10 NCI-sponsored clinical trials using HDi in breast cancer including one in noninvasive breast cancer. Considering the plethora of preclinical data of epigenetic changes in breast cancer, the early clinical data using epigenetic modulators in breast cancer and the exciting new era of identification of various target miRNAs, combination strategies of these agents with other targeted therapies should be further evaluated in breast cancer.

Footnotes

Since epigenetic changes are potentially reversible processes, efforts are directed toward understanding this mechanism in order to find novel therapies, as well as diagnostic and prognostic tools in breast cancer.

DISCLOSURE

The authors have no conflicts interest to declare.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Holliday R. The inheritance of epigenetic defects. Science. 1987;238(4824):163–170. doi: 10.1126/science.3310230. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Herman JG, Baylin SB. Gene silencing in cancer in association with promoter hypermethylation. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(21):2042–2054. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra023075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Bird A. Perceptions of epigenetics. Nature. 2007;447(7143):396–398. doi: 10.1038/nature05913. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Stearns V, Zhou Q, Davison NE. Epigenetic regulation as a new target for breast cancer therapy. Cancer Invest. 2007;25(8):659–665. doi: 10.1080/07357900701719234. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Yan PS, Perry MR, Laux DE, Asare AL, Caldwell CW, Huang TH. CpG Island Arrays: An application toward Deciphering epigenetic signatures of breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2000;6(4):1432–1438. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Giacinti L, Claudio PP, Lopez M, Giordano A. Epigenetic information and estrogen receptor alpha expression in breast cancer. Oncologist. 2006;11(1):1–8. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.11-1-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Rhee I, Bachman KE, Park BH, et al. DNMT1 and DNMT3b cooperate to silence genes in human cancer cells. Nature. 2002;416(6880):552–556. doi: 10.1038/416552a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Kim H, Kwon YM, Kim JS, et al. Elevated mRNA levels of DNA methyltransferase-1 as an independent prognostic factor in primary nonsmall cell lung cancer. Cancer. 2006;107(5):1042–1049. doi: 10.1002/cncr.22087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Nass SJ, Ferguson AT, El-Ashry D, Nelson WG, Davidson NE. Expression of DNA methyl-transferase (DMT) and the cell cycle in human breast cancer cells. Oncogene. 1999;18(52):7453–7461. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1203138. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Nass SJ, Herman JG, Gabrielson E, et al. Aberrant methylation of the estrogen receptor and E-cadherin 5' CpG islands increases with malignant progression in human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2000;60(16):4346–4348. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Goll MG, Kirpekar R, Maggert KA, et al. Methylation of tRNAAsp by the DNA methyltransferase homolog Dnmt2. Science. 2006;311(5759):395–398. doi: 10.1126/science.1120976. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Esteller M. Aberrant DNA methylation as a cancer-inducing mechanism. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 2005;45:629–656. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.45.120403.095832. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Rountree MR, Bachman KE, Baylin SB. DNMT1 binds HDAC2 and a new compressor, DMAP1, to form a complex at replication foci. Nat Genet. 2000;25(3):269–277. doi: 10.1038/77023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lopez-Serra L, Ballestar E, Ropero S, et al. Unmasking of epigenetically silenced candidate tumor suppressor genes by removal of methyl-CpG-binding domain proteins. Oncogene. 2008;27(25):3556–3566. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1211022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Ballestar E, Paz MF, Valle L, et al. Methyl-CpG binding proteins identify novel sites of epigenetic inactivation in human cancer. EMBO J. 2003;22(23):6335–6345. doi: 10.1093/emboj/cdg604. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lin X, Nelson WG. Methyl-CpG-binding domain protein-2 mediates transcriptional repression associated with hypermethylated GSTP1 CpG islands in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2003;63(2):498–504. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Zhang D, Rosbash M. Identification of eight proteins that cross-link to pre-mRNA in the yeast commitment complex. Genes Dev. 1999;13(5):581–592. doi: 10.1101/gad.13.5.581. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Wade PA, Gegonne A, Jones PL, Ballestar E, Aubry F, Wolffe AP. Mi-2 complex couples DNA methylation to chromatin remodelling and histone deacetylation. Nat Genet. 1999;23(1):62–66. doi: 10.1038/12664. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Fujita N, Watanabe S, Ichimura T, et al. Methyl-CpG binding domain 1 (MBD1) interacts with the Suv39h1-HP1 heterochromatic complex for DNA methylation-based transcriptional repression. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(26):24132–24138. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M302283200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Muller HM, Fiegl H, Goebel G, et al. MeCP2 and MBD2 expression in human neoplastic and non-neoplastic breast tissue and its association with oestrogen receptor status. Br J Cancer. 2003;89(10):1934–1939. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6601392. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Boix-Chornet M, Fraga MF, Villar-Garea A, et al. Release of hypoacetylated and trimethylated histone H4 is an epigenetic marker of early apoptosis. J Biol Chem. 2006;281(19):13540–13547. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M601136200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Bestor TH. Gene silencing. Methylation meets acetylation. Nature. 1998;393(6683):311–312. doi: 10.1038/30613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Robertson KD, Ait-Si-Ali S, Yokochi T, Wade PA, Jones PL, Wolffe AP. DNMT1 forms a complex with Rb, E2F1 and HDAC1 and represses transcription from E2F-responsive promoters. Nat Genet. 2000;25(3):338–342. doi: 10.1038/77124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Zhang Y, Iratni R, Erdjument-Bromage H, Tempst P, Reinberg D. Histone deacetylases and SAP18, a novel polypeptide, are components of a human Sin3 complex. Cell. 1997;89(3):357–364. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)80216-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Xue Y, Wong J, Moreno GT, Young MK, Cote J, Wang W. NURD, a novel complex with both ATP-dependent chromatin-remodeling and histone deacetylase activities. Mol Cell. 1998;2(6):851–861. doi: 10.1016/s1097-2765(00)80299-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Heinzel T, Lavinsky RM, Mullen TM, et al. A complex containing N-CoR, mSin3 and histone deacetylase mediates transcriptional repression. Nature. 1997;387(6628):43–48. doi: 10.1038/387043a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Horlein AJ, Naar AM, Heinzel T, et al. Ligand-independent repression by the thyroid hormone receptor mediated by a nuclear receptor co-repressor. Nature. 1995;377(6548):397–404. doi: 10.1038/377397a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Peterson TJ, Karmakar S, Pace MC, Gao T, Smith CL. The silencing mediator of retinoic acid and thyroid hormone receptor (SMRT) corepressor is required for full estrogen receptor alpha transcriptional activity. Mol Cell Biol. 2007;27(17):5933–5948. doi: 10.1128/MCB.00237-07. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Dobrzycka KM, Townson SM, Jiang S, Oesterreich S. Estrogen receptor corepressors -- a role in human breast cancer? Endocr Relat Cancer. 2003;10(4):517–536. doi: 10.1677/erc.0.0100517. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Strahl BD, Allis CD. The language of covalent histone modifications. Nature. 2000;403(6765):41–45. doi: 10.1038/47412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Wei Y, Xia W, Zhang Z, et al. Loss of trimethylation at lysine 27 of histone H3 is a predictor of poor outcome in breast, ovarian, and pancreatic cancers. Mol Carcinog. 2008;47(9):701–706. doi: 10.1002/mc.20413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Yamada N, Nishida Y, Tsutsumida H, et al. MUC1 expression is regulated by DNA methylation and histone H3 lysine 9 modification in cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2008;68(8):2708–2716. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-6844. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Hinshelwood RA, Huschtscha LI, Melki J, et al. Concordant epigenetic silencing of transforming growth factor-beta signaling pathway genes occurs early in breast carcinogenesis. Cancer Res. 2007;67(24):11517–11527. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-1284. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Calin GA, Croce CM. MicroRNAs and chromosomal abnormalities in cancer cells. Oncogene. 2006;25(46):6202–6210. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1209910. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Negrini M, Calin GA. Breast cancer metastasis: A microRNA story. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10(2):203. doi: 10.1186/bcr1867. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Si ML, Zhu S, Wu H, Lu Z, Wu F, Mo YY. miR-21-mediated tumor growth. Oncogene. 2007;26(19):2799–2803. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1210083. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Iorio MV, Ferracin M, Liu CG, et al. MicroRNA gene expression deregulation in human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2005;65(16):7065–7070. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-1783. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lehmann U, Hasemeier B, Christgen M, et al. Epigenetic inactivation of microRNA gene hsa-mir-9-1 in human breast cancer. J Pathol. 2008;214(1):17–24. doi: 10.1002/path.2251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Tavazoie SF, Alarcon C, Oskarsson T, et al. Endogenous human microRNAs that suppress breast cancer metastasis. Nature. 2008;451(7175):147–152. doi: 10.1038/nature06487. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Adams BD, Furneaux H, White BA. The micro-ribonucleic acid (miRNA) miR-206 targets the human estrogen receptor-alpha (ERalpha) and represses ERalpha messenger RNA and protein expression in breast cancer cell lines. Mol Endocrinol. 2007;21(5):1132–1147. doi: 10.1210/me.2007-0022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Miller TE, Ghoshal K, Ramaswamy B, et al. MicroRNA-221/222 confers tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer by targeting p27Kip1. J Biol Chem. 2008;283(44):29897–29903. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M804612200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Shann YJ, Cheng C, Chiao CH, Chen DT, Li PH, Hsu MT. Genome-wide mapping and characterization of hypomethylated sites in human tissues and breast cancer cell lines. Genome Res. 2008;18(5):791–801. doi: 10.1101/gr.070961.107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Esteller M, Herman JG. Cancer as an epigenetic disease: DNA methylation and chromatin alterations in human tumours. J Pathol. 2002;196(1):1–7. doi: 10.1002/path.1024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Gupta A, Godwin AK, Vanderveer L, Lu A, Liu J. Hypomethylation of the synuclein gamma gene CpG island promotes its aberrant expression in breast carcinoma and ovarian carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2003;63(3):664–673. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Feigl H, Millinger S, Goebel G, Müller-Holzner E, Marth C, Laird PW, Widschwendter M. Breast cancer DNA methylation profiles in cancer cells and tumor stroma: Association with HER-2/neu status in primary breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2006;66(1):29–33. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-2508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Widschwendter M, Siegmund KD, Muller HM, et al. Association of breast cancer DNA methylation profiles with hormone receptor status and response to tamoxifen. Cancer Res. 2004;64(11):3807–3813. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-03-3852. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Esteller M, Fraga MF, Guo M, et al. DNA methylation patterns in hereditary human cancers mimic sporadic tumorigenesis. Hum Mol Genet. 2001;10(26):3001–3007. doi: 10.1093/hmg/10.26.3001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Fackler MJ, Malone K, Zhang Z, et al. Quantitative multiplex methylation-specific PCR analysis doubles detection of tumor cells in breast ductal fluid. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12(11, Pt. 1):3306–3310. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2733. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Widschwendter M, Apostolidou S, Raum E, et al. Epigenotyping in peripheral blood cell DNA and breast cancer risk: A proof of principle study. PLoS ONE. 2008;3(7):e2656. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002656. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Widschwendter M, Jones PA. DNA methylation and breast carcinogenesis. Oncogene. 2002;21(35):5462–5482. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1205606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. The hallmarks of cancer. Cell. 2000;100(1):57–70. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81683-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Pathak S, Multani AS, Furlong CL, Sohn SH. Telomere dynamics, aneuploidy, stem cells, and cancer (review) Int J Oncol. 2002;20(3):637–641. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Pathak S, Multani AS. Aneuploidy, stem cells and cancer. EXS. 2006;(96):49–64. doi: 10.1007/3-7643-7378-4_3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Matzke MA, Mette MF, Kanno T, Matzke AJ. Does the intrinsic instability of aneuploid genomes have a causal role in cancer? Trends Genet. 2003;19(5):253–256. doi: 10.1016/s0168-9525(03)00057-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Lee HC, Wei YH. Mitochondrial DNA instability and metabolic shift in human cancers. Int J Mol Sci. 2009;10(2):674–701. doi: 10.3390/ijms10020674. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Tommasi S, Karm DL, Wu X, Yen Y, Pfeifer GP. Methylation of homebox genes is a frequent and early epigenetic event in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2009;11(1):R14. doi: 10.1186/bcr2233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Krassenstein R, Sauter E, Dulaimi E, et al. Detection of breast cancer in nipple aspirate fluid by CpG island hypermethylation. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10(1, Pt. 1):28–32. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-0410-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Lehmann U, Langer F, Feist H, Glockner S, Hasemeier B, Kreipe H. Quantitative assessment of promoter hypermethylation during breast cancer development. Am J Pathol. 2002;160(2):605–612. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9440(10)64880-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Liu T, Niu Y, Feng Y, et al. Methylation of CpG islands of p16(INK4a) and cyclinD1 over-expression associated with progression of intraductal proliferative lesions of the breast. Hum Pathol. 2008;39(11):1637–1646. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2008.04.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Subramaniam MM, Chan JY, Soong R, et al. RUNX3 inactivation by frequent promoter hypermethylation and protein mislocalization constitute an early event in breast cancer progression. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;113(1):113–121. doi: 10.1007/s10549-008-9917-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Suzuki M, Shigematsu H, Shames DS, et al. DNA methylation-associated inactivation of TGFbeta-related genes DRM/Gremlin, RUNX3, and HPP1 in human cancers. Br J Cancer. 2005;93(9):1029–1037. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602837. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] [Retracted]
  • 62.Goyal J, Smith KM, Cowan JM, Wazer DE, Lee SW, Band V. The role for NES1 serine protease as a novel tumor suppressor. Cancer Res. 1998;58(21):4782–4786. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Dhar S, Bhargava R, Yunes M, et al. Analysis of normal epithelial cell specific-1 (NES1)/kallikrein 10 mRNA expression by in situ hybridization, a novel marker for breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2001;7(11):3393–3398. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Yunes MJ, Neuschatz AC, Bornstein LE, Naber SP, Band V, Wazer DE. Loss of expression of the putative tumor suppressor NES1 gene in biopsy-proven ductal carcinoma in situ predicts for invasive carcinoma at definitive surgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56(3):653–657. doi: 10.1016/s0360-3016(03)00068-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Allinen M, Beroukhim R, Cai L, et al. Molecular characterization of the tumor microenvironment in breast cancer. Cancer Cell. 2004;6(1):17–32. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2004.06.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Hu M, Yao J, Cai L, et al. Distinct epigenetic changes in the stromal cells of breast cancers. Nat Genet. 2005;37(8):899–905. doi: 10.1038/ng1596. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Orimo A, Gupta PB, Sgroi DC, et al. Stromal fibroblasts present in invasive human breast carcinomas promote tumor growth and angiogenesis through elevated SDF-1/CXCL12 secretion. Cell. 2005;121(3):335–348. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2005.02.034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Bhowmick NA, Neilson EG, Moses HL. Stromal fibroblasts in cancer initiation and progression. Nature. 2004;432(7015):332–337. doi: 10.1038/nature03096. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Lin HJ, Zuo T, Lin CH, et al. Breast cancer-associated fibroblasts confer AKT1-mediated epigenetic silencing of Cystatin M in epithelial cells. Cancer Res. 2008;68(24):10257–10266. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-0288. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Roodi N, Bailey LR, Kao WY, et al. Estrogen receptor gene analysis in estrogen receptor-positive and receptor-negative primary breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87(6):446–451. doi: 10.1093/jnci/87.6.446. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Weigel RJ, deConinck EC. Transcriptional control of estrogen receptor in estrogen receptor-negative breast carcinoma. Cancer Res. 1993;53(15):3472–3474. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Macaluso M, Cinti C, Russo G, Russo A, Giordano A. pRb2/pl30-E2F4/5-HDAC1-SUV39H1-p300 and pRb2/p130-E2F4/5-HDAC1-SUV39H1-DNMT1 multimolecular complexes mediate the transcription of estrogen receptor-alpha in breast cancer. Oncogene. 2003;22(23):3511–3517. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1206578. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Sharma D, Saxena NK, Davidson NE, Vertino PM. Restoration of tamoxifen sensitivity in ER negative breast cancer cells: tamoxifen-bound reactivated estrogen receptor recrutis distinctive corepressor complexes. Cancer Res. 2006;66(12):6370–6378. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-0402. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Ferguson AT, Lapidus RG, Davidson NE. Demethylation of the progesterone receptor CpG island is not required for progesterone receptor expression. Oncogene. 1998;17(5):577–583. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1201961. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Yang X, Ferguson AT, Nass SJ, et al. Transcriptional activation of estrogen receptor alpha in human breast cancer cells by histone decetylase inhibition. Cancer Res. 2000;60(24):6890–6894. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Yan L, Nass SJ, Smith D, Nelson WG, Herman JG, Davidson NE. Specific inhibition of DNMT1 by antisense oligonucleotides induces re-expression of estrogen receptor alpha (ER) in ER negative human breast cancer cell lines. Cancer Biol Ther. 2003;2(5):552–556. doi: 10.4161/cbt.2.5.469. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Robert MF, Morin S, Beaulieu N, et al. DNMT1 is requiered to maintain CpG methylation and aberrant gene silencing in human cancer cells. Nat Genet. 2003;33(1):61–65. doi: 10.1038/ng1068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Yang X, Phillips DL, Ferguson AT, Nelson WG, Herman JG, Davidson NE. Synergistic activation of of functional estrogen receptor (ER)-alpha by DNA methyltransferase and histone deacetylase inhibtion in human ER-alpha-nagative breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2001;61(19):7025–7029. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Zhu Wg OG. The interaction of histone deacetylase inhibitors and DNA methyltransferase inhibitors in the treatment of human cancer cells. Curr Med Chem Anti-Canc Agents. 2003;3:187–199. doi: 10.2174/1568011033482440. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Jang ER, Lim SJ, Lee ES, et al. The histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A sensitizes estrogen receptor alpha-negative breast cancer cells to tamoxifen. Oncogene. 2004;23(9):1724–1736. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1207315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Kawai H, Li H, Avraham S, Jiang S, Avraham HK. Overexpression of histone deacetylase HDAC1 modulates breast cancer progression by negative regulation of estrogen receptor alpha. Int J Cancer. 2003;107(3):353–358. doi: 10.1002/ijc.11403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Bicaku E, Marchion DC, Schmitt ML, Munster PN. Selective inhibition of histone deacetylase 2 silences progesterone receptor-mediated signaling. Cancer Res. 2008;68(5):1513–1519. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-2822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Subramanian K, Jia D, Kapoor-Vazirani P, et al. Regulation of estrogen receptor alpha by the SET7 lysine methyltransferase. Mol Cell. 2008;30(3):336–347. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2008.03.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Leu YW, Yan PS, Fan M, et al. Loss of estrogen receptor signaling triggers epigenetic silencing of downstream targets in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2004;64(22):8184–8192. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-2045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Lapidus RG, Ferguson AT, Ottaviano YL, et al. Methylation of estrogen and progesterone receptor gene 5' CpG islands correlates with lack of estrogen and progesterone receptor gene expression in breast tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 1996;2(5):805–810. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Fleury L, Gerus M, Lavigne AC, Richard-Foy H, Bystricky K. Eliminating epigenetic barriers induces transient hormone-regulated gene expression in estrogen receptor negative breast cancer cells. Oncogene. 2008;27(29):4075–4085. doi: 10.1038/onc.2008.41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Roman SD, Clarke CL, Hall RE, Alexander IE, Sutherland RL. Expression and regulation of retinoic acid receptors in human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 1992;52(8):2236–2242. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Wu JM, Fackler MJ, Halushka MK, et al. Heterogeneity of breast cancer metastases: comparison of therapeutic target expression and promoter methylation between primary tumors and their multifocal metastases. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(7):1938–1946. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4082. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Liu Y, Lee MO, Wang HG, et al. Retinoic acid receptor beta mediates the growth-inhibitory effect of retinoic acid by promoting apoptosis in human breast cancer cells. Mol Cell Biol. 1996;16(3):1138–1149. doi: 10.1128/mcb.16.3.1138. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Wu Q, Dawson MI, Zheng Y, et al. Inhibition of trans-retinoic acid-resistant human breast cancer cell growth by retinoid X receptor-selective retinoids. Mol Cell Biol. 1997;17(11):6598–6608. doi: 10.1128/mcb.17.11.6598. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Chambon P. A decade of molecular biology of retinoic acid receptors. FASEB J. 1996;10(9):940–954. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Sirchia SM, Ferguson AT, Sironi E, Subramanyan S, Orlandi R, Sukumar S, Sacchi N. Evidence of epigenetic changes affecting the chromatin state of the retinoic acid receptor beta2 promoter in breast cancer cells. Oncogene. 2000;19(12):1556–1563. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1203456. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Sirchia SM, Ren M, Pill R, et al. Endogenous reactivation of the RARbeta2 tumor suppressor gene epigenetically silenced in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2002;62(9):2455–2461. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Patel JB, Mehta J, Belosay A, et al. Novel retinoic acid metabolism blocking agents have potent inhibitory activities on human breast cancer cells and tumour growth. Br J Cancer. 2007;96(8):1204–1215. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603705. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Belosay A, Brodie AM, Njar VC. Effects of novel retinoic acid metabolism blocking agent (VN/14-1) on letrozole-insensitive breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2006;66(23):11485–11493. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-2168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Esteller M, Silva JM, Dominguez G, et al. Promoter hypermethylation and BRCA1 inactivation in sporadic breast and ovarian tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(7):564–569. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.7.564. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Dobrovic A, Simpfendorfer D. Methylation of the BRCA1 gene in sporadic breast cancer. Cancer Res. 1997;57(16):3347–3350. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Dhillon VS, Shahid M, Husain SA. CpG methylation of the FHIT, FANCF, cyclin-D2, BRCA2 and RUNX3 genes in granulosa cell tumors (GCTs) of ovarian origin. Mol Cancer. 2004;3:33. doi: 10.1186/1476-4598-3-33. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Collins N, Wooster R, Stratton MR. Absence of methylation of CpG dinucleotides within the promoter of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2 in normal tissues and in breast and ovarian cancers. Br J Cancer. 1997;76(9):1150–1156. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1997.526. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Easton DF, Ford D, Bishop DT. Breast and ovarian cancer incidence in BRCA1-mutation carriers Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Am J Hum Genet. 1995;56(1):265–271. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Narod SA, Goldgar D, Cannon-Albright L, et al. Risk modifiers in carriers of BRCA1 mutations. Int J Cancer. 1995;64(6):394–398. doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910640608. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Ford D, Easton DF, Stratton M, et al. Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Am J Hum Genet. 1998;62(3):676–689. doi: 10.1086/301749. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Antoniou AC, Sinilnikova OM, Simard J, et al. RAD51 135G-->C modifies breast cancer risk among BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from a combined analysis of 19 studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2007;81(6):1186–1200. doi: 10.1086/522611. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Kontorovich T, Cohen Y, Nir U, Friedman E. Promoter methylation patterns of ATM, ATR, BRCA1, BRCA2 and P53 as putative cancer risk modifiers in Jewish BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;116(1):195–200. doi: 10.1007/s10549-008-0121-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Ganesan S, Silver DP, Greenberg RA, et al. BRCA1 supports XIST RNA concentration on the inactive X chromosome. Cell. 2002;111(3):393–405. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(02)01052-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Jonsson G, Naylor TL, Vallon-Christersson J, et al. Distinct genomic profiles in hereditary breast tumors identified by array-based comparative genomic hybridization. Cancer Res. 2005;65(17):7612–7621. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-0570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Richardson AL, Wang ZC, De Nicolo A, et al. X chromosomal abnormalities in basal-like human breast cancer. Cancer Cell. 2006;9(2):121–132. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.01.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Chin K, DeVries S, Fridlyand J, et al. Genomic and transcriptional aberrations linked to breast cancer pathophysiologies. Cancer Cell. 2006;10(6):529–541. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.10.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Vincent-Salomon A, Ganem-Elbaz C, Manie E, et al. X inactive-specific transcript RNA coating and genetic instability of the X chromosome in BRAC1 breast tumors. Cancer Res. 2007;67(11):5134–5140. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-0465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Klarmann GJ, Decker A, Farrar WL. Epigenetic gene silencing in the Wnt pathway in breast cancer. Epigenetics. 2008;3(2):59–63. doi: 10.4161/epi.3.2.5899. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Suzuki H, Toyota M, Carraway H, et al. Frequent epigenetic inactivation of Wnt antagonist genes in breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2008;98(6):1147–1156. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Veeck J, Geisler C, Noetzel E, et al. Epigenetic inactivation of the secreted frizzled-related protein-5 (SFRP5) gene in human breast cancer is associated with unfavorable prognosis. Carcinogenesis. 2008;29(5):991–998. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgn076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Marchion D, Munster P. Development of histone deacetylase inhibitors for cancer treatment. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2007;7(4):583–598. doi: 10.1586/14737140.7.4.583. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Butler LM, Agus DB, Scher HI, et al. Suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid, an inhibitor of histone deacetylase, suppresses the growth of prostate cancer cells in vitro and in vivo. Cancer Research. 2000;60(18):5165–5170. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115.Cohen LA, Marks PA, Rifikind RA, Amin S, Desai D, Pittman B, Richon VM. Suberoylanilide hydroxymic acid (SAHA), a histone deacetylase inhibitor, suppresses the growth of carcinogen-induced mammary tumors. Anticancer Res. 2002;22(3):1497–1504. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116.Isaacs JS, Xu W, Neckers L. Heat shock protein 90 as a molecular target for cancer therapeutics. Cancer Cell. 2003;3(3):213–217. doi: 10.1016/s1535-6108(03)00029-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117.Solit DB, Rosen N. Hsp90: A novel target for cancer therapy. Curr Top Med Chem. 2006;6(11):1205–1214. doi: 10.2174/156802606777812068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Kovacs JJ, Murphy PJ, Gaillard S, et al. HDAC6 regulates Hsp90 acetylation and chaperone-dependent activation of glucocorticoid receptor. Mol Cell. 2005;18(5):601–607. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.04.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119.Bali P, Pranpat M, Swaby R, et al. Activity of suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid against human breast cancer cells with amplificatoin of Her 2. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(17):6382–6389. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120.Beliakoff J, Bagatell R, Paine-Murrieta G, Taylor CW, Lykkesfeldt AE, Whitesell L. Hormone-refractory breast cancer remains sensitive to the antitumor acitivity of heat shock protein 90 inhibitors. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9(13):4961–4971. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121.Deroanne CF, Bonjean K, Servotte S, et al. Histone deacetylases inhibitors as anti-angiogenic agents altering vascular endothelial growth factor signaling. Oncogene. 2002;21(3):427–436. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1205108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122.Qian DZ, Wang X, Kachhap SK, et al. The histone deacetylase inhibitor NVP-LAQ824 inhibits angiogenesis and has a greater antitumor effect in combination with the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor PTK787/ZK222584. Cancer Res. 2004;64(18):6626–6634. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0540. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123.Marks PA, Richon VM, Breslow R, Rifkind RA. Histone deacetylase inhibitors as new cancer drugs. Curr Opin Oncol. 2001;13(6):477–483. doi: 10.1097/00001622-200111000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124.Fuino L, Bali P, Wittmann S, et al. Histone deacetylase inhibitor LAQ824 down regulated Her-2 and sensitizes human breast cancer cells to trastuzumab, taxotere, gemcitabine, and epothilone. B Mol Cancer Ther. 2003;2(10):971–984. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125.Munster PN, Troso-Sandoval T, Rosen N, Rifkind R, Marks PA, Richon VM. The histone deacetylase inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid induces differentiation of human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2001;61(23):8492–8497. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126.Fiskus W, Ren Y, Mohapatra A, et al. Hydroxamic acid analogue histone deacetylase inhibitors attenuate estrogen receptor-alpha levels and transcriptional activity: a result of hyperacetylation and inhibition of chaperone function of heat shock protein 90. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(16):4882–4890. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-3093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127.Marchion DC, Bicaku E, Daud AI, Richon V, Sullivan DM, Munster PN. Sequence-specific potentiation of topoisomerase II inhibitors by the histone deacetylase inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid. J Cell Biochem. 2004;92(2):223–237. doi: 10.1002/jcb.20045. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128.Phiel CJ, Zhang R, Huang EY, Guenther MG, Lazar MA, Klein PS. Histone deacetylase is a direct target of valproic acid, a potent anticonvulsant, mood stabilizer, and teratogen. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(39):36734–36741. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M101287200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129.Gurvich N, Tsygankova OM, Meinkoth JL, Klein PS. Histone deacetylase is a target of valproic acid-mediated cellular differentiation. Cancer Res. 2004;64(3):1079–1086. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.can-03-0799. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130.Mongan NP, Gudas LJ. Valproic acid in combination of with all-trans retinoic acid and 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine, restores expression of silenced RARB2 in breast cancer cells. Mol Cancer Ther. 2005;4(3):477–486. doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-04-0079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131.Keen JC, Yan L, Mack KM, Pettit C, Smith D, Sharma D, Davidson NE. A novel histone deacetylase inhibitor, scriptaid, enhances expression of functional estrogen receptor alpha (ER) in ER negative human breast cancer cells in combination with 5-aza2'deoxycytidine. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003;81(3):177–186. doi: 10.1023/A:1026146524737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132.A phase I study of the toxicities, biologic and clinical effects of daily 5 aza 2'deoxycytidine (DAC), NSC 127716 (IND 50733) for four weeks in patients with advanced malignancies ( NCT00030615) 2009 Jul 30; ClinicalTrials.gov Web site,
  • 133.Kelly WK, Richon VM, O'Connor O, et al. Phase I clinical trial of histone deacetylase inhibitor suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid administered intravenously. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9(10, Pt. 1):3578–3588. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134.Kelly WK, O'Connor OA, Krug LM, et al. Phase I study of an oral histone deacetylase inhibitor, suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid in patients with advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(17):3923–3931. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.14.167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135.Ramaswamy B, Bhalla K, Cohen B, et al. Phase I-II study of the histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi) vorinostat plus paclitaxel and bevacizumab in metastatic breast cancer (MBC): New York Cancer Consortium trial P7703. 31st Annu Meet San Antonio Breast Cancer Symp; San Antonio. Dec 11–14; 2008. Abst 404. [Google Scholar]
  • 136.Phase I-II trial of vorinostat plus weekly paclitaxel and trastuzumab followed by doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide in patients with locally advanced breast cancer ( NCT00574587) 2009 Jul 30; ClinicalTrials.gov Web site,
  • 137.Phase II trial of suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA, vorinostat) in combination with tamoxifen for patients with advanced breast cancer who have failed prior anti-hormonal therapy ( NCT00365599) 2009 Jul 30; ClinicalTrials.gov Web site,
  • 138.Munster P, Marchion D, Bicaku E, et al. Phase I trial of histone deacetylase inhibition by valproic acid followed by the topoisomerase II inhibitor epirubicin in advanced solid tumors: a clinical and translational study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(15):1979–1985. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.6165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139.Phase II study of valproic acid with FEC100 for patients with locally advanced breast cancer (NCT00437801) 2009 Jul 30; ClinicalTrials.gov Web site,
  • 140.Nimmrich I, Sieuwerts AM, Meijer-van Gelder ME, et al. DNA hypermethylation of PITX2 is a marker of poor prognosis in untreated lymph node-negative hormone receptor-positive breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;111(3):429–437. doi: 10.1007/s10549-007-9800-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141.Ai L, Kim WJ, Demircan B, et al. The transglutaminase 2 gene (TGM2), a potential molecular marker for chemotherapeutic drug sensitivity, is epigenetically silenced in breast cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2008;29(3):510–518. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgm280. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142.Fiegl H, Jones A, Hauser-Kronberger C, et al. Methylated NEUROD1 promoter is a marker for chemosensitivity in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14(11):3494–3502. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-4557. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143.Khan SA, Wiley EL, Rodriguez N, et al. Ductal lavage findings in women with known breast cancer undergoing mastectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(20):1510–1517. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djh283. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144.Li J, Zhao J, Yu X, et al. Identification of bio-markers for breast cancer in nipple aspiration and ductal lavage fluid. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(23):8312–8320. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1538. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145.Bean GR, Scott V, Yee L, et al. Retinoic acid receptor-beta2 promoter methylation in random periareolar fine needle aspiration. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14(4):790–798. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0580. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146.Shukla S, Mirza S, Sharma G, Parshad R, Gupta SD, Ralhan R. Detection of RASSF1A and RARbeta hypermethylation in serum DNA from breast cancer patients. Epigenetics. 2006;1(2):88–93. doi: 10.4161/epi.1.2.2679. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147.Brenner AJ, Stampfer MR, Aldaz CM. Increased p16 expression with first senescence arrest in human mammary epithelial cells and extended growth capacity with p16 inactivation. Oncogene. 1998;17(2):199–205. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1201919. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148.Foster SA, Wong DJ, Barrett MT, Galloway DA. Inactivation of p16 in human mammary epithelial cells by CpG island methylation. Mol Cell Biol. 1998;18(4):1793–1801. doi: 10.1128/mcb.18.4.1793. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149.Bender CM, Pao MM, Jones PA. Inhibition of DNA methylation by 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine suppresses the growth of human tumor cell lines. Cancer Res. 1998;58(1):95–101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150.Yu Y, Xu F, Peng H, et al. NOEY2 (ARHI), an imprinted putative tumor suppressor gene in ovarian and breast carcinomas. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999;96(1):214–219. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.1.214. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151.Ammanamanchi S, Kim SJ, Sun LZ, Brattain MG. Induction of transforming growth factor-beta receptor type II expression in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer cells through SP1 activation by 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine. J Biol Chem. 1998;273(26):16527–16534. doi: 10.1074/jbc.273.26.16527. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152.Widschwendter M, Berger J, Hermann M, et al. Methylation and silencing of the retinoic acid receptor-beta2 gene in breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(10):826–832. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.10.826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153.Lotan R, Xu XC, Lippman SM, et al. Suppression of retinoic acid receptor-beta in premalignant oral lesions and its up-regulation by isotretinoin. N Engl J Med. 1995;332(21):1405–1410. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199505253322103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154.Xu XL, Wu LC, Du F, et al. Inactivation of human SRBC, located within the 11p15.5-p15.4 tumor suppressor region, in breast and lung cancers. Cancer Res. 2001;61(21):7943–7949. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155.Meyyappan M, Wong H, Hull C, Riabowol KT. Increased expression of cyclin D2 during multiple states of growth arrest in primary and established cells. Mol Cell Biol. 1998;18(6):3163–3172. doi: 10.1128/mcb.18.6.3163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156.Evron E, Umbricht CB, Korz D, et al. Loss of cyclin D2 expression in the majority of breast cancers is associated with promoter hypermethylation. Cancer Res. 2001;61(6):2782–2787. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157.Ferguson AT, Evron E, Umbricht CB, et al. High frequency of hypermethylation at the 14-3-3 sigma locus leads to gene silencing in breast cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000;97(11):6049–6054. doi: 10.1073/pnas.100566997. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 158.Umbricht CB, Evron E, Gabrielson E, Ferguson A, Marks J, Sukumar S. Hypermethylation of 14-3-3 sigma (stratifin) is an early event in breast cancer. Oncogene. 2001;20(26):3348–3353. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1204438. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 159.Ai L, Tao Q, Zhong S, et al. Inactivation of Wnt inhibitory factor-1 (WIF1) expression by epigenetic silencing is a common event in breast cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2006;27(7):1341–1348. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgi379. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160.Ottaviano YL, Issa JP, Parl FF, Smith HS, Baylin SB, Davidson NE. Methylation of the estrogen receptor gene CpG island marks loss of estrogen receptor expression in human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res. 1994;54(10):2552–2555. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161.Krop IE, Sgroi D, Porter DA, et al. HIN-1, a putative cytokine highly expressed in normal but not cancerous mammary epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(17):9796–9801. doi: 10.1073/pnas.171138398. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162.Lau QC, Raja E, Salto-Tellez M, et al. RUNX3 is frequently inactivated by dual mechanisms of protein mislocalization and promoter hypermethylation in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2006;66(13):6512–6520. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-0369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 163.Du Y, Carling T, Fang W, Piao Z, Sheu JC, Huang S. Hypermethylation in human cancers of the RIZ1 tumor suppressor gene, a member of a histone/protein methyltransferase superfamily. Cancer Res. 2001;61(22):8094–8099. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164.Abbondanza C, Medici N, Nigro V, et al. The retinoblastoma-interacting zinc-finger protein RIZ is a downstream effector of estrogen action. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000;97(7):3130–3135. doi: 10.1073/pnas.050015697. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165.Zochbauer-Muller S, Fong KM, Maitra A, et al. 5' CpG island methylation of the FHIT gene is correlated with loss of gene expression in lung and breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2001;61(9):3581–3585. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 166.Takahashi Y, Miyoshi Y, Takahata C, et al. Down-regulation of LATS1 and LATS2 mRNA expression by promoter hypermethylation and its association with biologically aggressive phenotype in human breast cancers. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11(4):1380–1385. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-1773. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 167.Rivenbank AG, Jones WD, Coleman WS. DNA methylation-dependent silencing of CST6 in human breast cancer cell lines. Lab Invest. 200686(12):1233–1242. doi: 10.1038/labinvest.3700485. =: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 168.Meehan WJ, Samant RS, Hopper JE, et al. Breast cancer metastasis suppressor 1 (BRMS1) forms complexes with retinoblastoma-binding protein 1 (RBP1) and the mSin3 histone deacetylase complex and represses transcription. J Biol Chem. 2004;279(2):1562–1569. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M307969200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 169.Ramaswamy B, Majumder S, Roy S, et al. Estrogen mediated suppression of the gene encoding protein tyrosine phosphatase PTPRO in human breast cancer: Mechanism and role in tamoxifen sensitivity. Mol Endocrinol. 2009;23(2):176–187. doi: 10.1210/me.2008-0211. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 170.Versmold B, Felsberg J, Mikeska T, et al. Epigenetic silencing of the candidate tumor suppressor gene PROX1 in sporadic breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 2007;121(3):547–554. doi: 10.1002/ijc.22705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 171.Dammann R, Yang C, Pfeifer GP. Hypermethylation of the cpG island of Ras association domain family 1A (RASSF1A), a putative tumor suppressor gene from the 3p21.3 locus, occurs in a large percentage of human breast cancers. Cancer Res. 2001;61(7):3105–3109. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 172.Fackler MJ, McVeigh M, Mehrotra J, et al. Quantitative multiplex methylation-specific PCR assay for the detection of promoter hypermethylation in multiple genes in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2004;64(13):4442–4452. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-03-3341. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 173.Yuan Y, Mendez R, Sahin A, Dai JL. Hypermethylation leads to silencing of the SYK gene in human breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2001;61(14):5558–5561. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 174.Raman V, Martensen SA, Reisman D, et al. Compromised HOXA5 function can limit p53 expression in human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;405(6789):974–978. doi: 10.1038/35016125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 175.Raman V, Tamori A, Vali M, Zeller K, Korz D, Sukumar S. HOXA5 regulates expression of the progesterone receptor. J Biol Chem. 2000;275(34):26551–26555. doi: 10.1074/jbc.C000324200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 176.Conway KE, McConnell BB, Bowring CE, Donald CD, Warren ST, Vertino PM. TMS1, a novel proapoptotic caspase recruitment domain protein, is a target of methylation-induced gene silencing in human breast cancers. Cancer Res. 2000;60(22):6236–6242. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 177.Lombaerts M, van Wezel T, Philippo K, et al. E-cadherin transcriptional downregulation by promoter methylation but not mutation is related to epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in breast cancer cell lines. Br J Cancer. 2006;94(5):661–671. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602996. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 178.Bilanges B, Varrault A, Basyuk E, et al. Loss of expression of the candidate tumor suppressor gene ZAC in breast cancer cell lines and primary tumors. Oncogene. 1999;18(27):3979–3988. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1202933. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 179.Domann FE, Rice JC, Hendrix MJ, Futscher BW. Epigenetic silencing of maspin gene expression in human breast cancers. Int J Cancer. 2000;85(6):805–810. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(20000315)85:6<805::aid-ijc12>3.0.co;2-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 180.Li Q, Ahuja N, Burger PC, Issa JP. Methylation and silencing of the thrombospondin-1 promoter in human cancer. Oncogene. 1999;18(21):3284–3289. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1202663. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 181.Graff JR, Gabrielson E, Fujii H, Baylin SB, Herman JG. Methylation patterns of the E-cadherin 5' CpG island are unstable and reflect the dynamic, heterogeneous loss of E-cadherin expression during metastatic progression. J Biol Chem. 2000;275(4):2727–2732. doi: 10.1074/jbc.275.4.2727. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 182.Toyooka KO, Toyooka S, Virmani AK, et al. Loss of expression and aberrant methylation of the CDH13 (H-cadherin) gene in breast and lung carcinomas. Cancer Res. 2001;61(11):4556–4560. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 183.Gu YM, Tan JX, Lu XW, Ding Y, Han X, Sun YJ. BCSG1 methylation status and BCSG1 expression in breast tissues derived from Chinese women with breast cancer. Oncology. 2008;74(1–2):61–68. doi: 10.1159/000139125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 184.Virmani AK, Rathi A, Sathyanarayana UG, et al. Aberrant methylation of the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene promoter 1A in breast and lung carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2001;7(7):1998–2004. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 185.Jin Z, Tamura G, Tsuchiya T, et al. Adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene promoter hypermethylation in primary breast cancers. Br J Cancer. 2001;85(1):69–73. doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1853. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 186.Bachman KE, Herman JG, Corn PG, et al. Methylation-associated silencing of the tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-3 gene suggest a suppressor role in kidney, brain, and other human cancers. Cancer Res. 1999;59(4):798–802. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 187.Han HJ, Russo J, Kohwi Y, Kohwi-Shigematsu T. SATB1 reprogrammes gene expression to promote breast tumour growth and metastasis. Nature. 2008;452(7184):187–193. doi: 10.1038/nature06781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 188.Nicolson GL. Breast cancer metastasis-associated genes: Role in tumour progression to the metastatic state. Biochem Soc Symp. 1998;63:231–243. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 189.Lujambio A, Calin GA, Villanueva A, et al. A microRNA DNA methylation signature for human cancer metastasis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105(36):13556–13561. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0803055105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 190.Devereux TR, Horikawa I, Anna CH, Annab LA, Afshari CA, Barrett JC. DNA methylation analysis of the promoter region of the human telomerase reverse transcriptase (hTERT) gene. Cancer Res. 1999;59(24):6087–6090. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 191.Kyo S, Takakura M, Kanaya T, et al. Estrogen activates telomerase. Cancer Res. 1999;59(23):5917–5921. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 192.Esteller M, Corn PG, Urena JM, Gabrielson E, Baylin SB, Herman JG. Inactivation of glutathione S-transferase P1 gene by promoter hypermethylation in human neoplasia. Cancer Res. 1998;58(20):4515–4518. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 193.Jhaveri MS, Morrow CS. Methylation-mediated regulation of the glutathione S-transferase P1 gene in human breast cancer cells. Gene. 1998;210(1):1–7. doi: 10.1016/s0378-1119(98)00021-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES