4.7 Article

Androgen Receptor Phosphorylation at Serine 308 and Serine 791 Predicts Enhanced Survival in Castrate Resistant Prostate Cancer Patients

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES
Volume 14, Issue 8, Pages 16656-16671

Publisher

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/ijms140816656

Keywords

androgen receptor; phosphorylation; hormone naive prostate cancer; castrate resistant prostate cancer

Funding

  1. Association of International Cancer Research (AICR)
  2. Glasgow Royal Infirmary Endowments board

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We previously reported that AR phosphorylation at serine 213 was associated with poor outcome and may contribute to prostate cancer development and progression. This study investigates if specific AR phosphorylation sites have differing roles in the progression of hormone naive prostate cancer (HNPC) to castrate resistant disease (CRPC). A panel of phosphospecific antibodies were employed to study AR phosphorylation in 84 matched HNPC and CRPC tumours. Immunohistochemistry measured Androgen receptor expression phosphorylated at serine residues 94 (pAR(94)), 308 (pAR(308)), 650(pAR(650)) and 791 (pAR(791)). No correlations with clinical parameters were observed for pAR(94) or pAR(650) in HNPC or CRPC tumours. In contrast to our previous observation with serine 213, high pAR(308) is significantly associated with a longer time to disease specific death (p = 0.011) and high pAR(791) expression significantly associated with a longer time to disease recurrence (p = 0.018) in HNPC tumours and longer time to death from disease recurrence (p = 0.040) in CRPC tumours. This observation in CRPC tumours was attenuated in high apoptotic tumours (p = 0.022) and low proliferating tumours (p = 0.004). These results demonstrate that understanding the differing roles of AR phosphorylation is necessary before this can be exploited as a target for castrate resistant prostate cancer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available