help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrinology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Szepeshazi, K.
Right arrow Articles by Halmos, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Szepeshazi, K.
Right arrow Articles by Halmos, G.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Substance via MeSH
Endocrinology Vol. 142, No. 10 4371-4378
Copyright © 2001 by The Endocrine Society


ARTICLES

Antagonists of GHRH Decrease Production of GH and IGF-I in MXT Mouse Mammary Cancers and Inhibit Tumor Growth

Karoly Szepeshazi, Andrew V. Schally, Patricia Armatis, Kate Groot, Francine Hebert, Anita Feil, Jozsef L. Varga and Gabor Halmos

Endocrine, Polypeptide and Cancer Institute (K.S., A.V.S., P.A., K.G., F.H., A.F., J.L.V., G.H.), Veterans Affairs Medical Center, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112; and Department of Medicine (K.S., A.V.S., A.F., J.L.V., G.H.), Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. Andrew V. Schally, Endocrine, Polypeptide, and Cancer Institute, VA Medical Center, 1601 Perdido Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112-1262.


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The involvement of IGF-I in mammary carcinogenesis is well established, but the role of GH, as an autocrine growth factor for breast cancers is poorly understood. The goal of our study was to investigate whether antagonists of GHRH can interfere with the effects of GH and IGF-I in MXT mouse mammary cancers. GHRH antagonists JV-1–36 and JV-1–38 inhibited growth of estrogen-independent MXT mouse mammary cancers in vivo, producing about 50% reduction in tumor volume (P < 0.05). This growth inhibition was associated with a decrease in cell proliferation and an increase in apoptosis in MXT cancers. RIA and RT- PCR analyses showed that the concentrations of GH and IGF-I and the levels of mRNA for GH and IGF-I in MXT tumors were reduced by the therapy with GHRH antagonists. Messenger RNA for GH receptors was also decreased. In vitro, the proliferation of MXT cancer cells was strongly stimulated by GH and less effectively by IGF-I, indicating that both GH and IGF-I may act as growth factors for this mammary carcinoma. GHRH antagonist JV-1–38 inhibited the autonomous growth of MXT cells and the proliferation induced by IGF-I or GH and diminished 3H-thymidine-incorporation stimulated by IGF-I and GH. These findings and a sustained increase in cyclin B2 concentrations in the cells shown by immunoblotting indicate that JV-1–38 causes a block at the end of the G2 phase of cell cycle. Our results demonstrate that GHRH antagonists decrease the local production of both GH and IGF-I in MXT mouse mammary cancers, the resulting growth inhibition being the consequence of reduced cell proliferation and increased apoptosis.


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
VARIOUS EXPERIMENTAL AND clinical studies, carried out in the past decade, document the role of IGFs in the development and progression of breast cancers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Both IGF-I and IGF-II have been detected in mammary tumors. IGF-I derived from the circulation and IGF-I and IGF-II produced locally by epithelial and stromal cells (3, 4) may promote tumor growth by endocrine, paracrine, or autocrine mechanisms (3, 6, 7). The effects of IGF-I and IGF-II are mediated through the IGF-I receptor, and its activation leads to the stimulation of cell proliferation and the suppression of apoptosis in tumors (4). IGF-I receptors are present in breast cancers at higher levels than in normal breast tissue and show a correlation with receptors for E and progesterone and prognostic factors (1, 4). In view of the role of IGFs and their receptors in mammary carcinogenesis, the IGF system is considered to be an appropriate target for antitumor agents (1, 8).

In the search for new therapeutic approaches for IGF-I-dependent cancers, we recently developed GHRH antagonists (9). Tumor inhibitory effects of GHRH antagonists have been demonstrated in a wide range of experimental malignancies (9), including osteosarcomas (10); lung (11, 12), prostate (13, 14, 15), kidney (16), breast (17), pancreatic (18), and colon cancers (19); and glioblastomas (20). Several classes of GHRH analogs have been synthesized in our laboratory in an endeavor to develop antagonists with increased receptor-binding affinity, biological activity, and metabolic stability (9, 21). The evaluation of the tumor inhibitory effects of GHRH antagonists revealed that their mechanism of action is complex and not restricted solely to the blockade of the pituitary GH/hepatic IGF-I axis (9). The reduction of serum GH and IGF-I levels by prolonged administration of GHRH antagonists might explain the inhibitory effect of these antagonists on some IGF-I-dependent tumors such as osteosarcomas, lung, renal, and prostate cancers (10, 11, 13, 14, 16). However, in the course of inhibition of mammary, prostatic, pancreatic, and colorectal cancers and glioblastomas by the GHRH antagonists, the intratumoral concentrations of IGF-I and/or IGF-II are decreased, and the serum GH and IGF-I levels are only slightly affected or unchanged (15, 17, 18, 19, 20). This indicates that in some cancers the local action of the antagonists on tumor cells may be more important for the inhibitory process than systemic effects on the GHRH-GH-IGF-I axis. Whether the local target of GHRH antagonists is IGF-I or IGF-II appears to depend on the type of tumor. GHRH antagonists can also inhibit tumor growth by mechanisms that are IGF independent (12)—that is, by blocking the actions of locally produced autocrine/paracrine GHRH (12, 22).

Recent work indicates that GH also may be an autocrine growth substance in mammary tumors (23, 24). These findings raise the question of whether GHRH antagonists could affect GH synthesis at extrapituitary sites and thus interfere with the local production and effects of GH in cancers.

In the present study, we investigated the effects of GHRH antagonists on growth of E-independent MXT mouse mammary cancers. In addition to following the changes in tumor volume, we also analyzed cancer growth characteristics by histological methods such as silver staining of nucleolar organizer regions (AgNORs), immunohistochemical detection of proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), and assaying apoptotic cells. We likewise performed in vitro experiments to elucidate the mechanism of action of the antagonists. Our studies reveal that in MXT breast cancers, GHRH antagonists can inhibit tumor growth by suppressing the local production and effects of GH. This represents a new, previously unknown mechanism of tumor inhibitory action of GHRH antagonists. Our findings are reported herein.


    Materials and Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Peptides
GHRH antagonists [PhAc-Tyr1,D-Arg2,Phe(4Cl)6,Abu15,Nle27]hGHRH(1–28)Agm (MZ-5–156), [PhAc-Tyr1,D-Arg2,Phe(4Cl)6,Arg9, Abu15,Nle27,D-Arg28,Har29]hGHRH(1–29)NH2 (JV-1–36) and [PhAc-Tyr1,D-Arg2,Phe(4Cl)6,Har9,Tyr(Me)10,Abu15,Nle27,D-Arg28,Har29]hGHRH(1–29)NH2 (JV-1–38) were synthesized in our laboratory by solid-phase methods (21, 25). The peptides were dissolved in 20 µl dimethylsulfoxide and diluted with 10% propylene glycol in water for daily injections or 50% propylene glycol when used in osmotic pumps.

All chemicals were purchased from Sigma (St. Louis, MO) unless stated otherwise.

Animals and tumors
Female B6D2F1 mice were obtained from the National Cancer Institute, Frederick Cancer Research Facility (Frederick, MD). MXT(3.2)ovex mammary carcinoma was originally acquired from Dr. A. E. Bogden (Biomeasure, Hopkinton, MA) and was regularly transplanted in our laboratory. The maintenance of animals, the transplantation method of cancers, and the calculation of tumor volume were reported previously (26). All experiments were performed according to institutional ethical guidelines on animal care.

In vivo experimental protocol
One day after transplantation of tumors, the mice were randomly divided into groups, and the treatment was started. The GHRH antagonists were administered by single daily sc injections at a dose of 20 µg/d or continuously from Alzet osmotic pumps (model 2002) (ALZA, Palo Alto, CA) implanted sc and releasing 20 µg/d. The groups were as follows: (1) control, vehicle only; (2) MZ-5–156, injections; (3) JV-1–36, injections; (4) JV-1–38, injections; (5) JV-1–36, osmotic pump; and (6) JV-1–38, osmotic pump. The experiment was terminated on day 18. Body weights and tumors were measured regularly, and tumor volume was determined. Tumor growth reduction was calculated according to the formula: tumor growth reduction % = 100 - 100 x (T-t)/(C-c), where t = mean initial volume of treated tumors, T = mean final volume of treated tumors, c = mean initial volume of control tumors, and C = mean final volume of control tumors. The mice were killed by exsanguination under Metofane (Malinkrodt Vet., Mundelein, IL) anesthesia. The tumors were cleaned and weighed. Tumor samples were taken for histology, receptor analysis, RIA, and molecular biology studies.

Histological procedures
Tumor samples were fixed in 10% buffered formalin. The specimens were embedded in Paraplast (Oxford Labware, St. Louis, MO) and sections were stained with hematoxylin-eosin. The mitotic and apoptotic cells were counted in 10 standard high-power microscopic fields containing, on average, 500 cells, and their numbers per 1000 cells were accepted as the mitotic and apoptotic indices, respectively. For the demonstration of the nucleolar organizer region in tumor cell nuclei, the AgNOR method was used as described (26). The number of AgNOR granules is an indicator of cell proliferation (26). The silver-stained black dots in 50 cells of each tumor were counted, and the AgNOR number per cell was calculated.

Immunohistochemical detection of PCNA
The sections of paraffin-embedded tumor tissue on silanated glass slides underwent standard processing with additional 2 x 5 min microwave treatment in 0.01 M sodium citrate buffer, pH 6.0. Primary antibody for PCNA (Ab-1) (Calbiochem, Cambridge, MA) 1:500 was used for 1 h followed by biotinylated antimouse IgG 1:300 for 1 h and ExtrAvidine-peroxidase 1:100 for 30 min. Peroxidase was detected with Sigma Fast diaminobenzidine tablets. All incubations were carried out at room temperature. The nuclei containing PCNA were counted and the percentage of positive nuclei was determined.

Receptor assay
The IGF-I receptor assay on membranes of MXT cancers was described previously (11, 12, 13). The LIGAND PC computerized curve-fitting program of Munson and Rodbard (11, 12, 13) was used to evaluate the types of receptor binding, the maximal binding capacity of the receptor and the dissociation constant (Kd) values.

RIAs for GH, IGF-I, and IGF-II in mouse MXT breast cancers
The tumor tissue was homogenized in 2 M acetic acid supplemented with protease inhibitors. The homogenate was centrifuged at 10,000 g for 30 min. The supernatants were lyophilized and reconstituted in RIA buffer. Mouse GH was determined using materials provided by Dr. A. F. Parlow (NIDDK National Hormone and Pituitary Program, Torrance, CA): mGH reference preparation AFP 10783B, mGH antigen AFP 10783B, and antirat GH-RIA-5/AFP-411S.

The method used for determination of IGF-I and IGF-II in tumor samples was described (14). Briefly, 100 mg of tumor tissue was homogenized in 0.5 M homogenization buffer containing protease inhibitors. Tumor homogenates were extracted by a modified acid-ethanol cryoprecipitation method to eliminate the interference by IGF-binding proteins and 300 µl of homogenate was separated for protein determination using the Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (Hercules, CA) protein assay kit. In the cell culture medium, IGF-I and IGF-II were measured directly without extraction. Rat IGF-I (Diagnostics Systems Laboratories, Inc., [DSL], Webster, TX) was iodinated by the chloramine T method. The standard was in the range of 2–2,000 pg/tube. Goat anti-rIGF-I (DSL) was used at the final dilution of 1:20,833. Recombinant IGF-II (Bachem, Torrance, CA) was iodinated by the Lactoperoxidase method, the standard was set up in the range of 2–1,000 pg/tube. Mouse antibody generated against rIGF-II (Amano Enzyme, Troy, VA) (10 µg/ml) was used at the final dilution of 1:14,205. Inter- and intra-assay variation was less than 15% and less than 10%, respectively. The results were evaluated by using a computer-controlled APEX automatic {gamma} counter (Micromedic, Huntsville, AL).

mRNA extraction and RT-PCR analyses
Total RNA was extracted from MXT mouse mammary tumors using the Micro RNA extraction kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Resuspended RNA was quantified spectrophotometrically at 260 nm. One microgram total RNA was reverse transcribed into single-strand cDNA using Moloney murine leukemia reverse transcriptase according to manufacturer’s instructions (Perkin-Elmer Corp., Norwalk, CT). Following an initial 1.5-min denaturation step at 95 C, the reaction mixture was subjected to 35–40 cycles of PCR amplification using specific primers for mouse ß-actin (35 cycles), mouse/human IGF-I (35 cycles), mouse GH (40 cycles), and mouse GH receptors (GHRs) (40 cycles). Primer sequences for mouse ß-actin (27), IGF-I (28), GH, and GHR (29) were: 5'-GTCACCCACACTGTGCCCATCT-3' (ß-actin sense), 5'-ACAGAGTACTTGCGCTCAGGAG-3' (ß-actin antisense), 5'-ACATCTCCCATCTCTCTGGATTTCCTTTTGC-3' (IGF-I sense) and 5'-CCCTCTACTTGCGTTCTTCAAATGTACTTCC-3' (IGF-I antisense), 5'-CAGCCTGATGTTTGGTACCTCGGA-3' (GH sense), 5'-GCGGCGACACTTCATGACCCGCA-3' (GH antisense), 5'-AGTTGGAGGAGGTGAACACCAT-3' (GHR sense), and 5'-GGCACAAGAGATCAGCTTCCAT-3' (GHR antisense). Each cycle consisted of a 15-sec denaturation step at 95 C and a 30-sec annealing step at 60 C. The last cycle was followed by a 7-min elongation at 72 C using a GeneAmp PCR system 2400 cycler (Perkin-Elmer Corp.). Negative controls were run in parallel by performing the above reactions without the addition of reverse transcriptase as a test for the presence of contaminating genomic DNA in the RNA preparations from these tumors. Ten microliters of PCR-amplified product was resolved by electrophoresis on a 1.8% agarose gel that was then stained with ethidium bromide and visualized under UV light. PCR product bands of the expected sizes (542 bp for mouse ß-actin, 514 bp for IGF-I, 253 bp for GH, and 330 bp for GHR) were then analyzed using a model GS-700 imaging densitometer (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.).

In vitro studies
The E-independent MXT breast cancer cell line was kindly provided by Dr. Gunter Bernhard (University Regensburg, Germany). This cell line was maintained in Roswell Park Memorial Institute 1640 (RPMI 1640) medium with 10% FBS, 4 mM L-glutamine, 100 U/ml penicillin G sodium, 100 U/ml Streptomycin sulfate, and 0.25 µg/ml Amphotericin. The effects of the addition of IGF-I, IGF-II, GH, and JV-1–38 alone and in combinations were evaluated by the crystal violet proliferation assay as described previously (20). The results were calculated as percent T/C where T = optical density of treated cultures and C = optical density of untreated cultures. JV-1–38 was selected for these studies because in previous in vitro work, it appeared to be the most potent among the analogs tested (9, 15, 21).

For the measurement of the IGF-I, IGF-II, and GH levels in media, 12-well plates were seeded with 1500 cells/well and quadruplicate wells were treated with: (1) culture medium only; (2) serum-free medium (SFM) (RPMI 1640 + insulin-transferrin-selenium + 5% Fetuin); (3) JV-1–38 10-5 M in culture medium; and (4) JV-1–38 10-5 M in SFM. Aliquots of the respective incubation media were removed at 24, 48, 72, and 96 h of treatment and assayed for IGF-I, IGF-II, and GH along with samples of media without cells or compounds.

The incorporation of [methyl-3H]thymidine into DNA of MXT cells was determined as follows. MXT cells were seeded into duplicate microplates in culture medium. After the cells reached the confluence, the medium was removed and replaced with medium containing 5% FBS and the test compounds. Control wells received medium only. After 19 h of culture, one set of plates was pulsed with 0.25 µCi/well of [methyl-3H]thymidine (specific activity 25 Ci/mmol, Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ) in a total volume of 175 µl/well for 5 h. The cells were fixed with ice-cold 10% trichloroacetic acid, washed twice with 4 C trichloroacetic acid and solubilized overnight in 0.2 N NaOH at 37 C. Radioactivity was determined by liquid scintillation counting (analytical model 6880, Searle, Des Plaines, IL). The results were expressed as 100 x T/C, where T = average dpm of test cultures and C = average dpm of control cultures.

For the analysis of cyclin B2 in MXT cells, nine 75-cm2 flasks were seeded with 2 x 106 cells each in standard culture medium. Triplicate flasks were treated with 10-7 M mouse GH, 10-6 M JV-1–38, and control medium. After 24, 48 and 96 h, one flask of each group was harvested using Trypsin 0.05% EDTA 0.53 mM (Life Technologies, Inc., Rockville, MD) and washed with PBS.

Standard immunoblotting procedure
The protein concentration of whole MXT cell lysates was determined by Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. protein assay, and samples containing equal amounts of protein were loaded onto 7.5% SDS/polyacrylamide gel. After electrophoretic separation, the proteins were electrotransferred to nitrocellulose membranes and incubated as follows: blocking overnight at 4 C with 5% BSA, anti-cyclin B2 (N-20) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA) 1:1000 for 1 h, and then peroxidase-conjugated antigoat serum 1:10,000 for 1 h. The amounts loaded were confirmed by assaying actin with antiactin (I-19) (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.) 1:1000 for 1 h. The proteins were detected using a super signal chemiluminescent detection system (Pierce Chemical Co., Rockford, IL). The bands were analyzed with an imaging densitometer (model GS-700, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.) and the values related to actin densities.

Statistical methods
The SigmaStat software (Jandel, San Rafael, CA) was used for the statistical analysis of data. Tumor volume changes were evaluated by two-way repeated-measure ANOVA and other data by one-way ANOVA, and the groups were compared with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Effect of GHRH antagonists on growth of MXT breast cancers in mice
An inhibition of tumor growth was apparent in all groups of mice treated with GHRH antagonists, but the effect was statistically significant only for newer and more potent compounds JV-1–36 and JV-1–38 (Fig. 1Go and Table 1Go). The efficacy of administration from the osmotic pump was comparable to that from the injection. Histological investigation of proliferation characteristics showed that the mitotic index was unchanged, but AgNOR numbers were significantly decreased by the treatment with GHRH antagonists. PCNA levels were lowered in the tumors treated with JV-1–38 or JV-1–36. AgNOR scores correlated well with PCNA indices (r = 0.5, P = 0.005). The number of apoptotic cells was increased in the tumors treated with JV-1–38 (Table 1Go).



View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Effect of treatment with GH-RH antagonists (20 µg/d) administered by injection (inj.) or infusion from osmotic mini pump (pump) on growth of E-independent MXT mouse mammary cancers. The vertical bars show SE. *, P < 0.05 vs. control.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1. The effect of treatment with GHRH antagonists (20 µg/d) on growth and histological characteristics of MXT mouse mammary cancers

 
Effect of GHRH antagonists on the levels of GH, IGF-I, and IGF-II in MXT cancers
IGF-I, IGF-II, and GH concentrations in MXT tumors were determined by RIA, and the results are shown in Table 2Go. The levels of IGF-I were decreased in all the tumors treated with GHRH antagonists, but significant differences from controls were obtained only in the group receiving JV-1–38 by osmotic pumps (P = 0.032). IGF-II levels were not changed by the therapy. GH was present in the control tumors and in those treated with MZ-5–156. However, after the therapy with JV-1–36 and JV-1–38, GH levels in tumors were virtually undetectable (Table 2Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Effect of treatment with GHRH antagonists on IGF-I, IGF-II, and GH concentrations and mRNA expression for IGF-I GH and GH receptors in MXT mouse mammary tumors

 
The levels of mRNA for IGF-I and GH in MXT cancers were analyzed and expressed as IGF-I:ß-actin and GH:ß-actin ratios. The treatment with all the GHRH antagonists significantly decreased mRNA expression for both IGF-I and GH in MXT tumors (Fig. 2Go and Table 2Go).



View larger version (81K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. RT-PCR analysis of mouse GHR and GH and IGF-I mRNA expression in MXT mouse mammary cancers. PCR products were separated by 1.8% agarose gel electrophoresis and stained with ethidium bromide. The sizes of expected PCR products were 330 bp for GHR, 253 bp for GH, 514 bp for IGF-I, and 459 bp for ß-actin as internal control. Lanes: M, molecular weight marker; 1, positive control (pituitary for GH, liver for GHR, and IGF-I); 2, MXT cells; 3–4, control; 5–6, MZ-5–156 injection; 7–8, JV-1–36 injection; 9–10, JV-1–38 injection; 11–12, JV-1–36 osmotic pump; 13–14, JV-1–38 osmotic pump.

 
Receptor assays
Radiolabeled IGF-I was bound to a single class of high affinity (Kd = 0.91 ± 0.09 nM,) low capacity (maximal binding capacity = 301.1 ± 14.5 fmol/mg membrane protein) binding sites. The treatment with the GHRH antagonists did not have significant effects on the affinity or concentration of IGF-I receptors in MXT cancers. However, the treatment with each antagonist significantly decreased the mRNA expression for GH receptors in tumors, based on the ratio to mRNA for ß-actin (Table 2Go and Fig. 2Go).

In vitro studies on effects of IGF-I, IGF-II, mouse GH, and GHRH antagonist JV-1–38 in MXT-breast cancer cell line
Addition of IGF-I to the medium slightly enhanced proliferation of MXT cells at 73 h, but IGF-II had no significant effect. In contrast, mGH caused a major increase in cell number after 43 and 73 h. JV-1–38 at 3 x 10-6M significantly inhibited proliferation of MXT cells at both time points (Fig. 3). The GHRH antagonist JV-1–38 also decreased the promoting effect of IGF-I and GH on proliferation, and conversely, GH but not IGF-I abolished the inhibitory effect of JV-1–38 (Fig. 3Go). 3H-thymidine incorporation in MXT cells was increased by IGF-I and GH after 24 h (Fig. 4Go). JV-1–38 inhibited the stimulatory effect of IGF-I and GH on 3H-thymidine-incorporation. Immunoblotting analysis showed that cyclin B2, which characteristically appears in late G2 phase of cell cycle, accumulated in MXT cells 24 and 48 h after addition of GH or JV-1–38 to the medium. After 96 h, cyclin B2 in GH-treated cells was decreased to control levels but remained high in cells treated with JV-1–38 (Fig. 5Go). Cyclin B2 concentrations in the cells exposed to JV-1–38 were significantly higher than in controls (P = 0.036, with repeated-measure ANOVA).



View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Effect of JV-1–38, IGF-I, IGF-II, GH, GH-RH, and some combinations thereof on growth of E-independent MXT mouse mammary tumor cells 43 and 73 h after addition of the compounds. Growth was measured by crystal violet assay and expressed as percentage of control. The vertical bars represent SE. *, P < 0.05 vs. control; **, P < 0.05 vs. cells treated with either single compound.

 


View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. Effect of JV-1–38, IGF-I, IGF-II, GH, and some combinations thereof on 3H-thymidine incorporation into MXT mouse mammary cancer cells 24 h after addition of the compounds and 5 h after addition of 3H-thymidine as described in Materials and Methods. The results were expressed as percentage of control. The vertical bars show SE. *, P < 0.05 vs. control.

 


View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 5. Effect of addition of GH or JV-1–38 to the medium on cyclin B2 content of MXT mouse mammary cancer cells. Cyclin B2 concentrations in cell homogenates were determined by immunoblotting as described in Materials and Methods. A, A representative blot of cyclin B2; lanes 1–3, JV-1–38; lanes 4–6, GH; and lanes 7–9, control. Lanes 1, 4, 6, 24 h; lanes 2, 5, 7, 48 h; and lanes 3, 6, 9, 96 h after addition of the compounds. B, The blots in two assays were measured with a densitometer and the results expressed as cyclin B2/actin ratios. The vertical bars show SE.

 
In separate experiments, the levels of IGF-I, IGF-II, and GH were measured in the medium of cultured MXT cells. In normal medium containing 10% serum, the levels remained steady during culture. JV-1–38 caused a slight decrease in GH concentrations, but the differences from control were not significant statistically (Fig. 6AGo). In SFM, the initial levels of IGF-I and IGF-II were lower than in serum-containing medium, and IGF-I concentration increased with the time of culture showing that the cells produce this growth factor (Fig. 6BGo). There was only a very low concentration of GH in the SFM, close to the detection limit. The levels of GH and IGF-II did not change with the time of culture. Addition of 10-5 M JV-1–38 had no significant effect on the concentration of IGF-I, IGF-II, or GH in SFM.



View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 6. Concentrations of GH in standard medium (A) and IGF-I in SFM (B) of cultured MXT mouse mammary cancer cells. JV-1–38 was added to the medium 24 h after seeding of the cells, and GH and IGF-I concentrations were determined by RIA 24, 48, 72, and 96 h after the addition of the antagonist. The vertical bars show SE. *, P < 0.05 vs. levels at 24 and 48 h.

 

    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The involvement of IGF-I and IGF-II in mammary carcinogenesis is supported by numerous experimental and clinical studies (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). Accordingly, GH might affect mammary tumor growth indirectly by stimulating hepatic IGF-I production, leading to a rise in systemic IGF-I levels or by augmenting the local production of IGF-I in tumors (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). In addition, recent findings indicate that GH could also exert direct effects on the normal and cancerous breast epithelium (23, 24, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40).

The central role of GH in the development and differentiation of the mammary glands became apparent when both GH and its receptors were discovered in mammary tissues of various animal species (23, 24). GH receptors have been detected in rodent, bovine, and human mammary epithelial cells (23, 24, 30) and can mediate direct effects of this hormone. It is now also known that GH is produced at several extrapituitary sites including the brain, blood vessels, and the immune system (31). Furthermore, GH and mRNA for GH were detected in the mammary glands of dogs, cats, and humans (32, 33, 34). In addition to a role of GH in the development of normal mammary tissue, experimental observations accumulated in the past few years also suggest its involvement in mammary carcinogenesis. Thus, GH production was demonstrated in mammary tumors of dogs (32), and it was also revealed that transgenic mice, which overexpress GH, develop mammary carcinomas more frequently (35, 36).

In a like manner to animal tumors, the expression of the GH receptor gene was shown in human breast cancer specimens and breast cancer cell lines (37). It was also reported that GH stimulates the growth of breast cancer cells (38) and that this effect can be inhibited by a GH receptor antagonist (39). Some researchers postulate the existence of a local mammary GH-IGF-I axis (34) and the involvement of GH in mammary carcinogenesis by autocrine/paracrine mechanisms (24). This hypothesis is supported by a very recent study demonstrating the expression of GH receptors in a large number of human breast cancer samples (40). In spite of the growing information about the role of GH in mammary tumor growth, the pathway responsible for GH-stimulated mitogenesis has not yet been determined (24). Some effects of GH can be indirect and mediated by locally produced IGF-I. However, GH may also have a direct effect on tumor cells through GH receptors or through PRL receptors (23). There are several common mediators and possibilities for cross-talk in the intracellular signaling pathways of the receptors for GH and PRL (41). In view of the accumulation of information on the role of the GH-IGF-I system in the development of certain cancers, some investigators emphasize the need for further studies on a possible carcinogenic effect of GH therapy (42) or even an examination of an eventual link between dietary consumption of IGF-I from the milk of cows injected with bGH and breast cancer risk (43, 44).

The present study shows that GHRH antagonists inhibit growth of E-independent MXT mouse mammary cancers. This mouse carcinoma is a good and reliable model of breast cancer as the tumors grow invasively, contain little necrosis and metastasize to regional lymph nodes. Thus, although this tumor is not of human origin, it is more similar in many characteristics to breast cancers in patients than the xenografts of human cancer lines in nude mice. MXT cancers also express IGF-I receptors, indicating a possible role of the GHRH-GH-IGF-I axis in the progression of this tumor. Our study demonstrated that GH and IGF-I concentrations and mRNA expression for GH and IGF-I are decreased in the tumor tissue after treatment with GHRH antagonists, and the mechanisms of inhibitory action of GHRH antagonists in MXT mammary cancers could be based on these phenomena. Previously, we showed that GHRH antagonists decreased IGF-I and/or IGF-II levels in various human experimental tumors (9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20). However, this is the first demonstration that in an experimental setting, GHRH antagonists can also decrease the production of GH in a tumor.

Considering the complex role of the GHRH-GH-IGF-I axis in the growth of breast cancers, GHRH antagonists could interfere with this system in several ways. It is not presently clear whether GHRH antagonists suppress the production and actions of IGF-I directly or through the inhibition of GH. Some findings support the view that these antagonists can probably inhibit the synthesis and action of both GH and IGF-I in tumors. Thus, GHRH antagonists decrease the synthesis of both IGF-I or IGF-II and growth in a series of tumors in which the GH production was never detected (9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20). Likewise, the proliferation of MXT cells was inhibited in vitro by JV-1–38, although we could not detect GH secretion by the cells. Apparently, GHRH antagonists can use multiple mechanisms of action even in one type of tumor.

Our in vitro experiments demonstrate that the proliferation of MXT cells is enhanced not only by IGF-I but also even more powerfully by GH. Antagonist JV-1–38 significantly inhibited the autonomous growth of the cells as well as the proliferation stimulated by IGF-I or GH.

The receptors for GH and IGF-I have several common intracellular pathways. From insulin receptor substrate-1/2 to Ras-MAPKs, or PI3K and PKC, there are many mediators that become involved after activation of receptors of either IGF-I or GH (45, 46, 47). Both IGF-I and GH can protect the cells from apoptosis by acting through their own receptors and activating PI3K (45, 48).

In our in vitro study, JV-1–38 significantly inhibited the autonomous or stimulated proliferation of MXT cells. The GHRH antagonist alone had no significant effect on 3H-thymidine-incorporation into autonomously growing cells, but decreased the incorporation stimulated by IGF-I or GH. The finding that JV-1–38 decreased cell number without inhibiting 3H-thymidine-incorporation indicates that the cells pass through the S phase but do not undergo mitosis. The addition of GH or JV-1–38 to the medium resulted in an early increase of cyclin B2 concentrations in MXT cells. Cyclin B2 returned to control levels after 96 h in the GH-treated cells but remained high in the cells exposed to JV-1–38. B-type cyclin-cdc2 kinase complexes are essential for cell cycle progression from G2 to mitosis. Cyclin B is not present in the G1 phase but accumulates in G2 and disappears during mitosis (49). Elevated cyclin B2 levels suggest that some MXT cells treated with either GH or JV-1–38 enter the G2 phase of the cycle. Subsequently the cells exposed to GH undergo mitosis, as shown by the increase in cell numbers. In contrast, JV-1–38 reduced the cell number and preserved high cyclin B2 levels in the cells, indicating that the cell cycle was arrested for a longer time at the G2-M point. It is known that apoptosis is triggered when cells remain arrested at G2-M for a critical period (50). The arrest in G2 is a common response to DNA damage (50). GHRH antagonists are obviously not DNA-damaging agents, and their effect is more comparable to that of growth factor withdrawal, which is a stress for cells growing in vitro and which can result in apoptosis. In our experiments, we did not measure cyclin B/cdc2 activity, and used cyclin B2 detection only to follow the amount of cells in G2 phase of cycle.

These in vitro results are in accord with the in vivo studies in which the GHRH antagonists decreased cell proliferation and increased apoptosis in MXT tumors. These effects were linked to a decrease in local production of GH and IGF-I.

In conclusion, GHRH antagonists can inhibit growth of mammary cancers by several mechanisms. Because GHRH antagonists appear to interfere at each level of the GHRH-GH-IGF axis, this class of compounds could be applied to the treatment of a variety of tumors that depend on endocrine-paracrine-autocrine stimulation by GHRH, GH, or IGFs. Moreover, the GHRH antagonists block the growth promoting action of IGFs and also the direct effects of GH on tumors. This action of GHRH antagonists results in an arrest at the G2-M checkpoint of cell cycle and cell death. Considering that various findings have been recently reported about the role of GH in mammary carcinogenesis, the therapies that antagonize GH activity might be important. In addition, GHRH antagonists, by preventing the antiapoptotic effects of IGFs and GH, may also enhance the efficacy of cytotoxic compounds in combination therapies.


    Acknowledgments
 
We thank Elena Glotser for excellent technical assistance. The gifts of materials for RIA provided by Dr. A. F. Parlow from NIDDK are greatly appreciated.


    Footnotes
 
This work was supported by a grant from ASTA MEDICA to Tulane University School of Medicine and by the Medical Research Service of the Veterans Affairs Departments (all to A.V.S.).

Abbreviations: AgNOR, Silver staining of nucleolar organizer region; GHR, GH receptor; PCNA, proliferating cell nuclear antigen; SFM, serum-free medium.

Received April 27, 2001.

Accepted for publication June 6, 2001.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Yee D 1994 The insulin-like growth factor system as a target in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 32:85–95[CrossRef][Medline]
  2. Dickson RB, Lippman ME 1995 Growth factors in breast cancer. Endocr Rev 16:559–589[CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Ethier SP 1995 Growth factor synthesis and human breast cancer progression. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:964–973[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Ellis MJ, Jenkins S, Hanfelt J, et al. 1998 Insulin-like growth factors in human breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 52:175–184[CrossRef][Medline]
  5. Khandwala HM, McCutcheon IE, Flyvbjerg A, Friend KE 2000 The effects of insulin-like growth factors on tumorigenesis and neoplastic growth. Endocr Rev 21:215–244[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. Osborn CK, Coronado EB, Kitten LJ, et al. 1989 Insulin-like growth factor II (IGF-II): a potential autocrine/paracrine growth factor for human breast cancer acting via the IGF-I receptor. Mol Endocrinol 3:1701–1709[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Pollak MN 1998 Endocrine effects of IGF-I on normal and transformed breast epithelial cells: potential relevance to strategies for breast cancer treatment and prevention. Breast Cancer Res Treat 47:209–217[CrossRef][Medline]
  8. Resnik JL, Reichart DB, Huey K, Webster NJG, Seely BL 1998 Elevated insulin-like growth factor I receptor autophosphorylation and kinase activity in human breast cancer. Cancer Res 58:1159–1164[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Schally AV, Varga JL 1999 Antagonistic analogs of growth hormone-releasing hormone: new potential antitumor agents. Trends Endocrinol Metab 10:383–391[CrossRef][Medline]
  10. Pinski J, Schally AV, Groot K, et al. 1995 Inhibition of growth of human osteosarcomas by antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:1787–1794[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Pinski J, Schally AV, Jungwirth A, et al. 1996 Inhibition of growth of human small cell and non-small cell lung carcinomas by antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone. Int J Oncol 9:1099–1105
  12. Kiaris H, Schally AV, Varga JL, Groot K, Armatis P 1999 Growth hormone-releasing hormone: an autocrine growth factor for small cell lung carcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:14894–14898[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Jungwirth A, Schally AV, Pinski J, et al. 1997 Inhibition of in vivo proliferation of androgen-independent prostate cancers by an antagonist of growth hormone-releasing hormone Br J Cancer 75:1585–1592[Medline]
  14. Lamharzi N, Schally AV, Koppan M, Groot K 1998 Growth hormone-releasing hormone antagonist MZ-5–156 inhibits growth of DU-145 human androgen-independent prostate carcinoma in nude mice and suppresses the levels and mRNA expression of insulin-like growth factor II in tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:8864–8868[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Plonowski A, Schally AV, Varga JL, et al. 2000 Potentiation of the inhibitory effect of growth hormone-releasing hormone antagonists on PC-3 human prostate cancer by bombesin antagonists indicative of interference with both IGF and EGF pathways. Prostate 44:172–180[CrossRef][Medline]
  16. Jungwirth A, Schally AV, Pinski J, Groot K, Armatis P, Halmos G 1997 Growth hormone-releasing hormone antagonist MZ-4–71 inhibits in vivo proliferation of CAKI-I renal adenocarcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:5810–5813[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Kahan Z, Varga JL, Schally AV, et al. 2000 Antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone arrest the growth of MDA-MB-468 estrogen-independent human breast cancers in nude mice. Breast Cancer Res Treat 60:71–79[CrossRef][Medline]
  18. Szepeshazi K, Schally AV, Groot K, Armatis P, Hebert F, Halmos G 2000 Antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone (GH-RH) inhibit in vivo proliferation of experimental pancreatic cancers and decrease IGF-II levels in tumors. Eur J Cancer 36:128–136
  19. Szepeshazi K, Schally AV, Groot K, et al. 2000 Antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone (GH-RH) inhibit IGF-II production and growth of HT-29 human colon cancers. Br J Cancer 82:1724–1731[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Kiaris H, Schally AV, Varga JL 2000 Antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone inhibit the growth of U-87MG human glioblastoma in nude mice. Neoplasia 2:242–250[Medline]
  21. Varga JL, Schally AV, Csernus VJ, et al. 1999 Synthesis and biological evaluation of antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone with high and protracted in vivo activities. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:692–697[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Kahan Z, Arencibia JM, Csernus VJ, et al. 1999 Expression of growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) messenger ribonucleic acid and the presence of biologically active GHRH in human breast, endometrial and ovarian cancers J Clin Endocrinol Metab 84:582–589[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Kleinberg DL 1996 [Editorial] A novel whey to study effects of insulin-like growth factor-I on mammary development. Endocrinology 137:1–2[CrossRef][Medline]
  24. Kaulsay KK, Mertani HC, Törnell J, Morel G, Lee K-O, Lobie PE 1999 Autocrine stimulation of human mammary carcinoma cell proliferation by human growth hormone. Exp Cell Res 250:35–50[CrossRef][Medline]
  25. Zarandi M, Kovacs M, Horvath JE, et al. 1997 Synthesis and in vitro evaluation of new potent antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone. Peptides 18:423–430[CrossRef][Medline]
  26. Szepeshazi K, Schally AV, Nagy A 1999 Effective treatment of advanced estrogen-independent MXT mouse mammary cancers with targeted cytotoxic LH-RH analogs. Breast Cancer Res Treat 56:267–276[CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Murata T, Takizawa T, Funaba M, Fujimura H, Murata E, Torii K 1997 Quantitation of mouse and rat ß-actin mRNA by competitive polymerase chain reaction using capillary electrophoresis. Anal Biochem 244:172–174[CrossRef][Medline]
  28. Bell GI, Stempien MM, Fong NM, Rall LB 1986 Sequences of liver cDNAs encoding two different mouse insulin-like growth factor I precursors. Nucleic Acids Res 14:7873–7882[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Pantaleon M, Whiteside EJ, Harvey MB, Bernard RT, Waters MJ, Kaye PL 1997 Functional growth hormone (GH) receptors and GH are expressed by preimplantation mouse embryos: a role for GH in early embryogenesis? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:5125–5130[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Sinovatz F, Schams D, Kölle S, Plath A, Lincoln D, Waters MJ 2000 Cellular localization of GH receptor in the bovine mammary gland during mammogenesis, lactation and involution. J Endocrinol 166:503–510[Abstract]
  31. Liu N, Mertani HC, Norstedt G, Törnell J, Lobie PE 1997 Mode of the autocrine/paracrine mechanism of growth hormone action. Exp Cell Res 237:196–206[CrossRef][Medline]
  32. van Garderen E, de Wit M, Voorhout WF, et al. 1997 Expression of growth hormone in canine mammary tissue and mammary tumors. Am J Pathol 150:1037–1047[Abstract]
  33. Rijnberk A, Mol JA 1997 Progestin-induced hypersecretion of growth hormone: an introductory review. J Reprod Fertil Suppl 51:335–338[Medline]
  34. Mol JA, Latinga-van Leeuwen IS, van Garderen E, et al. 1999 Mammary growth hormone and tumorigenesis—lessons from the dog. Vet Q 21:111–115[Medline]
  35. Wennbo H, Gebre-Medhin M, Gritli-Linde A, Ohlsson C, Isaksson OG, Tornell J 1997 Activation of the prolactin receptor but not the growth hormone receptor is important for induction of mammary tumors in transgenic mice. J Clin Invest 100:2744–2751[Medline]
  36. Tornell J, Carlsson B, Pohjanen P, Wennbo H, Rymo L, Isaksson OGP 1992 High frequency of mammary adenocarcinomas in metallothionein promoter-human growth hormone transgenic mice created from two different strains of mice. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 43:237–242[CrossRef][Medline]
  37. Decouvelaere C, Peyrat J-P, Bonneterre J, Djiane J, Jammes H 1995 Presence of the two growth hormone receptor messenger RNA isoforms in human breast cancer. Cell Growth Diff 6:477–483[Abstract]
  38. Kaneko H, Fujikawa T, Alam KS, et al. 1998 Cooperative and differential effects of estrogen, prolactin, 22K and 20K human growth hormones on cyclin D1/PRAD1 gene expression in T-47D human breast cancer cells. Biochem Mol Biol Int 46:411–414[Medline]
  39. Kaulsay KK, Zhu T, Bennett WF, Lee K-O, Lobie PE 2001 The effects of autocrine human growth hormone (hGH) on human mammary carcinoma cell behavior are mediated via the hGH receptor. Endocrinology 142:767–777[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Gebre-Medhin M, Kindblom L-G, Wennbo H, Törnell J, Meis-Kindblom JM 2001 Growth hormone receptor is expressed in human breast cancer. Am J Pathol 158:1217–1222[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Wennbo H, Tornell J 2000 The role of prolactin and growth hormone in breast cancer. Oncogene 19:1072–1076[CrossRef][Medline]
  42. Holly JMP, Gunnell DJ, Smith GD 1999 Growth hormone, IGF-I and cancer. Less intervention to avoid cancer? More intervention to prevent cancer? J Endocrinol 162:321–330[Abstract]
  43. Outwater JL, Nicholson A, Barnard N 1997 Dairy products and breast cancer: the IGF-I, estrogen, and bGH hypothesis. Med Hypotheses 48:453–461[CrossRef][Medline]
  44. Epstein SS 2001 Re: role of the insulin-like growth factors in cancer development and progression. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:238[Free Full Text]
  45. Jeay S, Sonnenshein GE, Postel-Vinay M-C, Baixeras E 2000 Growth hormone prevents apoptosis through activation of nuclear factor-{kappa}B in interleukin-3-dependent Ba/F3 cell line. Mol Endocrinol 14:650–661[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Frank SJ, Messina JL, Maumann G, Black RA, Bertics PJ 2000 Insight into modulation of (and by) growth hormone signaling. J Lab Clin Med 136:14–20[CrossRef][Medline]
  47. Le Roith D, Bondy C, Yakar S, Liu J-L, Butler A 2001 The somatomedin hypothesis: 2001. Endocr Rev 22:53–74[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Kulik G, Klippel A, Weber MJ 1997 Antiapoptotic signalling by the insulin-like growth factor I receptor, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, and Akt. Mol Cell Biol 17:1595–1606[Abstract]
  49. Lange-zu Dohna C, Brandeis M, Berr F, Mössner J, England K 2000 A CDE/CHR tandem element regulates cell cycle-dependent repression of cyclin B2 transcription. FEBS Lett 484:77–81[CrossRef][Medline]
  50. Sleiman RJ, Stewart BW 2000 Early caspase activation in leukemic cells subject to etoposide-induced G2-M arrest: evidence of commitment to apoptosis rather than mitotic cell death. Clin Cancer Res 6:3756–3765[Abstract/Free Full Text]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
V. Pandey, J. K. Perry, K. M. Mohankumar, X.-J. Kong, S.-M. Liu, Z.-S. Wu, M. D. Mitchell, T. Zhu, and P. E. Lobie
Autocrine Human Growth Hormone Stimulates Oncogenicity of Endometrial Carcinoma Cells
Endocrinology, August 1, 2008; 149(8): 3909 - 3919.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
Q. Shen, D. D. Lantvit, Q. Lin, Y. Li, K. Christov, Z. Wang, T. G. Unterman, R. G. Mehta, and S. M. Swanson
Advanced Rat Mammary Cancers Are Growth Hormone Dependent
Endocrinology, October 1, 2007; 148(10): 4536 - 4544.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
S. Buchholz, A. V. Schally, J. B. Engel, F. Hohla, E. Heinrich, F. Koester, J. L. Varga, and G. Halmos
Potentiation of mammary cancer inhibition by combination of antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone with docetaxel
PNAS, February 6, 2007; 104(6): 1943 - 1946.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
B. S. Emerald, Y. Chen, T. Zhu, Z. Zhu, K.-O. Lee, P. D. Gluckman, and P. E. Lobie
{alpha}CP1 Mediates Stabilization of hTERT mRNA by Autocrine Human Growth Hormone
J. Biol. Chem., January 5, 2007; 282(1): 680 - 690.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
S. Mukhina, D. Liu, K. Guo, M. Raccurt, S. Borges-Bendris, H. C. Mertani, and P. E. Lobie
Autocrine Growth Hormone Prevents Lactogenic Differentiation of Mouse Mammary Epithelial Cells
Endocrinology, April 1, 2006; 147(4): 1819 - 1829.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
G. Keller, A. V. Schally, K. Groot, G. L. Toller, A. Havt, F. Koster, P. Armatis, G. Halmos, M. Zarandi, J. L. Varga, et al.
Effective treatment of experimental human non-Hodgkin's lymphomas with antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone
PNAS, July 26, 2005; 102(30): 10628 - 10633.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
J. B. Engel, G. Keller, A. V. Schally, G. L. Toller, K. Groot, A. Havt, P. Armatis, M. Zarandi, J. L. Varga, and G. Halmos
Inhibition of Growth of Experimental Human Endometrial Cancer by an Antagonist of Growth Hormone-Releasing Hormone
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., June 1, 2005; 90(6): 3614 - 3621.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
E. E. Spangenburg
SOCS-3 Induces Myoblast Differentiation
J. Biol. Chem., March 18, 2005; 280(11): 10749 - 10758.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
G. L. Toller, J. E. Horvath, A. V. Schally, G. Halmos, J. L. Varga, K. Groot, D. Chism, and M. Zarandi
Development of a polyclonal antiserum for the detection of the isoforms of the receptors for human growth hormone-releasing hormone on tumors
PNAS, October 19, 2004; 101(42): 15160 - 15165.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
J. L. Varga, A. V. Schally, J. E. Horvath, M. Kovacs, G. Halmos, K. Groot, G. L. Toller, Z. Rekasi, and M. Zarandi
Increased activity of antagonists of growth hormone-releasing hormone substituted at positions 8, 9, and 10
PNAS, February 10, 2004; 101(6): 1708 - 1713.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
Z. Szereday, A. V. Schally, J. L. Varga, C. A. Kanashiro, F. Hebert, P. Armatis, K. Groot, K. Szepeshazi, G. Halmos, and R. Busto
Antagonists of Growth Hormone-Releasing Hormone Inhibit the Proliferation of Experimental Non-Small Cell Lung Carcinoma
Cancer Res., November 15, 2003; 63(22): 7913 - 7919.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
G. Halmos, A. V. Schally, T. Czompoly, M. Krupa, J. L. Varga, and Z. Rekasi
Expression of Growth Hormone-Releasing Hormone and Its Receptor Splice Variants in Human Prostate Cancer
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2002; 87(10): 4707 - 4714.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
H. Kiaris, A. V. Schally, R. Busto, G. Halmos, S. Artavanis-Tsakonas, and J. L. Varga
Expression of a splice variant of the receptor for GHRH in 3T3 fibroblasts activates cell proliferation responses to GHRH analogs
PNAS, January 1, 2002; (2002) 12590999.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
H. Kiaris, A. V. Schally, R. Busto, G. Halmos, S. Artavanis-Tsakonas, and J. L. Varga
Expression of a splice variant of the receptor for GHRH in 3T3 fibroblasts activates cell proliferation responses to GHRH analogs
PNAS, January 8, 2002; 99(1): 196 - 200.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available