Ligand-independent Androgen Receptor Activity Is Activation Function-2-independent and Resistant to Antiandrogens in Androgen Refractory Prostate Cancer Cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Androgen ablation inhibits androgen receptor (AR) activity and is as an effective treatment for advanced prostate cancer (PCa). Invariably, PCa relapses in a form resistant to further hormonal manipulations. Although this stage of the disease is androgen-refractory, or androgen depletion-independent (ADI), most tumors remain AR-dependent through aberrant mechanisms of AR activation. We employed the LNCaP/C4-2 model of PCa progression to study AR activity in androgen-dependent and ADI PCa cells. In this report, we show that the AR is transcriptionally inactive in androgen-dependent LNCaP cells in the absence of androgens. However, in ADI C4-2 cells, the AR displays a high level of constitutive, androgen-independent transcriptional activity. To study the mechanisms of ligand-dependent and ligand-independent AR activation in these AR-expressing cells, we generated a reporter system based on swapping the DNA binding domain of the AR with the DNA binding domain of the yeast Gal4 transcription factor. In androgen-dependent PCa cells, the well characterized C-terminal AR activation function-2 (AF-2) domain was critical for strong, ligand-dependent activity. Conversely, in ADI PCa cells, constitutive, ligand-independent AR activity was AF-2-independent but instead dependent on N-terminal AR domains. Importantly, the ligand- and AF-2-independent mode of AR activation observed in ADI PCa cells was completely resistant to the antiandrogen, bicalutamide. Our data thus demonstrate that the AR can inappropriately activate transcription in ADI PCa cells via mechanisms that are resistant to castration and AR antagonism, the two modes of androgen ablation used to treat advanced PCa.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".