Search

Background: Androgen receptor (AR) is considered a marker of better prognosis in hormone receptor positive breast cancers (BC), however, its role in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is controversial. This may be attributed to intrinsic molecular differences or scoring methods for AR positivity. We derived AR regulated gene score and examined its utility in BC subtypes. Methods: AR regulated genes were derived by applying a bioinformatic pipeline on publicly available microarray data sets of AR+ BC cell lines and gene score was calculated as average expression of six AR regulated genes. Tumors were divided into AR high and low based on gene score and associations with clinical parameters, circulating androgens, survival and epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) markers were examined, further evaluated in invitro models and public datasets. Results: 53% (133/249) tumors were classified as AR gene score high and were associated with significantly better clinical parameters, disease-free survival (86.13 vs 72.69 months, log rank p = 0.032) when compared to AR low tumors. 36% of TNBC (N = 66) were AR gene score high with higher expression of EMT markers (p = 0.024) and had high intratumoral levels of 5α-reductase, enzyme involved in intracrine androgen metabolism. In MDA-MB-453 treated with dihydrotestosterone, SLUG expression increased, E-cadherin decreased with increase in migration and these changes were reversed with bicalutamide. Similar results were obtained in public datasets. Conclusion: Deciphering the role of AR in BC is difficult based on AR protein levels alone. Our results support the context dependent function of AR in driving better prognosis in ER positive tumors and EMT features in TNBC tumors.

Background: The glucocorticoid receptor (GR) is frequently expressed in breast cancer (BC), and its prognostic implications are contingent on estrogen receptor (ER) status. To address conflicting reports and explore therapeutic potential, a GR signature (GRsig) independent of ER status was developed. We also investigated cell type-specific GR protein expression in BC tumor epithelial cells and infiltrating lymphocytes. Methods: GRsig was derived from Dexamethasone treated cell lines through a bioinformatic pipeline. Immunohistochemistry assessed GR protein expression. Associations between GRsig and tumor phenotypes (proliferation, cytolytic activity (CYT), immune cell distribution, and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) were explored in public datasets. Single-cell RNA sequencing data evaluated context-dependent GR roles, and a cell type-specific prognostic role was assessed in an independent BC cohort. Results: High GRsig levels were associated with a favorable prognosis across BC subtypes. Tumor-specific high GRsig correlated with lower proliferation, increased CYT, and anti-tumorigenic immune cells. Single-cell data analysis revealed higher GRsig expression in immune cells, negatively correlating with EMT while a positive correlation was observed with EMT primarily in tumor and stromal cells. Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated the robust and independent predictive capability of GRsig for favorable prognosis. GR protein expression on immune cells in triple-negative tumors indicated a favorable prognosis. Conclusion: This study underscores the cell type-specific role of GR, where its expression on tumor cells is associated with aggressive features like EMT, while in infiltrating lymphocytes, it predicts a better prognosis, particularly within TNBC tumors. The GRsig emerges as a promising independent prognostic indicator across diverse BC subtypes.