Women at increased risk for breast cancer are at increased risk for ovarian cancer as well, reflecting common risk factors and intertwined etiology of the two diseases. We previously developed a rat model of elevated breast and ovarian cancer risk, allowing evaluation of dual-target cancer prevention strategies. Tamoxifen, a Food and Drug Administration–approved breast cancer chemoprevention drug, has been shown to promote ovarian cysts in premenopausal women; however, the effect of tamoxifen on ovarian cancer risk is still controversial. In the current experiment, Fischer 344 rats (n = 8 per treatment group) received tamoxifen (TAM) or vehicle (control) in factorial combination with combined breast and ovarian carcinogen (17β-estradiol and 7,12 dimethylbenza[a]anthracene, respectively). Mammary and ovarian morphologies were normal in the control and TAM groups. Carcinogen (CARC) treatment induced mammary dysplasia with elevated cell proliferation and reduced estrogen receptor-α expression and promoted preneoplastic changes in the ovary. In the CARC + TAM group, tamoxifen reduced preneoplastic changes and proliferation rate in the mammary gland, but not in the ovary, compared with rats treated with carcinogen alone. Putative stem cell markers (Oct-4 and aldehyde dehydrogenase 1) were also elevated in the mammary tissue by carcinogen and this expansion of the stem cell population was not reversed by tamoxifen. Our study suggests that tamoxifen prevents early progression to mammary cancer but has no effect on ovarian cancer progression in this rat model.

The development of promising breast cancer chemoprevention agents [i.e., selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs), aromatase inhibitors, and retinoids; refs. 13] has been permitted by minimally invasive techniques to access tissue, availability of surrogate biomarkers, and relatively high incidence of the disease (4, 5). In contrast, ovarian cancer prevention trials are seldom attempted due to low disease incidence, the absence of accepted disease-specific biomarkers, and the invasiveness of sampling for ovarian tissue. Consequently, although most ovarian cancers are diagnosed at advanced stages resulting in high mortality rates, prevention of ovarian cancer remains elusive (6). One practical approach for successful prevention of ovarian cancer may be the development of chemoprevention agents acting simultaneously against both ovarian and breast cancers.

Breast and ovarian adenocarcinomas share numerous risk factors (e.g., estrogen exposure, ovulation, nulliparity, obesity, family history, and BRCA1/2 mutations) and women at increased risk for one of these cancers are often also at risk for the other, suggesting intertwined disease pathways (7, 8). Recent studies have shown that women receiving hormone replacement therapy are at increased risk for both cancers (911). Alternatively, drugs that decrease ovarian cancer risk may actually increase the incidence of breast cancer (e.g., progesterone; refs. 12, 13). To date, no human chemoprevention trials have been designed simultaneously targeting both breast and ovarian cancers despite the promise of such an approach. Indeed, successful human ovarian cancer chemoprevention has only been shown incidentally during the course of breast cancer prevention trials (i.e., fenretinide; ref. 14). To investigate common chemoprevention strategies, our laboratory has developed a preclinical model that exhibits early changes of mammary and ovarian carcinogenesis in the rat (15). This model allows observation of synergistic and antagonistic drug actions against breast and ovarian cancers that are ignored when each cancer is examined in isolation.

Tamoxifen, the most commonly used breast cancer chemoprevention drug, blocks cell proliferation in the breast and has been shown to cause tumor regression and inhibit tumor formation, especially in ER+ breast tumors (16). In the ovary, especially in premenopausal women, tamoxifen has been suggested to promote abnormal ovarian function and cyst formation, a putative ovarian preneoplastic change (17, 18). Tamoxifen and other (SERMs) have also been used to stimulate ovarian function in subfertile women with some questions about the effect on ovarian cancer risk (19, 20).

Tamoxifen prevents 70% of ER+ breast cancers in high-risk women but fails to prevent ER and some ER+ tumors (3). One possibility for the lack of tamoxifen efficacy on 30% of ER+ cancers may be the presence of an estrogen–independent breast stem cell population (21). The existence of self-renewing, pluripotent stem cells has been shown both in human breast and in rodent mammary glands (22, 23). Following recurrent carcinogen exposure, these long-lived breast stem cells are thought to accumulate mutations leading to tumor formation. The size of the breast stem cell pool has therefore been hypothesized to serve as a determinate of the likelihood for breast cancer incidence. Indeed, several studies have suggested a strong correlation between increased number of breast stem cells and elevated breast cancer risk, as well as a possible intervention that targets stem cell for cancer treatment and prevention (2427). In the current study, we use a combined breast and ovarian cancer model to examine the effect of tamoxifen on markers of cancer risk, stemness, and progression in the ovary and mammary gland during carcinogenesis.

Animals and treatments

Female Fischer 344 rats (Harlan; n = 8 per treatment group), weighing 50 to 55 g, were housed in a climate and light (12 h light:12 h dark) controlled environment and received food and water ad libitum. All experimental protocols were approved by the University of Kansas Medical Center Animal Care and Use Committee. Animals were randomly assigned into four different treatment groups as shown in Table 1. Rats were anesthetized using ketamine hydrochloride and xylazine (80 and 8 mg/kg, respectively). Hemiovariectomy was done aseptically to concentrate ovulation on the remaining ovary and hasten a senescent hormonal milieu (28, 29) as these are risk factors of human ovarian cancer (15, 30, 31). The remaining ovary was treated by passing a 7,12 dimethylbenza[a]anthracene (DMBA)–impregnated (2.5-mm region dipped in melted DMBA) or vehicle 5-0 silk suture through the ovary twice such that the DMBA or vehicle region was apposed directly and gently secured to the ovarian surface epithelium. Rats receiving ovarian DMBA were subsequently treated with E2 (1.5 mg, pellet implant, Hormone Pellet Press; ref. 32). Our laboratory has previously shown that this treatment combination promotes progression to simultaneous mammary and ovarian cancers in the rat after 6 mo of treatment (15). Rats were further treated with tamoxifen (5 mg, pellet implant, Hormone Pellet Press) or vehicle to test the effect of tamoxifen in early mammary and ovarian cancers (33).

Table 1

Experimental groups to examine the effect of tamoxifen on the progression toward concurrent mammary and ovarian cancers

Treatment groupCONTTAMCARCCARC + TAM
Ovarian treatment Vehicle Vehicle DMBA DMBA 
Systemic treatment Vehicle Vehicle E2 E2 
Tamoxifen treatment Vehicle Tamoxifen Vehicle Tamoxifen 
Treatment groupCONTTAMCARCCARC + TAM
Ovarian treatment Vehicle Vehicle DMBA DMBA 
Systemic treatment Vehicle Vehicle E2 E2 
Tamoxifen treatment Vehicle Tamoxifen Vehicle Tamoxifen 

NOTE: CONT, vehicle-treated animals; TAM, tamoxifen-treated animals; CARC, carcinogen-treated animals.

Tissue preparation

Rats were killed by decapitation at 6 mo posttreatment and the right thoracic mammary glands were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and embedded in paraffin. Right abdominal mammary glands were spread onto a glass slide, fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde overnight, hydrated, infused with alum carmine (4 d), dehydrated, cleared in xylene, and stored in methyl salicylate. Left thoracic mammary glands were snap frozen and stored at −80°C. The ovary was bisected through the site of DMBA application. One half was fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde and embedded in paraffin and the remainder was snap frozen and stored at −80°C.

Immunohistochemistry

Six-micron sections of mammary glands and ovaries were deparaffinized, rehydrated, and stained with H&E. Mammary and ovarian sections (midsaggital, at three different equidistant levels per tissue) were evaluated for morphologic changes associated with early progression to mammary adenocarcinoma and epithelial ovarian cancer by an observer blinded to treatment group identity (34, 35). Adjacent sections were prepared for immunostaining by antigen retrieval (93°C, 10 mmol/L citrate buffer, 25 min) and incubation with 0.3% hydrogen peroxide (Lab Vision). Nonimmune serum or primary antibodies against Ki-67 (1:100; clone Ki-S5; rabbit monoclonal antibody, Lab Vision), ERα (1:200; MC-20; mouse monoclonal antibody, Santa Cruz), aldehyde dehydrogenase-1 (ALDH-1) family member A1 (1:150; rabbit polyclonal; Abcam), or Oct-3/Oct-4 (1:50, mouse monoclonal, Santa Cruz) were applied and visualized with biotinylated secondary antibodies (Lab Vision) and diaminobenzidine chromogen. All incubations were carried out using a DAKO LV-1 autostainer.

Protein isolation and immunoblotting

Samples of mammary gland (n = 4) and ovary (n = 4) from all treatment groups were homogenized in lysis buffer (Cell Signaling Technology) with 1 mmol/L phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride. The lysates were centrifuged at 10,000 × g for 15 min at 4°C and supernatant was collected. Protein concentrations were measured with a bicinchoninic acid protein assay kit (Pierce). Following boiling for 5 min in Laemmli sample buffer (Bio-Rad), samples (25 μg protein) and ladders (Kaleidoscope prestained standards, Bio-Rad) were run on 10% Tris-HCl Criterion Precast gels (Bio-Rad) under reducing conditions and transferred onto nitrocellulose membrane. Membranes were blocked with 10% milk in TBS with Tween 20 (TBST) for 1 h at room temperature and incubated with antibodies against ALDH-1 family member A1 (1 μg/mL), cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2; 2 μg/mL, rabbit polyclonal, Lab Vision), or Oct-3/Oct-4 (1:200) at 4°C overnight. Following washing in TBST, blots were incubated in peroxidase-conjugated donkey anti-mouse, anti-rabbit, or anti-goat antibodies (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories) for 2 h at room temperature and washed. Heart tissue lysates were used as positive control for ALDH1A1 immunoreactivity (36) and primary antibody omission was used as negative control. Protein signals were visualized with chemiluminescent substrate (Pierce) and protein bands were quantified using GelPro. Equal protein loading was confirmed by stripping (BlotFresh, SignaGen) and reprobing the membranes with β-actin antibody (1:20,000; goat polyclonal; Santa Cruz). Data are presented as integrated absorbance.

Quantitative analysis of preneoplastic lesions

Mammary sections stained with H&E were evaluated and each section was assigned a dysplasia score according to the presence of preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions associated with breast cancer progression (15, 35). A score of 0 represented normal mammary histology. Preneoplastic changes included mild (score = 1) or severe (score = 2) ductal hyperplasia and/or hyperplasia with atypia (score = 3). Neoplastic changes included ductal carcinoma in situ (score = 4) and invasive cancer (score = 5). The sum of scores from all three sections from each animal was used as the total dysplasia score, a value ranging from 0 to 15.

Preneoplastic changes of the ovary were defined as surface hyperplasia, inclusion cysts, stromal hyperplasia, and papilloma, each being a separate histologic parameter (15, 34, 37). For each ovarian section, each parameter was given a score of 0, 1, or 2 based on the severity or prevalence of each preneoplastic category (i.e., a score of 0 represented normal histology; a score of 1 corresponded to a moderate prevalence or degree of change; and a score of 2 indicated a high incidence or degree of abnormality). Scores for all four histologic parameters were added up to give a dysplasia score for each ovarian section. The sum of all three dysplasia scores for each animal gave rise to the total dysplasia score, a value ranging from 0 to 24. These preneoplastic criteria are the same as those used by Stewart et al. (34) with this rat model of ovarian adenocarcinoma.

Ki-67 and ERα expression in the mammary ductal epithelia cells and ovarian surface epithelium was quantified by counting immunoreactive cells and total cells (at least 1,000 cells were evaluated per section) and presented as percent immunoreactive epithelial cells. The location and distribution of ALDH-1 and Oct-3/Oct-4 expression were documented. All data are presented as mean ± SE. Protein levels of Ki-67, ERα, COX-2, ALDH-1, and Oct-3/Oct-4 expression as determined by immunohistochemistry and Western blot were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with treatment type as main effect. Dysplasia scores were analyzed using a nonparametric test (Mann Whitney test). Differences were considered significant when P ≤ 0.05.

Tamoxifen blocks mammary carcinogenesis

Mammary gland whole mounts

Control and tamoxifen-treated (TAM) rats had normal mammary morphology (Fig. 1A and B). Carcinogen (E2 + DMBA) treatment increased area occupied by alveoli (Fig. 1C). This effect was markedly reduced by tamoxifen in the carcinogen and tamoxifen–treated (CARC + TAM) group (Fig. 1D).

Fig. 1

Whole mounts (A-D; ×20), and H&E sections (E-H, ×100) of the mammary gland. Controls (CONT) and tamoxifen-treated (TAM) animals showed normal mammary histology (A-B, E-F). Carcinogen treatment (CARC) caused preneoplasia and neoplasia (C and G), and this effect was blocked by carcinogen + tamoxifen (CARC + TAM; D and H). Secreting mammary glands were observed in CARC + TAM rats. Bar, 5 mm (A-D), 200 μm (E-H).

Fig. 1

Whole mounts (A-D; ×20), and H&E sections (E-H, ×100) of the mammary gland. Controls (CONT) and tamoxifen-treated (TAM) animals showed normal mammary histology (A-B, E-F). Carcinogen treatment (CARC) caused preneoplasia and neoplasia (C and G), and this effect was blocked by carcinogen + tamoxifen (CARC + TAM; D and H). Secreting mammary glands were observed in CARC + TAM rats. Bar, 5 mm (A-D), 200 μm (E-H).

Close modal

Mammary tissue histology

Controls showed a normal appearance of lobular/acinar units surrounded by abundant adipose tissue (Fig. 1E). These units constituted a single layer of myoepithelium and inner mammary epithelial cells. TAM animals also showed normal mammary histology (Table 2; Fig. 1F). All CARC animals exhibited pathologic mammary histology ranging from hyperplasia to disseminated ductal carcinoma in situ and had higher dysplasia scores when compared with controls (Fig. 1G; Table 2; P < 0.0001). In CARC + TAM rats, the number and morphology of lobular units were restored to near normality (Fig. 1H). These rats also showed mildly increased ductal branching and enlarged intraductal lumen as compared with controls, but no dysplastic foci were present in any of these animals (Table 2).

Table 2

Mammary and ovarian dysplasia scores

Animal groupMammary glandOvaries
CONT 0.44 ± 0.24 
TAM 1.38 ± 0.32 
CARC 7.88 ± 0.79* 7.29 ± 1.09* 
CARC + TAM 5.83 ± 0.54* 
Animal groupMammary glandOvaries
CONT 0.44 ± 0.24 
TAM 1.38 ± 0.32 
CARC 7.88 ± 0.79* 7.29 ± 1.09* 
CARC + TAM 5.83 ± 0.54* 

NOTE: Dysplasia scores are presented as mean ± SE for each treatment group.

*Differs significantly from control (P < 0.05). In the ovary, the differences between CONT and TAM as well as CARC and CARC + TAM were not significant (P = 0.202 and P = 0.085, respectively).

Tamoxifen neither blocks nor accelerates the progression to ovarian cancer in a rat model

Controls showed normal ovarian morphology with mild inflammatory reaction to suture materials and rare inclusion cysts (Fig. 2A and E; Table 2). Compared with controls, TAM rats showed a slight increase in dysplasia score mostly due to the occasional presence of inclusion cysts; however, this difference was not significant (P = 0.202; Fig. 2B and F; Table 2). Consistent with our previous findings, CARC rats received higher dysplasia score when compared with controls (P < 0.0001) and showed markedly abnormal ovarian morphology with disorganized granulosal clusters, stromal hyperplasia, epithelial hyperplasia, papilloma, and glandular cystic changes resembling inclusion cysts (Fig. 2C and G; Table 2). In the CARC + TAM group, tamoxifen did not reduce the degree of ovarian preneoplasia following carcinogen treatment (P = 0.0851; Fig. 2D and H; Table 2). Interestingly, tamoxifen treatment seemed to increase the number of ovarian follicles when compared with those of the CARC group (data not shown).

Fig. 2

H&E sections of the ovary. Bar, 600 μm (A-D), 50 μm (E-H and inset). CONT, controls; TAM, tamoxifen-treated rats; CARC, E2/DMBA–treated rats; OSE, ovarian surface epithelia; Pa, papilloma; IC, inclusion cyst.

Fig. 2

H&E sections of the ovary. Bar, 600 μm (A-D), 50 μm (E-H and inset). CONT, controls; TAM, tamoxifen-treated rats; CARC, E2/DMBA–treated rats; OSE, ovarian surface epithelia; Pa, papilloma; IC, inclusion cyst.

Close modal

Expression of Ki-67, ERα, and COX-2 in mammary gland and ovary under normal or dysplastic conditions

Ki-67 expression was localized in the nucleus of ductal epithelial cells in the mammary gland. The average numbers of Ki-67 positive cells per 100 ductal epithelia were 5.17 ± 2.11, 4.58 ± 1.93, 22.94 ± 3.57, and 8.75 ± 0.79 in control, TAM, CARC, and CARC + TAM animals, respectively. These data showed that cellular proliferation was elevated in the mammary gland of CARC-treated animals when compared with control (P < 0.0001) and TAM (P < 0.0001) animals. Tamoxifen inhibited carcinogen-induced Ki-67 elevation in CARC + TAM rats when compared with CARC rats (P = 0.0003; Fig. 3). Very few ovarian surface epithelial cells expressed Ki-67 (<0.2% immunoreactivity) and there was no difference in expression among the treatment groups (P > 0.05).

Fig. 3

Ki-67 and ERα immunostaining in the mammary gland. Mammary epithelial proliferation (% Ki-67) was increased above controls in CARC animals (A and C; P < 0.05). Carcinogen + tamoxifen treatment reduced this elevation (C and D; P < 0.05). Tamoxifen alone did not affect percent Ki-67 compared with controls (A and B). Carcinogen treatment depleted ER expression in the mammary gland when compared with control and TAM-treated animals (E-G; P < 0.05). There was a trend for ERα expression to increase in response to tamoxifen treatment in CARC + TAM animals when compared with the CARC group; however, this difference was not significant (G and H; P = 0.063). Bar, 100 μm (A-D), 50 μm (E-H).

Fig. 3

Ki-67 and ERα immunostaining in the mammary gland. Mammary epithelial proliferation (% Ki-67) was increased above controls in CARC animals (A and C; P < 0.05). Carcinogen + tamoxifen treatment reduced this elevation (C and D; P < 0.05). Tamoxifen alone did not affect percent Ki-67 compared with controls (A and B). Carcinogen treatment depleted ER expression in the mammary gland when compared with control and TAM-treated animals (E-G; P < 0.05). There was a trend for ERα expression to increase in response to tamoxifen treatment in CARC + TAM animals when compared with the CARC group; however, this difference was not significant (G and H; P = 0.063). Bar, 100 μm (A-D), 50 μm (E-H).

Close modal

ERα expression

Carcinogen treatment depleted ERα expression (immunoreactivity, 0.25 ± 0.06%; Fig. 3) in the mammary gland when compared with control (10.30 ± 1.855%; P < 0.0001) and TAM-treated animals (11.87 ± 0.88%; P < 0.0001). While no significant differences were detected, there was a trend for ERα expression to increase in response to tamoxifen treatment in CARC + TAM animals (3.61 ± 0.25%; P = 0.063) when compared with the CARC group. In the ovary, percentages of ERα immunoreactivity in ovarian surface epithelium were 40.97 ± 5.00, 47.45 ± 1.57, 41.69 ± 5.98, and 40.68 ± 6.66 for control, TAM, CARC, and CARC + TAM animals, respectively. No change in ERα expression was found in the ovary among the treatment groups.

Inflammation biomarker

COX-2 protein level was elevated in the mammary gland of CARC rats (integrated absorbance, 517.49 ± 197.27) when compared with control (11.47 ± 0.56; P = 0.0067) and TAM (37.61 ± 8.28; P = 0.0089) animals. Tamoxifen treatment reduced COX expression in CARC + TAM rats when compared with the CARC group (7.60 ± 1.00; P = 0.0065; Fig. 4A and B). In the ovary, COX-2 expression was not altered by carcinogen treatment (P > 0.05).

Fig. 4

COX-2, Oct-4, and ALDH-1 expression in the mammary gland. A, representative Western blots of mammary glands from rats treated with vehicle (C1 and C2), tamoxifen (T1 and T2), carcinogen (Ca1 and Ca2), and carcinogen + tamoxifen (CaT1 and CaT2). β-Actin was used as a loading control. B, quantitative analysis of Western blots showing that COX-2, Oct-4, and ALDH-1 levels (y axis, integrated absorbance (IOD) were elevated following carcinogen treatment (CARC) compared with controls (CONT). COX-2 expression was reduced by tamoxifen in the CARC + TAM group. Letters indicate significant differences among the treatment groups. C, cytoplasmic ALDH-1 immunostaining was observed in a few luminal epithelial cells in the mammary gland of CARC animals (arrow). No immunoreactivity was observed in control and TAM animals. Bar, 50 μm.

Fig. 4

COX-2, Oct-4, and ALDH-1 expression in the mammary gland. A, representative Western blots of mammary glands from rats treated with vehicle (C1 and C2), tamoxifen (T1 and T2), carcinogen (Ca1 and Ca2), and carcinogen + tamoxifen (CaT1 and CaT2). β-Actin was used as a loading control. B, quantitative analysis of Western blots showing that COX-2, Oct-4, and ALDH-1 levels (y axis, integrated absorbance (IOD) were elevated following carcinogen treatment (CARC) compared with controls (CONT). COX-2 expression was reduced by tamoxifen in the CARC + TAM group. Letters indicate significant differences among the treatment groups. C, cytoplasmic ALDH-1 immunostaining was observed in a few luminal epithelial cells in the mammary gland of CARC animals (arrow). No immunoreactivity was observed in control and TAM animals. Bar, 50 μm.

Close modal

Levels of putative stem cell markers in the mammary gland and ovary

In the mammary gland, immunoblot analysis showed that Oct-3/Oct-4 and ALDH-1 expression were increased in CARC rats compared with controls (Fig. 4A and B; P = 0.014 and 0.012, respectively). Surprisingly, while tamoxifen drastically reduced histologic progression to breast cancer, tamoxifen had no effect on the induction of stem cell markers by sustained exposure to estrogen. Our results showed that ALDH-1 and Oct-3/Oct-4 levels between CARC and CARC + TAM animals and between control and TAM animals do not differ (P > 0.05, Fig. 4). Immunohistochemistry revealed that while no immunoreactivity was observed in ductal epithelial cells of control and TAM animals, ALDH-1–positive cells were present in the cytoplasm of a few lobules in CARC and CARC + TAM animals (Fig. 4C). However, immunoreactivity of Oct-3/Oct-4 was not observed in the selected mammary gland sections. While the stem cell hypothesis has been explored in breast carcinogenesis, no putative stem cell markers have been suggested to be associated with ovarian carcinogenesis. In the current study, immunohistochemistry data suggest that ALDH-1 and Oct-3/Oct-4 are not expressed in ovarian surface epithelia.

Mammary gland

Tamoxifen inhibited mammary cancer progression in our preclinical model of breast and ovarian carcinogenesis, consistent with previous data from clinical trials and animal studies (3, 38). Ki-67, a proliferation marker, and COX-2, an inflammation marker, are potential markers of breast cancer risk and have been used as surrogate markers of response in human phase II chemoprevention trials (39). In our rat model, Ki-67 and COX-2 also correlated with progression of mammary carcinoma. Mammary ERα expression is down-regulated in CARC animals, consistent with previous studies showing the loss of ERα following E2-initiated cell proliferation (15, 40); however, it is also possible that the loss of ERα is temporary and is caused by ligand-induced receptor degradation (41).

Ovary

The current study is the most detailed experiment investigating the effect of tamoxifen on ovarian physiology and cancer progression. While our study showed that tamoxifen does not retard ovarian cancer, this negative finding is very important and in agreement with the human literature with more intensive biomarker and histopathology data than in human study. Although there seemed to be a slight increase in dysplasia in the ovary of animals treated with tamoxifen alone when compared with controls, this elevation was not significant. While there is a possibility of cancer incidence with longer tamoxifen administration, 6 months of treatment (one quarter of life span in rats) in the current experiment far exceeds the recommended treatment time for women taking tamoxifen (≤5 years). Women taking tamoxifen have an increased risk for developing follicular cysts in the ovary (17, 18), and it has been suggested that tamoxifen-induced ovarian cysts may contribute to increased risk of ovarian cancer (42). However, in the current experiment, tamoxifen neither augments nor diminishes preneoplastic lesions induced by carcinogen treatment in the ovary in our high-risk model. Our results therefore suggest that tamoxifen, as a common prevention therapy for breast cancer, does not affect ovarian cancer risk in animals at high risk for both mammary and ovarian cancers. While COX-2 levels remained unchanged in the different treatment groups, recent studies revealed the relevance of COX-1, but not COX-2, expression in ovarian tumor development (43). The role of COX-1 in mammary and ovarian carcinogenesis should be further investigated using this model. In addition, no endometrial neoplasia was observed in our model following 6 months of sustained tamoxifen administration.

Stem cell biomarkers

Oct-4 is a transcriptional factor expressed by early embryonic and germ cells and has been used to identify pluripotent cell populations (44). ALDH-1, an enzyme that is required for the conversion of retinol to retinoic acids, is highly enriched in hematopoietic stem cells, and recently, researchers have suggested its presence in breast stem cells as well (45). Our data showed increased expression of both markers in the mammary gland of rats treated with carcinogens. This finding suggests that stem cell populations are expanded during mammary carcinogenesis in our model.

Estrogen is used to induce mammary carcinogenesis in the current experiment. The mechanism by which estrogen acts on stem cell number is still unclear because most studies agree that breast stem cells are ER (26). However, studies have also shown that dysregulation of breast stem cells, or an increased stem cell pool size, can be induced by exposure to elevated breast epithelial mitogens such as insulin-related growth factor-1 and steroid hormones including estrogens (46, 47). One rationale for this effect of estrogen is via an indirect mechanism or stem cell niche; thus, estrogen acts on ER+ cells surrounding the stem cell and promotes paracrine signaling (26, 48). Interestingly, rats treated with carcinogen + tamoxifen were rescued from progression toward mammary cancer but still exhibited elevated mammary stem cell markers. This observation may suggest that tamoxifen, while retarding breast cancer progression, does not act on the stem cell population but rather has its effects on the differentiated epithelia. This, in turn, is consistent with the absence of ER in the breast stem cell (26); however, our understanding of mammary stem cell markers and biology will need to improve to fully answer this question.

Combined model of breast and ovarian cancer prevention

The rat model of breast and ovarian carcinogenesis used here, while allowing us to observe synergistic and antagonistic drug action in our search for a dual-target prevention strategy, has some inherent limitations. The human population best modeled by these experiments is probably menopausal women on hormone replacement therapy, and the results may be less relevant to other populations. This model is also focused on early changes of breast and ovarian cancers because these are the intended targets for cancer chemoprevention, rather than following animals to tumor incidence. While this shortens the trials and parallels our human chemoprevention studies (39, 49), it does entail the use of surrogate end point biomarkers for cancer with their inherent uncertainties.

Breast and ovarian cancers share similar etiology (endocrine background, risk factors, epithelial origin, etc.) reflecting common disease pathways; however, these cancers show discrepancy in terms of development and cancer cell type. This difference in pathology may be due to differences in the cells of origin or the hormonal milieu surrounding them. Despite these differences in the later stages of disease, the initiation factors for breast and ovarian cancers are similar, and therefore, it is plausible to target both cancers simultaneously for prevention.

In the present study, we have shown that although tamoxifen is an effective breast cancer prevention drug for ER+ disease, it does not retard the development of ovarian preneoplasia and therefore is not ideal for simultaneous prevention of breast and ovarian cancers. Our results also suggest that although tamoxifen has been shown to induce ovarian cyst formation, it does not increase ovarian cancer risk in this model. Mechanistically, hormonal mammary carcinogenesis in this model is accompanied with elevated expression of ALDH-1 and Oct-4, and this putative expansion of the ALDH-1– or Oct-4–positive stem cell population is not reversed by tamoxifen cancer chemoprevention. These data also confirm that our combined breast and ovarian cancer model allows the observation of synergistic and antagonistic drug actions on the breast and ovary. Simultaneous breast and ovarian cancer prevention is biologically feasible and may offer the best possibility for ovarian cancer prevention. Future studies will include investigation of common mechanism/disease pathways and evaluation of other candidate drugs for simultaneous chemoprevention of both breast and ovarian cancers using this model.

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

We thank Drs. Ossama Tawfik and Sara Li for technical assistance.

1
Veronesi
U
,
De Palo
G
,
Marubini
E
, et al
. 
Randomized trial of fenretinide to prevent second breast malignancy in women with early breast cancer
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
1999
;
91
:
1847
56
.
2
Vogel
VG
,
Costantino
JP
,
Wickerham
DL
, et al
. 
Effects of tamoxifen vs raloxifene on the risk of developing invasive breast cancer and other disease outcomes: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial
.
JAMA
2006
;
295
:
2727
41
.
3
Fisher
B
,
Costantino
JP
,
Wickerham
DL
, et al
. 
Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
1998
;
90
:
1371
88
.
4
Fabian
CJ
,
Kimler
BF
,
Zalles
CM
, et al
. 
Short-term breast cancer prediction by random periareolar fine-needle aspiration cytology and the Gail risk model
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2000
;
92
:
1217
27
.
5
Kelloff
GJ
,
Lippman
SM
,
Dannenberg
AJ
, et al
. 
Progress in chemoprevention drug development: the promise of molecular biomarkers for prevention of intraepithelial neoplasia and cancer—a plan to move forward
.
Clin Cancer Res
2006
;
12
:
3661
97
.
6
Gershenson
DM
,
Tortolero-Luna
G
,
Malpica
A
, et al
. 
Ovarian intraepithelial neoplasia and ovarian cancer
.
Obstetrics Gynecol Clin NA
1996
;
23
:
475
543
.
7
MacMahon
B
. 
Epidemiology and the causes of breast cancer
.
Int J Cancer
2006
;
118
:
2373
8
.
8
Brekelmans
CT
. 
Risk factors and risk reduction of breast and ovarian cancer
.
Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol
2003
;
15
:
63
8
.
9
Katalinic
A
,
Rawal
R
. 
Decline in breast cancer incidence after decrease in utilisation of hormone replacement therapy
.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
2008
;
107
:
427
30
.
10
Danforth
KN
,
Tworoger
SS
,
Hecht
JL
,
Rosner
BA
,
Colditz
GA
,
Hankinson
SE
. 
A prospective study of postmenopausal hormone use and ovarian cancer risk
.
Br J Cancer
2007
;
96
:
151
6
.
11
Lacey
JV
 Jr.
,
Brinton
LA
,
Leitzmann
MF
, et al
. 
Menopausal hormone therapy and ovarian cancer risk in the National Institutes of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study Cohort
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2006
;
98
:
1397
405
.
12
Birrell
SN
,
Butler
LM
,
Harris
JM
,
Buchanan
G
,
Tilley
WD
. 
Disruption of androgen receptor signaling by synthetic progestins may increase risk of developing breast cancer
.
FASEB J
2007
.
13
Risch
HA
. 
Hormonal etiology of epithelial ovarian cancer, with a hypothesis concerning the role of androgens and progesterone
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
1998
;
90
:
1774
86
.
14
De Palo
G
,
Mariani
L
,
Camerini
T
, et al
. 
Effect of fenretinide on ovarian carcinoma occurrence
.
Gynecol Oncol
2002
;
86
:
24
7
.
15
Ting
AY
,
Kimler
BF
,
Fabian
CJ
,
Petroff
BK
. 
Characterization of a preclinical model of simultaneous breast and ovarian cancer progression
.
Carcinogenesis
2007
;
28
:
130
5
.
16
Vogel
VG
. 
Reducing the risk of breast cancer with tamoxifen in women at increased risk
.
J Clin Oncol
2001
;
19
:
87S
92S
.
17
Metindir
J
,
Aslan
S
,
Bilir
G
. 
Ovarian cyst formation in patients using tamoxifen for breast cancer
.
Jpn J Clin Oncol
2005
;
35
:
607
11
.
18
Cohen
I
,
Figer
A
,
Tepper
R
, et al
. 
Ovarian overstimulation and cystic formation in premenopausal tamoxifen exposure: comparison between tamoxifen-treated and nontreated breast cancer patients
.
Gynecol Oncol
1999
;
72
:
202
7
.
19
Steiner
AZ
,
Terplan
M
,
Paulson
RJ
. 
Comparison of tamoxifen and clomiphene citrate for ovulation induction: a meta-analysis
.
Human reproduction (Oxford, England)
2005
;
20
:
1511
5
.
20
Laven
JS
,
Fauser
BC
. 
What role of estrogens in ovarian stimulation
.
Maturitas
2006
;
54
:
356
62
.
21
Song
LL
,
Miele
L
. 
Cancer stem cells—an old idea that's new again: implications for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer
.
Exp Opin Biol Ther
2007
;
7
:
431
8
.
22
Proia
DA
,
Kuperwasser
C
. 
Reconstruction of human mammary tissues in a mouse model
.
Nat Protocol
2006
;
1
:
206
14
.
23
Russo
J
,
Balogh
GA
,
Chen
J
, et al
. 
The concept of stem cell in the mammary gland and its implication in morphogenesis, cancer and prevention
.
Front Biosci
2006
;
11
:
151
72
.
24
Anderson
E
,
Clarke
RB
. 
Epithelial stem cells in the mammary gland: casting light into dark corners
.
Breast Cancer Res
1999
;
1
:
11
3
.
25
Wicha
MS
. 
Identification of murine mammary stem cells: implications for studies of mammary development and carcinogenesis
.
Breast Cancer Res
2006
;
8
:
109
.
26
Sleeman
KE
,
Kendrick
H
,
Robertson
D
,
Isacke
CM
,
Ashworth
A
,
Smalley
MJ
. 
Dissociation of estrogen receptor expression and in vivo stem cell activity in the mammary gland
.
J Cell Biol
2007
;
176
:
19
26
.
27
Ginestier
C
,
Hur
MH
,
Charafe-Jauffret
E
, et al
. 
ALDH1 is a marker of normal and malignant human mammary stem cells and a predictor of poor clinical outcome
.
Cell Stem Cell
2007
;
1
:
555
67
.
28
Anzalone
CR
,
Hong
LS
,
Lu
JK
,
LaPolt
PS
. 
Influences of age and ovarian follicular reserve on estrous cycle patterns, ovulation, and hormone secretion in the Long-Evans rat
.
Biol Reprod
2001
;
64
:
1056
62
.
29
Chatterjee
A
,
Greenwald
GS
. 
The long-term effects of unilateral ovariectomy of the cycling hamster and rat
.
Biol Reprod
1972
;
7
:
238
46
.
30
Riman
T
,
Nilsson
S
,
Persson
IR
. 
Review of epidemiological evidence for reproductive and hormonal factors in relation to the risk of epithelial ovarian malignancies
.
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
2004
;
83
:
783
95
.
31
Kreiger
N
,
Sloan
M
,
Cotterchio
M
,
Parsons
P
. 
Surgical procedures associated with risk of ovarian cancer
.
Int J Epidemiol
1997
;
26
:
710
5
.
32
Li
JJ
,
Papa
D
,
Davis
MF
, et al
. 
Ploidy differences between hormone- and chemical carcinogen-induced rat mammary neoplasms: comparison to invasive human ductal breast cancer
.
Molr Carcinog
2002
;
33
:
56
65
.
33
Li
SA
,
Weroha
SJ
,
Tawfik
O
,
Li
JJ
. 
Prevention of solely estrogen-induced mammary tumors in female aci rats by tamoxifen: evidence for estrogen receptor mediation
.
J Endocrinol
2002
;
175
:
297
305
.
34
Stewart
SL
,
Querec
TD
,
Ochman
AR
, et al
. 
Characterization of a carcinogenesis rat model of ovarian preneoplasia and neoplasia
.
Cancer Res
2004
;
64
:
8177
83
.
35
Thompson
HJ
,
Singh
M
. 
Rat models of premalignant breast disease
.
J Mamm Gland Biol Neoplasia
2000
;
5
:
409
20
.
36
Oyama
T
,
Isse
T
,
Kagawa
N
, et al
. 
Tissue-distribution of aldehyde dehydrogenase 2 and effects of the ALDH2 gene-disruption on the expression of enzymes involved in alcohol metabolism
.
Front Biosci
2005
;
10
:
951
60
.
37
Crist
KA
,
Zhang
Z
,
You
M
, et al
. 
Characterization of rat ovarian adenocarcinomas developed in response to direct instillation of 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene (DMBA) coated suture
.
Carcinogenesis
2005
;
26
:
951
7
.
38
Decensi
A
,
Robertson
C
,
Viale
G
, et al
. 
A randomized trial of low-dose tamoxifen on breast cancer proliferation and blood estrogenic biomarkers
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
2003
;
95
:
779
90
.
39
Fabian
CJ
,
Kimler
BF
,
Anderson
J
, et al
. 
Breast cancer chemoprevention phase I evaluation of biomarker modulation by arzoxifene, a third generation selective estrogen receptor modulator
.
Clin Cancer Res
2004
;
10
:
5403
17
.
40
Cheng
G
,
Weihua
Z
,
Warner
M
,
Gustafsson
JA
. 
Estrogen receptors ERα and ERβ in proliferation in the rodent mammary gland
.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2004
;
101
:
3739
46
.
41
Nawaz
Z
,
Lonard
DM
,
Dennis
AP
,
Smith
CL
,
O'Malley
BW
. 
Proteasome-dependent degradation of the human estrogen receptor
.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
1999
;
96
:
1858
62
.
42
Spicer
DV
,
Pike
MC
,
Henderson
BE
. 
Ovarian cancer and long-term tamoxifen in premenopausal women
.
Lancet
1991
;
337
:
1414
.
43
Daikoku
T
,
Tranguch
S
,
Trofimova
IN
, et al
. 
Cyclooxygenase-1 is overexpressed in multiple genetically engineered mouse models of epithelial ovarian cancer
.
Cancer Res
2006
;
66
:
2527
31
.
44
Tai
MH
,
Chang
CC
,
Kiupel
M
,
Webster
JD
,
Olson
LK
,
Trosko
JE
. 
Oct4 expression in adult human stem cells: evidence in support of the stem cell theory of carcinogenesis
.
Carcinogenesis
2005
;
26
:
495
502
.
45
Ferrell
CM
,
Dorsam
ST
,
Ohta
H
, et al
. 
Activation of stem-cell specific genes by HOXA9 and HOXA10 homeodomain proteins in CD34+ human cord blood cells
.
Stem cells (Dayton, Ohio)
2005
;
23
:
644
55
.
46
Savarese
TM
,
Strohsnitter
WC
,
Low
HP
, et al
. 
Correlation of umbilical cord blood hormones and growth factors with stem cell potential: implications for the prenatal origin of breast cancer hypothesis
.
Breast Cancer Res
2007
;
9
:
R29
.
47
De Assis
S
,
Hilakivi-Clarke
L
. 
Timing of dietary estrogenic exposures and breast cancer risk
.
Ann N Y Acad Sci
2006
;
1089
:
14
35
.
48
Mallepell
S
,
Krust
A
,
Chambon
P
,
Brisken
C
. 
Paracrine signaling through the epithelial estrogen receptor α is required for proliferation and morphogenesis in the mammary gland
.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2006
;
103
:
2196
201
.
49
Fabian
CJ
,
Kimler
BF
,
Zalles
CM
, et al
. 
Reduction in proliferation with six months of letrozole in women on hormone replacement therapy
.
Breast Cancer Res Treat
2007
;
106
:
75
84
.