G protein–coupled receptor 30 (GPR30) exhibits estrogen-binding affinity and mediates nongenomic signaling of estrogen to regulate cell growth. We here demonstrated for the first time, in contrast to the reported promoting action of GPR30 on the growth of breast and ovarian cancer cells, that activation of GPR30 by the receptor-specific, non-estrogenic ligand G-1 inhibited growth of androgen-dependent and -independent prostate cancer (PCa) cells in vitro and PC-3 xenografts in vivo. However, G-1 elicited no growth or histological changes in the prostates of intact mice and did not inhibit growth in quiescent BPH-1, an immortalized benign prostatic epithelial cell line. Treatment of PC-3 cells with G-1-induced cell-cycle arrest at the G2 phase and reduced the expression of G2-checkpoint regulators (cyclin A2, cyclin B1, cdc25c, and cdc2) and the phosphorylation of their common transcriptional regulator NF-YA in PC-3 cells. With the extensive use of siRNA knockdown experiments and the MEK inhibitor PD98059 in the present study, we dissected the mechanism underlying G-1–induced inhibition of PC-3 cell growth, which was mediated through GPR30, followed by a sustained activation of Erk1/2 and a c-jun/c-fos-dependent upregulation of p21, resulting in the arrest of PC-3 growth at the G2 phase. The discovery of this signaling pathway lays the foundation for future development of GPR30-based therapies for PCa.

No abstract

Abbreviations & AcronymsED = erectile dysfunction EHS = ErectionObjectives: To investigate the role of low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy in the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Methods: This was a double-blinded, single-center, prospective, randomized, placebocontrolled trial. After a 2-week phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor washout period, patients were assessed with Sexual Health Inventory for Men, International Index of Erectile Function-ED domain scores and Erection Hardness Score. Randomization into either the low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy group or the sham group took place. After the 9-week treatment period, patients were followed up 4 weeks later. Follow-up assessment was in the form of International Index of Erectile Function-ED domain score and Erection Hardness Score. Results: A total of 70 patients were recruited into the study, 58 patients completed the study. A total of 28 patients were randomized into the sham therapy arm, and 30 patients were randomized into the low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy arm. There was no significant difference between these two groups in baseline International Index of Erectile Function-ED domain score and Erection Hardness Score. The mean International Index of Erectile Function-ED domain score of the low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy arm and sham arm in week 13 were 17.8 ± 4.8 and 15.8 ± 6.1, respectively (P = 0.156). The mean Erection Hardness Scores in week 13 were 2.7 ± 0.5 and 2.4 ± 0.9, respectively (P = 0.163). When patients were stratified into different baseline Sexual Health Inventory for Men subgroups, the pre-intervention and post-intervention difference in low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy was found to be significant in the subgroup with severe erectile dysfunction (low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy International Index of Erectile Function-ED domain improvement: 10.1 ± 4.1 vs sham therapy International Index of Erectile Function-ED domain improvement: 3.2 ± 3.3; P = 0.003).Conclusion: The present trial shows the tolerability and clinical efficacy of lowintensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy in a subgroup of patients with erectile dysfunction.