Breast cancer (one of the most common malignancy in Western societies), as well as esophagus, stomach, lung, bladder, and prostate cancer, depend on environmental factors and diet for growth and evolution. Dietary micronutriments have been proposed as effective inhibitory agents for cancer initiation, progression, and incidence. Among them, polyphenols, present in different foods and beverages, have retained attention in recent years. Red wine is a rich source of polyphenols, and their antioxidant and tumor arresting effects have been demonstrated in different in vitro and in vivo systems. In the present study, we have measured the antiproliferative effect of red wine concentrate, its total polyphenolic pool, and purified catechin, epicatechin, quercetin, and resveratrol, which account for more than 70% of the total polyphenols in red wine, on the proliferation of hormone sensitive (MCF7, T47D) and resistant (MDA-MB-231) breast cancer cell lines. Our results indicate that polyphenols, at the picomolar or the nanomolar range, decrease cell proliferation in a dose- and a time-dependant manner. In hormone sensitive cell lines, a specific interaction of each polyphenol with steroid receptors was observed, with IC(50)s lower than previously described. Interaction of polyphenols with steroid receptors cannot fully explain their inhibitory effect on cell proliferation. In addition, discrete antioxidant action on each cell line was detected under the same concentrations, both by modifying the toxic effect of H(2)O(2), and the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), after phorbol ester stimulation. Our results suggest that low concentrations of polyphenols, and consecutively, consumption of wine, or other polyphenol-rich foods and beverages, could have a beneficial antiproliferative effect on breast cancer cell growth.

Opioids decrease cell proliferation in different systems including breast, prostate, lung, kidney, and intestine, through an interaction with opioid as well as other membrane-receptor systems (somatostatin, cholinergic), through an unidentified mechanism. Recently, we have reported an interaction of taxol with opioid membrane sites (BBRC 235, 201-204, 1997), and an involvement of opioids to the modification of actin cytoskeleton in renal OK cells (J Cell Biochem. [19981 70:60-69), indicating a possible action of the opioid effect. In the present work, we have examined the effect of two general opioid agonists (ethylketocyclazocine and etorphine) on the cell cycle, in human breast cancer T47D cells, as well as a possible modification of the cellular cytoskeleton under their action, in order to explain the antiproliferative effect of these agents. These two opioids produce a dose-dependent and reversible decrease of the proliferation of T47D cells, with a maximum attained at 10(-8) M. The addition of 10(-8) M of either opioid produced a significant increase of the number of cells arrested in the G2/M phase. Confocal laser microscopy revealed a modification of the actin and tubulin microfilaments, with a clear redistribution at the periphery of the cell, reversed by the addition of the general opioid antagonist diprenorphine. Furthermore, differences between the two opioids were obvious, attributed to the different receptor affinity of each agent. The observed redistribution of actin and tubulin cytoskeletal elements gives therefore a possible answer of the antiproliferative action of opioids. The modification of the cytoskeleton, directly involved to cell division, might provoke a "mechanical" obstacle, which could be the reason of the antiproliferative effect of these agonists. Furthermore, the observed tubulin-opioid interaction by opioids provides a possible explanation of the arrest at the G2/M phase of T47D cells under opioid treatment. Nevertheless, although the observed interaction of opioids with cytoskeletal elements gives a plausible answer of the antiproliferative effects of the agents, this might not be the only action of these agents in cell proliferation. Other, direct or indirect, genomic actions, which which remains to be elucidated, might be taken into consideration.

Somatostatin and opioid systems, are the two main inhibitory systems in mammals. Both classes of substances have been identified in normal and malignant mammary gland, as well as their cognitive receptors. They have been implied in the inhibition of cell growth of cancer cells and cell lines, in a dose-dependent and reversible manner. Somatostatin acts through homologous receptors (SSTRs), belonging to five distinct classes (SSTR1-5). We, and others have identified SSTR2 and 3 as been the only SSTRs present in the breast. Furthermore, opioids act through the three classes of opioid receptors (mu, delta,kappa). In the breast, kappa opioid receptor subtypes (kappa 1-kappa 3) are the most widely expressed. We further have shown that opioids, in addition to their binding to opioid receptors, compete for binding to SSTRs. This functional interaction, together with other identified modes of opioid action in the breast (modulation of steroid receptors, proteases' secretion, interaction with cytoskeletal elements), will be discussed, taking into consideration also the possible local production of casomorphins (casein-derived opioids), which are very potent antiproliferative agents.

In many cancer cell lines, including breast, prostate, lung, brain, head and neck, retina, and the gastrointestinal tract, opioids decrease cell proliferation in a dose-dependent and reversible manner. Opioid and/or other neuropeptide receptors mediate this decrease. We report that only the steroid-hormone-sensitive cell lines MCF7 and T47D respond to opioid growth inhibition in a dose-dependent manner. Therefore, an interaction of the opioid and steroid receptor system might exist, as is the case with insulin. To investigate this interaction, we have assayed two estrogen-inducible proteins (pS2 and the lysosomal enzyme cathepsin D) in MCF7 and T47D cells. When cells were grown in the presence of FBS (in which case a minimal quantity of estrogens and/or opioids is provided by the serum), we observed either no effect of etorphine or ethylketocyclazocine (EKC) or an increase of secretion and/or production of pS2 and cathepsin D. However, when cells were cultured in charcoal-stripped serum and in the absence of phenol red, the effect of the two opioids is different: EKC decreased the production and/or secretion of pS2 and cathepsin D, whereas etorphine increased their synthesis and/or secretion. The differential effect of the two general opioids was attributed to their different receptor selectivity. Furthermore, the variations of the ratio of secreted/produced protein and the use of cycloheximide indicate that opioids selectively modify the regulatory pathway of each protein discretely. In conclusion, through the interaction with opioid and perhaps other membrane-receptor sites, opioid agonists modify in a dose-dependent manner the production and the secretion of two estrogen-regulated proteins. Opioids may therefore disturb hormonal signals mediated by the estrogen receptors. Hence, these chemicals may have potential endocrine disrupting activities.