M. Angelini

Expression of aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) and AHR-interacting protein in pituitary adenomas: pathological and clinical implications

Germline mutations of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR)-interacting protein (AIP) gene confer a predisposition to pituitary adenomas (PA), usually in the setting of familial isolated PA. To provide further insights into the possible role of AIP in pituitary tumour pathogenesis, the expression of AIP and AHR was determined by real-time RT-PCR and/or immunohistochemistry (IHC) in a large series of PA (n=103), including 17 with AIP mutations (AIP(mut)). Variable levels of AIP and AHR transcripts were detected in all PA, with a low AHR expression (P<0.0001 versus AIP). Cytoplasmic AIP and AHR were detected by IHC in 84.0 and 38.6% of PA respectively, and significantly correlated with each other (P=0.006). Nuclear AHR was detected in a minority of PA (19.7%). The highest AIP expression was observed in somatotrophinomas and non-secreting (NS) PA, and multivariate analysis in somatotrophinomas showed a significantly lower AIP immunostaining in invasive versus non-invasive cases (P=0.019). AIP expression was commonly low in other secreting PA. AIP immunostaining was abolished in a minority of AIP(mut) PA, with a frequent loss of cytoplasmic AHR and no evidence of nuclear AHR. In contrast, AIP overexpression in a subset of NS PA could be accompanied by nuclear AHR immunopositivity. We conclude that down-regulation of AIP and AHR may be involved in the aggressiveness of somatotrophinomas. Overall, IHC is a poorly sensitive tool for the screening of AIP mutations. Data obtained on AHR expression suggest that AHR signalling may be differentially affected according to PA phenotype.

Somatostatin analogues increase AIP expression in somatotropinomas, irrespective of Gsp mutations

Germline aryl hydrocarbon receptor interacting protein (AIP) gene mutations confer a predisposition to pituitary adenoma (PA), predominantly GH-secreting (GH-PA). As recent data suggest a role for AIP in the pathogenesis of sporadic GH-PA and their response to somatostatin analogues (SSA), the expression of AIP and its partner, aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR), was determined by semiquantitative immunohistochemistry scoring in 62 sporadic GH-PA (37 treated with SSA preoperatively). The influence of Gsp status was studied in a subset of tumours (n=39, 14 Gsp(+)) and six GH-PA were available for primary cultures. AIP and AHR were detected in most cases, with a positive correlation between AIP and cytoplasmic AHR (P=0.012). Low AIP expression was significantly more frequent in untreated vs SSA-treated tumours (44.0 vs 20.5%, P=0.016). AHR expression or localisation did not differ between the two groups. Similarly, in vitro octreotide induced a median twofold increase in AIP expression (range 1.2-13.9, P=0.027) in GH-PA. In SSA-treated tumours, the AIP score was significantly higher in the presence of preoperative IGF1 decrease or tumour shrinkage (P=0.008 and P=0.014 respectively). In untreated tumours, low AIP expression was significantly associated with invasiveness (P=0.028) and suprasellar extension (P=0.019). The only effect of Gsp status was a significantly lower nuclear AHR score in Gsp(+) vs Gsp(-) tumours (P=0.025), irrespective of SSA. In conclusion, AIP is involved in the aggressiveness of sporadic GH-PA, regardless of Gsp status, and AIP up-regulation in SSA-treated tumours is associated with a better preoperative response, with no clear role for AHR.

Genetic susceptibility in pituitary adenomas: from pathogenesis to clinical implications

Pituitary adenomas usually present sporadically, with a multifactorial pathogenesis including somatic mutational events in cancer-related genes. Genetic predisposition implies the presence of germline DNA alterations with a range of impacts on pituitary cell biology, translating into a variable penetrance of the disease. Genetic causes must be considered in the presence of specific clinical settings, such as familial occurrence of pituitary adenoma, with or without extrapituitary diseases, and may also be suspected in young patients (<30 years of age) with macroadenomas. We review the clinical implications of genetic predisposition, with special attention on multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1, Carney complex and familial isolated pituitary adenoma. Genetic screening in selected patients with an apparently sporadic disease is also discussed.