Behm, J. | bioRxiv Science

bioRxiv2026

5β-Dihydrotestosterone reveals a mutant androgen receptor vulnerability in prostate cancer

Bipolar androgen therapy (BAT) exploits the paradoxical vulnerability of castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) cells to rapid cycling between castrate and supraphysiologic androgen concentrations, but clinical BAT uses testosterone, which can also activate wild-type androgen receptor (AR) in androgen-responsive tissues, causing systemic side effects. 5{beta}-dihydrotestosterone (5{beta}-DHT) is a naturally occurring testosterone metabolite generally considered androgenically inactive because it binds wild-type AR weakly, yet its activity against clinically relevant AR mutants has not been systematically evaluated. Here, we tested whether 5{beta}-DHT and related 5{beta}-reduced testosterone metabolites activate AR signaling and growth programs in prostate cancer models that carry AR mutations. In C4-2 cells, 5{beta}-DHT and 3{beta}-etiocholanediol (3{beta}-ecdiol) increased canonical AR target genes, including KLK3 and TMPRSS2, with weaker activity than testosterone, whereas other 5{beta} metabolites showed limited activity. In androgen-responsive LNCaP and C4-2 models, 5{beta}-DHT and 3{beta}-ecdiol promoted cell growth under androgen-depleted conditions, and this effect was suppressed by enzalutamide, supporting AR dependence. RNA-seq confirmed that 5{beta}-DHT and 3{beta}-ecdiol induced androgen-response gene sets substantially overlapping with testosterone, albeit at lower transcriptional magnitude. Further, we found that 5{beta}-DHT, but not 3{beta}-ecdiol, suppresses cell proliferation of LNCaP, C4-2, and PC-3 cells stably expressing the clinically relevant AR gain-of-function mutants W742C and H875Y through activating AR-induced senescence-like features after high-dose exposure, consistent with the therapeutic logic of BAT. These findings identify 5{beta}-DHT as an overlooked mutant-AR agonist capable of BAT-like tumor suppression and propose it as a testosterone surrogate in BAT with potentially reduced systemic androgenic side effects. HighlightsO_LI5{beta}-DHT and 3{beta}-ecdiol promote AR-dependent prostate cancer cell growth C_LIO_LIBoth are weaker AR agonists than testosterone by RNA-seq and qPCR C_LIO_LISupraphysiologic 5{beta}-DHT suppresses growth via AR-mediated senescence C_LIO_LIGrowth suppression extends to AR mutants W742C and H875Y C_LIO_LI5{beta}-DHT may be a lower-androgenicity testosterone surrogate for BAT C_LI

cancer biology↗

bioRxiv2018

Benefits And Limitations Of Three-Dimensional Printing Technology For Ecological Research

BackgroundEcological research often involves sampling and manipulating non-model organisms that reside in heterogeneous environments. As such, ecologists often adapt techniques and ideas from industry and other scientific fields to design and build equipment, tools, and experimental contraptions custom-made for the ecological systems under study. Three-dimensional (3D) printing provides a way to rapidly produce identical and novel objects that could be used in ecological studies, yet ecologists have been slow to adopt this new technology. Here, we provide ecologists with an introduction to 3D printing.\n\nResultsFirst, we give an overview of the ecological research areas in which 3D printing is predicted to be the most impactful and review current studies that have already used 3D printed objects. We then outline a methodological workflow for integrating 3D printing into an ecological research program and give a detailed example of a successful implementation of our 3D printing workflow for 3D printed models of the brown anole, Anolis sagrei, for a field predation study. After testing two print media in the field, we show that the models printed from the less expensive and more sustainable material (blend of 70% plastic and 30% recycled wood fiber) were just as durable and had equal predator attack rates as the more expensive material (100% virgin plastic).\n\nConclusionsOverall, 3D printing can provide time and cost savings to ecologists, and with recent advances in less toxic, biodegradable, and recyclable print materials, ecologists can choose to minimize social and environmental impacts associated with 3D printing. The main hurdles for implementing 3D printing - availability of resources like printers, scanners, and software, as well as reaching proficiency in using 3D image software - may be easier to overcome at institutions with digital imaging centers run by knowledgeable staff. As with any new technology, the benefits of 3D printing are specific to a particular project, and ecologists must consider the investments of developing usable 3D materials for research versus other methods of generating those materials.

ecology↗