An Estrogen Receptor-
Splicing Variant Mediates Both Positive and Negative Effects on Gene Transcription
Aliccia Bollig and
Richard J. Miksicek
Michigan State University Department of Physiology East
Lansing, Michigan 48824-1101
 |
ABSTRACT
|
---|
Analysis of mRNA prepared from a variety of
estrogen-responsive cell lines, breast tumor specimens, and normal
breast tissue have established that estrogen receptor-
(ER
) mRNA
is typically expressed as a mixture of transcripts. Using PCR
amplification, this heterogeneity has been shown to result largely from
an imprecise pattern of mRNA splicing that gives rise to a family of
correctly processed and exon-skipped ER
transcripts. We have
reconstructed ER
cDNAs representing the single exon-skipped variants
ER
E2 through ER
E7 to enable their functional characterization in
a well defined cell transfection system. All six of the ER
splicing
variants support the efficient expression of stable proteins in Cos7
cells, and each shows a characteristic pattern of subcellular
distribution. Each of the variants displays a dramatic reduction in
DNA-binding activity with a consensus estrogen response element (ERE)
in an in vitro gel mobility shift assay. While this
DNA-binding defect appears to be complete for ER
E2, ER
E3,
ER
E4, and ER
E6, weak DNA binding is observed for ER
E5 and
ER
E7. Scatchard analysis of hormone binding demonstrates that among
the variants, only ER
E3 binds 17ß-estradiol
(E2) and does so with an affinity similar to
wild-type ER
(wt ER
). Individual variants cotransfected with the
pERE-TK-CAT reporter plasmid [a consensus ERE-driven chloramphenicol
acetyltransferase (CAT) reporter gene that is highly responsive to
E2-liganded wt ER
] were ineffective at
inducing CAT expression in ER-negative HeLa cells. Only ER
E5 showed
indications of positive transcriptional activity on the pERE-TK-CAT
reporter, but this activity was limited to approximately 5% of the
activity of wt ER
. When variants were expressed simultaneously with
wt ER
, ER
E3 and ER
E5 were observed to have a dominant negative
effect on wt ER
transcriptional activity. Like the wild-type
receptor, both ER
E3 and ER
E5 interact with steroid receptor
coactivator-1e (SRC-1e) in vitro; however, only ER
E3
retained the ability to dimerize with wt ER
. Transcription from a
region of the ovalbumin promoter, which contains an ERE half-site and
an AP-1 motif, is positively regulated by liganded wt ER
and ER
E3
in phorbol ester-treated, transiently transfected HeLa cells. In both
cases, this activity was enhanced by cotransfected cJun. These
observations suggest that selected ER
splicing variants are likely
to exert important transcriptional effects, especially on genes that
are regulated by nonconsensus EREs and subject to complex hormonal
control.
 |
INTRODUCTION
|
---|
Binding of estrogen to the estrogen receptor (ER) elicits a change
in receptor conformation that allows the receptor to bind DNA and
enhance transcription from the promoters of regulated genes (1, 2, 3).
ER-induced gene expression supports the proliferation and, ultimately,
the differentiation of target cells (4, 5). Interference with these
proliferative effects forms the basis for the chemotherapeutic actions
of estrogen antagonists that are used to treat cancers of the breast
and reproductive tract (6). The reported success of antiestrogens such
as tamoxifen and raloxifene in preventing breast tumors emphasizes a
crucial role for ER in mammary carcinogenesis (7, 8, 9).
The transcriptional effects of estrogens are mediated by two
closely related receptor isoforms, ER
and the more recently
described ERß (10, 11), each of which is encoded by a separate gene.
While ERß is also being investigated for its potential role in
various diseases, including cancer, this study focuses solely on the
ER
isoform. Analysis of mRNA prepared from a variety of
estrogen-responsive cells and tissues, including breast tumors, has
established that ER
mRNA is typically expressed as a mixture of
transcripts (12, 13, 14, 15). This heterogeneity results largely from a pattern
of alternative mRNA splicing that gives rise to a family of correctly
processed and exon-skipped ER
mRNAs. ER
mRNA comprises sequences
from 8 coding exons and is translated to yield a protein with discrete
functional domains. An N-terminal transactivation function (AF1)
encoded by exon 1 and a portion of exon 2 is thought to promote gene
transcription by interacting with nuclear receptor coactivators and
also with proteins integral to the transcription initiation complex (1, 16, 17). Derived from exons 2 and 3 is a centrally located zinc-finger
motif (commonly referred to as the DNA-binding domain or DBD) that is
essential for sequence-specific DNA binding and transcriptional
activation through canonical estrogen response elements (EREs) (18).
Within the region encoded by exon 4 are the nuclear localization
signals (NLS) and a hinge region that allows for receptor
conformational flexibility (3, 19). A ligand-binding domain (LBD)
confers regulatory function to the receptor and is encoded by the
C-terminal exons 4 through 8 (20). This region also includes
determinants for subunit dimerization and a well characterized
C-terminal transactivation function (AF2), which promotes gene
transcription by recruiting coactivators (1, 2, 3, 21). Like other nuclear
receptors, ER
is a modular protein in that individual domains are
capable of demonstrating autonomous function within receptor mutants,
as well as when they are introduced into heterologous fusion proteins
(1, 18). It can reasonably be assumed that the exclusion of a
particular exon will predictably result in a protein lacking the
function ascribed to that exon. Additionally, it is probable that the
loss of a particular exon will result in unpredictable functional
deficits or perhaps even bestow a novel function on the variant
receptor. This study examines the function of ER
splicing variants
from the vantage point of what is known about the functional
organization of wt ER
. Concurrently, the process of examining
splicing variants, like mutational studies, improves our understanding
of wt ER
function. We report results from experiments designed to
assess receptor capacity to translocate to the nucleus, bind to DNA,
bind ligand, participate in protein complexes, and promote gene
transcription.
Fuqua and colleagues (22, 23) have reported that ER
E5 (which
contains the AF1 domain, but lacks AF2 and the regulatory functions
imparted by the LBD), is constitutively active in promoting
transcription from an ERE in a heterologous yeast reporter gene assay.
These authors have also described that overexpression of ER
E5 in a
stably transfected breast cancer cell line (MCF-7) supported greater
proliferation compared with control cells, as well as imparting a
tamoxifen-resistant phenotype (24). In the human osteosarcoma cell line
U2-OS, it has recently been reported that coexpression of ER
E5
significantly enhances ERE-directed reporter gene expression induced by
wt ER
(25). The existence of a constitutively active receptor
variant (such as ER
E5) able to exert a mitogenic effect in breast
tumor cells in the absence of E2 or in the
presence of tamoxifen is an appealing explanation for the acquisition
of antiestrogen resistance observed in previously responsive tumors and
cell lines (26, 27). However, this model is challenged by conflicting
observations that ER
E5 and closely related, genetically engineered
ER
mutants do not efficiently induce transcription from an ERE
reporter in transiently transfected ER-negative HeLa or CEF cells (2, 28), or promote proliferation in stably transfected MCF-7 cells
(28).
Recently, a novel mechanism for mediation of an estrogen response has
been reported to involve AP-1-directed regulation of transcription by
ER (29, 30, 31, 32). AP-1 describes the fos/jun family of transcription factors
that play a key role in transducing the effects of growth factors to
regulate cell proliferation (33, 34). A variety of estrogen-responsive
genes have been described that lack a palindromic ERE, but instead
contain one or more consensus AP-1 elements (5'-TGAG/CTCA-3'), with or
without a degenerate ERE or ERE half-site (5'-GGTCA-3' or 5'-TGACC-3').
Examples of such genes include ovalbumin, which is induced by
E2 in chicken oviduct cells (35), and the
insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) gene whose expression is
stimulated by E2 in the uterus of
ovariectomized-hypophy-sectomized rats and in cultured rat
osteoblast cells (36, 37). An AP-1 enhancer motif identified in the
chicken IGF-I promoter is essential for E2 and
phorbol ester-stimulated gene transcription (31). Phorbol esters act
directly on protein kinase C to initiate a signal transduction cascade
that ultimately activates AP-1 (33). Reporter gene cotransfection
studies with expression vectors for AP-1 isoforms and ER
in HeLa
cells indicate that a similar mechanism regulates the human collagenase
promoter (32). The minimal region of the collagenase promoter reported
to be responsive to tamoxifen-liganded wt ER
, and to a variety of
ER
mutants, harbors a critical AP-1 element and lacks a consensus
ERE. Additionally, the activity of ER
on the collagenase promoter
was enhanced with AP-1 (c-jun or c-fos)
overexpression (32). Further evidence that ER regulation converges with
AP-1-directed gene transcription is provided by results from protein
binding assays indicating that c-jun is able to bind to wt
ER
in vitro (32).
Although evidence for function of ER
variants has been elusive,
reports that ER
E5 can support weak, cell type-dependent activity
(23, 25, 28), and that, when tested on an ERE, both ER
E5 and ER
E3
are dominant negative receptor forms in the presence of wt ER
(38, 39) indicate that it is inaccurate to label these variants as
transcriptionally inert. To investigate the capacity for ER
splicing
variants to regulate gene transcription, we have expanded our
transcriptional focus to include the noncanonical ERE of the ovalbumin
promoter in addition to the consensus vitellogenin A2 ERE. Here we
present data indicating that individual variants display both
similarities and differences compared with wt ER
, and that selected
splicing variants (specifically ER
E3 and ER
E5) have the capacity
to both positively and negatively regulate gene expression, depending
on the promoter context.
 |
RESULTS
|
---|
Numerous variant ER
cDNAs have now been cloned and sequenced
from breast tumors and established tumor cell lines (12, 13, 14, 15). The most
common variants harbor a precise deletion of one of the internal exons
from the eight that contribute to the structure of the mature ER
protein, suggesting that they arise as a result of imprecise splicing
of the primary ER
mRNA transcript. ER
cDNAs with sequence
deletions corresponding to exons 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 have been
identified, along with a large number of more complex variants
(12, 13, 14, 15). These basic variants will be referred to as ER
E2 through
ER
E7, where the deleted exon is indicated numerically. Although
there is no consistent ratio of relative expression, wild-type and
variant ER transcripts are always coexpressed in ER- positive tumor
cell lines and normal and tumorous breast tissue. Quantitation of
individual variants shows that they generally represent a minority of
ER mRNA; however, as a population, splicing variants typically
constitute as much as 50% of the total ER mRNA in the tissues and cell
lines examined (Refs. 12, 13, 15 and D. P. Ankrapp and
R. J. Miksicek, unpublished observations). While there has been
extensive analysis at the RNA level of the pattern of expression and
abundance of ER
splicing variants, limited information is available
on their functional activity. We have therefore constructed
cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter-driven ER
cDNA expression vectors
representing the exon-skipped variants ER
E2 through ER
E7 to
enable their functional characterization in a well defined cell
transfection system. Our assembled pool of ER
splicing variants also
includes the hypothetical receptor ER
E6, even though this variant is
not readily identified in vivo. Figure 1A
diagrams the ER
mRNA splicing
variants examined, showing the positions of deleted exons and their
consequences with respect to protein structure. Deletion of exon 2, 5,
6, or 7 all cause a frame-shift mutation resulting in premature
termination of translation, thereby generating a diverse class of
C-terminally truncated receptor forms. Omission of either exon 3 or 4
does not disrupt the mRNA reading frame, but produces a receptor
protein with an internal deletion.
Transient expression in Cos7 cells demonstrates that each of these
variants translates to a stable protein able to accumulate to readily
detectable levels within transfected cells (Fig. 1B
). Based on
immunoblot analysis with an N-terminal monoclonal antibody (Mab-17),
which recognizes an epitope within exon 1 common to all of the variants
(40), we observe that the mobility of the six variant proteins is
consistent with their predicted molecular weights. No immunoreactivty
is observed in mock transfected cells, confirming the specificity of
the Mab-17 antibody.
Measurement of the DNA-Binding Activity of the ER
Splicing
Variants
Efficient DNA binding by ER
requires the cooperation of
several functional elements within this protein, including the
centrally located DBD and a ligand-inducible subunit dimerization motif
located near the C-terminal end of the LBD (2, 18). It is also possible
that additional subunit contacts occur elsewhere in the protein.
Because all of the ER
splicing variants sustained deletions within
various regions of this protein, it was of interest to systematically
assess the DNA-binding ability of each variant. For this purpose, gel
mobility shift assays were performed using extracts prepared from
E2-treated, transiently transfected Cos7 cells.
Extracts were incubated with a 32P-labeled
oligonucleotide containing a consensus ERE (AGGTCACAGTGACCT) from the
Xenopus vitellogenin A2 promoter. As expected, variants that
harbor a mutation within the DBD (ER
E2 and ER
E3) are completely
unable to recognize the ERE (Fig. 2
, lanes 58). Less predictably, the loss of exons contributing to the
LBD also result in a strong defect in ERE recognition (Fig. 2
, lanes
916). For ER
E5 and ER
E7, however, this appears to be a
quantitative defect in DNA binding. The addition of the monoclonal
antibody, MAb-17, to the binding reactions consistently results in the
recovery of weak DNA binding by ER
E5 (Fig. 2
, lane 12). Presumably,
the role of the bivalent antibody is to stabilize the interaction of
receptor subunits with their palindromic binding site, mimicking the
function of the missing dimerization motif present within the C
terminus of the LBD. These results suggest the possible existence of
cell-specific constituents that perform the same function in
vivo and may account for the variable activity of ER
E5 and
related constructs in different cell types (2, 25, 28). We have also
observed the formation of a complex between ER
E7 and labeled ERE
probe (Fig. 2
, lane 16, and data not shown). Overall, however, the
relative weakness of DNA-binding observed in these studies raises
serious questions about the extent to which any of the variants,
including ER
E5 and ER
E7, are able to recognize and bind to a
consensus ERE, in vivo. Furthermore, that ER
E7 binds an
ERE in vitro has little transcriptional relevance in light
of the observation that ER
E7 is not translocated to the nucleus when
expressed in Cos 7 cells (see below).
ER
E3, Like wt ER
, Binds Ligand
To test the ability of the ER
mRNA splicing variants to bind
hormone, we performed a saturation binding assay on whole-cell extracts
from Cos7 cells transiently transfected with wt ER
or the ER
variants. Only wt ER
and ER
E3 were able to bind
3H-labeled E2, whereas all
of the remaining variants demonstrated no specific ligand binding (Fig. 3A
). The individual deletion of exons 2,
4, 5, 6, and 7 effectively eliminates all, or a significant portion, of
the LBD (see Fig. 1A
), consistent with their loss of hormone binding.
We confirmed these results using an in vivo ligand-binding
assay in which the binding of a fluorescent estrogen analog was
visualized in cells cultured on cover slips. Cos7 cells transiently
expressing the individual variants or wt receptor were treated with the
fluorescent ligand, nitrile tetrahydrochrysene (nitrile THC) (41). Only
those cultures transfected with wt ER
or ER
E3 were observed to
stain with this ligand. In both cases, staining was localized tightly
within the nucleus. This suggests that among the variants examined, wt
ER
and ER
E3 exclusively bind ligand and in both cases,
ligand-bound receptors are translocated normally to the nucleus of
expressing cells (Fig. 3B
). With Scatchard analysis we compared the
affinity of ER
E3 and wt ER
for 3H-labeled
E2. The measured dissociation constants were 0.66
nM for wt ER
and 0.79 nM
for ER
E3 (Fig. 3C
).
Subcellular Localization of ER
Splicing Variants
To more carefully assess the subcellular localization of
ER
splicing variants, including those that fail to bind ligand, Cos7
cells were transiently transfected with expression vectors encoding wt
ER
or individual variants. These receptors were detected in
transfected cells by indirect immunofluorescence staining (using the
MAb-17 monoclonal antibody) and confocal microscopy. Similar to wt
ER
, ER
E3 and ER
E5 localize to the nuclei of transfected cells,
although ER
E5 showed perinuclear as well as nuclear staining (Fig. 4
). These results are consistent with the
fact that both ER
E3 and ER
E5 retain a NLS immediately downstream
of the DBD (3, 19). Subcellular localization studies have also been
completed for the exon 2, 4, 6, and 7 deletion variants. Each of these
proteins can be readily detected in transfected cells, but they all
possess dramatic defects in nuclear targeting (Fig. 4
). Nuclear
targeting of wt ER
is governed, in large part, by a tripartite
karyophilic signal present within exon 4 (19). Loss of this signal is
therefore consistent with the cytoplasmic pattern of distribution of
mutants such as ER
E2 and ER
E4, both of which lack protein
corresponding to exon 4 sequences. Inappropriate presentation or
folding of this signal must account for the defects in nuclear
localization seen with ER
E6 and ER
E7, since the NLS is retained
in these variants. Based on their subcellular distribution, we would
predict that only ER
E3 and ER
E5, like wt ER
, would have the
potential to exert nuclear effects, such as modulating gene
transcription. Furthermore, the inability of the cytoplasmic variants
ER
E2, ER
E4, ER
E6, and ER
E7 to dimerize with wt ER
predicts that their subcellular distribution will not be influenced by
coexpression with the nuclear isoforms (wt ER
, ER
E3, and
ER
E5). For ER
E4, this was confirmed with a cotransport assay
using a dimerization-competent ER
(data not shown). It is worth
noting, moreover, that the existence of translationally stable,
cytoplasmic splicing variants such as these may provide an explanation
for cytoplasmic staining that is commonly observed during
immunohistochemical analysis of breast biopsy specimens to assess ER
status.
Characterization of the Transactivation Function of ER
Splicing
Variants on the Vitellogenin ERE
HeLa cell cotransfection experiments designed to assess the
transcriptional activity of individually expressed ER
splicing
variants have failed to demonstrate any significant ability of variant
receptors to support gene activation through an ERE, with the possible
exception of the ER
E5 variant, which is reported to display a low
level of constitutive transcriptional activity on an ERE-driven
reporter in some, but not all, cell types examined (23, 25, 28). In our
hands none of the variants were effective transcriptional activators of
an ERE-containing promoter. ER
E5 repeatedly showed only modest
constitutive activity (
5% of wt ER
induction) on an ERE-directed
reporter plasmid cotransfected into HeLa cells (see Fig. 7
, inset).
It is important to recognize that the tissues and cell lines that
express these variants also express wt ER
. We have previously
reported that the ER
E3 variant acts as a dominant negative mutant
when it is coexpressed with wt ER
in HeLa cells treated with
E2 (39). In the human breast epithelial cell line
HMT-3522S1, ER
E5 has also been reported to disrupt transactivation
by agonist-bound wt ER
of an ERE reporter gene (38). To clarify
whether this is a function unique to these variants, we completed a
series of experiments to test whether the remaining exon-skipped ER
variants also support transcriptional inhibitory effects. When examined
in a HeLa cell cotransfection assay in which the expression of
pERE-TK-CAT was driven by E2-bound wt ER
, a
5-fold molar excess of any of the splicing variants lacking exons 2, 4,
6, or 7 failed to inhibit the E2-dependent
induction of chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) gene expression by
intact receptor (data not shown). In agreement with previously
published results, the ER
E3 and ER
E5 variants both demonstrated a
dominant inhibitory activity at all molar ratios tested (Fig. 5
). With the caveat that equal amounts of
plasmid DNA support similar levels of variant receptor expression (see
Fig. 1B
), it appears that ER
E3 and ER
E5 are approximately
equivalent in their inhibitory activity in HeLa cells.
Dimerization and Coactivator Binding Properties of ER
E3 and
ER
E5
We next questioned whether a direct interaction between the
variants and factors responsible for ERE-directed transcription might
explain the inhibitory effects of ER
E3 and ER
E5 on wt ER
activity; specifically, we tested for a direct interaction of ER
E3
and ER
E5 with wt ER
and steroid receptor coactivator-1e (SRC-1e).
The C terminus of wt ER
and fragments of the SRC-1e protein were
expressed as fusion proteins with glutathione S-transferase
(GST) and attached to glutathione-Sepharose beads. Binding assays with
GST fused to the C terminus of wt ER
(GST-AF2) and
35S-methionine labeled in vitro
translated receptor demonstrate that ligand-bound wt ER
and ER
E3,
but not ER
E5, dimerize with the LBD of ER
in solution (Fig. 6A
). In experiments with GST-SRC-1e
fragments, both ER
E3 and ER
E5 were observed to bind to regions of
the coactivator that also bind wt ER
(Fig. 6B
). ER
E3 and wt ER
bind the SRC-1e fragments comprising amino acids 570780 and 989-1240
and do so only in the presence of E2. In
contrast, binding of ER
E5 to the 989-1240 amino acid fragment is
constitutive (Fig. 6B
).
ER
E3 Is a Positive Regulator of Gene Expression on an AP-1
Reporter
The results presented above indicate that ER
splicing variants
are either inactive (ER
E2, ER
E4, ER
E6, and ER
E7) or largely
inhibitory (ER
E3 and ER
E5) in their effect on reporter constructs
that contain a consensus ERE. Recent reports suggest that wt ER
is
also able to transactivate genes whose promoters do not contain an
obvious ERE. In particular are promoters for the human collagenase,
chicken IGF-I and ovalbumin genes that are regulated by wt ER
and
contain a critical AP-1 element (29, 31, 32). Mutational analysis
revealed that the DBD was not required for ER
-dependent expression
of these genes. Clearly, the mechanisms of ER
transcriptional
activity and DNA targeting are complicated by these reports. We propose
that to assess the transactivating potential of ER
variants, the
promoter focus must be expanded to include promoters that contain
noncanonical regulatory elements. These thoughts prompted us to test
the activity of the ER
variants on the ovalbumin promoter that
contains a complex hormone response element. We performed
cotransfection experiments in HeLa cells using vectors expressing wt
ER
or the exon-skipped variants ER
E2 through ER
E7 and a CAT
reporter gene construct, pOvalb-CAT, driven by a fragment of the
ovalbumin promoter (-1342 to +7 relative to the transcription start
site) described to encompass much of the regulatory sequence of this
gene (35, 42). Results from these experiments indicate that both wt
ER
and ER
E3 support inducible gene expression from the ovalbumin
promoter (Fig. 7
) and that all of the
remaining single exon-skipped variants are transcriptionally inactive
on this reporter construct (data not shown). For wt ER
, this
corroborates previously published reports (29, 35). Maximal activity
was measured in cultures treated with both phorbol 12-myristate,
13-acetate (PMA, a phorbol ester) and E2, where a
16-fold induction was observed. Like wt ER
, ER
E3 reproducibly
induced this reporter, despite its lack of an intact DBD. While the
induction shown in Fig. 7
for ER
E3 (averaging 9-fold) is less than
that supported by wt ER
, the activity of ER
E3 equaled and
occasionally exceeded that of the intact receptor in several individual
experiments, confirming that this variant can be a potent inducer of
transcription. In both cases cotreatment with PMA and
E2 is highly synergistic as
E2 treatment alone has no significant effect, and
PMA treatment alone supports only modest induction for wt ER
(2.5-fold relative to vehicle control, P < 0.001).
Tamoxifen treatment of wt ER
- or ER
E3-transfected cultures,
either alone or together with phorbol ester, had no significant effect
on pOvalb-CAT expression. This contrasts with the stimulatory activity
of tamoxifen observed on other AP-1 containing estrogen-responsive
reporter genes (32). In control cells transfected with an empty CMV
expression vector, treatment with PMA yielded negligible reporter gene
activity. This suggests that, in the absence of ER
, activation of
endogenous AP-1 alone is not an effective inducer of transcription from
the ovalbumin promoter in these cells. To confirm that wt ER
and
ER
E3 cooperate with AP-1 factors to regulate transactivation of the
ovalbumin promoter, we measured pOvalb-CAT expression in HeLa cells
cotransfected with both a receptor isoform and cJun. Transcriptional
activity of wt ER
and ER
E3 supported by PMA and
E2 cotreatment was enhanced by cJun
overexpression. While the presence of endogenous AP-1 tended to obscure
the synergism between cJun and wt ER
in this system, the combined
effects of these transcription factors were slightly more than
additive. A greater than additive activation was also observed when
cJun and ER
E3 were coexpressed (Fig. 8
). Exogenous cJun alone elicited only a
modest response to PMA and E2 treatment. These
observations, combined with the dual requirement for activating both
AP-1 and ER
, strongly suggest that these factors are acting
cooperatively on the ovalbumin promoter.
 |
DISCUSSION
|
---|
Our efforts to functionally characterize exon-skipped ER
mRNA
splicing variants have identified two receptor isoforms that possess
the ability to modulate estrogen signaling on genes that are targeted
by the ER. Although their protein structure is significantly altered,
the ER
E3 and ER
E5 splicing variants retain many of the activities
attributed to the full-length receptor. Loss of exon 3 results in a
receptor protein with an internal deletion that lacks a major portion
of the DBD and therefore prevents ER
E3 from binding to a consensus
ERE, as confirmed by gel mobility shift analysis. However, ER
E3
retains the LBD and NLS, thereby allowing it to bind hormone with an
affinity similar to wt ER
and translocate to the nucleus. The
deletion of exon 5 causes a frame-shift mutation and results in a
C-terminally truncated form of the receptor. Loss of the LBD
predictably renders ER
E5 unable to bind E2.
Nonetheless, ER
E5 still retains the NLS, and immunofluorescence
analysis shows nuclear staining in Cos7 cells transfected with this
variant.
Rather than serving to stimulate transcription on a consensus ERE,
results from transient transfection experiments in HeLa cells that
combine either ER
E3 or ER
E5 with wt ER
and an ERE-driven
reporter gene indicate that these isoforms actually function to inhibit
transcriptional activation by wt ER
. These observations agree with
our previous results and with those reported by others from similar
experiments using HMT-3522S1 cells (38, 39). A 70% inhibition of
transcriptional activation by E2-liganded wt
ER
on an ERE-driven CAT reporter gene was observed in HeLa cells
when ER
E3 and wt ER
expression vectors were cotransfected at a
ratio of 5:1 (39). In the ER-negative cell line HMT-3522S1,
coexpression of an equal amount of ER
E5 significantly inhibited
stimulation of an ERE reporter construct by wt ER
(38). Increasing
the ratio of transfected variant to wt ER
demonstrates that the
repression of wt ER
by ER
E3 and ER
E5 is dose-related and
becomes nearly complete when the variants are present in sufficient
excess (38, 39). This observation has physiological significance in the
case of breast tumor cells that predominantly express one of these
splicing variants (12, 22). Castles et al. (22) report that
ER
E5 is the major ER transcript in BT-20 and MDA MB 330 breast tumor
cell lines. In BT-20 cells the ER
E5 variant comprises 68% of the ER
mRNA population while wt ER
measures 8%. Studies by Erenburg
et al. (43) indicate that, while ER
E3 tends to be
underrepresented in breast tumors and tumor cell lines, it typically
constitutes 50% or more of ER
mRNA in both stromal fibroblasts and
epithelial cells isolated from reduction mammoplasty specimens. These
authors further demonstrated that stable overexpression of ER
E3 in
MCF-7 cells to levels seen in normal mammary epithelial cells
dramatically reduced the expression and estrogen inducibility of
endogenous pS2 mRNA, as well as reducing their anchorage-independent
growth and in vivo invasiveness (43).
The dominant negative character of ER
E3 and ER
E5 suggests that,
like wt ER
, these variants are able to interact with at least one
component of the ERE-directed transcription complex in a manner that
disrupts positive gene regulation by wt ER
. Based on gel mobility
shift assay analysis, it is unlikely that transcriptional interference
by these variants involves binding to an ERE to the exclusion of wt
ER
. Our DNA binding analysis indicates that ER
E5 can bind only
weakly to DNA, and only when the formation of this complex is
stabilized by the addition of a bivalent antibody. The role of the
antibody in this case is presumably to substitute for the missing
dimerization interface and to tether receptor subunits together in a
form more able to interact with DNA. DNA binding by ER
E7 similarly
requires the addition of antibody, but this binding is even less
efficient than binding by ER
E5. Interestingly, a correlation exists
among the ER
variants between their ability to translocate to the
nucleus and their transcriptional inhibitory effect on wt ER
activity in mammalian cells. As of yet, no clear function has been
established for the ER
E7 variant in mammalian cells, despite an
earlier report that ER
E7 is a dominant inhibitor of wt ER
function in yeast (44). This is noteworthy since a number of
quantitative studies have indicated that, as a rule, ER
E7 represents
the most abundant of the ER
splicing variants in breast tumors
(summarized in Ref. 15).
We have previously reported that although ER
E3 is unable to bind to
an ERE itself, it can prevent wt ER
from binding to DNA (39). That
ER
E3 inhibits both DNA complex formation and transactivation by wt
ER
suggests that the potential targets of interaction by ER
E3 may
include protein-protein contacts with wt ER
itself or interactions
with nuclear receptor coactivators or other receptor-associated
factors. ER
function may be disrupted when ER
E3, which lacks the
DBD but retains the hormone-inducible dimerization domain, forms mixed
dimers with wt ER
that are inefficient at binding stably to DNA. We
are able to show that, in the presence of E2,
ER
E3 (but not ER
E5) can form a stable complex with the LBD of
ER
fused to GST attached to glutathione-Sepharose beads. This is
consistent with a model for direct inhibition of the DNA binding
activity of full-length receptor by ER
E3. Experiments using
fragments from SRC-1e fused to GST indicate that both ER
E3 and
ER
E5 can bind a nuclear receptor coactivator. Similar to the pattern
of wt ER
interaction with SRC-1e, in vitro translated
ER
E3 is able to associate in an E2-dependent
manner with two regions of the steroid coactivator SRC-1e (amino acids
570780 and 989-1240). This agrees with previous reports that also
describe three conserved nuclear receptor-binding motifs (LXXLL) within
the 570780 amino acid region and a distinct site for AF-1 interaction
within the 989-1240 amino acid fragment (17, 45). A site for SRC-1
interaction within ER
corresponds with the AF2 domain (46), a region
that is retained in the ER
E3 variant. Isoforms of SRC-1 are potent
enhancers of agonist-bound ER
and are required for its full
transcriptional activity (47, 48). Transfection experiments in
E2-treated HeLa cell cultures demonstrate that
coexpression of mutants containing the C terminus of ER
can
attenuate ER
-dependent gene expression and that this decreased
activity can be overcome with simultaneous overexpression of the
SRC-1-related coactivator transcriptional intermediary factor 2
(TIF2) (49). These results suggest that coactivators are
limiting factors for which the receptors are competing and that
ER
E3, like wt ER
, is a target for SRC-1 binding.
In a surprising result from cotransfection studies using engineered
mutants of ER
, maximal expression of an ERE-containing reporter gene
could be observed when SRC-1 was transfected simultaneously with
separate N- and C-terminal fragments of ER
, containing the AF-1/DBD
and the LBD/AF2 regions, respectively (50). These results suggest that
separate AF1- and AF2-containing ER
polypeptides can interact in a
transcriptionally productive manner, provided they are brought together
by SRC-1. Furthermore, they provide an initial indication that SRC-1
interacts separately and perhaps directly with both the AF1 and AF2
domains. More support for this notion is provided by our observations
that ER
E5 binds to the SRC-1e amino acid fragment 989-1240 in
solution. These results suggests the possibility that the inhibitory
function of ER
E5, which itself is relatively inefficient at binding
DNA or activating transcription through an ERE, most likely results
from competition with wt ER
for interaction with SRC-1 or other
cellular factors.
The most compelling evidence that some of the ER
mRNA splicing
variants may indeed be transcriptionally active is seen in transfection
experiments involving ER
E3 and reporter gene constructs containing a
nonconsensus hormone-regulatory element. Recently, a novel mechanism
for mediation of an estrogen response has been reported to involve
AP-1-directed regulation of transcription by ER
(29, 30, 31, 32). AP-1 and
its isoforms represent a family of nearly ubiquitous transcription
factors whose activity is crucial for the efficient expression of a
wide variety of genes. As an important downstream target for the
mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)- and Jun kinase
signaling cascades, AP-1 is a central player in mediating the effects
of serum and growth factors on cellular proliferation (33, 34). A
variety of estrogen-responsive genes have been described that lack a
palindromic ERE, but instead contain one or more consensus AP-1
elements that often occur near a degenerate ERE or ERE half-site (29, 31, 32). It should be noted that these imperfect EREs may in some cases
serve dual function as cryptic AP-1 response elements whose consensus
sequence (5'-TGAG/CTCA-3') bears superficial similarity to an ERE
half-site (5'-GGTCA-3' or 5'-TGACC-3').
An important observation from the analysis of genes regulated by
noncanonical EREs is that the structure-activity requirements for
activation by ER
(both for the ligand and for the receptor) are
different than those for transcriptional activation through a
palindromic ERE. Using a region of the collagenase gene promoter
(-73/+63) that lacks an ERE but harbors an essential AP-1 element,
Kushner and co-workers (32) demonstrated that a DBD-deleted mutant of
ER
was significantly more effective at supporting
E2-induced reporter gene expression than wt ER
in transfected HeLa cells. Similar to collagenase gene expression,
ER
-dependent activation of the chicken ovalbumin promoter, which
lacks a palindromic ERE, does not require an intact DBD (29).
Furthermore, an ERE half-site was determined to be the site for
synergistic regulation of ovalbumin gene expression by AP-1 and ER
(29). Our studies involving cotransfection of an ER
splice variant
with the ovalbumin promoter construct, pOvalb-CAT, agree with these
findings. Results from Fig. 7
demonstrate that, compared with
mock-transfected HeLa control cultures, pOvalb-CAT is strongly
activated by either wt ER
or ER
E3. A breakdown of treatments
indicates that maximal activity of both wt ER
and ER
E3 clearly
requires E2 in addition to an AP-1 activator.
In vitro assays demonstrate an interaction between cJun and
the N terminus of ER
fused to GST (32). Additional evidence
suggesting that ER
E3 and wt ER
cooperate with activated AP-1 to
maximally transactivate the ovalbumin promoter is provided by our
observation that receptor activity is enhanced by simultaneous cJun
overexpression. In our studies tamoxifen treatment had little or no
effect on the activity of wt ER
or ER
E3, either with or without
PMA cotreatment. This contrasts with results observed when wt ER
was
cotransfected with a collagenase reporter construct in HeLa cells,
where tamoxifen supported a significant induction of reporter gene
expression (32).
Our transfection results show that, while several of the ER
splicing
variants are functionally incapacitated by their deletions, two of the
variants clearly retain significant transcriptional activity. For the
ER
E3 and ER
E5 variants, this activity is quite complex. Both of
these variants represent stable receptor isoforms that, like the
full-length receptor, localize efficiently to the nucleus where
they can interact with the transcription apparatus. However, when
acting through a consensus ERE, these variants completely lack
(ER
E3) or show only weak (ER
E5) transcriptional stimulatory
activity, consistent with their poor DNA binding ability. On the
contrary, both variants serve to blunt the ability of coexpressed wt
ER
to promote transcription of ERE-containing genes. At the same
time, the ability of ER
E3 (and presumably also ER
E5) to interact
productively with nuclear receptor coactivators or other transcription
factors gives these ER
splicing variants the potential to stimulate
or otherwise modulate gene expression through nonconsensus hormone
response elements that are targeted by AP-1 motifs or other DNA-binding
sites. We have clearly shown this to be true for ER
E3 and the
chicken ovalbumin promoter and believe that this is also likely to be
true for many other genes, such as those encoding collagenase,
cathepsin D, IGF-I, transforming growth factor-ß, c-fos, heat shock
protein-27, and retinoic acid receptor-
, all of which lack an
obvious ERE and yet still respond to estrogen. In this respect, ER
splicing variants may actually serve to redirect transcription away
from ERE-containing genes to genes such as these that appear to be
regulated nonclassically by estrogens.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
---|
Expression Vectors
Plasmids for ER
mRNA splicing variant cDNAs were generated as
derivatives of pCMV4 (51) and pcDNA3.1 (Invitrogen, San
Diego, CA), which support high levels of receptor expression in HeLa
and Cos7 cell lines (41). Plasmids expressing ER
E4, ER
E5, and
ER
E6 were generated using synthetic oligonucleotides to construct
the variant splice junctions within an otherwise wt ER
cDNA
expression plasmid. The remaining plasmids were constructed with the
use of flanking restriction sites to shuttle cloned cDNAs (39) into the
appropriate expression vectors. Mouse cJun cDNA cloned into the pCMV2
expression vector was provided by L. McCabe (Michigan State University,
East Lansing, MI).
Cell Culture, Transfection, and CAT Assays
Cos7 and Hela cells were grown in phenol red-free DMEM
supplemented with 10% calf-serum, 5 mM HEPES (pH 7.4), 2
mM glutamine, penicillin (50 U/ml), and streptomycin (50
µg/ml). Cells were transfected by the CaPO4
method, as previously described (52). HeLa cells (
2 x
10-6 cells per 100-mm dish) were transfected
with 1 µg of the indicated ER
expression plasmid, 2 µg of the
cJun expression plasmid (where indicated) and 16 µg of the
estrogen-responsive reporter plasmid, pERE-TK-CAT (53) or pOvalb-CAT (a
reporter gene construct containing -1342 to +7 bp of the chicken
ovalbumin promoter relative to its transcription start site) (42). Calf
thymus DNA (10 µg) was added as carrier. After overnight incubation
with DNA, culture medium was replaced with 5% charcoal-treated
serum-supplemented DMEM containing the indicated hormones. After a 24-h
incubation, cells were harvested and CAT assays were performed as
previously described (54) using 100 µg protein. Quantification of CAT
activities was performed by phosphorimage analysis of thin layer
chromatographs (ImageQuaNT, Molecular Dynamics, Inc.,
Sunnyvale, CA). For experiments involving biochemical or cytochemical
analysis of ER
variants, Cos7 cells were similarly transfected with
10 µg of the indicated expression plasmid and 10 µg of calf thymus
carrier DNA. After overnight exposure to DNA, cells were cultured for
48 h in 10% calf serum-supplemented DMEM. All experiments
involving extracts from transfected cells were normalized with respect
to protein, as measured using the method of Lowry et al.
(55). Two-way ANOVA and comparison with Students t test
were used to assess statistical differences between groups. Statistical
significance was set at the P < 0.05 or
P < 0.001 level as indicated in Figs. 7
and 8
.
E2 Binding Analysis
Ligand-binding assays were performed as previously described
(40). Whole-cell extracts were prepared from transfected Cos7 cells
that were resuspended and sonicated in extraction buffer (20
mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 20% glycerol, 0.4 M KCl, 1
mM MgCl2) supplemented immediately
before use with protease inhibitors (0.05 mg/ml each of chymostatin,
trypsin inhibitor, antipain, leupeptin, aprotinin, and pepstatin).
Aliquots containing 200 µg of protein were incubated overnight at 4 C
with various concentrations (0.1 nM10 nM) of
3H-labeled E2 (NEN Life Science Products, Boston, MA) in the presence or absence of
a 200-fold molar excess of unlabeled E2. Free
ligand was separated from bound ligand by treatment with dextran-coated
charcoal. For determination of equilibrium binding constants, these
data were plotted according to the method of Scatchard (56).
DNA Binding Assays
DNA binding assays were performed as previously described (40).
Aliquots containing 30 µg of protein from extracts prepared as above
from transfected Cos7 cells were preincubated for 15 min at room
temperature in 10 µl binding buffer [10 mM HEPES (pH
7.4), 1 mM MgCl2, 1 mM
dithiothreitol, and 20% glycerol] containing 1 µg poly (dI-dC),
with or without 1 µl of added human ER-specific monoclonal antibody
(Mab-17), generated as described by Neff et al. (40).
Approximately 6 fmol (40,000 cpm) of a 32P-labeled
double-stranded ERE oligonucleotide (39) were added to the samples and
incubated for 30 min at room temperature, followed by an additional
5-min incubation at 4 C. Samples were then loaded on a
preelectrophoresed nondenaturing 5% polyacrylamide gel that was run in
0.5 x Tris-Borate-EDTA at 275 V for 2 h. The gel was dried
and exposed for autoradiography.
Immunoblot Analysis
Discontinuous 12% SDS-PAGE was carried out as previously
described (57). After electrophoresis of 30 µg of whole-cell protein
from extracts of transfected Cos7 cells, proteins were
electrophoretically transferred to nitrocellulose filters with a Trans
Blot apparatus (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. Richmond, CA)
using the procedure of Erickson et al. (58). Immunoblots
were probed with the ER-specific monoclonal antibody, Mab-17, obtained
from a hybridoma culture supernate that was diluted with an equal
volume of PBS (40). Immunoreactive protein was visualized by enhanced
chemiluminescence using a horseradish peroxidase-conjugated goat
antimouse IgG, following manufacturers instructions (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Arlington Heights, IL).
In Vitro Protein-Protein Interaction Assays
Variant and wt ER
receptor protein was translated in the
presence of [35S]methionine using the TNT
Coupled Reticulocyte System (Promega Corp., Madison, WI).
GST-fusion proteins were expressed in the pGEX system (Pharmacia Biotech, Uppsala, Sweden) (45, 59). Overnight cultures of
transformed bacteria were diluted 1:20 and cultured for 2 h before
protein expression was induced with the addition of isopropyl
ß-D-thiogalactoside (IPTG, 0.2 mM final
concentration). Bacteria were collected by centrifugation 2 h
following IPTG induction, and pellets were resuspended in 400 µl of
extraction buffer supplemented with protease inhibitors. Cells were
sonicated briefly, and the resulting lysates were centrifuged for 20
min at 20,000 rpm, 4 C. Protein concentrations were determined (55) and
extracts were diluted to 2 µg/µl extraction buffer and stored at
-70 C until binding assays were performed.
Before use in protein interaction assays, 25 µl of
glutathione-Sepharose 4B beads (Pharmacia Biotech) were
washed three times in 100 µl NETN [0.5% Nonidet P-40, 1
mM EDTA, 20 mM Tris (pH 8.0) 100 mM
NaCl] and suspended in 100 µl NETN, 0.5% powdered milk. Washed
beads were incubated with 40 µg of GST-fusion protein for 2 h,
rotating at room temperature. Beads complexed with GST-fusion proteins
were washed three times with 100 µl NETN, 4 C. For protein-protein
interaction assays, 5 µl of in vitro translated receptor
were added to washed complexed beads resuspended in 100 µl NETN
supplemented with protease inhibitors (as above) with and without 2.5
µM E2. After a 2-h
incubation during which the samples were rotated at room temperature,
the beads were pelleted and washed four times with 100 µl NETN, 4 C.
Bound proteins were separated on a discontinuous 10% polyacrylamide
SDS-PAGE gel (57). The gels were dried and exposed for
autoradiography.
Immunohistochemical and Cytochemical Analysis
Indirect immunofluorescence analysis was performed as previously
described (40) using Cos7 cells that were plated and transfected on
glass cover slips. On the second day after transfection, cells
were washed three times with Tris-buffered saline (TBS), fixed for 3
min in cold 95% methanol, rehydrated by three washes with TBS, and
incubated 30 min at 37 C with primary antibody (Mab-17 hybridoma
supernate used at a 1:10 dilution in TBS). Bound antibody was detected
by staining with a rhodamine-conjugated affinity-purified goat
antimouse IgG (Roche Molecular Biochemicals, Indianapolis,
IN) diluted 1:2000 in TBS, and incubating for 30 min at 37 C in the
presence of 0.02 µg/ml of 4',6-diamidine-2-phenylindole
dihydrochloride. Confocal images were recorded using the Odyssey system
(Noran Instruments, Middleton, WI) on an Optiphot 2 Nikon
(Melville, NY) microscope. Fluorescent ligand staining of transfected
Cos7 cells was performed as described by Miksicek et al.
(41) on live, whole-cell mounts treated in DMEM with
10-7 M nitrile THC. For
these studies, cells were visualized using a Nikon UFX
microscope equipped with a 100 watt mercury lamp for fluorescence
excitation, and a 40 x 0.7 numerical aperture Plan objective.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
---|
We are grateful to Malcolm G. Parker for kindly providing us
with the GST-fusion constructs, to M. Sanders for pOvalb-CAT, and to L.
McCabe for pCMV2-cJun. We would also like to thank M. Morrison and D.
Ankrapp for helpful suggestions during the course of this work.
 |
FOOTNOTES
|
---|
Address requests for reprints to: Richard J. Miksicek, Department of Physiology, 108 Giltner Hall, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1101.
This work was supported by Awards DAMD1794-J-4372 and DAMD17991-9293
to R.J.M. and A.B. from the US Army Breast Cancer Research Program.
Received for publication February 15, 1999.
Revision received January 31, 2000.
Accepted for publication February 3, 2000.
 |
REFERENCES
|
---|
-
Beato M, Sanchez-Pacheco A 1996 Interaction of steroid
hormone receptors with the transcription initiation complex. Endocr Rev 17:587609[Medline]
-
Kumar V, Chambon P 1988 The estrogen receptor binds tightly
to its responsive element as a ligand-induced homodimer. Cell 55:145156[Medline]
-
Tsai M-J, OMalley BW 1994 Molecular mechanisms of action of
steroid/thyroid receptor superfamily members. Annu Rev Biochem 63:451486[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Dickson Rb, Johnson MD, el-Ashry D, Shi YE, Ban O, Zugmaier
G, Ziff B, Lippman ME, Chysogelos S 1993 Breast cancer: influence of
endocrine hormones, growth factors and genetic alterations. Adv Exp Med
Biol 330:119141[Medline]
-
Haslam SZ 1987 Role of sex steroid hormones in normal mammary
gland function. In: Neville MC, Daniel CW (eds) The Mammary Gland.
Plenum, New York, pp 499533
-
Kaufmann M 1997 A review of endocrine options for the
treatment of advanced breast cancer. Oncology 54[Suppl 2]:25
-
Clarke M, Collins R et al. 1998 Tamoxifen for early breast
cancer: an overview of randomised trials. Lancet 351:14511467[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Smigel K 1998 Breast cancer prevention trial shows major
benefit, some risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 90:647648[Free Full Text]
-
Huston L 1999 Raloxifene reduces breast cancer risk. Lancet 353:44[CrossRef]
-
Kuipper GGJM, Enmark E, PeltoHuikko M, Nilsson S, Gustafsson
JA 1996 Cloning of a novel estrogen receptor expressed in rat prostate
and ovary. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:59255930[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Mosselman S, Polman J, Dijkema R 1996 ERß:
identification and characterization of a novel human estrogen receptor.
FEBS Lett 392:4953[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Castles CG, Klotz DM, Fuqua SAW, Hill SM 1995 Coexpression of
wild-type and variant oestrogen receptor mRNAs in a panel of human
breast cancer cell lines. Br J Cancer 71:974980[Medline]
-
Gotteland M, Desauty G, Delarue JC, Liu L, May E 1995 Human
estrogen receptor messenger RNA variants in both normal and tumor
breast tissues. Mol Cell Endocrinol 112:113[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Miksicek RJ, Lei Y, Wang Y 1993 Exon skipping gives rise to
alternatively spliced forms of the estrogen receptor in breast tumor
cells. Breast Cancer Res Treat 26:163179[Medline]
-
Murphy LC, Leygue E, Dotzlaw H, Douglas D, Coutts A, Watson PH 1997 Oestrogen receptor variants and mutations in human breast cancer.
Ann Med 29:221234[Medline]
-
Metzger D, Ali S, Bonnert JM, Chambon P 1995 Characterization
of the amino-terminal transcriptional activation function of the human
estrogen receptor in animal and yeast cells. J Biol Chem 270:95359542[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Webb P, Nguyen P, Shinsako J, Anderson C, Feng W, Nguyen MP,
Chen D, Katzenellenbogen BS, Stallcup MR, Kushner PJ 1998 Estrogen
receptor activation function 1 works by binding p160 coactivator
proteins. Mol Endocrinol 12:16051618[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kumar V, Green S, Stack G, Berry M, Jin JR, Chambon P 1987 Functional domains of the human estrogen receptor. Cell 51:941951[Medline]
-
Ylikomi T, Bocquel MT, Berry M, Chambon P 1992 Cooperation of
protosignals for nuclear accumulation of estrogen and progesterone
receptors. EMBO J 11:36813694[Abstract]
-
Kumar V, Guren S, Staub A, Chambon P 1986 Localization of the
oestradiol-binding and putative DNA binding domain of the human
oestrogen receptor. EMBO J 5:22312236[Abstract]
-
Horowitz KB, Jackson TA, Bain DL, Richer JK, Takimoto GS, Tung
L 1996 Nuclear receptor coactivators and corepressors. Mol Endocrinol 10:11671177[Abstract]
-
Castles CG, Fuqua SAW, Klotz DM, Hill SM 1993 Expression of a
constitutively active estrogen receptor variant in the estrogen
receptor-negative BT-20 human breast cancer cell line. Cancer Res 53:59345939[Abstract]
-
Fuqua SAW, Fitzgerald SD, Chamness GC, Tandon AK, McDonnell
DP, Nawaz Z, OMally BW, McGuire WL 1991 Variant human breast tumor
estrogen receptor with constitutive transcriptional activity. Cancer
Res 51:105109[Abstract]
-
Fuqua SAW, Wolf DM 1995 Molecular aspects of estrogen receptor
variants in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 35:233241[Medline]
-
Chaidarun SS, Alexander JM 1998 A tumor-specific truncated
estrogen receptor splice variant enhances estrogen-stimulated gene
expression. Mol Endocrinol 12:13551366[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Wiseman LR, Johnson MD, Wakeling AE, Lykkesfeldt AE, May FEB,
Westley BR 1993 Type I IGF receptor and acquired tamoxifen resistance
in oestrogen-responsive human breast cancer cells. Eur J Cancer
29A:22562264
-
Wolf DM, Jordan VC 1994 Characterization of tamoxifen
stimulated MCF-7 tumor variants grown in athymic mice. Breast Cancer
Res Treat 31:117127[Medline]
-
Rea D, Parker MG 1996 Effects of an exon 5 variant of the
estrogen receptor in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Cancer Res 56:15561563[Abstract]
-
Gaub MP, Bellard M, Scheuer I, Chambon P, Sassone-Corsi P 1990 Activation of the ovalbumin gene by the estrogen receptor involves the
Fos-Jun complex. Cell 63:12671276[Medline]
-
Uht RM, Anderson CM, Webb P, Kushner PJ 1997 Transcriptional
activities of estrogen and glucocorticoid receptors are functionally
integrated at the AP-1 response element. Endocrinology 138:29002908[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Umayahara Y, Kawamori R, Watada H, Imano E, Iwama N, Morishima
T, Yamasaki Y, Kajimoto Y, Kamada T 1994 Estrogen regulation of the
insulin-like growth factor I gene transcription involves an AP-1
enhancer. J Biol Chem 269:1643316442[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Webb P, Lopez GN, Uht RM, Kushner PJ 1995 Tamoxifen activation
of the estrogen receptor/AP-1 pathway: potential origin for the
cell-specific estrogen-like effects of antiestrogens. Mol Endocrinol 9:443456[Abstract]
-
Boyle WJ, Smeal T, Defize LHK, Angel P, Woodgett JR,
Karin M, Hunter T 1991 Activation of protein kinase C decreases
phosphorylation of cJun at sites that negatively regulate its
DNA-binding activity. Cell 64:573584[Medline]
-
Westwick JK, Weitzel C, Minden A, Karin M, Brenner DA 1994 Tumor necrosis factor a simulates AP-1 activity through prolonged
activation of the c-Jun kinase. J Biol Chem 269:263926401
-
Tora L, Gaub MP, Mader S, Dierich A, Bellard M, Chambon P 1988 Cell-specific activity of a GGTCA half-palindromic oestrogen-responsive
element in the chicken ovalbumin gene promoter. EMBO J 7:37713778[Abstract]
-
Ernst M, Rodan GA 1991 Estradiol regulation of insulin-like
growth factor-1 expression in osteoblastic cells: evidence for
transcriptional control. Mol Endocrinol 5:10811089[Abstract]
-
Murphy LJ, Ghahary A 1990 Uterine insulin-like growth
factor-1: regulation of expression and its role in estrogen-induced
uterine proliferation. Endocr Rev 3:443453
-
Ohlsson H, Lykkesfeldt AE, Madsen MW, Briand P 1998 The
estrogen receptor variant lacking exon 5 has dominant negative activity
in the human breast epithelial cell line HMT-3522S1. Cancer Res 58:42644268[Abstract]
-
Wang Y, Miksicek RJ 1991 Identification of a dominant negative
form of the human estrogen receptor. Mol Endocrinol 5:17071715[Abstract]
-
Neff S, Sadowski C, Miksicek RJ 1994 Mutational analysis of
cysteine residues within the hormone-binding domain of the human
estrogen receptor identifies mutants that are defective in both
DNA-binding and subcellular distribution. Mol Endocrinol 8:12151223[Abstract]
-
Miksicek RJ, Carlson KE, Hwang K-J, Katzenellenbogen JA 1995 Studies using fluorescent tetrahydrochrysene estrogens for in
situ visualization of the estrogen receptor in living cells. Mol
Endocrinol 9:592604[Abstract]
-
Schweers LA, Frank DE, Weigel NL, Sanders MM 1990 The
steroid-dependent regulatory element in the ovalbumin gene does not
function as a typical steroid-response element. J Biol Chem 265:75907595[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Erenburg I, Schachter B, Mira y Lopez R, Ossowski l 1997 Loss
of an estrogen receptor isoform (ER

E3) in breast cancer and
the consequences of its reexpression: interference with
estrogen-stimulated properties of malignant transformation. Mol
Endocrinol 11:20042015[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Fuqua SAW, Fitzgerald SD, Allred DC, Elledge RM, Nawaz Z,
McDonnell DP, OMalley BW, Green GL, McGuire WL 1992 Inhibition of
estrogen receptor action by a naturally occurring variant in human
breast tumors. Cancer Res 52:483486[Abstract]
-
Kalkhoven E, Valentine JE, Heery DM, Parker MG 1998 Isoforms
of steroid receptor co-activator 1 differ in their ability to
potentiate transcription by the oestrogen receptor. EMBO J 17:232243[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Feng W, Ribeiro RCJ, Wagner RL, Nguyen H, Apriletti JW,
Fletterick RJ, Baxter JD, Kushner PJ, West BL 1998 Hormone-dependent
coactivator binding to a hydrophobic cleft on nuclear receptors.
Science 280:17471749[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Oñate SA, Tsai SY, Tsai M-J, OMalley BW 1995 Sequence
and characterization of a coactivator for the steroid hormone receptor
superfamily. Science 270:13541357[Abstract]
-
Xu J, Qiu Y, DeMayo FJ, Tsai SY, Tsai M-J, OMalley BW 1998 Partial hormone resistance in mice with disruption of the steroid
receptor coactivator-1 (SRC-1) gene. Science 279:19221925[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Vogel JJ, Heine MJS, Zechel C, Chambon P, Grone-meyer H 1996 TIF2, a 160 kDa transcriptional mediator for the ligand-dependent
activation function AF-2 of nuclear receptors. EMBO J 15:36673675[Abstract]
-
McInery EM, Tsai MJ, OMalley BW, Katzenellenbogen BS 1996 Analysis of estrogen receptor transcriptional enhancement by a nuclear
hormone receptor coactivator. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:1006910073[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Andersson S, Davis DN, Dahlback H, Jornvall H, Russell
DW 1989 Cloning, structure, and expression of the mitochondrial
cytochrome P450 sterol 26-hydroxylase, a bile acid biosynthetic enzyme.
J Biol Chem 264:82228229[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Jordan M, Schallhorn A, Wurm FM 1996 Transfecting mammalian
cells: optimization of critical parameters affecting calcium-phosphate
precipitate formation. Nucleic Acids Res 24:596601[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Klock G, Strähle U, Schütz G 1987 Oestrogen and
glucocorticoid responsive elements are closely related but distinct.
Nature 329:734736[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Gorman CM, Moffat LF, Howard BH 1982 Recombinant genomes which
express chloramphenicol acetyltransferase in mammalian cells. Mol Cell
Biol 2:10441051[Medline]
-
Lowry OH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL, Randall RJ 1951 Protein
measurement with the folin phenol reagent. J Biol Chem 193:265275[Free Full Text]
-
Scatchard G 1949 The attractions of proteins for small
molecules and ions. Ann NY Acad Sci 51:660672
-
Laemmli UK 1970 Cleavage of structural proteins during
assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 227:680685[Medline]
-
Erickson PF, Minier LN, Lasher RS 1982 Quantitative
electrophoretic transfer of polypeptides from SDS polyacrylamide gels
to nitrocellulose sheets: a method for their re-use in
immunoautoradiographic detection of antigens. J Immunol Methods 51:241249[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Cavailles V, Dauvois S, Danielian PS, Parker MG 1994 Interaction of proteins with transcriptionally active estrogen
receptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:1000910013