Effect of Overexpression of Progesterone Receptor A on Endogenous Progestin-Sensitive Endpoints in Breast Cancer Cells
Eileen M. McGowan and
Christine L. Clarke
Westmead Institute for Cancer Research University of Sydney
Westmead Hospital Westmead, New South Wales 2145, Australia
 |
ABSTRACT
|
---|
The human progesterone receptor (PR) is expressed
as two isoforms, PRA and PRB, which differ in the N-terminal region and
exhibit different activities in vitro, with PRA
demonstrating dominant negative inhibitory effects on the activity of
PRB and other nuclear receptors. PRA and PRB are expressed in target
tissues at comparable levels although cells expressing a predominance
of one isoform can be identified. In breast cancers, PRA is expressed
at high levels in some tumors, and this may be associated with features
of poorer prognosis. To investigate the role of PRA overexpression in
PR-positive target cells, the effect of PRA induction on cell
proliferation and expression of endogenous progestin-sensitive genes,
SOX4 and fatty acid synthetase (FAS), was examined using PR-positive
T-47D cell lines, which express a predominance of PRB, in which PRA
could be increased 2- to 20-fold over basal levels. No effect of PRA
induction was noted on cell proliferation, but marked changes in
morphology, consistent with loss of adherent properties, were observed.
Increases up to 4-fold in the relative PRA levels augmented
progestin induction of SOX4 mRNA expression, and RU486 treatment
revealed a progestin agonist effect. There was no consistent effect of
PRA induction on progestin-mediated increases in FAS mRNA levels under
these conditions. Clones with PRA:PRB ratios greater than 15 were
associated with diminished progestin responses on both SOX4 and FAS
mRNA expression. These data show that PRA overexpression is associated
with alteration in adhesive properties in breast cancer cells and
effects on endogenous progestin targets that were dependent on the
cellular ratio of PRA:PRB. The results of this study are consistent
with the view that PRA expression can fluctuate within a broad range in
target cells without influencing the nature of progestin action on
downstream targets, but that overexpression of PRA, such as is seen in
a proportion of breast cancers, may be associated with inhibition of
progestin action and features of poor prognosis.
 |
INTRODUCTION
|
---|
The steroid hormone progesterone plays a pivotal role in
normal female development and reproduction (1) through its interaction
with the nuclear progesterone receptor (PR). The expression of human PR
is controlled by two promoters (2) that direct the synthesis of mRNA
transcripts encoding two receptor proteins, PRB and PRA, in breast
cancer cells (3). The two proteins are identical except that the
shorter A protein is N-terminally truncated by 164 amino acids. PRA and
PRB are coexpressed in the same target cells in the human (4), and
their relative expression, where it has been examined, generally is
close to unity (1) although cells expressing a predominance of one of
the isoforms are observed in target tissues under some physiological
circumstances (4). PRA is the predominant isoform in the rodent (1) and
is widely expressed in the macaque reproductive system (5) and in the
human uterus (4, 6). In breast cancers, high levels of PRA can occur:
previous studies using immunoblot analysis documented very high levels
of PRA (up to 100 fold higher than PRB) in a subset of breast tumors
(7). Transgenic mice overexpressing PRA exhibited features in their
mammary glands that were abnormal and commonly associated with
neoplasia (8), and in vitro studies have suggested that
poorly differentiated endometrial cancer cells express only PRA
(9).
The PRA and B proteins have different capacities to activate target
genes, and regions of the PR protein to which these different effects
can be attributed have been identified (10, 11, 12). Insights into the
different transcriptional activities of PRA and PRB have been obtained
by transient cotransfection of PRA and/or PRB and reporter constructs
containing progestin-responsive sequences ranging from the simple
PRE-tk-chloramphenicol acetyl transferase (CAT) [containing one copy
of a palindromic progesterone responsive element (PRE)] to more
complex constructs such as those incorporating the mouse mammary tumor
virus long terminal repeat (MMTV-LTR), which contains multiple
hormone-responsive elements, into a variety of cell lines (13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19). In
all cell types examined, PRB exhibited hormone-dependent
transactivation irrespective of the complexity of the response
elements, whereas the transcriptional activity of PRA was cell- and
reporter specific. Interestingly, PRA acted as a transdominant
inhibitor of PRB where PRA had little or no transactivational activity
(14, 18) and, moreover, PRA regulated the transcriptional activity of
other nuclear receptors such as glucocorticoid, mineralocorticoid,
androgen, and estrogen (14, 15, 18, 20, 21), suggesting that PRA may
play a central role in regulation of activity of a number of nuclear
receptors in addition to PRB.
The different transcriptional activities of PRA and B, and the
inhibitory activity of PRA in vitro, suggest that tissues
that express different relative levels of the two proteins, and in
particular high levels of PRA, may have impaired responsiveness to
progesterone and other nuclear receptor ligands. However, while
transient transfection studies have yielded important insights into the
mechanisms of PRA and PRB transactivation, most have been carried out
in cells that are not normally progestin targets, and the endpoints
examined have consisted of hormone-responsive elements linked to
reporter sequences. Consequently, little is known of the effect of
altering the ratio of PRA and PRB in PR-positive cells, in particular
on endogenous targets of progesterone action. In this study, to examine
the significance of overexpression of PRA on endogenous
progestin-responsive targets, PR positive T-47D breast cancer cell
lines have been constructed in which PRA can be induced 2- to 20-fold,
allowing manipulation of PRA levels and consequently of the ratio of
PRA:PRB in favor of PRA. The consequence of PRA overexpression on
endogenous progestin-sensitive endpoints has been examined, including
cell proliferation, cell morphology, and expression of SOX4, which is
directly transcriptionally regulated by progestin (22) and the
progestin-sensitive gene fatty acid synthetase (FAS) (23).
 |
RESULTS
|
---|
Construction and Sequence Verification of the pOP13 hPRA
Plasmid
The pOP13 hPRA plasmid was sequenced in both sense and antisense
directions using PRA- and pOP13-specific primers. Three nucleotide base
changes were observed within the hPRA coding sequence, which differed
from the published sequence (GenBank accession X51730). A change from A
to G (AGC = GGC) at position 2130 was noted, which would result in
an amino acid change from serine to glycine. A change from TGT to GTC
at positions 22202222 was noted, which would result in an amino acid
change from cysteine to valine. Amplification of these regions in
genomic DNA indicated that the sequences observed in the plasmid were
identical to those observed in genomic DNA but differed from the
published sequence. A change from C to T at position 2633, resulting in
a silent base change, was observed in the pOP13 hPRA plasmid and was
present in pSG5-hPR1, but not in genomic DNA or the published
sequence.
Characterization of T-47DhPRA Cell Lines
After sequence verification, the pOP13-hPRA plasmid was used
to construct stable transfectants of two breast cancer cell lines:
T-47D cells, which contain both PRA and PRB, with PRB predominating,
and an ER-positive, PR-negative clone of MCF-7M cells, MCF-7M11 cells,
in which PR was undetectable by Northern blot and immunoblot analysis.
T-47D cells were chosen to construct cell lines in which PRA levels
could be manipulated, as they are PR positive and highly progestin
responsive and have been used extensively in published studies as a
model to examine PR action. A PR-negative MCF-7 clone was used to
constitutively express PRA, to characterize the activity of PRA encoded
by the pOP13-hPRA plasmid, in the absence of endogenous PRA or PRB, but
in a context, when PR is expressed (as in the wild-type MCF-7 cells),
where progestin response is normally seen.
T-47D clonal cell lines constitutively expressing the
lac repressor protein predominantly expressed PRB (PRA:PRB
ratio, 0.560.89), and the ratio of the two PR isoforms was stable in
these lines upon passage (data not shown). Transfection of the
pOP13-hPRA plasmid into these clonal cell lines yielded 18 cell lines
(T-47DhPRA cells): 5 of these were examined further (Fig. 1
; T-47DhPRAN3, -N4, -N5, and -E3) and
T-47DhPRAB8 (not shown). The basal level of PR expression and the
relative expression of PRA and PRB were similar in T-47DhPRA cells and
in the parent lines (
Figs. 68

and data not shown), indicating little
expression of PRA from the pOP13-hPRA plasmid in the absence of
induction using isopropyl-ß-thiogalactosidase (IPTG), except in the
case of the N5 (Fig. 1
) and B8 (not shown) cell lines, which displayed
basal levels of PRA greater than PRB, suggesting incomplete suppression
of the pOP13-hPRA plasmid in these cell lines. Induction of PRA
expression using IPTG, which sequestered the lac repressor
and allowed transcription from the pOP13-hPRA plasmid, resulted in
induction of PRA over basal levels (Fig. 1
): this caused a marked
change in the ratio of PRA:PRB, in favor of PRA (PRA:PRB ratio ranged
from 220 in all the cell lines examined).

View larger version (62K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Characterization of PRA and PRB Expression in
T-47DhPRA Cell Lines
T-47DhPRA cell lines were constructed using the Lac-Switch
inducible mammalian expression system as described in Materials
and Methods. The figure shows immunoblot analysis (30 µg
total protein/lane) of T-47DhPRAN3, -N4, -N5, and -E3 cells stably
expressing both the p3'SS and the pOP13 hPRA plasmids. Cells were
treated with IPTG (+; 10 mM) or vehicle (-). PRA:PRB
ratios were calculated after quantitative densitometry.
|
|

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. Progestin Effect on SOX4 mRNA Expression in
T-47DhPRA Cells
T-47DhPRA cells were treated with IPTG (10 mM) for
24 h before treating with ORG2058 (10 nM). Cells were
harvested 24 h later and total RNA and cytosol protein
prepared. A, Northern blots (30 µg RNA/lane) were probed with SOX4
cDNA and then stripped and reprobed for 18S rRNA. PRA and B protein
were visualized on immunoblots (25 µg cytosol protein/lane). B,
Histogram of SOX4 expression (AU) after correcting for loading:
hatched bars, -IPTG; open bars, +IPTG.
PRA:PRB ratio is indicated above the bars. C,
Squares, triangles, diamonds, and crosses
show the results from four separate experiments.
|
|

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7. Progestin Effect on Endogenous FAS mRNA in
T-47DhPRA
RNA and protein were run on Northern and immunoblots and probed for
SOX4 mRNA and PR protein as described in the legend to Fig. 6 . A, The
figure is a composite of two blots, one blot containing the data for
T-57D-N, T-47DhPRAN4 cells and the other blot containing the data for
T-47DhPRAE3 cells; each blot was derived from a separate experiment. B,
Histogram of FAS expression as described in Fig. 6 . C, Squares,
triangles, diamonds, and crosses show the
results from four separate experiments.
|
|

View larger version (87K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 8. Progestin and Antiprogestin Effects on Endogenous
FAS and SOX4 mRNA in T-47DhPRA Cells
T-47DE parent cells and T-47DhPRAE3 and -N5 cells were treated with
IPTG (10 mM) or vehicle for 24 h and then treated with
ORG2058 (10 nM), RU486 (100 nM), or their
combination. Cells were incubated for a further 24 h before
harvesting and preparation of total RNA and cytosol protein. Northern
blots (30 µg total RNA/lane) were probed for FAS and SOX4 mRNA and
reprobed for ß-actin as a loading control. PRA and B proteins were
visualized on immunoblots (25 µg cytosol protein/lane).
|
|
Time- and Concentration Dependence of PRA Induction in
T-47DhPRA Cells
The time- and concentration dependence of PRA induction in
T-47DhPRA cells were measured in two T-47DhPRA cell lines, T-47DhPRA-E3
(Fig. 2
) and T-47DhPRA-N4 (data not
shown), and similar results were obtained for each cell line. Increases
in PRA protein levels were observed as early as 4 h after IPTG
treatment and continued to 48 h (Fig. 2
) and 72 h (data not
shown) thereafter. The increase in PRA protein after IPTG treatment was
consistent with increased transcription of mRNA encoding PRA from the
pOP13-hPRA plasmid, and no IPTG-mediated increase in endogenous PR
transcripts was observed (Fig. 2C
, inset). There was no
difference in PRA induction at the IPTG concentrations tested (Fig. 2B
), or if the IPTG concentration was increased to 20 mM
(data not shown). An increase in basal PRA levels was observed in
untreated cells over time (Fig. 2
, A and B). This was also noted for
PRB (data not shown) and has been described previously, probably as a
consequence of time in culture (Ref. 24 and our unpublished
results).

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. Time- and Concentration Dependence of PRA Induction
in T-47DhPRAE3 Cells
T-47DhPRAE3 cells were treated with IPTG (1, 5, or 10 mM)
or vehicle, 24 h after seeding and cells were harvested 7, 12, 24,
31, and 48 h thereafter. A, Representative immunoblot (30 µg
total protein/lane). B, Levels of PRA and PRB in arbitrary units (AU)
calculated after quantitative densitometry. Inset shows
an immunoblot of PRA and PRB protein at 48 h. , Vehicle; , 1
mM IPTG; , 5 mM IPTG; , 10 mM
IPTG. C, Total RNA was isolated 24 h and 48 h after IPTG
treatment and PR mRNA levels detected by Northern blot (20 µg/lane).
Arrow indicates the major 11.4-kb endogenous PR
transcript; pOP13hPRA indicates the position of the PRA transcript
encoded by the plasmid. Inset shows fold induction of
pOP13-hPRA transcript (open bars) compared with the
predominant 11.4-kb PR mRNA transcript (stippled bars)
after correction for loading. The data are representative of two
experiments in separate T-47DhPRA clones in which the same results were
observed.
|
|
Progestin Effect on Cell Proliferation and Morphology in T-47DhPRA
Cells
The doubling time of T-47DhPRA cells stably expressing the
pOP13-hPRA plasmid was similar to that of the parent cells expressing
only the plasmid encoding the lac repressor (Fig. 3
) and to that of wild-type T-47D cells
(data not shown). Induction of PRA had no effect on cell proliferation
(Fig. 3
, compare circles and diamonds) in the
absence of the progestin ligand. Treatment with progestin resulted in
growth inhibition in the parent T-47DE and in the T-47DhPRAE3 cells,
and there was no difference in the effect seen in cells in which PRA
had been induced by IPTG (Fig. 3A
, compare squares and
triangles), when cell proliferation was measured using an
assay based on cell viability. However, when cell counts were
determined, it was noted that induction of PRA resulted in a greater
loss of cells from the monolayer than that observed in the absence of
PRA induction (Fig. 3B
, T-47DhPRAE3 cells, compare squares
with triangles). This effect was noted consistently in four
additional T-47DhPRA clonal cell lines (data not shown). Prolonged
exposure to progestin for longer than 6 days resulted in a more
pronounced effect on PRA-overexpressing cells. Cells in which PRA had
been induced were more sensitive at these late time points to the
growth-inhibitory effects of progestins, and maximal effects that were
greater than those seen in uninduced cells were observed (data not
shown).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. Progestin Effect on Cell Proliferation in T-47DhPRA
Cells
T-47DE and T-47DhPRAE3 cells were seeded in 96-well plates or
25-cm2 flasks at a density of 2 x 104
cells/ml as described in Materials and Methods. Twenty
four hours later (day -2) the medium was supplemented with IPTG (10
mM) or vehicle. Cells were treated with ORG2058 (10
nM) or vehicle on day -1. A, Cell proliferation was
measured using the CellTiter 96 nonradioactive cell proliferation assay
on days -2, -1, 2, 4, and 6. B, Cell number was determined by
hemocytometer on days -2, 0, 3, and 5. , Vehicle; , ORG2058 (10
nM); , IPTG (10 mM); , IPTG (10
mM) and ORG2058 (10 nM). All experiments were
performed in triplicate and the data expressed as mean ±
SEM. Where the error bars are not visible, they did not
exceed the size of the symbol.
|
|
Examination of the morphology of T-47DhPRA cells revealed that
progestin treatment of cells in which PRA had been induced caused
rounding and detachment of cells from the monolayer (Fig. 4
, D and F) compared with cells treated
with progestin without PRA induction (Fig. 4
, C and E). Cells that
detached from the monolayer retained viability, as evidenced by the
assay shown in Fig. 3A
, and also by their ability to readhere to tissue
culture flasks in fresh medium lacking progestin (data not shown).
Induction of PRA in the absence of progestin had no effect on cell
morphology (Fig. 4
, compare A and B).

View larger version (128K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. Effect of Progestin Treatment on Morphology of
T47DhPRA Cells
T-47DhPRAE3 cells were seeded in 75-cm2 flasks at a density
of 2 x 104 cells/ml and treated with IPTG and ORG2058
as described in the legend to Fig. 3 . Cells were photographed on days
0, 2, 3, and 4 after ORG2058 treatment. Panels AD show the morphology
of the cells at day 3 (magnification 170x): A, vehicle; B, IPTG (10
mM); C, ORG2058 (10 nM); D, IPTG (10
mM) and ORG2058 (10 nM). E and F, High
magnification views, day 4 after ORG2058 treatment: E, ORG2058 (10
nM); F, IPTG (10 mM) and ORG2058 (10
nM) (magnification 340x).
|
|
Transcriptional Activity of PRA in PR-Negative MCF-7M11 Cells
Stably Transfected with the pOP13 hPRA Plasmid
To document the transcriptional activity of the PRA protein
encoded by the pOP13-hPRA plasmid, PRA was constitutively expressed by
stable expression of this plasmid in PR-negative MCF-7M11 cells,
without the lac repressor encoding (p3'SS) plasmid. Activity
of the PRA protein encoded by the pOP13- hPRA plasmid was
determined by evaluation of its ability to down-regulate estrogen
receptor (ER) and its ability to induce the progestin-responsive
pMSG-CAT reporter. PRA protein was detected in MCF-7M11 cells after
stable expression, with the expected progestin-mediated increase in
size being observed (Fig. 5C
). Progestin
treatment of MCF-7M11 hPRA cells resulted in down-regulation of ER mRNA
expression (Fig. 5A
), a previously described effect of progestin on ER
expression (25), and increased activity of the transiently transfected
pMSG-CAT plasmid (Fig. 5B
), demonstrating the activity of PRA encoded
by the pOP13-hPRA plasmid. PR protein was absent in MCF-7M11 parent
cells, and there was no effect of progestin treatment on either ER mRNA
levels or on pMSG-CAT activity in these cells (Fig. 5
).

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. Transcriptional Activity of PRA Encoded by
pOP13- hPRA Plasmid
MCF-7M11 and MCF-7M11 cells stably transfected with pOP13 hPRA
(MCF-7M11 hPRA cells) were treated with ORG2058 (10 nM) (+)
or vehicle (-) for 24 h before harvesting and preparation of
total RNA and protein. A, Northern blots (30 µg total RNA/lane)
hybridized with a cDNA probe for ER. Blots were stripped and reprobed
for 18S rRNA. B, PR protein was visualized on immunoblots (25 µg
cytosol protein lane). C, MCF-7M11 and MCF-7M11 hPRA cells were
transiently transfected with pMSG-CAT and CAT activity measured after
treatment (24 h) with ORG2058 (10 nM) or vehicle. Data were
normalized for transfection efficiency by cotransfection with a plasmid
encoding ß-galactosidase, pCH110. Experiments were performed in
triplicate and the data expressed as the mean fold induction ±
SEM.
|
|
Effects of Increased hPRA Expression on Endogenous
Progestin-Responsive Genes in T-47DhPRA Cells
To determine whether alteration in the ratio of
PRA:PRB, in favor of PRA, influenced expression of endogenous
progestin-sensitive genes, T-47DhPRA cells were treated with progestin,
with or without PRA induction, and the expression of SOX4 (Fig. 6
) and FAS (Fig. 7
) mRNA was measured. Addition of IPTG
increased PRA levels in the T-47DhPRA cells but not in the T-47DN
parent cell line (Fig. 6A
). The magnitude of the increase in PRA levels
ranged from 2-fold in the -E3 cells to 3.3-fold in the N5 cells (Fig. 6A
, lower panel). PR protein levels were decreased in
progestin-treated cells, including T-47DhPRA cells in which PRA had
been induced by IPTG, consistent with the known down-regulatory
effect of progestins on PR (26), except in the case of
T-47DhPRAN5 cells, in which persistence and even accumulation of
PRA was observed upon progestin treatment (Fig. 6A
, lower
panel).
The effect of PRA induction on the endogenous progestin-responsive gene
SOX4 was evaluated by examining the same samples of T-47DhPRA cells for
SOX4 mRNA expression. SOX4 mRNA was increased by progestin treatment in
the parent T-47DN cells and in the T-47DhPRAE3, -N5 (Fig. 6
), and -N4
(data not shown) cell lines. Induction of PRA augmented the induction
of SOX4 mRNA expression in T-47DhPRAE3 and -N5 (Fig. 6
, A and B) and
-N4 cells (data not shown). There was no effect of PRA induction on the
parent N cells (Fig. 6
, A and B). The augmentation of the
progestin-mediated effect was proportional to cellular levels of PRA
(r2 = 0.96, not shown) but not PRB
(r2 = 0.28, not shown), with greater increases being
observed with higher PRA:PRB ratios (Fig. 6B
). The relationship between
PRA:PRB ratio and SOX4 mRNA expression was explored in a number of
separate experiments (Fig. 6C
): these showed that SOX4 mRNA levels were
proportional to the ratio of PRA:PRB (P < 0.0001,
analysis of covariance) in all cell lines tested (n = 4). The
effect of PRA on another endogenous progestin target, FAS, was
different from that noted for SOX4. FAS mRNA expression was
increased in the T-47DN parent cell line and in the T-47DhPRAE3 and -N4
cells after addition of ORG2058 (Fig. 7
). Over a range of experiments,
where the same RNA shown in Fig. 6C
was probed for FAS, increased PRA
levels had a variable effect on ORG2058 induction of FAS (Fig. 7B
),
suggesting that if there was a relationship between PRA or PRB levels
and progestin-mediated increase in FAS mRNA, it was not a consistent
one (Fig. 7C
).
Progestin and Antiprogestin Effects on Endogenous FAS and SOX4 mRNA
Expression in T-47DhPRA Cells
The expression of FAS and SOX4 mRNA was determined in T-47DhPRAE3
and -N5 cells and in the parent T-47DhPRAE cell line treated with a
combination of ORG2058, RU486, IPTG, and vehicle as shown in Fig. 8
. Progestin-mediated induction of FAS
and SOX4 mRNA was observed in all cells, and induction of PRA with IPTG
augmented the progestin induction of SOX4 mRNA, with little effect on
FAS mRNA levels, as described in Figs. 6
and 7
. RU486 alone had little
effect on FAS mRNA levels, with or without PRA induction (Fig. 8
),
whereas SOX mRNA levels were increased in RU486- and IPTG-treated cells
in which PRA had been induced, indicating that RU486 displayed some
agonist activity on SOX4 expression upon PRA induction (Fig. 8
, middle panels). Combined treatment with ORG2058 and RU486
resulted in a diminution of the progestin-mediated induction of FAS and
SOX4 mRNAs, indicating that RU486 was exerting an antiprogestogenic
effect on expression of these genes. The combined effect of ORG2058 and
RU486 on FAS mRNA was the same whether or not PRA had been induced
(Fig. 8
, FAS: compare IPTG+ and IPTG- panels). The combination of
ORG2058 and RU486 on SOX4 expression was similar to the effect obtained
with RU486 alone, whether or not PRA had been induced (Fig. 8
, SOX4:
compare IPTG+ and IPTG- panels).
Effect of Marked PRA Excess on Endogenous Progestin-Dependent
Targets
The PRA:PRB ratio observed in the experiments presented in
Figs. 68

ranged from 13.3: in these circumstances, PRA induction
augmented progestin-mediated increases in SOX4 mRNA expression,
with no consistent effect on FAS mRNA expression. To determine the
effect of progestin on endogenous targets in cells expressing more
marked relative levels of PRA, either in the absence of PRB or with low
relative levels of PRB, SOX4 and FAS mRNA levels were determined in
MCF-7M11 hPRA cells, which contained only PRA and lacked PRB, and in
two clones of the T-47DhPRA cells (N5, B8), which had PRA:PRB ratios of
15 and 20, respectively. Where PRA was the only isoform, as in MCF-7M11
hPRA cells, ORG2058 treatment did not cause an increase in SOX4 or FAS
mRNA levels, but instead resulted in a decrease in SOX4 and no effect
on FAS mRNA levels (Fig. 9
).

View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 9. Effect of Marked PRA Excess on Endogenous
Progestin-Dependent Targets
RNA and protein were isolated from MCF-7M11 hPRA and T-47DhPRA-N5
and -B8 cells and analyzed on Northern blots (30 µg RNA/lane)
and immunoblots (25 µg cytosol protein/lane). The cells were probed
for FAS and SOX4 mRNA, 18S rRNA, and PR protein as described in the
legends of Figs. 6 and 7 . The relative levels of FAS and SOX4 (AU)
corrected for loading are shown graphically.
|
|
In cell lines where PRB and PRA were both present, basal levels of SOX4
and FAS mRNA were increased by ORG2058 (N5, B8 cells, Fig. 9
). The
progestin-mediated increase in SOX4 mRNA expression was diminished upon
15- to 20-fold induction of PRA [SOX4 mRNA levels after loading
correction: 51% (N5 cells) and 75% (B8 cells) of ORG2058 treated,
IPTG untreated, Fig. 9
]. The progestin-mediated increase in basal FAS
mRNA levels was diminished upon induction of PRA with IPTG in N5 and B8
cells [FAS mRNA levels after loading correction: 23% (N5 cells) and
60% (B8 cells) of ORG2058 treated, IPTG untreated, Fig. 9
].
The effect was greater in N5 cells than B8 cells, and the persistence
of PRA upon progestin treatment in N5 cells (described above) may play
a role in this effect. The N5 cells were interesting in this regard,
and also because in these cells, unlike the other clones, the induction
of PRA varied from 3-fold to 15-fold between experiments. In
experiments where the induction of PRA in N5 cells was 3-fold,
augmentation of progestin-mediated SOX4 mRNA expression was noted, with
no consistent effect on FAS mRNA (Figs. 6
and 7
). In the experiments
described in Fig. 9
, where 15-fold increases of PRA were noted in N5
cells, inhibition of progestin-mediated induction of both SOX4 and FAS
expression was seen. This demonstrates that the effects of PRA
induction on progestin-mediated gene expression were related to the
cellular content and relative level of PRA, rather than to clonal
variation between the cell lines examined.
Taken together, these data showed that when PRA was coexpressed with
PRB, in 15- to 20-fold excess, inhibition of progestin-mediated
increases in SOX4 and FAS was observed. This was in contrast to the
effect of PRA on progestin-mediated increases in SOX4 and FAS mRNA in
cell lines where relative expression of PRA was 1- to 3.3-fold that of
PRB (
Figs. 68

).
Repression of Transcription of Transfected Progestin-Responsive
Plasmids by PRA in T-47DhPRA Cells
Previous studies have shown that PRA can be a dominant
negative inhibitor of PRB activity and also of the activities of other
members of the steroid receptor family (14, 15, 18, 20, 21). Those
previous observations, in contrast to the present study, were made in
transient transfections systems. To determine the effect of PRA
induction on exogenously transfected progestin-responsive plasmids in
T-47DhPRA cells, reporter gene activity was measured after transfection
of pMSG-CAT with or without PRA induction. Treatment of transiently
transfected cells with ORG2058 resulted in stimulation of CAT activity
in T-47DhPRA clones (14- to 15-fold), comparable with the induction
observed in wild-type T-47D cells (Fig. 10
). Increasing the ratio of PRA:PRB,
in favor of PRA (PRA:PRB ratio 2:1, Fig. 10
, inset), in
T-47DhPRA-E3 cells caused little or no change in progestin-induced CAT
activity (Fig. 10
). However, when PRA levels were increased so that the
ratio was >4:1, as observed in the T-47DhPRAN5 cells (Fig. 10
, inset), a 2- to 3-fold decrease in the PR-mediated
transcriptional activity was observed (Fig. 10
). These results
suggested that a marked excess of PRA was required to decrease
PR-mediated transcriptional activity of an exogenously transfected
reporter.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 10. Repression of Transcription of Transfected
Progestin-Responsive Plasmids by PRA in T-47DhPRA Cells
Wild-type T-47D cells and T-47DhPRA cells were transiently transfected
with pMSG-CAT and treated with IPTG (5 mM) or vehicle.
CAT activity was measured 24 h after treatment with ORG2058 (10
nM) or vehicle. CAT activity was normalized for
transfection efficiency using pCH110. Experiments were performed in
triplicate and the data expressed as fold induction (±
SE). Inset shows PRA/B ratio; +IPTG
(stippled bars) and -IPTG (clear bars).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION
|
---|
This study has documented the generation of new clones of T-47D
breast cancer cells, containing predominantly PRB, in which the ratio
of PRA:PRB can be altered by induction of PRA. The consequence of PRA
induction is an alteration in the ratio of the PR isoforms in favor of
PRA, such that the predominant isoform in these cells becomes PRA.
Although the mechanisms that control the relative expression of the PR
isoforms in vivo are not known, in this study their ratio
was maintained over multiple passages (data not shown) and only altered
upon induction of PRA by sequestration of the lac repressor
by IPTG. The advantages of such cell lines in investigating alterations
in the ratio of PRA:PRB are that T-47D cells are well characterized
models of PR action, in which a number of endogenous
progestin-sensitive endpoints, such as inhibition of cell proliferation
and modulation of gene expression, have been described. Stable
transfection of a plasmid that can be induced to synthesize PRA allows
determination of the magnitude of progestin responses both before and
after PRA induction, so that the cellular context remains identical
except for the levels of PRA contained. In addition, the ratio of
PRA:PRB can be calculated precisely in stable transfectants, unlike
transient transfectants where only a proportion of cells contain the
introduced plasmid.
Expression of PRA had no effect on cell proliferation in any of the
cell lines: cells in which PRA was predominant were equally growth
inhibited by progestin as cells in which PRB was the predominant
isoform. However, after prolonged progestin exposure, PRA
overexpressing cells were more sensitive to the growth-inhibitory
effects of progestins and displayed an increase in the maximal growth
inhibition observed (data not shown). Whether this was due to a
specific effect of PRA or was a consequence of higher total cellular PR
concentrations as a consequence of PRA induction is not known. Although
there was little effect of altering the ratio of PRA:PRB on cell
proliferation, there was a marked effect on cell morphology. Cells in
which PRA predominated were rounded upon progestin treatment, phase
bright, and loosely adherent to the substratum, from which they
detached in large numbers and were detected in the medium. These cells
were still viable, as evidenced by their ability to readhere to
tissue culture flasks once the progestin had been removed. These
changes in morphology suggested that there was a loss of adherent
properties of cells in which PRA predominated. Studies in PRA
transgenic mice may provide insights into the mechanisms involved: an
increase in PRA resulted in disruption of the basal membrane and a
decrease in cell-cell adhesion (8). A significant proportion of breast
tumors contain levels of PRA markedly higher than those of PRB (7); the
findings in this study, that PRA-overexpressing cells had lost adherent
properties, suggest that such tumors may demonstrate features of poorer
prognosis, and this is borne out by current investigations (our
unpublished observations).
The effect was examined of induction of PRA on SOX4 mRNA (22) and FAS
mRNA (23), which are endogenous targets of progestin action. Progestin
induction of mRNA levels of SOX4, which is directly transcriptionally
regulated by progestins (22), was augmented by PRA induction in cells
with PRA:PRB ratios which ranged from 1 to 3. Interestingly, PRA alone
had no stimulatory effect on SOX4 expression when transfected into
PR-negative MCF-7M11 cells. This suggested that the activity of PRA was
modulated in the presence of PRB, signaling that the PRA-PRB
heterodimer may have a different effect on SOX4 gene expression than
that of either homodimer alone and suggesting that the transcriptional
effect of progestins on SOX4 gene expression in vivo may be
dependent on the cellular ratio of PRA and PRB. Induction of PRA such
that PRA:PRB ratios were 13 had no consistent effect on the progestin
induction of FAS mRNA expression. In some experiments, augmentation of
the progestin response was noted, and in others diminution or no effect
of the progestin response were observed upon PRA induction. This
suggested that the effect of PRA overexpression on progestin
inducibility of this transcript, if any, was likely to be modest.
Transient transfection of a progestin-regulated reporter also showed
that progestin induction of reporter gene activity was unaffected by
modest relative increases in PRA. Taken together, these data showed
that increases up to 4-fold in the relative PRA levels augmented
progestin induction of SOX4 mRNA and had little effect on progestin
induction of FAS mRNA expression or progestin stimulation of reporter
gene activity, suggesting that the progestin was able to stimulate
expression of the endogenous and exogenous targets in this study
despite increases of up to 4-fold in the cellular PRA:PRB ratio.
To determine the effect of a large PRA excess on the endpoints examined
above, clones were examined that had PRA:PRB ratios of 1520
(T-47DhPRA-B8 and -N5 cells). Such an excess resulted in inhibition of
progestin-mediated effects on SOX4 and FAS mRNA expression, in contrast
to the effects seen at lower relative PRA levels. PRA:PRB ratios
of greater than 4:1 were associated also with inhibition of progestin-
responsive reporter gene activity, as previously shown (14, 15, 18, 20, 27). However, the magnitude of the effect was less than that
previously demonstrated and required ratios of at least 4:1 to be
manifested. This is in contrast with previous studies using transient
transfections, which showed the inhibitory activity of PRA to be
elicited at relative levels well below those of PRB, but is more
consistent with other evidence that at least equimolar levels of PRA
are required to demonstrate significant inhibition of PRB
transactivation (10).
The findings of this study, that PRA induction had different effects on
different endogenous genes, being ineffective on FAS, yet increasing
SOX4 induction, was in keeping with previous conclusions that PRA
effects are cell type- and promoter specific. However, there was little
evidence that the effects of PRA on endogenous or exogenous targets
were dominant, as previously shown. Rather, the data are consistent
with the view that PRA can inhibit progestin action, but only when it
is present at significant excess over PRB. The previous observations on
the powerful negative effect of PRA were made using transient
transfections, and this may provide explanations for the discrepancy
between this and previous studies. The cell lines used in this study
were stably expressing the inducible PRA-encoding plasmid, and
consequently the cellular levels of PRA and PRB and hence their ratio,
were easily measurable.
Treatment of cells with RU486 revealed the expected antiprogestogenic
effects in most contexts on endogenous gene expression. Interestingly,
however, an agonist effect on SOX4 expression was noted only after PRA
induction. This effect was gene specific, as no agonist effect was
noted on FAS expression. This suggested that PRA, when occupied by
RU486, may demonstrate transactivation in a gene-specific manner. This
is in contrast with previous demonstrations that only
antagonist-occupied PRB can activate transcription (16, 18, 28). It
must be emphasized that there is no formal evidence in this study that
PRA-bound RU486 is mediating the agonist effects on SOX4 expression: an
alternative explanation is that induction of SOX4 gene expression may
require a minimum level of total PR, which was only reached in this
study after induction of PRA. Clarification of the effect on endogenous
progestin targets of RU486 when bound to PRA will necessitate use of
the MCF-7M11 hPRA cell lines, expressing only PRA, and this forms the
focus of future studies.
In summary, this study describes new PR-positive cell lines, in
which PRA can be induced so that it becomes the predominant isoform,
and the effect of alteration in the PRA:PRB ratio on progestin action.
PRA induction had little effect on cell proliferation, but there were
striking changes in morphology: cells in which PRA predominated were
rounded and displayed reduced adherence to tissue culture flasks, while
retaining viability, suggesting that increased PRA expression, as
observed in a proportion of breast cancers, may play a role in loss of
adhesion observed in malignancy. PRA overexpression was associated with
effects on endogenous progestin targets that were dependent on the
cellular ratio of PRA:PRB. Increases up to 4-fold in the relative PRA
levels augmented progestin induction of SOX4 mRNA and had little effect
on progestin induction of FAS mRNA expression, whereas 15- to 20-fold
relative PRA levels were associated with diminished progestin responses
on both SOX4 and FAS mRNA expression. This suggests that progestin was
able to stimulate expression of the endogenous targets in this study
despite increases of up to 4-fold in the cellular PRA:PRB levels,
whereas extreme alterations in the PRA:PRB ratio, in favor of PRA, were
associated with inhibition of progestin action. The results of this
study are consistent with the view that PRA expression can fluctuate
within a broad range in target cells without influencing the nature of
progestin action on downstream targets, but that overexpression of PRA,
such as is seen in a proportion of breast cancers, may be associated
with inhibition of progestin action and features of poor prognosis.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
---|
Recombinant Plasmids
The pSG5-hPR1 plasmid (2) was a gift of Dr. Pierre Chambon
(Strasbourg, France). Plasmids containing the progestin-responsive
mouse mammary tumor virus long terminal repeat linked to
chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (pMSG-CAT) and bacterial
ß-galactosidase sequences, pCH110, were obtained from Pharmacia LKB
Biotechnology (North Ryde, Sydney, Australia). The pOP13 hPRA
construct was made by excision of the BamHI-BamHI
fragment of PR from pSG5-hPR1 and ligation into the BamHI
site of pGEM11A(+) (Promega Corp. North Ryde, Australia)
creating a NotI site downstream from the PRA coding
sequence. A NotI site was created 54 bp upstream from the
PRA ATG codon by PCR. The PRA insert was excised from the
pGEM11Z(+) vector using the NotI sites and inserted into the
NotI sites of the pOP13CAT vector containing lac
operon sequences (Lac-Switch inducible mammalian expression system,
Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) replacing the CAT sequence. The
PRA insert and surrounding regions were sequenced using the ABI 373A,
DNA sequencer using ABI Prism dye terminator cycle sequencing ready
reaction kit (ABI Advanced Biotechnologies, Inc., Columbia, MD)
with AmpliTaq DNA polymerase, FS (Perkin Elmer Corp.,
Norwalk, CT).
Cell Lines
The ER-positive, PR-positive T-47D cell line (29), (E.G. Mason
Research Institute, Worcester, MA) and an ER-positive, PR-negative
clone of the MCF-7M cell line (MCF-7M11, a gift from Dr. Anna de Fazio,
Garvan Institute of Medical Research, New South Wales, Australia) were
cultured in antibiotic-free phenol red-free RPMI 1640 medium or DMEM,
respectively, containing 10% FCS and supplemented as described (24).
Cells were negative for mycoplasma contamination as determined using
the Genprobe rapid detection system (Gen-Probe Inc. San Diego, CA).
Cell stocks were passaged regularly to maintain exponential growth.
Construction of Breast Cancer Cell Lines Stably Expressing
hPRA
T-47D cells were plated into 162-cm2 peel-back
flasks (2.53 x 106 cells per flask) in DMEM phenol
red-free medium containing 5% FCS 3 days before transfection. The
medium was changed on the day of transfection. Cells were transfected
using the calcium phosphate precipitation method as described
previously (24) with the p3'SS plasmid, encoding the lac
repressor (40 µg/162 cm2 flask). T-47D cells were
subjected to osmotic shock 34 h after transfection, and exposure of
T-47D cells to DNA continued for 18 h thereafter (30). Cells were
cultured for 68 weeks in medium supplemented with hygromycin B (400
µg/ml, Life Technologies, Inc., Melbourne, Australia),
and surviving colonies were selected using cloning cylinders.
Individual colonies were transferred to 24-well plates and expanded in
the presence of hygromycin B (200 µg/ml). Ten clonal cell lines were
analyzed for lac repressor protein expression by immunoblot
analysis using rabbit anti-LacI polyclonal sera. Three cell
lines expressing high, medium, and low amounts of lac
repressor protein (T47Dp3'SS -B, -E, and -N, respectively) were
transfected with the pOP13 hPRA expression vector (40 µg/162
cm2 flask) and selected using 400 µg/ml geneticin (G418)
(Life Technologies, Inc.). T-47D clones containing both
the p3'SS vector and the pOP13 hPRA plasmid were maintained in medium
supplemented with hygromycin B (200 µg/ml) and G418 (200 µg/ml).
MCF-7M11 cells were transfected with the pOP13 hPRA only and selected
and maintained with 400 µg/ml and 200 µg/ml G418, respectively.
Cell Growth Experiments
Cells were seeded in 96-well plates (100 µl medium) or
25-cm2 flasks (5 ml medium) in triplicate at a density of
2 x 104 cells/ml. Twenty four hours later (day -1)
the medium was supplemented with 10 mM IPTG, to sequester
the lac repressor and allow induction of PRA from pOP13 hPRA
or vehicle. On day 0, the medium was supplemented with ORG2058 (10
nM) or vehicle only. Cell proliferation was assayed using
the CellTiter 96 nonradioactive cell proliferation assay (Promega Corp., Madison, WI) and recorded on days -2, -1, 2, 4, and 6,
as the absorbance at 570 nm with a reference wavelength of 630 nm. Cell
counts were determined by counting using a hemocytometer on days -2, 0,
3, and 5.
Transient Transfections
T-47DhPRA cells were cotransfected with pMSG-CAT (2040
µg/150 cm2 flask) and pCH110 (1020 µg/150
cm2 flask), harvested the next day from the
150-cm2 flasks, and replated into 25-cm2 flasks
(8 x 105 cells per flask). Six hours after seeding,
cells were treated with 10 mM IPTG or vehicle; 24 h
later, cells were treated with the synthetic progestin ORG2058 (10
nM) or vehicle, and enzyme activities were measured
subsequently as described previously (30). MCF-7M11PRA cells were
transfected with pMSG-CAT (3.5 µg/25 cm2 flask) and
pCH110 (1 µg/25 cm2 flask) using Fugene transfection
reagent (Boehringer Mannheim, Indianapolis, IN) for
24 h before addition of either ORG2058 (10 nM) or
vehicle. All experiments were performed in triplicate.
Immunoblot Analysis of PR
T-47D and T-47DhPRA cells were harvested after treatment
with IPTG (Life Technologies, Inc., Melbourne, Australia)
110 mM, or vehicle and/or ORG2058, 10 nM
and/or RU486 (100 nM) and/or vehicle and stored as
described previously (31). Cell pellets were thawed on ice in PEMTG
buffer (24) containing 0.4 M KCl and protease inhibitors
[0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1.4
µM pepstatin A, bacitracin (100 µg/ml), 25
mM benzamidine, 86 µM leupeptin, and
aprotinin (77 µg/ml)]. Cytosol extracts were prepared and 1530
µg protein were transferred to nitrocellulose as described previously
(Ref. 24 and references therein). Protein concentration was determined
by the method of Bradford (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc., Reagents Park, Australia). Blots were incubated
with monoclonal antibodies against human PR (hPRa3, or 6 and 7) (32) at
saturating concentrations and goat antimouse Igs linked to horseradish
peroxidase at 1:5000 (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.). PR
immunoreactivity was visualized using a chemiluminescent method (ECL,
Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ). The
relative intensity, in the linear range of the film, of the
immunoreactive bands was calculated after densitometric scanning of
x-ray films (Molecular Dynamics, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA),
followed by integration of the areas under the peaks corresponding to
PRA and PRB (Imagequant, Molecular Dynamics, Inc.).
Results are expressed as the percentage of immunoreactivity in control
samples.
Isolation and Analysis of RNA
Total RNA was extracted using Tri-reagent (Molecular Research Center, Inc., Cincinnati, OH) and transferred to N+
hybond membrane (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) or Zeta probe
(Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.) using Vacu-blot
(Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.) and fixed by UV radiation
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech UV cross-linker). cDNA probes
were labeled by random priming using the Amersham Pharmacia Biotech Multiprime DNA labeling system; Northern blots were
quantitated using a PhosphorImager and Imagequant software
(Molecular Dynamics, Inc.) and subsequently exposed to
x-ray film and analyzed as described above. FAS cDNA was a gift from
Dr. Henri Rochefort (Montpellier, France). The cDNA probes used for
detection were as follows: PR cDNA, containing the full-length hPRA
coding sequence and a SOX4 cDNA fragment (nucleotides 16122412) (22).
The 18S rRNA probe (30-bp oligonucleotide complementary to rat 18S
rRNA) (33) and the ß-actin probe from human cDNA plasmid clone,
LK221, 2 kb BamHI fragment (a gift from Dr. Linda Bendall
(Westmead Institute for Cancer Research, New South Wales, Australia),
were used to control for RNA loading.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
---|
The authors thank Patricia Mote for assistance with the cell
lines, Nham Tran for assistance in preparation of the figures, and
James Indsto for assistance with photography.
 |
FOOTNOTES
|
---|
Address requests for reprints to: Christine L. Clarke, Westmead Institute for Cancer Research, University of Sydney, Westmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales 2145, Australia.
Supported by the National Health and Medical Research Council of
Australia and the New South Wales Cancer Council. E.M.M. received a
Dora Lush Biomedical Research Scholarship from the National Health and
Medical Research Council of Australia and an Initiating Grant from the
Westmead Hospital Foundation.
Received for publication January 11, 1999.
Revision received June 3, 1999.
Accepted for publication July 2, 1999.
 |
REFERENCES
|
---|
-
Graham JD, Clarke CL 1997 Physiological action of
progesterone in target tissues. Endocr Rev 18:502519[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kastner P, Bocquel MT, Turcotte B, Garnier JM, Horwitz KB,
Chambon P, Gronemeyer H 1990 Transient expression of human and chicken
progesterone receptors does not support alternative translational
initiation from a single mRNA as the mechanism generating two receptor
isoforms. J Biol Chem 265:1216312167[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lessey BA, Alexander PS, Horwitz KB 1983 The sub- unit
structure of human breast cancer progesterone receptors:
characterization by chromatography and photoaffinity labelling.
Endocrinology 112:12671274[Medline]
-
Mote PA, Balleine RL, McGowan EM, Clarke CL 1999 Co-localization of progesterone receptors A and B by dual
immunofluorescent histochemistry in human endometrium during the
menstrual cycle. J Clin Endocrinol Metab, in press
-
Bethea CL, Widmann AA 1998 Differential expression of
progestin receptor isoforms in the hypothalamus, pituitary and
endometrium of rhesus macaques. Endocrinology 139:677687[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Mangal RK, Wiehle RD, Poindexter AN 3rd, Weigel NL 1997 Differential expression of uterine progesterone receptor forms A and B
during the menstrual cycle. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 63:195202[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Graham JD, Yeates C, Balleine RL, Harvey SS, Milliken JS,
Bilous AM, Clarke CL 1995 Characterization of progesterone receptor A
and B expression in human breast cancer. Cancer Res 55:50635068[Abstract]
-
Shyamala G, Yang X, Silberstein G, Barcellos-Hoff MH, Dale E 1998 Transgenic mice carrying an imbalance in the native ratio of A to
B forms of progesterone receptor exhibit developmental abnormalities in
mammary glands. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:696701[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kumar NS, Richer J, Owen G, Litman E, Horwitz KB, Leslie KK 1998 Selective downregulation of progesterone receptor isoform B in
poorly differentiated human endometrial cancer cells: implications for
unopposed estrogen action. Cancer Res 58:18601865[Abstract]
-
Huse B, Verca SB, Matthey P, Rusconi S 1998 Definition of a
negative modulation domain in the human progesterone receptor. Mol
Endocrinol 12:13341342[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Hovland AR, Powell RL, Takimoto GS, Tung L, Horwitz KB 1998 An
N-terminal inhibitory function, IF, suppresses transcription by the
A-isoform but not the B-isoform of human progesterone receptors. J
Biol Chem 273:54555460[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Giangrande PH, Pollio G, McDonnell DP 1997 Mapping and
characterization of the functional domains responsible for the
differential activity of the A and B isoforms of the human progesterone
receptor. J Biol Chem 272:3288932900[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kazmi SMI, Visconti V, Plante RK, Ishaque A, Lau C 1993 Differential regulation of human progesterone receptor A and B
form-mediated trans-activation by phosphorylation. Endocrinology 133:12301238[Abstract]
-
Vegeto E, Shahbaz MM, Wen DX, Goldman ME, OMalley BW,
McDonnell DP 1993 Human progesterone receptor A form is a cell- and
promoter-specific repressor of human progesterone receptor B function.
Mol Endocrinol 7:12441255[Abstract]
-
Wen DX, Xu YF, Mais DE, Goldman ME, McDonnell DP 1994 The A
and B isoforms of the human progesterone receptor operate through
distinct signaling pathways within target cells. Mol Cell Biol 14:83568364[Abstract]
-
Meyer ME, Pornon A, Ji JW, Bocquel MT, Chambon P, Gronemeyer H 1990 Agonistic and antagonistic activities of RU486 on the functions of
the human progesterone receptor. EMBO J 9:39233932[Abstract]
-
Sartorius CA, Melville MY, Hovland AR, Tung L, Takimoto GS,
Horwitz KB 1994 A third transactivation function (AF3) of human
progesterone receptors located in the unique N-terminal segment of the
B-isoform. Mol Endocrinol 8:13471360[Abstract]
-
Tung L, Mohamed MK, Hoeffler JP, Takimoto GS, Horwitz KB 1993 Antagonist-occupied human progesterone B-receptors activate
transcription without binding to progesterone response elements and are
dominantly inhibited by A-receptors. Mol Endocrinol 7:12561265[Abstract]
-
Tora L, Gronemeyer H, Turcotte B, Gaub MP, Chambon P 1988 The
N-terminal region of the chicken progesterone receptor specifies target
gene activation. Nature 333:185188[CrossRef][Medline]
-
McDonnell DP, Shahbaz MM, Vegeto E, Goldman ME 1994 The human
progesterone receptor A-form functions as a transcriptional modulator
of mineralocorticoid receptor transcriptional activity. J Steroid
Biochem Mol Biol 48:425432[CrossRef][Medline]
-
McDonnell DP, Goldman ME 1994 RU486 exerts anti-estrogenic
activities through a novel progesterone receptor A form-mediated
mechanism. J Biol Chem 269:1194511949[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Graham JD, Hunt SMN, Tran N, Clarke CL 1999 Regulation of the
expression and activity by progestins of a member of the SOX gene
family of transcriptional modulators. J Mol Endocrinol 22:295304[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Chalbos D, Westley B, May F, Alibert C, Rochefort H 1986 Cloning of cDNA sequences of a progestin-regulated mRNA from MCF7 human
breast cancer cells. Nucleic Acids Res 14:965982[Abstract]
-
Graham JD, Roman SD, McGowan E, Sutherland RL, Clarke CL 1995 Preferential stimulation of human progesterone receptor B
expression by estrogen in T-47D human breast cancer cells. J Biol
Chem 270:3069330700[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Alexander IE, Shine J, Sutherland RL 1990 Progestin regulation
of estrogen receptor messenger RNA in human breast cancer cells. Mol
Endocrinol 4:821828[Abstract]
-
Mockus MB, Horwitz KB 1983 Progesterone receptors in
human breast cancer. Stoichiometric translocation and nuclear
receptor processing. J Biol Chem 258:47784783[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kraus WL, Weis KE, Katzellenbogen BS 1997 Determinants for the
repression of estrogen receptor transcriptional activity by
ligand-occupied progestin receptors. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 63:175188[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Sartorius CA, Groshong SD, Miller LA, Powell RL, Tung L,
Takimoto GS, Horwitz KB 1994 New T47D breast cancer cell lines for the
independent study of progesterone B and A-receptors: only
antiprogestin-occupied B-receptors are switched to transcriptional
agonists by cAMP. Cancer Res 54:38683877[Abstract]
-
Keydar I, Chen L, Karby S, Weiss FR, Delarea J, Radu M,
Chaitcik S, Brenner HJ 1979 Establishment and characterization of a
cell line of human breast carcinoma origin. Eur J Cancer 15:659670[Medline]
-
Clarke CL, Graham J, Roman SD, Sutherland RL 1991 Direct
transcriptional regulation of the progesterone receptor by retinoic
acid diminishes progestin responsiveness in the breast cancer cell line
T-47D. J Biol Chem 266:1896918975[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Alexander IE, Clarke CL, Shine J, Sutherland RL 1989 Progestin
inhibition of progesterone receptor gene expression in human breast
cancer cells. Mol Endocrinol 3:13771386[Abstract]
-
Clarke CL, Zaino RJ, Feil PD, Miller JV, Steck ME,
Ohlsson-Wilhelm BM, Satyaswaroop PG 1987 Monoclonal antibodies to human
progesterone receptor: characterization by biochemical and
immunohistochemical techniques. Endocrinology 121:11231132[Abstract]
-
Roman SD, Ormandy CJ, Manning DL, Blamey RW, Nicholson RI,
Sutherland RL, Clarke CL 1993 Estradiol induction of retinoic acid
receptors in human breast cancer cells. Cancer Res 53:59405945[Abstract]