A Synthetic Triterpenoid, 2-Cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic Acid (CDDO), Is a Ligand for the Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor
Yongping Wang1,
Weston W. Porter1,
Nanjoo Suh,
Tadashi Honda,
Gordon W. Gribble,
Lisa M. Leesnitzer,
Kelli D. Plunket,
David J. Mangelsdorf,
Steven G. Blanchard,
Timothy M. Willson and
Michael B. Sporn
Departments of Pharmacology (Y.W., N.S., M.B.S.) and Chemistry
(T.H., G.W.G.) Dartmouth Medical School and Dartmouth College
Hanover, New Hampshire 03755
Howard Hughes Medical Institute
and Departments of Pharmacology and Biochemistry (W.W.P., D.J.M)
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas, Texas
75390
Departments of Molecular Biochemistry (L.M.L., S.G.B.),
Molecular Endocrinology (K.D.P.), and Medicinal Chemistry (T.M.W.)
Glaxo Wellcome Research and Development Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina 27709
 |
ABSTRACT
|
---|
A novel synthetic triterpenoid,
2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO), previously
reported to have potent differentiating, antiproliferative, and
antiinflammatory activities, has been identified as a ligand for the
peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor
(PPAR
). CDDO induces
adipocytic differentiation in 3T3-L1 cells, although it is not as
potent as the full agonist of PPAR
, rosiglitazone. Binding studies
of CDDO to PPAR
using a scintillation proximity assay give a
Ki between 10-8 to
10-7 M. In
transactivation assays, CDDO is a partial agonist for PPAR
. The
methyl ester of CDDO, CDDO-Me, binds to PPAR
with similar affinity,
but is an antagonist. Like other PPAR
ligands, CDDO synergizes with
a retinoid X receptor (RXR)-specific ligand to induce 3T3-L1
differentiation, while CDDO-Me is an antagonist in this assay. The
partial agonism of CDDO and the antagonism of CDDO-Me reflect the
differences in their capacity to recruit or displace cofactors of
transcriptional regulation; CDDO and rosiglitazone both release the
nuclear receptor corepressor, NCoR, from PPAR
, while CDDO-Me does
not. The differences between CDDO and rosiglitazone as either partial
or full agonists, respectively, are seen in the weaker ability of CDDO
to recruit the coactivator CREB-binding protein, CBP, to PPAR
. Our
results establish the triterpenoid CDDO as a member of a new class of
PPAR
ligands.
 |
INTRODUCTION
|
---|
Triterpenoids are a large family of structures synthesized
in plants through the cyclization of squalene and have been used in
traditional Asian medicine for centuries (1). Naturally occurring
triterpenoids like oleanolic acid (OA) and ursolic acid (UA) are known
to have relatively weak antiinflammatory and anticarcinogenic
activities (2, 3). To increase their usefulness, we have synthesized a
series of novel derivatives of OA and UA and have shown that some
derivatives of OA are much more potent than the parent compound in
suppressing the induction of the enzymes, inducible nitric oxide
synthase (iNOS) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) (4, 5, 6). The most active of
these synthetic derivatives, 2-cyano-3,12-dioxooleana-1,9-dien-28-oic
acid (CDDO) (Fig. 1
), is not only
antiinflammatory, but also has potent antiproliferative and
differentiating activities (7, 8).
One of the effects of CDDO on differentiation can be easily
measured by its ability to convert 3T3-L1 fibroblasts into mature
adipocytes (8). These fibroblasts undergo dramatic morphological and
biochemical changes upon induction of differentiation and accumulate
triglyceride (9). The classic inducers for this process have been a
combination of 1-methyl-3-isobutyl xanthine, dexamethasone, and insulin
(MDI), although more recently, ligands for the peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor
(PPAR
) such as the
thiazolidinedione, rosiglitazone, have also been identified as potent
inducers of adipogenic differentiation (10, 11, 12).
PPAR
is a member of the nuclear receptor superfamily of
transcription factors. It forms heterodimers with the retinoid X
receptor (RXR) to activate gene transcription (13, 14, 15). This
cooperation is reflected in the ability of PPAR
and RXR ligands to
synergize in the induction of adipocyte differentiation (16).
Furthermore, binding of ligands to nuclear receptors such as PPAR
results in the recruitment or displacement of different cofactors that
either enhance or suppress transcription (17). In particular, the
binding of an agonist to nuclear receptors results in the recruitment
of coactivators such as NCoA/SRC-1 (nuclear receptor
coactivator/steroid receptor coactivator-1) and p300/CBP (CREB binding
protein) and leads to activation of transcription (18, 19). In
contrast, corepressors such as NCoR (nuclear receptor corepressor) or
SMRT (silencing mediator for retinoid and thyroid hormone receptors)
can suppress transcription by binding to receptors either in the
absence of their ligands or when an antagonist is bound (20, 21).
Here we demonstrate that the adipogenic effect of CDDO is due to its
binding to PPAR
. It not only induces differentiation as a single
agent, but also acts synergistically with an RXR-specific ligand.
Binding and transactivation studies indicate that CDDO is a partial
agonist for PPAR
. We also report that the C-28 methyl ester of CDDO,
CDDO-Me (6, 7), is a PPAR
antagonist, and that these opposite
activities of CDDO and CDDO-Me can be explained by their differential
effects on the interactions of cofactors with PPAR
.
 |
RESULTS
|
---|
CDDO Induces Differentiation in 3T3-L1 Cells
To induce adipocytic differentiation, 3T3-L1 fibroblasts were
treated with MDI mix (Fig. 2B
), or
rosiglitazone at 100 nM (Fig. 2E
) or 1 µM
(Fig. 2F
) for 2 days. Accumulation of triglyceride droplets was evident
on the sixth day, as shown by positive staining with Oil Red O.
Treatment with CDDO (100 nM), however, induced
differentiation more slowly and less effectively (Fig. 2C
); the
percentage of differentiated cells was approximately 30% by day 6
(Fig. 2C
) and peaked at 50% by day 8 (not shown). Interestingly,
unlike rosiglitazone at 1 µM (Fig. 2F
), a higher dose of
CDDO (1 µM) was not effective (Fig. 2D
), even when
evaluated at day 10. In fact, this higher dose was inhibitory to
differentiation induced by MDI or rosiglitazone (data not shown).

View larger version (117K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. CDDO Induces Accumulation of Triglyceride in 3T3-L1
Cells
3T3-L1 cells were differentiated as described in Materials and
Methods and stained on day 6. Triglyceride was stained with Oil
Red O, and nuclei were counterstained with hematoxylin. A, Cells
maintained in DMEM/10% FBS for 6 days. BF, Cells differentiated with
MDI (B), 0.1 µM (C) or 1 µM (D) CDDO, 0.1
µM (E) or 1 µM (F) rosiglitazone.
|
|
To quantify the degree of differentiation, the enzyme
glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GPDH), a key enzyme in triglyceride
synthesis, was used as a marker (22). GPDH activity correlated well
with visual detection of triglyceride droplets under the light
microscope. Cells treated with CDDO were assayed for GPDH activity on
day 8 while those treated by rosiglitazone or MDI were assayed on day
6, as shown in Fig. 3A
, which confirms
that CDDO is a weaker inducer than MDI or rosiglitazone, and that it
has no adipogenic activity at 1 µM. The C-28 methyl ester
of CDDO, CDDO-Me, did not induce differentiation in 3T3-L1 cells at all
concentrations tested on day 8 (Fig. 3B
). Furthermore, it acted in a
dose-dependent manner as an antagonist and inhibited differentiation
induced by 100 nM rosiglitazone (Fig. 3B
). Even though CDDO
also inhibits differentiation at 1 µM, at concentrations
where it acted as a differentiating agent (100 nM or
lower), it did not inhibit differentiation induced by rosiglitazone and
its activity was additive to that of the full agonist (data not
shown).

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. CDDO Induces GPDH Activity in 3T3-L1 Cells
A, GPDH activities for cells differentiated with CDDO (0.1
nM to 1 µM), rosiglitazone (0.1
nM to 1 µM), or MDI. Cells treated with CDDO
were harvested on day 8, while those treated by rosiglitazone and MDI
were harvested on day 6. B, GPDH activities for cells differentiated
with CDDO-Me (10 nM to 1 µM), in the absence
or presence of 100 nM rosiglitazone, assayed on day 6.
|
|
CDDO Binds to and Transactivates PPAR
The adipogenic effect of CDDO suggested that it might be a ligand
for PPAR
. Therefore, binding studies were performed using a
scintillation proximity assay (SPA), which has been successfully used
in the study of PPARs and their ligands (23). Using this assay, CDDO
and rosiglitazone were shown to compete for bound
3H-CDDO, with Ki values of
310 nM and 50 nM, respectively (Fig. 4
). Importantly, the presence of
dithiothreitol (DTT) in the binding buffer interfered with CDDO binding
to PPAR
. We repeated these experiments using
3H-rosiglitazone as the ligand and nonradioactive
CDDO or CDDO-Me as competitors. Again, the presence of DTT blocked the
ability of either CDDO or CDDO-Me to compete for binding to PPAR
;
the Ki values in this assay were determined to be
12 nM for CDDO and 130 nM for CDDO-Me (Fig. 5
and Table 1
). Both triterpenoids were also tested
for binding to PPAR
, either in the presence or absence of DTT, and
neither binds to PPAR
(Table 1
).

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. CDDO Binds to PPAR
Nonradioactive CDDO (A) or rosiglitazone (B) was used to compete for
binding to PPAR using 50 nM 3H-CDDO as the
ligand. The assays were performed in the absence of 10 mM
DTT.
|
|

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. CDDO and CDDO-Me Compete with Rosiglitazone for
Binding to PPAR
Nonradioactive CDDO (A) or CDDO-Me (B) was used to compete for binding
to PPAR using 3H-rosiglitazone as the ligand. The assays
were performed in the absence of 10 mM DTT.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 1. Ki Values for CDDO and CDDO-Me
Competing for Binding to PPAR or PPAR , Using
3H-GW2331 (35 ) and 3H-Rosiglitazone as Ligands,
Respectively
|
|
To determine whether bound CDDO can transactivate PPAR
, a
Gal4-PPAR
chimeric protein was used to drive the expression of
secreted placental alkaline phosphatase (SPAP) linked to the DNA
binding sequence of Gal4. Figure 6A
shows
that CDDO transactivates Gal4-PPAR
in a dose-dependent manner,
although the maximal level of transactivation achieved by CDDO was only
26% of that obtained with rosiglitazone (1 µM). We also
tested the ability of CDDO to transactivate the wild-type PPAR
receptor in the context of a natural PPAR
response element (PPRE)
derived from the acyl-CoA oxidase gene promoter (13). CDDO had 57% of
the maximal activity obtained with 1 µM rosiglitazone in
this system (Fig. 6B
). CDDO-Me, which also bound to PPAR
with high
affinity, did not transactivate PPAR
in either system (data not
shown). To ensure the specificity of this transactivation, CDDO,
rosiglitazone, and another PPAR
ligand,
15-deoxy-
12,14-PGJ2
(15d-PGJ2) (24, 25), were tested in a
transactivation assay for PPAR
. While the PPAR
ligand Wy14,643
transactivated this receptor, none of the PPAR
ligands did (data not
shown). This result is consistent with the fact that CDDO does not bind
to PPAR
(Table 1
).
CDDO Synergizes with an RXR-Specific Ligand to Induce 3T3-L1
Differentiation
The above data demonstrate that CDDO is a partial agonist for
PPAR
. Since PPAR
is known to heterodimerize with RXR and activate
transcription (13, 26), we determined if CDDO would synergize with the
RXR-specific ligand LG100268 (27). Figure 7
shows that although LG100268 alone at 1
µM induced only slight differentiation in 3T3-L1 cells,
it greatly potentiates the activity of CDDO. In contrast, not only did
CDDO-Me fail to synergize with LG100268 to induce differentiation, it
inhibited the differentiation induced by the RXR ligand (Fig. 7
).
Unlike the GPDH assays for CDDO in Fig. 3A
, this experiment was
performed on day 6 to minimize the differentiating effect of CDDO and
maximize the level of synergism between CDDO and LG100268.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7. CDDO Synergizes with LG100268 to Induce 3T3-L1
Differentiation
3T3-L1 cells were differentiated and GPDH activity was assayed as
described in Materials and Methods. Shown are GPDH
activities of cells differentiated with CDDO or CDDO-Me (0.01
µM or 0.1 µM), in the absence or presence
of 1 µM LG100268, assayed on day 6 (different from those
obtained for CDDO in Fig. 3A , which was done on day 8).
|
|
CDDO and CDDO-Me Differentially Recruit Cofactors to PPAR
To further explore the mechanisms of action of CDDO and CDDO-Me, a
mammalian two-hybrid system was used to examine the ability of CDDO or
CDDO-Me to recruit the coactivator, CBP, to PPAR
or to release the
corepressor, NCoR, from it; rosiglitazone is known to have both of
these activities (28). Figure 8A
shows
that rosiglitazone recruits CBP to PPAR
in a dose-dependent manner,
as expressed by the level of expression of the reporter gene
chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) normalized against ß-gal
activity. CDDO also recruits CBP to PPAR
in a dose-dependent manner,
but much less so than rosiglitazone. CDDO-Me is also a weaker recruiter
of CBP in the concentrations tested. A maximum of 0.3 µM
CDDO-Me was used since 1 µM CDDO-Me was toxic to the
COS-1 cells used in the transfection assay. We then tested the ability
of PPAR
, when bound with CDDO and CDDO-Me, to interact with the
corepressor NCoR. Unlike coactivators, the two-hybrid system indicates
that NCoR interacts with PPAR
in the absence of ligands (28). When
rosiglitazone was added, however, NCoR was released from PPAR
in a
dose-dependent manner (Fig. 8B
), leading to a decrease in CAT reporter
expression. Interestingly, CDDO, although only a partial agonist, was
equally capable of releasing NCoR from PPAR
(Fig. 8B
). CDDO-Me,
which does not transactivate PPAR
, did not lead to a dissociation of
the corepressor (Fig. 8B
).
 |
DISCUSSION
|
---|
Previous studies have shown that CDDO is a multifunctional agent,
with marked antiinflammatory, antiproliferative, and differentiating
activities, as shown by studies in a wide variety of cells (8). It is
therefore important to understand the mechanisms of action of this
molecule. Although the present studies do little to elucidate the
antiinflammatory and antiproliferative activities of CDDO, they do
provide the first data that explain some of its ability to control cell
differentiation, at least in the context of the conversion of 3T3-L1
fibroblasts to adipocytes. We have shown that CDDO is an effective
agent for adipogenic conversion of 3T3-L1 fibroblasts, although it is
less active than a prototypical PPAR
ligand such as rosiglitazone.
Binding competition assays, using labeled CDDO or rosiglitazone,
indicate that CDDO is a ligand for PPAR
, and that this binding could
transactivate both the Gal4-PPAR
chimeric and wild-type receptor.
The functional interaction of CDDO with PPAR
has been further
confirmed by the ability of CDDO to synergize with a ligand specific
for RXR; RXR and PPAR
are known to form functional heterodimers
(13). Further studies on cofactor interactions are consistent with the
observation that CDDO is a partial agonist for PPAR
and that its
methyl ester is an antagonist.
Two interesting observations in this study warrant further discussion.
One is the biphasic dose response of CDDO in the induction of 3T3-L1
differentiation. At 1 µM, CDDO not only failed to induce
differentiation (Fig. 3A
), but it could also inhibit those induced by
all other known inducers tested, including MDI, rosiglitazone, or
RXR-specific ligands (data not shown); the mechanism of this inhibition
is unknown. However, based on our studies of CDDO in different
biological systems (8), CDDO was shown to be a multifunctional molecule
and could be interacting with cellular targets other than PPAR
to
inhibit the differentiation process. This characteristic is not unique
to CDDO. Recent studies of another well known PPAR
ligand,
15-deoxy-
12,14-PGJ2
(15d-PGJ2), indicate the presence of other
cellular targets, namely components of the nuclear factor-
B (NF-
B
pathway), for this prostaglandin (29, 30). The antiinflammatory
activities of 15d-PGJ2, in terms of its ability
to suppress reporter expression driven by NF-
B or AP-1 elements,
have been shown to be dependent on PPAR
(30).
The second observation is the different binding conditions CDDO and
rosiglitazone require in the in vitro binding studies.
Unlike the results obtained with rosiglitazone, the presence of DTT
interfered with the binding of CDDO to PPAR
. Due to the presence of
an
,ß-unsaturated carbonyl function in the A-ring of CDDO, we
searched for direct adduct formation between CDDO and DTT but found
none. Although we could demonstrate no covalent bond formation between
CDDO and DTT, it is still possible that a reversible noncovalent
interaction exists. Again, this sensitivity to DTT is not unique to
CDDO. 15d-PGJ2 has also been shown to be
sensitive to thiol groups found in DTT or cysteine (29, 30), although
there is no convincing chemical evidence to support the notion that a
covalent adduct is found between 15d-PGJ2 and
these agents.
The molecular coordinates of the interaction of CDDO with PPAR
remain to be determined. It would appear that a free COOH group at
C-28 is important for agonistic activity in the 3T3-L1 cells, since the
methyl ester of CDDO acts as an antagonist in this system. Thus, in
3T3-L1 cells, we have shown that CDDO-Me can block the differentiating
effects of rosiglitazone and the RXR-specific ligand, LG100268, as well
as those of CDDO itself (data not shown). Although CDDO-Me binds to
PPAR
, it does not transactivate the receptor, which may be the
result of its failure to cause release of a corepressor such as NCoR.
Given the fact that CDDO is also an inhibitor of differentiation at 1
µM, the mechanisms of the inhibitory actions of CDDO-Me
at the same concentration could be attributed to either a direct
antagonism of PPAR
, other mechanisms independent of this receptor,
or both. It is also important to note that at concentrations higher
than 1 µM, CDDO-Me becomes toxic to many cells and thus
should not be used at those doses to attribute the activities to the
antagonism of PPAR
.
Although the results we described here provide a reasonable
explanation for the differentiating effects of CDDO on 3T3-L1 cells,
they do not account for other notable activities of CDDO, particularly
its ability to suppress the expression of the enzyme iNOS in
macrophages. Neither do they explain the ability of CDDO to act as a
potent antiproliferative agent on a wide variety of tumor cells or to
induce differentiation in leukemia cells. Thus, we have found that
while CDDO can suppress iNOS expression in macrophages at doses below 1
nM, a number of PPAR
ligands, including rosiglitazone
and 15d-PGJ2, are inactive in this assay
at concentrations below 1 µM (our unpublished data and
Refs. 31, 32). Furthermore, unlike CDDO, thiazolidinediones such as
rosiglitazone do not induce differentiation in leukemia cells (our
unpublished data). Given the diverse biological activities of CDDO in
these systems, we are therefore left with the conclusion that it is
likely that another functional receptor system (or systems) beyond
PPAR
remain to be identified for CDDO, if we wish to understand the
mechanism of action of this agent in cells other than 3T3-L1. The
identification of PPAR
as a receptor for CDDO represents the first
important step in our understanding of the actions of CDDO, but it is
only a beginning in this intriguing problem.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
---|
Reagents and Plasmids
The synthesis of CDDO and its methyl ester have been
described previously (7). 3H-CDDO (6 Ci/mmol) was
prepared by tritium exchange at the C-13 position with tritium oxide in
the presence of triethylamine in chloroform, and the synthesis of
3H-rosiglitazone (26 Ci/mmol) has been described
previously (33). pCMX-mPPAR
, pCMX-mPPAR
1, PPREx3-tk-Luc
(13); pSG5-Gal4-mPPAR
-LBD, pCMX-Gal4-mPPAR
1-LBD,
MLH100x4-tk-Luc (25); and Gal4-CBP, Gal4-NCoR, VP16-PPAR
2 (28) have
been previously described. 1-Methyl-3-isobutyl xanthine, dexamethasone,
ß-nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH), and dihydroxyacetone
phosphate (DHAP) were obtained from Sigma (St. Louis, MO).
Insulin was purchased from Biofluids (Rockville, MD).
LG100268 was obtained from Dr. Richard Heyman (Ligand Pharmaceuticals, Inc., San Diego, CA). Reagents for SPA
assays have been described (34).
3T3-L1 Differentiation and Analysis
3T3-L1 cells were obtained from Dr. Gustav Lienhard (Dartmouth
Medical School, Hanover, NH). Cells were propagated in DMEM/5% calf
serum (CS) and differentiated in DMEM/10% FBS. Cells grown to
confluency (day -2) were kept for two more days before agents were
added (day 0). For MDI treatment, 0.5 mM
1-methyl-3-isobutyl xanthine, 0.25 µM dexamethasone, and
0.35 µM insulin were used for 2 days. Cells were then
cultured in DMEM/10% FBS/insulin for the rest of the differentiation
process. All other treatments are for day 0 to day 2 only, and medium
was changed every 2 days. For Oil Red O staining, cells were fixed in
10% formaldehyde for 1 h and stained with Oil Red O for 2 h.
The nuclei were counterstained with hematoxylin and photographed. Lysis
buffer for GPDH analysis includes 50 mM Tris, pH 8, 100
mM NaCl, 0.5% NP-40, 1 mM DTT and was
supplemented with 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonylfluoride, 10
µg/ml each of leupeptin and aprotinin. GPDH enzyme activity was
measured as the consumption of 0.2 mM NADH at 340
nM using 0.2 mM DHAP as the substrate (22).
Transfection Assays
For Gal4-PPAR
transactivation studies, CV-1 cells were
transfected as described previously (28). Wild-type PPAR
transfections were performed in HeLa cells using Lipofectamine Plus
(Life Technologies, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD) according to
manufacturers instructions. Percentage of transactivation was
normalized against 1 µM rosiglitazone. For mammalian
two-hybrid assays, COS-1 cells in 24-well plates were transfected using
Lipofectamine Plus. Twenty nanograms of CMX-ß-gal, 60 ng pG5-CAT, 60
ng VP16-PPAR
2, and 60 ng Gal4-cofactors were used for each well.
Ligands were added 4 h after transfection; CAT and ß-gal
activities were measured 40 h later.
SPA Binding Assays
The details of SPA assays have been published elsewhere (34). In
brief, human PPAR
ligand-binding domain was expressed in
Escherichia coli as a polyhistidine-tagged fusion protein.
The protein was purified, biotinylated, and immobilized on
streptavidin-modified SPA beads. DTT was washed away and binding assays
were performed in 50 mM HEPES, pH 7, 50
mM KCl, 5 mM
3-[(3-cholamidopropyl)dimethylammonio]-1-propane sulfonate (CHAPS),
and 0.1 mg/ml BSA. When DTT was used, its concentration was 10
mM.
 |
FOOTNOTES
|
---|
Address requests for reprints to: Michael B. Sporn, M. D., Department of Pharmacology, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755. E-mail: Michael.Sporn{at}dartmouth.edu
Y.W. is a predoctoral fellow of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute
(HHMI). W.W. P. is an associate and D.J.M. is an Investigator of
the HHMI. This work was supported by HHMI (D.J.M.), the Robert A. Welch
Foundation (D.J.M.), and the NIH (SPORE on Lung Cancer, D.J.M.),
as well as grants to Dartmouth Medical School from the NIH (R01
CA-78814) and the National Foundation for Cancer Research. M.B.S. is an
Oscar M. Cohn Professor.
1 These authors contributed equally to this work. 
Received for publication March 3, 2000.
Revision received June 26, 2000.
Accepted for publication July 20, 2000.
 |
REFERENCES
|
---|
-
Tang W, Eisenbrand G 1992 Chinese Drugs of Plant Origin:
Chemistry, Pharmacology, and Use in Traditional and Modern Medicine.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin
-
Nishino H, Nishino A, Takayasu J, Hasegawa T, Iwashima A,
Hirabayashi K, Iwata S, Shibata S 1988 Inhibition of the
tumor-promoting action of
12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate by some oleanane-type
triterpenoid compounds. Cancer Res 48:52105215[Abstract]
-
Huang MT, Ho CT, Wang ZY, Ferraro T, Lou YR, Stauber K,
Ma W, Georgiadis C, Laskin JD, Conney AH 1994 Inhibition of skin
tumorigenesis by rosemary and its constituents carnosol and ursolic
acid. Cancer Res 54:701708[Abstract]
-
Honda T, Finlay HJ, Gribble GW, Suh N, Sporn MB 1997 New
enone derivatives of oleanolic acid and ursolic acid as inhibitors of
nitric oxide production in mouse macrophages. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 7:16231628[CrossRef]
-
Honda T, Rounds BV, Bore L, Favaloro Jr FG, Gribble GW, Suh
N, Wang Y, Sporn MB 1999 Novel synthetic oleanane triterpenoids: a
series of highly active inhibitors of nitric oxide production in mouse
macrophages. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 9:34293434[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Suh N, Honda T, Finlay HJ, Barchowsky A, Williams C, Benoit
NE, Xie QW, Nathan C, Gribble GW, Sporn MB 1998 Novel triterpenoids
suppress inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) and inducible
cyclooxygenase (COX-2) in mouse macrophages. Cancer Res 58:717723[Abstract]
-
Honda T, Rounds BV, Gribble GW, Suh N, Wang Y, Sporn MB 1998 Design and synthesis of 2-cyano-3,12-dioxoolean-1,9-dien-28-oic acid, a
novel and highly active inhibitor of nitric oxide production in mouse
macrophages. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 8:27112714[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Suh N, Wang Y, Honda T, Gribble GW, Dmitrovsky E, Hickey WF,
Maue RA, Place AE, Porter DM, Spinella MJ, Williams CR, Wu G,
Dannenberg AJ, Flanders KC, Letterio JJ, Mangelsdorf DJ, Nathan CF,
Nguyen L, Porter WW, Ren RF, Roberts AB, Roche NS, Subbaramaiah K,
Sporn MB 1999 A novel synthetic oleanane triterpenoid,
2-cyano-3,12-dioxoolean-1,9-dien-28-oic acid, with potent
differentiating, antiproliferative, and anti-inflammatory activity.
Cancer Res 59:336341[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Green H, Kehinde O 1974 Sublines of mouse 3T3 cells that
accumulate lipid. Cell 1:113116
-
Tontonoz P, Hu E, Graves RA, Budavari AI, Spiegelman BM 1994 mPPAR
2: tissue-specific regulator of an adipocyte enhancer.
Genes Dev 8:12241234[Abstract]
-
Loftus TM, Lane MD 1997 Modulating the transcriptional control
of adipogenesis. Curr Opin Genet Dev 7:603608[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Lehmann JM, Moore LB, Smith-Oliver TA, Wilkison WO, Willson
TM, Kliewer SA 1995 An antidiabetic thiazolidinedione is a high
affinity ligand for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor
(PPAR
). J Biol Chem 270:1295312956[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kliewer SA, Umesono K, Noonan DJ, Heyman RA, Evans RM 1992 Convergence of 9-cis retinoic acid and peroxisome proliferator
signalling pathways through heterodimer formation of their receptors.
Nature 358:771774[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Willson TM, Brown PJ, Sternbach DD, Henke BR 2000 The PPARs:
from orphan receptors to drug discovery. J Med Chem 43:527550[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Mangelsdorf DJ, Evans RM 1995 The RXR heterodimers and orphan
receptors. Cell 83:841850[Medline]
-
Schulman IG, Shao G, Heyman RA 1998 Transactivation by
retinoid X receptor-peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor
(PPAR
) heterodimers: intermolecular synergy requires only the
PPAR
hormone-dependent activation function. Mol Cell Biol 18:34833494[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Xu L, Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG 1999 Coactivator and corepressor
complexes in nuclear receptor function. Curr Opin Genet Dev 9:140147[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Onate SA, Tsai SY, Tsai MJ, OMalley BW 1995 Sequence
and characterization of a coactivator for the steroid hormone
receptor superfamily. Science 270:13541357[Abstract]
-
Chakravarti D, LaMorte VJ, Nelson MC, Nakajima T, Schulman IG,
Juguilon H, Montminy M, Evans RM 1996 Role of CBP/P300 in nuclear
receptor signalling. Nature 383:99103[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Horlein AJ, Naar AM, Heinzel T, Torchia J, Gloss B, Kurokawa
R, Ryan A, Kamei Y, Soderstrom M, Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG 1995 Ligand-independent repression by the thyroid hormone receptor mediated
by a nuclear receptor co-repressor. Nature 377:397404[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Chen JD, Evans RM 1995 A transcriptional co-repressor that
interacts with nuclear hormone receptors. Nature 377:454457[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Wise LS, Green H 1979 Participation of one isozyme of
cytosolic glycerophosphate dehydrogenase in the adipose conversion of
3T3 cells. J Biol Chem 254:273275[Abstract]
-
Xu HE, Lambert MH, Montana VG, Parks DJ, Blanchard SG, Brown
PJ, Sternbach DD, Lehmann JM, Wisely GB, Willson TM, Kliewer SA,
Milburn MV 1999 Molecular recognition of fatty acids by peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptors. Mol Cell 3:397403[Medline]
-
Forman BM, Tontonoz P, Chen J, Brun RP, Spiegelman BM, Evans
RM 1995 15-Deoxy-
12,14-prostaglandin
J2 is a ligand for the adipocyte determination
factor PPAR
. Cell 83:803812[Medline]
-
Kliewer SA, Lenhard JM, Willson TM, Patel I, Morris DC,
Lehmann JM 1995 A prostaglandin J2 metabolite
binds peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor
and promotes
adipocyte differentiation. Cell 83:813819[Medline]
-
Mukherjee R, Davies PJ, Crombie DL, Bischoff ED, Cesario RM,
Jow L, Hamann LG, Boehm MF, Mondon CE, Nadzan AM, Paterniti Jr JR,
Heyman RA 1997 Sensitization of diabetic and obese mice to insulin by
retinoid X receptor agonists. Nature 386:407410[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Boehm MF, Zhang L, Zhi L, McClurg MR, Berger E, Wagoner M,
Mais DE, Suto CM, Davies JA, Heyman RA, et al. 1995 Design and
synthesis of potent retinoid X receptor selective ligands that induce
apoptosis in leukemia cells. J Med Chem 38:31463155[Medline]
-
Oberfield JL, Collins JL, Holmes CP, Goreham DM, Cooper JP,
Cobb JE, Lenhard JM, Hull-Ryde EA, Mohr CP, Blanchard SG, Parks DJ,
Moore LB, Lehmann JM, Plunket K, Miller AB, Milburn MV, Kliewer SA,
Willson TM 1999 A peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor
ligand inhibits adipocyte differentiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96:61026106[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Rossi A, Kapahi P, Natoli G, Takahashi T, Chen Y, Karin M,
Santoro MG 2000 Anti-inflammatory cyclopentenone prostaglandins are
direct inhibitors of I
B kinase. Nature 403:103108[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Straus DS, Pascual G, Li M, Welch JS, Ricote M, Hsiang CH,
Sengchanthalangsy LL, Ghosh G, Glass CK 2000 15-deoxy-
12,14-prostaglandin
J2 inhibits multiple steps in the NF-
B
signaling pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:48444849[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ricote M, Li AC, Willson TM, Kelly CJ, Glass CK 1998 The
peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-
is a negative
regulator of macrophage activation. Nature 391:7982[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Jiang C, Ting AT, Seed B 1998 PPAR-
agonists inhibit
production of monocyte inflammatory cytokines. Nature 391:8286[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Willson TM, Cobb JE, Cowan DJ, Wiethe RW, Correa ID, Prakash
SR, Beck KD, Moore LB, Kliewer SA, Lehmann JM 1996 The
structure-activity relationship between peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor
agonism and the
antihyperglycemic activity of thiazolidinediones. J Med Chem 39:665668[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Nichols JS, Parks DJ, Consler TG, Blanchard SG 1998 Development of a scintillation proximity assay for peroxisome
proliferator-activated receptor
ligand binding domain. Anal
Biochem 257:112119[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Kliewer SA, Sundseth SS, Jones SA, Brown PJ, Wisely GB, Koble
CS, Devchand P, Wahli W, Willson TM, Lenhard JM, Lehmann JM 1997 Fatty
acids and eicosanoids regulate gene expression through direct
interactions with peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors
and
. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 94:43184323[Abstract/Free Full Text]