Inhibition of the Dihydrotestosterone-Activated Androgen Receptor by Nuclear Receptor Corepressor

Shinta Cheng, Sabrina Brzostek, Suzanne R. Lee, Anthony N. Hollenberg and Steven P. Balk

Cancer Biology Program, Division of Hematology-Oncology (S.C., S.R.L., S.P.B.) and Thyroid Unit, Division of Endocrinology (S.B., A.N.H.), Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02215

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Anthony N. Hollenberg, Division of Endocrinology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215. E-mail: thollenb{at}caregroup.harvard.edu; or Steven P. Balk, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215; E-mail: sbalk{at}caregroup.harvard.edu.


    ABSTRACT
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 REFERENCES
 
Nuclear receptor corepressor (NCoR) mediates transcriptional repression by unliganded nuclear receptors and certain steroid hormone receptors (SHRs) bound to nonphysiological antagonists, but has not been found to regulate SHRs bound to their natural ligands. This report demonstrates that NCoR interacts directly with the androgen receptor (AR) and represses dihydrotestosterone-stimulated AR transcriptional activity. The NCoR C terminus, containing the receptor interacting domains, was necessary for repression, which was ablated by mutations in the corepressor nuclear receptor (CoRNR) boxes. In contrast, the NCoR N terminus, containing domains that can recruit histone deacetylases, was not necessary for repression. Binding studies in vitro with a series of glutathione-S-transferase-NCoR and -AR fusion proteins demonstrated a direct interaction that was similarly dependent upon the NCoR corepressor nuclear receptor boxes and AR ligand binding domain and was independent of ligand and helix 12 in the AR ligand binding domain. This NCoR-AR interaction was further demonstrated in mammalian two-hybrid assays and by coimmunoprecipitation of the endogenous proteins from a prostate cancer cell line. Finally, AR transcriptional activity could be enhanced in vivo by sequestration of endogenous NCoR with unliganded thyroid hormone receptor. These results demonstrate that AR, in contrast to other SHRs, is regulated by NCoR and suggest the possibility of developing selective AR modulators that enhance this interaction.


    INTRODUCTION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 REFERENCES
 
THE ANDROGEN RECEPTOR (AR) is a steroid hormone receptor (SHR) member of the larger nuclear receptor (NR) superfamily of ligand-regulated and sequence-specific transcription factors and is critical for normal male development as well as prostate cancer development and progression (1, 2, 3, 4). The AR and other unliganded SHRs associate with a heat shock protein 90 complex that functions as a chaperone to maintain the C-terminal ligand binding domain (LBD) in a conformation competent to bind ligand. Ligand binding causes a conformational change in the LBD with subsequent dissociation from heat shock protein 90, homodimerization, and DNA binding mediated by a central DNA binding domain (DBD). A major feature of this ligand-induced conformational change is movement of helix 12 in the LBD against helices 3 and 5, generating a small hydrophobic cleft that binds LXXLL motifs (where L is leucine and X is any amino acid) (5, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11). These LXXLL motifs were identified initially in the p160 family of steroid receptor coactivator (SRC) proteins, which mediate the LBD transactivation function (AF-2) through intrinsic histone acetyltransferase activity and recruitment of CREB-binding protein/p300 (8, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20). However, the LXXLL motif has been identified in multiple other transcriptional regulatory proteins that presumably compete for LBD binding.

Although the DBD and LBD of SHRs are highly conserved, there is much less homology among SHRs in the N-terminal domain. The AR has a particularly long N-terminal domain with a very strong autonomous transactivation function (AF-1) (21, 22). The AR and estrogen receptor {alpha} (ER{alpha}) N-terminal domains have been found to interact directly with their respective LBDs (23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28). In the case of the AR, this interaction is mediated by LXXLL-like sequences in the N terminus, which presumably compete with other LXXLL motif-containing proteins for binding to the LBD (28). The AR and ER{alpha} N-terminal domains can also bind directly to SRC-1 and SRC-2 (human transcriptional intermediary factor 2, murine glucocorticoid receptor interacting protein 1) through sites in the coactivators distinct from the LXXLL motifs (10, 27, 29, 30, 31). Indeed, SRC-1 binding to the AR appears to be primarily dependent upon the N terminus, as SRC-1 binding to the AR LBD is extremely weak or absent (10, 27, 31).

In contrast to SHRs, other NRs including thyroid hormone receptor (TR) isoforms, the retinoic acid receptor isoforms, and the vitamin D receptor, bind DNA and function as transcriptional repressors in the absence of ligand. This repression is mediated in part by two related corepressor proteins, the nuclear receptor corepressor (NCoR) (32) and the silencing mediator of retinoic acid and thyroid hormone receptors (SMRT) (33), which serve to repress transcription by recruiting histone deacetylases (HDACs) to target genes (34, 35, 36, 37). Importantly, the corepressors interact with NRs through a binding site that overlaps the SRC site in the LBD. Binding is through conserved C-terminal receptor interaction domains (RIDs) in NCoR and SMRT. These RIDs have a hydrophobic core (I/LXXII, where I is isoleucine, L is leucine, and X is any amino acid), termed the corepressor nuclear receptor box (CoRNR box), that is related to the coactivator binding LXXLL motif (38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43). The ligand-induced movement of helix 12 in the LBD of NRs that generates the SRC binding site also occludes the NCoR and SMRT binding site and thereby acts as a corepressor-coactivator switch. Indeed, in some NRs such as retinoic X receptor, helix 12 functions as an inhibitor of corepressor binding even in the absence of ligand (44).

Certain synthetic partial agonists such as 4-hydroxytamoxifen (4OHT) for the ER{alpha} can induce an alternative positioning of helix 12 in the LBD that permits corepressor binding (6, 11, 45, 46, 47). Indeed, 4OHT functions as an ER{alpha} agonist in fibroblasts from NCoR knockout mice (48). NCoR binding to the 4OHT-liganded ER{alpha} may mediate the therapeutic effects of 4OHT in breast cancer, but the physiological significance of these corepressor binding interactions have been unclear as neither NCoR nor SMRT has been found to repress the activity of SHRs stimulated by their natural ligands. This report demonstrates that NCoR interacts with the AR and represses transcriptional activity stimulated by dihydrotestosterone (DHT), a natural ligand for the AR. These findings indicate that NCoR is a physiological regulator of AR transcriptional activity and support the development of novel AR antagonists that enhance the AR-NCoR interaction.


    RESULTS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 REFERENCES
 
NCoR Represses AR Transcriptional Activity
The weak interaction between SRC-1 and the AR LBD, the lack of AR AF-2 activity in mammalian cells, and the reported AR AF-2 activity in yeast (49) suggested that the agonist-bound AR AF-2 might permit binding to a mammalian corepressor. This hypothesis was tested by cotransfection of AR and NCoR expression vectors, with an androgen response element (ARE4)-luciferase reporter gene. NCoR, but not the parent PKCR2 vector, inhibited the DHT-induced transcriptional activation of the AR (Fig. 1AGo and data not shown). This inhibition did not reflect a nonspecific effect on transcription, as neither the basal activity of the ARE4-luciferase reporter nor a control cytomegalovirus (CMV)-regulated Renilla reporter gene were decreased by NCoR (Fig. 1BGo). Furthermore, NCoR did not down-regulate AR protein levels in transfected cells (Fig. 1CGo). Finally, NCoR did not inhibit the transcriptional activity of the estradiol (E2)-liganded ER{alpha} (Fig. 1DGo, right panel). Taken together, these results supported the hypothesis that NCoR interacted with and repressed the agonist-bound AR.



View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. NCoR Repression of AR Transcriptional Activity

A, CV-1 cells were cotransfected with 200 ng of ARE4-luciferase reporter, 200 ng of AR expression vectors (pSVARo), 0.2 ng of pRL-CMV, and full-length NCoR expression vector (PKCR2-NCoR), as indicated. DHT (10 nM) was added as indicated 24 h after the transfection was initiated, and cells were harvested 24 h later. B, Renilla activity in the lysates from panel A. C, CV-1 cells were transfected as above in conjunction with the indicated amounts of NCoR expression vector, and 10 µl of the lysates (total 100 µl) were immunoblotted for AR expression. D, CV-1 cells were cotransfected with ARE4- or ERE2-luciferase reporters (200 ng), AR or ER{alpha} expression vectors (200 ng), pRL-CMV, and NCoR (200 ng) and treated with either 10 nM DHT or 10 nM E2 as indicated.

 
Repression Requires NCoR RIDs and Is Not HDAC Dependent
The N terminus of NCoR contains repressor domains (RD1–3) that function, at least in part, by recruiting HDACs (Fig. 2AGo). To determine whether NCoR repression of AR activity was HDAC dependent, transfections were carried out in the presence of trichostatin A (TSA), a specific HDAC inhibitor. TSA markedly enhanced overall transcriptional activity as well as DHT-stimulated AR transcriptional activity (Fig. 3AGo). However, this DHT-dependent AR activity in the presence of TSA was still strongly repressed by NCoR, suggesting that repression was not HDAC dependent.



View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Schematic Representation of Full-Length Human NCoR Deletion Mutants and AR

A, Full-length NCoR and mutants. RD1–3 are the N-terminal repressor domains, SID is a potential Sin3 interacting domain, and N1–3 are the C-terminal RIDs. NCoRI is a truncation to amino acid 1574, NCoRId has a further deletion removing the SID, and NCoRIm has point mutations that substitute an alanine for the initial leucine or isoleucine in each of the three CoRNR boxes, as indicated. B, Outline of AR structure indicating the beginning of the DBD (residue 539), nuclear localization signal (NLS, residue 627), and helices 3 and 12 (residues 697 and 893, respectively).

 


View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. NCoR Repression of AR Transcriptional Activity Mediated by the RIDs

A, CV-1 cells were cotransfected with pSVARo, ARE4-luciferase, pRL-CMV, and full-length PKCR2-NCoR at 200 ng and were then treated with DHT (10 nM) or TSA (100 nM), as indicated. B, CV-1 cells were transfected with pSVARo, ARE4-luciferase, pRL-CMV, and PKCR2-NCoRI (200 ng) and treated with DHT (10 nM) as indicated. C, CV-1 cells were transfected with pSVARo, ARE4-luciferase, pRL-CMV, and PKCR2-NCoRId or -NCoRIm expression vectors (200 ng) as indicated. D, Lysates from cells transfected as above with NCoRI or NCoRIm expression vectors were immunoblotted with an affinity-purified rabbit Ab generated against a C-terminal NCoR peptide. E, Lysates from cells transfected with the indicated amounts of NCoR expression vectors were immunoblotted for AR.

 
To further address the HDAC requirement for NCoR repression of DHT-stimulated AR transcriptional activity, the function of an NCoR mutant with the HDAC binding N-terminal repressor domains deleted was assessed (NCoRI, see Fig. 2AGo) (43, 50). NCoRI similarly repressed AR transcriptional activity (Fig. 3BGo). An additional mutant (NCoRId), with a further deletion to remove a potential Sin3 binding site carboxy to the previously identified repressor domains, was also tested (Fig. 2AGo). Similarly to NCoRI, the NCoRId mutant strongly repressed AR transcriptional activity (Fig. 3CGo). These findings indicated that repression was not dependent on HDAC or the N-terminal repression domains of NCoR.

It was next determined whether repression required the NCoR C-terminal RIDs previously shown to mediate binding to nonsteroid hormone nuclear receptors. The NCoRIm mutant contains the NCoR C terminus corresponding to NCoRI, but with point mutations in each of the NCoR CoRNR boxes (N1–3) that were shown previously to abrogate thyroid hormone receptor binding (43) (Fig. 2AGo). In contrast to the wild-type NCoRI, the NCoRIm mutant did not repress AR transcriptional activity (Fig. 3CGo). Importantly, immunoblotting showed that the lack of repression by NCoRIm was not due to lower protein expression as it was expressed at greater levels than NCoRI (Fig. 3DGo). Immunoblotting also demonstrated that transfection with NCoR mutants, similarly to intact NCoR, did not decrease AR protein levels (Fig. 3EGo). Taken together, these results demonstrated that the AR-NCoR interaction was mediated by the C-terminal RIDs. They further showed that the NCoR C-terminal RIDs could repress AR activity in the absence of N-terminal repressor domains, possibly through competition for coactivators or AR N- and C-terminal interactions.

AR-NCoR Binding in Vitro and in Vivo
Precipitation experiments using glutathione-S-transferase (GST)-NCoR fusion proteins corresponding to the above wild-type and RID mutants were next performed to further address whether there were direct binding interactions between the AR and NCoR (Fig. 4AGo). 35S-Labeled AR generated by in vitro transcription/translation bound specifically to GST-NCoRI, containing the three C-terminal RIDs (Fig. 4BGo). Binding was not affected by DHT or by a pure AR antagonist, bicalutamide. However, GST-NCoRIm, with mutations in the CoRNR boxes that abrogated repression of AR transcriptional activity, had diminished AR binding (~45% relative to GST-NCoRI).



View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. NCoR Binding to the AR in Vitro

A, Coomassie blue-stained gel of GST-NCoRI and GST-NCoRIm fusion proteins, with arrow indicating the intact fusion proteins. B, GST, GST-NCoRI, and GST-NCoRIm fusion proteins (5 µg) on glutathione-agarose beads were incubated with 5 µl of 35S-methionine-labeled AR, with DHT (10 nM) or bicalutamide (100 nM), as indicated, and bound protein was determined. Input represents 2 µl (40%) of the AR used for binding. C and D, The indicated GST or GST-AR fusion proteins (5 µg) bound to glutathione-agarose beads were incubated as above with 5 µl of in vitro transcription/translation generated 35S-labeled NCoRI or NCoRIm, with DHT (10 nM) as indicated. Input represents 2 µl (40%).

 
The converse experiments were carried out using GST-AR fusion proteins (Fig. 2BGo). GST-AR(505–919), containing the AR DBD and LBD, bound specifically to 35S-labeled NCoRI, with much weaker binding to the CoRNR box mutant NCoRIm (Fig. 4CGo). There was no binding to GST-AR(505–635), containing the AR DBD, whereas deletion of the AR C-terminal helices 9–12 in GST-AR(635–804) did not prevent binding (Fig. 4DGo). Taken together, these results supported a direct, helix 12-independent binding interaction between the AR LBD and the RIDs in NCoR.

Coimmunoprecipitation experiments were next carried out to determine whether there was an in vivo binding interaction between endogenous AR and NCoR. These experiments used the LNCaP cell line, the only generally available AR expressing human prostate cancer cell line. The AR expressed by LNCaP has a well characterized point mutation in the LBD (T877A), but it still responds to DHT (51). LNCaP cells were grown in medium with charcoal and dextran-stripped (steroid hormone-depleted) FCS (CS-FCS), plus or minus added DHT. Lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-AR antibodies against the N or C terminus, and NCoR in the immunoprecipitates was detected with the affinity-purified polyclonal antibody (Ab) raised against a C-terminal NCoR peptide. Immunoblots of lysates from LNCaP cells demonstrated readily detectable levels of endogenous NCoR, which comigrated with transfected full-length NCoR (Fig. 5Go and data not shown). NCoR was coimmunoprecipitated with the anti-AR N- and C-terminal antibodies, but not in the control immunoprecipitations (Fig. 5Go, A and B, respectively). There were no marked differences in the amount of NCoR coimmunoprecipitated with the AR from hormone-depleted or DHT-treated cells. These results demonstrated an interaction between NCoR and the AR in vivo, with comparable amounts of AR-associated NCoR in the absence or presence of added DHT.



View larger version (47K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 5. Coimmunoprecipitation of Endogenous AR and NcoR

LNCaP cells grown to confluence on 10-cm plates in RPMI-164, 10% CS-FCS, and 10 nM DHT as indicated were lysed and immunoprecipitated with anti-AR N-terminal (A) or C-terminal (B) antibodies or normal rabbit serum (NRS) IgG, followed by anti-NCoR immunoblotting. Double arrow is position of 220-kDa marker. Input is 1% of the lysate.

 
AR-NCoR Interaction in Mammalian Two-Hybrid Assays
Mammalian two-hybrid assays were carried out to further assess functional in vivo interactions between the AR LBD and the RIDs of NCoR. CV1 cells were cotransfected with the AR LBD (amino acids 660–919) fused to the Gal4 DBD [pBind-ARLBD(660–919)] and a fragment of NCoR corresponding to NCoRId (amino acids 1806–2454), which was fused to the VP16 transactivation domain (AASVVP16-NCoRId). The Gal4-AR LBD(660–919) had no transcriptional activity, consistent with the weak or absent AF-2 of the AR LBD (Fig. 6AGo). However, transcriptional activity was strongly stimulated by cotransfection with the VP16-NCoRId vector, in the presence or absence of DHT. In contrast, VP16-NCoRId did not stimulate when coexpressed with the Gal4 DBD or Gal4-AR DBD vectors (Fig. 6BGo and data not shown). These results further supported a direct and ligand-independent interaction between NCoR and the AR LBD.



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 6. NCoR-AR Interaction in Mammalian Two-Hybrid Assay

A, CV-1 cells were cotransfected with pG5-luciferase reporter (100 ng), pBind-ARLBD (100 ng), pRL-CMV, and AASVP16-NCoRId (0–20 ng) and treated with DHT as indicated. B, CV-1 cells were cotransfected with pG5-luciferase reporter (100 ng), pBind-ARDBD or ARLBD (100 ng), pRL-CMV, and AASVP16-NCoRId (0–20 ng) and treated as indicated.

 
AR Transcriptional Repression by Endogenous NCoR
Experiments were next carried out to determine whether NCoR at physiological levels modulated ligand-dependent AR activity. Immunoblotting confirmed that CV1 cells expressed readily detectable levels of NCoR, which could be augmented by transfection (Fig. 7AGo). The unliganded TRß, which binds to NCoR with high affinity (52), was used to sequester NCoR in cotransfection experiments with AR and an ARE4-luciferase reporter gene. TRß in the absence of ligand enhanced DHT-dependent AR activity approximately 2-fold (Fig. 7BGo). Addition of ligand for TRß, T3, abrogated this increase in AR transcriptional activity and resulted in repression below the level in the absence of TRß. This result was consistent with a ligand-induced release of NCoR from the TRß and subsequent competition for transcriptional coactivators.



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 7. AR Transcriptional Activity Enhanced by NCoR Sequestration

A, CV-1 cells were transfected as indicated with full-length (PKCR2-NCoR) or C-terminal (PKCR2-NCoRI) NCoR expression vectors, and lysates were immunoblotted with NCoR C-terminal antibody. Arrow indicates position of endogenous NCoR. B, CV-1 cells were transfected with pSVARo (100 ng), ARE4-luciferase (200 ng), pRL-CMV (0.2 ng), PKCR2-TRß (200 ng), or PKCR2-TRß(P214R) (200 ng) vectors, and cultured in DMEM and 10% CS-FCS with 10 nM DHT or 10 nM T3, as indicated.

 
A further control was a TRß hinge region mutant, TRß(P214R), shown previously to be defective in NCoR binding (53). In contrast to the wild-type TRß, the TRß(P214R) mutant did not augment AR transcriptional activity. Taken together, these results indicated that endogenous NCoR functioned as a negative regulator of DHT-stimulated AR transcriptional activity.


    DISCUSSION
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 REFERENCES
 
Nonsteroidal NRs bind NCoR in the absence of ligand, but SHRs have been found previously to bind NCoR only in the presence of nonphysiological partial agonists such as 4OHT and raloxifene for the ER{alpha} (6, 11, 45, 46, 47). In contrast to these findings with other SHRs, this report demonstrates that NCoR binds to the AR and functions as a negative regulator of agonist-dependent AR transcriptional activity. Agonist ligand binding by most SHRs generates a high-affinity site for binding coactivator proteins through LXXLL motifs, accounting for the independent transcriptional activity of the LBD (AF-2). However, the AR LBD has minimal independent transcriptional activity, and this can be attributed to very weak SRC coactivator binding. The 4OHT- and raloxifene-liganded ER{alpha} assume conformations with helix 12 positioned away from helices 3 and 5, thereby failing to generate the high-affinity LXXLL coactivator binding site and revealing a cryptic corepressor binding site (6, 11). Taken together, these observations suggest the hypothesis that the DHT-liganded AR LBD may assume an alternative conformation with helix 12 positioned so that it does not ablate the NCoR binding site.

However, recent crystal structures of the agonist-liganded AR LBD do not demonstrate such alternative positioning of helix 12. Although the DHT-liganded AR LBD crystallized as a monomer, helix 12 was still positioned next to helices 3 and 5 as in the agonist-liganded ER{alpha} and PR (54). Helix 12 was split into two shorter helices when the AR was bound to the synthetic androgen R1881 (55), but these were again positioned similarly to helix 12 in agonist-bound ER and PR. Therefore, while it is possible that this agonist conformation of the AR can bind NCoR or that the AR in solution has a unique agonist conformation that can bind coactivators or corepressors, an alternative hypothesis consistent with the above structural data is that the agonist-bound AR can readily flip between coactivator and corepressor binding conformations. Each conformation would be stabilized in vivo by coactivator or corepressor binding, respectively, so the relatively weak AR interaction with coactivators through LXXLL motifs could permit increased NCoR binding. Conversely, the lack of detectable NCoR interaction with other agonist-liganded SHRs presumably reflects stronger coactivator binding as well as enhanced agonist-induced stabilization of the LXXLL binding conformation. Importantly, the conformation of agonist-bound AR could be further regulated by posttranslational modifications, including phosphorylation and acetylation, which may modulate transcriptional activity (2, 56).

Whether the AR assumes a single agonist conformation that can bind NCoR or flips between discrete coactivator and corepressor binding conformations, NCoR binding would almost certainly prevent coactivator protein binding and would likely interfere with critical interactions between the N terminus and LBD mediated by N-terminal LXXLL-like motifs (27, 28). This interference may account for the transcriptional repression mediated by transfection of NCoR C-terminal RIDs lacking known repressor domains. Alternately, repression may be mediated by a recently identified corepressor that binds to the C terminus of SMRT through a sequence with homology to NCoR (57). In either case, the N-terminal repressor domains and their associated HDACs most likely contribute to repression of AR transcriptional activity on endogenous genes at physiological NCoR levels in vivo.

The physiological functions of most SHRs are regulated largely by the levels of their corresponding steroid hormones, although the responses to these hormones may certainly be modulated by other factors. In contrast, the biological activity of AR differs from other SHRs in that androgen levels do not fluctuate markedly in adult males. Therefore, the relative levels of NCoR and other corepressors (58) vs. coactivator activity may be more important regulators of AR function. NCoR may further provide a link between AR and other NRs, with increased NCoR activity and a subsequent decrease in AR function possibly contributing to the therapeutic effects in prostate cancer of retinoids, vitamin D, and troglitazone, the latter being a ligand for the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor {gamma} (59). Most significantly, the data presented here suggest the potential for development of selective AR modulators that would promote NCoR binding. Such drugs could be an alternative to androgen-ablative therapies in prostate cancer and could make important contributions to prostate cancer prevention and treatment.


    MATERIALS AND METHODS
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 REFERENCES
 
Plasmids and Reagents
Expression vectors for the AR (pSVARo) (60), ER{alpha} (pcDNA-ER{alpha}) (61), NCoR (PKCR2-NCoR) (32), TRß (PKCR2-TRß) (52), and TRß(P214R) [PKCR2-TRß(P214R)] (53) have been described. NCoRI is a truncation of human NCoR to amino acid 1574 that was initially cloned in a yeast two-hybrid screen (43, 50). NCoRId has a further deletion to amino acid 1806 that removes a putative Sin3 interacting domain. NCoRIm was derived from NCoRI and has point mutations that substitute an alanine for the initial leucine or isoleucine in each of the three CoRNR boxes (43). The NCoR mutants were cloned into PKCR2 or AASVVP16 for mammalian expression and pGEX4T1 for GST fusion protein production (43). GST-AR fusion protein expression vectors in pGEX-2TK have been described previously (62). The AR LBD (amino acids 660–919) and DBD (501–660) were cloned into the mammalian Gal4 DBD fusion vector pBIND (Promega Corp., Madison, WI), to give pBIND-ARLBD(660–919) and pBIND-ARDBD(501–660), respectively. The reporter genes used were ARE4-luciferase containing four tandem copies of a synthetic ARE (63), estrogen response element (ERE2)-luciferase containing two EREs (61), a CMV-regulated Renilla control, pRL-CMV (Promega Corp.), and pG5-Luc (regulated by five tandem Gal4 binding sites) (Promega Corp.). TSA, DHT, E2, and T3 were from Sigma (St. Louis, MO).

Transfections
CV-1 cells in 24-well plates in DMEM with 10% CS-FCS (HyClone Laboratories, Inc., Logan, UT) were cotransfected using Lipofectamine 2000 (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) and the indicated vectors, using 0.2 ng of pRL-CMV for normalization. Fresh medium was added after 24 h, and DHT (10 nM) or other hormones were then added for an additional 24 h. Firefly and Renilla luciferase activities were assayed with a Dual Luciferase Reporter Assay System Kit (Promega Corp.). Firefly luciferase activities in identically treated triplicate or quadruplicate samples were normalized for Renilla activities, and these values were used to determine standard deviations (SDs), with error bars indicating 1 SD. However, as some treatments had effects on the Renilla activities, the presented firefly luciferase results reflect the actual means of triplicate or quadruplicate samples that are not adjusted for differences in Renilla between experimental conditions. The data shown are representative of at least three independent experiments.

Immunoblotting
Cell lysates were immunoblotted for AR expression using pooled polyclonal rabbit Ab specific for the AR N- and C-termini (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA). Other lysates were immunoblotted with an affinity purified rabbit Ab generated against a C-terminal NCoR peptide (PHQQNRIWEREPAPLLSAQ) (Hollenberg, A., unpublished data).

Precipitations
GST, GST-NCoRI, and GST-NCoRIm fusion proteins (5 µg) bound to glutathione-agarose beads were generated as described (43) and incubated with 5 µl of 35S methionine-labeled AR generated by in vitro transcription/translation (TNT reticulocyte lysate, Promega Corp.), using a pcDNA3-AR template. Binding was for 2–4 h at 4 C in a total volume of 0.5 ml of binding buffer (20 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 0.3% Nonidet P-40, and 20% glycerol), with DHT (10 nM) or bicalutamide (100 nM), as indicated. After four washes with binding buffer, the beads were boiled in 30 µl Laemmli reducing sample buffer and analyzed by SDS-PAGE followed by autoradiography. GST or GST-AR fusion proteins (5 µg) bound to glutathione-agarose beads were incubated as above with 5 µl of in vitro transcription/translation-generated 35S-labeled NCoRI or NCoRIm, with DHT (10 nM) as indicated.

For coimmunoprecipitations, LNCaP cells grown to confluence on 10-cm plates in RPMI-1640, 10% CS-FCS, with 10 nM DHT as indicated, were lysed in 1 ml cell lysis buffer [50 mM HEPES (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 1% Triton X-100, 1.5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM EGTA, 100 mM NaF, 1 mM Na3VO4, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and 4 µg/ml 4-(2-aminoethyl) benzenesulfonyl fluoride]. The lysates were split and immunoprecipitated with 2 µg of polyclonal rabbit anti-AR specific for the AR N- or C-termini (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.) or 2 µg of normal rabbit serum IgG bound to 10 µl of protein A-Sepharose beads for 2 h at 4 C. Proteins were run reduced on 6% SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted with the anti-NCoR peptide Ab.


    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank A. Brinkmann, M. Lu, M. Brown, W. Chin, and C. Glass for kindly providing vectors, and Anita Makowski for technical assistance.


    FOOTNOTES
 
This work was supported by NIH Grants R01-CA65647, R01-DK56123, and T32-CA81156, and by the Hershey Family Prostate Cancer Research Fund.

Abbreviations: Ab, Antibody; AF-1, AF-2, transactivation functions 1 and 2; AR, Androgen receptor; ARE, androgen response element; CMV, cytomegalovirus; CoRNR, corepressor nuclear receptor; CS-FCS, charcoal dextran-stripped FCS; DBD, DNA-binding domain; DHT, dihydrotestosterone; E2, estradiol; ER{alpha}, estrogen receptor-{alpha}; ERE, estrogen response element; FCS, fetal calf serum; GST, glutathione-S-transferase; HDAC, histone deacetylase; LBD, ligand-binding domain; NCoR, nuclear receptor corepressor; NR, nuclear receptor; 4OHT, 4-hydroxytamoxifen; RID, receptor interaction domain; SHR, steroid hormone receptor; SMRT, silencing mediator of retinoid and thyroid hormone receptor; SRC, steroid receptor coactivator; TR, thyroid hormone receptor; TSA, trichostatin A.

Received for publication October 16, 2001. Accepted for publication March 5, 2001.


    REFERENCES
 TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Quigley CA, De Bellis A, Marschke KB, el Awady MK, Wilson EM, French FS 1995 Androgen receptor defects: historical, clinical, and molecular perspectives. Endocr Rev 16:271–321[Medline]
  2. Brinkmann AO, Blok LJ, de Ruiter PE, Doesburg P, Steketee K, Berrevoets CA, Trapman J 1999 Mechanisms of androgen receptor activation and function. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 69:307–313[CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Catalona WJ 1994 Management of cancer of the prostate. N Engl J Med 331:996–1004[Free Full Text]
  4. Bubley GJ, Balk SP 1996 Treatment of metastatic prostate cancer. Lessons from the androgen receptor. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 10:713–725[Medline]
  5. Wurtz JM, Bourguet W, Renaud JP, Vivat V, Chambon P, Moras D, Gronemeyer H 1996 A canonical structure for the ligand-binding domain of nuclear receptors. Nat Struct Biol 3:206[Medline]
  6. Brzozowski AM, Pike AC, Dauter Z, Hubbard RE, Bonn T, Engstrom O, Ohman L, Greene GL, Gustafsson JA, Carlquist M 1997 Molecular basis of agonism and antagonism in the oestrogen receptor. Nature 389:753–758[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Heery DM, Kalkhoven E, Hoare S, Parker MG 1997 A signature motif in transcriptional co-activators mediates binding to nuclear receptors. Nature 387:733–736[CrossRef][Medline]
  8. Torchia J, Rose DW, Inostroza J, Kamei Y, Westin S, Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG 1997 The transcriptional co-activator p/CIP binds CBP and mediates nuclear-receptor function. Nature 387:677–684[CrossRef][Medline]
  9. Feng W, Ribeiro RC, 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 280:1747–1749[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Ding XF, Anderson CM, Ma H, Hong H, Uht RM, Kushner PJ, Stallcup MR 1998 Nuclear receptor-binding sites of coactivators glucocorticoid receptor interacting protein 1 (GRIP1) and steroid receptor coactivator 1 (SRC-1): multiple motifs with different binding specificities. Mol Endocrinol 12:302–313[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Shiau AK, Barstad D, Loria PM, Cheng L, Kushner PJ, Agard DA, Greene GL 1998 The structural basis of estrogen receptor/coactivator recognition and the antagonism of this interaction by tamoxifen. Cell 95:927–937[Medline]
  12. Onate SA, Tsai SY, Tsai MJ, O’Malley BW 1995 Sequence and characterization of a coactivator for the steroid hormone receptor superfamily. Science 270:1354–1357[Abstract]
  13. Voegel JJ, Heine MJ, Zechel C, Chambon P, Gronemeyer H 1996 TIF2, a 160 kDa transcriptional mediator for the ligand-dependent activation function AF-2 of nuclear receptors. EMBO J 15:3667–3675[Abstract]
  14. Kamei Y, Xu L, Heinzel T, Torchia J, Kurokawa R, Gloss B, Lin SC, Heyman RA, Rose DW, Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG 1996 A CBP integrator complex mediates transcriptional activation and AP-1 inhibition by nuclear receptors. Cell 85:403–414[Medline]
  15. Hong H, Kohli K, Garabedian MJ, Stallcup MR 1997 GRIP1, a transcriptional coactivator for the AF-2 transactivation domain of steroid, thyroid, retinoid, and vitamin D receptors. Mol Cell Biol 17:2735–2744[Abstract]
  16. Anzick SL, Kononen J, Walker RL, Azorsa DO, Tanner MM, Guan XY, Sauter G, Kallioniemi OP, Trent JM, Meltzer PS 1997 AIB1, a steroid receptor coactivator amplified in breast and ovarian cancer. Science 277:965–968[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Chen H, Lin RJ, Schiltz RL, Chakravarti D, Nash A, Nagy L, Privalsky ML, Nakatani Y, Evans RM 1997 Nuclear receptor coactivator ACTR is a novel histone acetyltransferase and forms a multimeric activation complex with P/CAF and CBP/p300. Cell 90:569–580[Medline]
  18. Takeshita A, Cardona GR, Koibuchi N, Suen CS, Chin WW 1997 TRAM-1, A novel 160-kDa thyroid hormone receptor activator molecule, exhibits distinct properties from steroid receptor coactivator-1. J Biol Chem 272:27629–27634[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Spencer TE, Jenster G, Burcin MM, Allis CD, Zhou J, Mizzen CA, McKenna NJ, Onate SA, Tsai SY, Tsai MJ, O’Malley BW 1997 Steroid receptor coactivator-1 is a histone acetyltransferase. Nature 389:194–198[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Onate SA, Boonyaratanakornkit V, Spencer TE, Tsai SY, Tsai MJ, Edwards DP, O’Malley BW 1998 The steroid receptor coactivator-1 contains multiple receptor interacting and activation domains that cooperatively enhance the activation function 1 (AF1) and AF2 domains of steroid receptors. J Biol Chem 273:12101–12108[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Jenster G, van der Korput HA, van Vroonhoven C, van der Kwast TH, Trapman J, Brinkmann AO 1991 Domains of the human androgen receptor involved in steroid binding, transcriptional activation, and subcellular localization. Mol Endocrinol 5:1396–1404[Abstract]
  22. Simental JA, Sar M, Lane MV, French FS, Wilson EM 1991 Transcriptional activation and nuclear targeting signals of the human androgen receptor. J Biol Chem 266:510–518[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Wong CI, Zhou ZX, Sar M, Wilson EM 1993 Steroid requirement for androgen receptor dimerization and DNA binding. Modulation by intramolecular interactions between the NH2-terminal and steroid-binding domains. J Biol Chem 268:19004–19012[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Kraus WL, McInerney EM, Katzenellenbogen BS 1995 Ligand-dependent, transcriptionally productive association of the amino- and carboxyl-terminal regions of a steroid hormone nuclear receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92:12314–12318[Abstract]
  25. Doesburg P, Kuil CW, Berrevoets CA, Steketee K, Faber PW, Mulder E, Brinkmann AO, Trapman J 1997 Functional in vivo interaction between the amino-terminal, transactivation domain and the ligand binding domain of the androgen receptor. Biochemistry 36:1052–1064[CrossRef][Medline]
  26. Ikonen T, Palvimo JJ, Janne OA 1997 Interaction between the amino- and carboxy-terminal regions of the rat androgen receptor modulates transcriptional activity and is influenced by nuclear receptor coactivators. J Biol Chem 272:29821–29828[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Berrevoets CA, Doesburg P, Steketee K, Trapman J, Brinkmann AO 1998 Functional interactions of the AF-2 activation domain core region of the human androgen receptor with the amino-terminal domain and with the transcriptional coactivator TIF2 (transcriptional intermediary factor 2). Mol Endocrinol 12:1172–1183[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. He B, Kemppainen JA, Wilson EM 2000 FXXLF and WXXLF sequences mediate the NH2-terminal interaction with the ligand binding domain of the androgen receptor. J Biol Chem 275:22986–22994[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Webb P, Nguyen P, Shinsako J, Anderson C, Feng W, Nguyen MP, Chen D, Huang SM, Subramanian S, McKinerney E, Katzenellenbogen BS, Stallcup MR, Kushner PJ 1998 Estrogen receptor activation function 1 works by binding p160 coactivator proteins. Mol Endocrinol 12:1605–1618[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Alen P, Claessens F, Verhoeven G, Rombauts W, Peeters B 1999 The androgen receptor amino-terminal domain plays a key role in p160 coactivator-stimulated gene transcription. Mol Cell Biol 19:6085–6097[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Bevan CL, Hoare S, Claessens F, Heery DM, Parker MG 1999 The AF1 and AF2 domains of the androgen receptor interact with distinct regions of SRC1. Mol Cell Biol 19:8383–8392[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Horlein AJ, Naar AM, Heinzel T, Torchia J, Gloss B, Kurokawa R, Ryan A, Kamei Y, Soderstrom M, Glass CK 1995 Ligand-independent repression by the thyroid hormone receptor mediated by a nuclear receptor corepressor. Nature 377:397–404[CrossRef][Medline]
  33. Chen JD, Evans RM 1995 A transcriptional co-repressor that interacts with nuclear hormone receptors. Nature 377:454–457[CrossRef][Medline]
  34. Alland L, Muhle R, Hou Jr H, Potes J, Chin L, Schreiber-Agus N, DePinho RA 1997 Role for N-CoR and histone deacetylase in Sin3-mediated transcriptional repression. Nature 387:49–55[CrossRef][Medline]
  35. Heinzel T, Lavinsky RM, Mullen TM, Soderstrom M, Laherty CD, Torchia J, Yang WM, Brard G, Ngo SD, Davie JR, Seto E, Eisenman RN, Rose DW, Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG 1997 A complex containing N-CoR, mSin3 and histone deacetylase mediates transcriptional repression. Nature 387:43–48[CrossRef][Medline]
  36. Nagy L, Kao HY, Chakravarti D, Lin RJ, Hassig CA, Ayer DE, Schreiber SL, Evans RM 1997 Nuclear receptor repression mediated by a complex containing SMRT, mSin3A, and histone deacetylase. Cell 89:373–380[Medline]
  37. Huang EY, Zhang J, Miska EA, Guenther MG, Kouzarides T, Lazar MA 2000 Nuclear receptor corepressors partner with class II histone deacetylases in a Sin3-independent repression pathway. Genes Dev 14:45–54[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Hu X, Lazar MA 1999 The CoRNR motif controls the recruitment of corepressors by nuclear hormone receptors. Nature 402:93–96[CrossRef][Medline]
  39. Perissi V, Staszewski LM, McInerney EM, Kurokawa R, Krones A, Rose DW, Lambert MH, Milburn MV, Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG 1999 Molecular determinants of nuclear receptor-corepressor interaction. Genes Dev 13:3198–3208[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Nagy L, Kao HY, Love JD, Li C, Banayo E, Gooch JT, Krishna V, Chatterjee K, Evans RM, Schwabe JW 1999 Mechanism of corepressor binding and release from nuclear hormone receptors. Genes Dev 13:3209–3216[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Webb P, Anderson CM, Valentine C, Nguyen P, Marimuthu A, West BL, Baxter JD, Kushner PJ 2000 The nuclear receptor corepressor (N-CoR) contains three isoleucine motifs (I/LXXII) that serve as receptor interaction domains (IDs). Mol Endocrinol 14:1976–1985[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Cohen RN, Putney A, Wondisford FE, Hollenberg AN 2000 The nuclear corepressors recognize distinct nuclear receptor complexes. Mol Endocrinol 14:900–914[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Cohen RN, Brzostek S, Kim B, Chorev M, Wondisford FE, Hollenberg AN 2001 The specificity of interactions between nuclear hormone receptors and corepressors is mediated by distinct amino acid sequences within the interacting domains. Mol Endocrinol 15:1049–1061[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Zhang J, Hu X, Lazar MA 1999 A novel role for helix 12 of retinoid X receptor in regulating repression. Mol Cell Biol 19:6448–6457[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Jackson TA, Richer JK, Bain DL, Takimoto GS, Tung L, Horwitz KB 1997 The partial agonist activity of antagonist-occupied steroid receptors is controlled by a novel hinge domain-binding coactivator L7/SPA and the corepressors N-CoR or SMRT. Mol Endocrinol 11:693–705[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Smith CL, Nawaz Z, O’Malley BW 1997 Coactivator and corepressor regulation of the agonist/antagonist activity of the mixed antiestrogen, 4-hydroxytamoxifen. Mol Endocrinol 11:657–666[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. Zhang X, Jeyakumar M, Petukhov S, Bagchi MK 1998 A nuclear receptor corepressor modulates transcriptional activity of antagonist-occupied steroid hormone receptor. Mol Endocrinol 12:513–524[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Jepsen K, Hermanson O, Onami TM, Gleiberman AS, Lunyak V, McEvilly RJ, Kurokawa R, Kumar V, Liu F, Seto E, Hedrick SM, Mandel G, Glass CK, Rose DW, Rosenfeld MG 2000 Combinatorial roles of the nuclear receptor corepressor in transcription and development. Cell 102:753–763[Medline]
  49. Moilanen A, Rouleau N, Ikonen T, Palvimo JJ, Janne OA 1997 The presence of a transcription activation function in the hormone-binding domain of androgen receptor is revealed by studies in yeast cells. FEBS Lett 412:355–358[CrossRef][Medline]
  50. Hollenberg AN, Monden T, Madura JP, Lee K, Wondisford FE 1996 Function of nuclear co-repressor protein on thyroid hormone response elements is regulated by the receptor A/B domain. J Biol Chem 271:28516–28520[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  51. Veldscholte J, Ris-Stalpers C, Kuiper GG, Jenster G, Berrevoets C, Claassen E, van Rooij HC, Trapman J, Brinkmann AO, Mulder E 1990 A mutation in the ligand binding domain of the androgen receptor of human LNCaP cells affects steroid binding characteristics and response to anti-androgens. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 173:534–540[Medline]
  52. Cohen RN, Wondisford FE, Hollenberg AN 1998 Two separate NCoR (nuclear receptor corepressor) interaction domains mediate corepressor action on thyroid hormone response elements. Mol Endocrinol 12:1567–1581[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  53. Monden T, Wondisford FE, Hollenberg AN 1997 Isolation and characterization of a novel ligand-dependent thyroid hormone receptor-coactivating protein. J Biol Chem 272:29834–29841[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  54. Sack JS, Kish KF, Wang C, Attar RM, Kiefer SE, An Y, Wu GY, Scheffler JE, Salvati ME, Krystek Jr SR, Weinmann R, Einspahr HM 2001 Crystallographic structures of the ligand-binding domains of the androgen receptor and its T877A mutant complexed with the natural agonist dihydrotestosterone. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:4904–4909[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  55. Poujol N, Wurtz JM, Tahiri B, Lumbroso S, Nicolas JC, Moras D, Sultan C 2000 Specific recognition of androgens by their nuclear receptor. A structure-function study. J Biol Chem 275:24022–24031[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  56. Fu M, Wang C, Reutens AT, Wang J, Angeletti RH, Siconolfi-Baez L, Ogryzko V, Avantaggiati ML, Pestell RG 2000 p300 and p300/cAMP-response element-binding protein-associated factor acetylate the androgen receptor at sites governing hormone-dependent transactivation. J Biol Chem 275:20853–20860[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  57. Shi Y, Downes M, Xie W, Kao HY, Ordentlich P, Tsai CC, Hon M, Evans RM 2001 Sharp, an inducible cofactor that integrates nuclear receptor repression and activation. Genes Dev 15:1140–1151[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  58. Yu X, Li P, Roeder RG, Wang Z 2001 Inhibition of androgen receptor-mediated transcription by amino-terminal enhancer of split. Mol Cell Biol 21:4614–4625[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  59. Mueller E, Smith M, Sarraf P, Kroll T, Aiyer A, Kaufman DS, Oh W, Demetri G, Figg WD, Zhou XP, Eng C, Spiegelman BM, Kantoff PW 2000 Effects of ligand activation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor {gamma} in human prostate cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:10990–10995[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  60. Brinkmann AO, Faber PW, van Rooij HC, Kuiper GG, Ris C, Klaassen P, van der Korput JA, Voorhorst MM, van Laar JH, Mulder E 1989 The human androgen receptor: domain structure, genomic organization and regulation of expression. J Steroid Biochem 34:307–310[CrossRef][Medline]
  61. DiRenzo J, Shang Y, Phelan M, Sif S, Myers M, Kingston R, Brown M 2000 BRG-1 is recruited to estrogen-responsive promoters and cooperates with factors involved in histone acetylation. Mol Cell Biol 20:7541–7549[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  62. Sun Z, Pan J, Balk SP 1997 Androgen receptor-associated protein complex binds upstream of the androgen-responsive elements in the promoters of human prostate-specific antigen and kallikrein 2 genes. Nucleic Acids Res 25:3318–3325[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  63. Lu ML, Schneider MC, Zheng Y, Zhang X, Richie JP 2001 Caveolin-1 interacts with androgen receptor. A positive modulator of androgen receptor mediated transactivation. J Biol Chem 276:13442–13451[Abstract/Free Full Text]