Inhibition of Androgen Receptor (AR) Function by the Reproductive Orphan Nuclear Receptor DAX-1
Elin Holter,
Noora Kotaja,
Sari Mäkela,
Leena Strauss,
Silke Kietz,
Olli A. Jänne,
Jan-Åke Gustafsson,
Jorma J. Palvimo and
Eckardt Treuter
Department of Biosciences at Novum (E.H., S.M., S.K., J.Å.G., E.T.), Department of Medical Nutrition (J.Å.G.), Karolinska Institute, S-14157 Huddinge, Sweden; Department of Anatomy (S.M., L.S.), University of Turku, FIN-20520 Turku, Finland, Department of Clinical Chemistry (O.A.J.); Institute of Biotechnology (J.J.P.); Institute of Biomedicine and Biomedicum Helsinki (N.K., O.A.J., J.J.P.), University of Helsinki, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. Eckardt Treuter, Department of Biosciences at Novum, Karolinska Institute, S-14157 Huddinge, Sweden. E-mail: eckardt.treuter{at}cbt.ki.se.
 |
ABSTRACT
|
---|
DAX-1 (NROB1) is an atypical member of the nuclear receptor family that is predominantly expressed in mammalian reproductive tissues. While a receptor function of DAX-1 remains enigmatic, previous work has indicated that DAX-1 inhibits the activity of the orphan receptor steroidogenic factor 1 and the estrogen receptors (ERs), presumably via direct occupation of the coactivator-binding surface and subsequent recruitment of additional corepressors. In vivo evidence points at a particular role of DAX-1 for the development and maintenance of male reproductive functions. In this study, we have identified the androgen receptor (AR) NR3C4 as a novel target for DAX-1. We show that DAX-1 potently inhibits ligand-dependent transcriptional activation as well as the interaction between the N- and C-terminal activation domains of AR. We provide evidence for direct interactions of the two receptors that involve the N-terminal repeat domain of DAX-1 and the C-terminal ligand-binding and activation domain of AR. Moreover, DAX-1, known to shuttle between the cytoplasm and the nucleus, is capable of relocalizing AR in both cellular compartments, suggesting that intracellular tethering is associated with DAX-1 inhibition. These results implicate novel inhibitory mechanisms of DAX-1 action with particular relevance for the modulation of androgen-dependent gene transcription in the male reproductive system.
 |
INTRODUCTION
|
---|
DAX-1 [NROB1; dosage-sensitive sex reversal, adrenal hypoplasia (AHC) critical region on the X chromosome, gene 1] is an atypical member of the nuclear receptor family of transcription factors that includes approximately 50 proteins in mammals (1, 2, 3, 4). While its C-terminus consists of a putative ligand-binding domain (LBD) with no identified ligands yet, DAX-1 lacks the zinc-finger DNA-binding domain typical of most nuclear receptors (5). Instead, its N- terminus consists of a unique repeat domain implicated in single-stranded DNA and RNA binding (6, 7) as well as in protein-protein interactions (8, 9). Closest relative to DAX-1 within the nuclear receptor superfamily is the orphan receptor SHP (NROB2), which only consists of a putative LBD (10).
Previous work has established a coregulatory role of DAX-1 because it inhibits the activity of the orphan receptor steroidogenic factor 1 (SF-1), a critical regulator of gonadal and adrenal differentiation (8, 11, 12, 13), as well as of the two ERs, ER
and ERß (9). Presumably, DAX-1 acts as corepressor for these receptors via direct occupation of the coactivator-binding surface AF-2 and subsequent recruitment of other corepressors. A distinct cytoplasmic and nongenomic function has recently been attributed to DAX-1, i.e. the association of DAX-1 with polyribosomes, which is mediated by binding of the unique N-terminal repeat domain to RNA (7). Although the in vivo relevance of this finding is currently unclear, it indicates the existence of novel mechanisms whereby DAX-1 may interfere with fundamental processes in the cytoplasm.
DAX-1 is predominantly expressed in both male and female reproductive tissues of mammals, e.g. in testis and ovary, as well as in adrenal, hypothalamus and pituitary (14, 15, 16, 17). Multiple mutations have been detected in DAX-1 that cause an X-linked form of adrenal hypoplasia congenita (AHC) (12, 18, 19). The disorder is limited to males and is characterized by neonatal adrenal insufficiency and failure to undergo puberty because of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. AHC mutations in DAX-1 (e.g. R267P) eliminate its repression function (12). While the function of DAX-1 in females is largely unknown, recent in vivo evidence from genetic knock-out mice points at a particular importance of DAX-1 for the development and maintenance of male reproductive functions (20, 21, 22). In addition to defects in spermatogenesis, DAX-1 (-/-) mice display significantly increased expression of the aromatase gene in the Leydig cells (23).
In light of these cumulative data on the function and expression of DAX-1, we became interested in studying possible connections between DAX-1 and another crucial regulator of the male reproductive system, the AR (also NR3C4). AR is a member of the steroid hormone receptor branch of the nuclear receptor superfamily (24) and, as mediator of androgen signaling, it plays important roles for the coordinated gene expression in male reproductive tissues (25, 26, 27, 28, 29). Previous functional and the structural studies have provided detailed insights into the mechanisms of AR activation (24, 30 and the references therein). Briefly, ligand binding to the cytoplasmic receptor induces conformational changes that, in turn, cause dissociation of the receptor from heat shock proteins, nuclear localization, binding to hormone response elements and association with coregulatory factors (31). A number of distinct coregulatory factors may play particular roles in AR signaling (32). While many of these factors function as bona fide coactivators or corepressors by directly communicating with chromatin and the transcription machinery, additional coregulators may exist that function in an antagonistic manner by preventing, disrupting or redirecting interactions with bona fide coactivators and corepressors.
In this study, we identify DAX-1 as an inhibitory coregulator for AR. We provide evidence for previously uncovered aspects of DAX-1 mechanisms of action in the nucleus and in the cytoplasm. These data strongly suggest that DAX-1 antagonism could play a physiological role in modulating AR-dependent gene regulation in reproductive tissues.
 |
RESULTS
|
---|
DAX-1 Inhibition of Transcriptional AR Activation
Previous studies have demonstrated that DAX-1 function as a potent corepressor for SF-1 and ERs in mammalian cells under transient expression conditions (8, 9, 11, 13). To test whether DAX-1 also affects the transcriptional activity of AR, we performed transient transfection studies using AR-negative Cos-7 cells. We used two different androgen responsive luciferase reporter constructs, namely pARE2-TATA-LUC containing two androgen response elements of the C3 (1) gene in front of a TATA box (Fig. 1
, A and C) and pPB(-285/+32)-LUC containing the natural probasin promoter (Fig. 1B
). In the absence of DAX-1, AR activated both reporters in an agonist-dependent fashion. Coexpression of increasing amounts of DAX-1 decreased AR activity in a dose-dependent manner, and 200 ng of DAX-1/well typically resulted in up to 80% inhibition of the AR activity (Fig. 1
, A and B). DAX-1 inhibition was similarly observed in human HeLa cells and resulted in approximately 50% inhibition of the AR activity (data not shown). To get insight into mechanisms of AR inhibition by DAX-1, we studied the effect of the natural DAX-1 R267P mutant that has lost the intrinsic repression potential (12). By cotransfecting the same amounts of expression plasmids coding for wt and mutant DAX-1 proteins, we observed that the inhibitory potential of DAX-1 R267P on AR was significantly reduced, particularly at lower DAX-1 concentrations, but not abolished (compare Fig. 1
, A and C). The idea that cellular cofactors affect DAX-1 inhibition is further consistent with the observation, that both DAX-1 wt and the R267P mutant were less inhibitory in HeLa cells than in Cos-7 cells (data not shown). As a control for the specificity of the AR inhibition by DAX-1, we coexpressed the TR with AR. Although unliganded TR is a potent transcriptional repressor and possibly shares cellular corepressors such as N-CoR and Alien with DAX-1 (8, 33), coexpression of TR did not inhibit AR activity in Cos-7 or in HeLa cells (data not shown). This suggests that coexpression of a transcriptional repressor, i.e. unliganded TR, that presumably does not physically interact with AR, is not sufficient to antagonize AR activation. Finally, previous studies have indicated that proper AR function requires interdomain communication between the AF-1 and AF-2 activation domains (34, 35). To investigate whether DAX-1 affects this interaction, we performed a mammalian two-hybrid assay with GAL4-AR LBD and VP16-AR-N-terminus (Fig. 1D
). In the presence of 100 nM T, we observed an approximately 90-fold activation of the GAL4-responsive reporter gene (pG5-LUC). In contrast, cotransfecting with increasing amount of pSG5-DAX-1 resulted in a reduction of the reporter gene activity to one-fifth of control with 100 ng pSG5-DAX-1. This indicates that DAX-1 is indeed able to interfere with the interdomain communication of the AR.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Inhibition of AR-Dependent Transcription by DAX-1 in Mammalian Cells
A, Cos-7 cells cultured on 12-well plates were transfected with 200 ng of pARE2-TATA-LUC reporter, 20 ng of pSG5-rAR, 20 ng of pCMVß, and increasing amounts (50 ng, 100 ng, and 200 ng) of pSG5-DAX-1 in the presence of 100 nM T. The total amount of DNA was kept constant by adding empty pSG5 as needed. B, DAX-1-mediated inhibition of transactivation from the natural probasin (PB) promoter. The experimental conditions were the same as in panel A, except that the pPB(-285/+32)-LUC reporter was used. C, Increasing amounts of pSG5-DAX-1 R267P were cotransfected with pSG5-rAR and pARE2-TATA-LUC. D, Effect of DAX-1 on the N- and C-terminal interaction of AR. Cos-7 cells were transfected with 100 ng of pGAL4-AR LBD and 100 ng of pVP16-AR NT in the absence and presence of 50 or 100 ng of pSG5-DAX-1 with 200 ng of pG5-LUC and 20 ng of pCMVß. After normalization for transfection efficiency using ß-galactosidase activity, the relative luciferase activity of AR in the presence of T was set 100, whereas in panel D, the activity of AR LBD with AR NT in the presence of T was set 100. The mean ± SD values from at least three independent experiments are shown.
|
|
Intracellular Tethering of AR by DAX-1
Recent studies have suggested that DAX-1 is not exclusively a nuclear orphan receptor but also can be detected in the cytoplasm and probably constitutes a shuttling intracellular receptor (7). Although this property of DAX-1 is seldom seen for orphan members of the nuclear receptor family (2), intracellular shuttling is a common characteristic of steroid hormone receptors, including AR (36, 37). In light of the above results of DAX-1 inhibition of AR activity, we were interested in studying the intracellular localization of DAX-1 and AR in mammalian cells under conditions of individual expression or coexpression using confocal microscopy. Immunostaining, that was specific only for transfected cells, showed that DAX-1 was mainly localized in the cytoplasm in approximately 80% of the transfected cells (Fig. 2B
, left panel). In the remaining approximately 20% of the cells, DAX-1 was both nuclear and cytoplasmic (Fig. 2B
, middle panel) or entirely nuclear (Fig. 2B
, right panel). Apparently, nuclear DAX-1 displayed a rather structured pattern that is distinct from the more uniform AR pattern (compare Fig. 2
, B and D). Further, DAX-1 but not AR displays a specific granulae-like pattern in the cytoplasm (compare Fig. 2
, B and C), which appears very similar to that previously reported for the localization of both endogenous and overexpressed DAX-1 (7).

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. Intracellular Localization of DAX-1 and AR
A, Schematic representation of the DAX-1 and AR domain structure. B, Cos-7 cells were transfected with pSG5-DAX-1 (0.5 µg). Rabbit polyclonal anti-DAX-1 antibody followed by Lissamine Rhodamine-conjugated antirabbit IgG was used to detect DAX-1 in a confocal microscope. The images show three distinct representative localization pattern of DAX-1. The left panel shows DAX-1 only localized in the cytoplasm, the middle panel shows DAX-1 distributed both in the cytoplasm and in the nucleus, and the right panel shows DAX-1 only localized in the nucleus. C and D, Localization of GFP-AR in cultured Cos-7 cells is shown in the absence (C) and presence (D) of 10 nM DHT. Four hours before transfection, fresh medium containing 10% CS-FBS was added. pGFP-hARwt (0.5 µg) was transfected into Cos-7 cells, and DHT was added 4 h before fixing. The distribution of fluorescence was examined 20 h after transfection in a confocal microscope. Average percentages of cells displaying the depicted phenotype are shown in lower right corner of each panel.
|
|
Next, to study the localization of AR, Cos-7 cells were transfected with green fluorescent protein-tagged AR (GFP-AR) (Fig. 2
, C and D) or wt AR that was detected by indirect immunofluorescence (data not shown). In both cases, we found AR to reside mainly in the cytoplasm in the absence of ligand (Fig. 2C
), but after addition of 10 nM 5
-dihydrotestosterone (DHT) to the cell culture medium, AR translocated into the nucleus (Fig. 2D
). This is in agreement with previous studies utilizing these GFP-AR fusions (36). In contrast, when GFP-AR was coexpressed with DAX-1 (Fig. 3
), we found in approximately 80% of the cells GFP-AR localized to the cytoplasm in an unique pattern, identical to that seen for DAX-1, both in the absence (Fig. 3A
, upper panel) or presence of DHT (Fig. 3C
, upper panel). This indicates that cytoplasmic DAX-1 either prevents AR from ligand-induced import into the nucleus or probably mediates AR export out of the nucleus. Additionally, activation of AR by ligand appears not required for colocalization with DAX-1 in the cytoplasm. In contrast, in approximately 17% of the coexpressing cells where DAX-1 was nuclear, we could not detect any colocalization with AR in the absence of ligand (Fig. 3A
, lower panel). This is not unexpected because unliganded AR is entirely cytoplasmic and therefore cannot interact with nuclear localized DAX-1. Interestingly, this also indicates that DAX-1, which most likely shuttles between cytoplasm and nucleus, is unable to import unliganded AR to the nucleus. However, in the presence of ligand (Fig. 3C
, lower panel) AR and DAX-1 colocalized in the nucleus in approximately 29% of the coexpressing cells because liganded AR is entirely nuclear and therefore can interact with nuclear localized DAX-1. For clarity, we estimated the average percentages of cells displaying a distinct localization or colocalization pattern of AR and DAX-1 in the absence (Fig. 3B
) or presence (Fig. 3D
) of ligand. This estimation shows that a significant number of cells does not coexpress the two receptors, which may in part explain why DAX-1 inhibition of AR activity in the transfection studies is not complete, as it would have been expected from the colocalization studies in the presence of AR ligand. In summary, these results demonstrate colocalization of DAX-1 with AR in intact cells both in cytoplasm and in nucleus and suggest that intracellular tethering of the AR represents a novel feature of DAX-1. Notably, it appears that in all cases of colocalization AR was tethered by DAX-1 in a dominant fashion, i.e. AR adopted the DAX-1 typical intracellular pattern.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. Intracellular Colocalization of AR and DAX-1
pGFP-hAR (0.5 µg) was cotransfected with pSG5-DAX-1 (0.5 µg) in the absence (A) or presence (C) of 10 nM DHT. Representative fluorescence images for GFP-AR (green) are shown in panel I, for DAX-1 (red, detected using anti-DAX-1 antibody) in panel II, and merged images (yellow) after superimposition of I and II are shown in panel III. The upper panel in A and C shows cells where DAX-1 is localized in the cytoplasm, whereas the lower panel show cells where DAX-1 is localized in the nucleus. B and D, Average percentages of cells displaying distinct localization or colocalization patterns of AR and DAX-1 in the absence (B) or presence (D) of ligand (N = nucleus and C = cytoplasm).
|
|
Delineation of AR and DAX-1 Domains Responsible for Tethering and Interaction
To investigate, which domains of AR are important for the colocalization with DAX-1 we performed confocal microscopy studies with GFP fusions of AR-LBD and AR-
LBD coexpressed with DAX-1 (Fig. 4
, A and B). The subcellular distribution of GFP-AR-LBD and GFP-AR-
LBD in the absence of DAX-1 (Fig. 4
, A and B, left panel) was as previously demonstrated (36). However, while coexpression of DAX-1 both in the absence and presence (data not shown) of ligand clearly had an effect on the subcellular distribution of GFP-AR-LBD (Fig. 4A
, right panel), the localization pattern of GFP-AR-
LBD was unaffected (Fig. 4B
, right panel). These results indicate that the AR LBD is responsible for the cytoplasmic tethering of AR. Moreover, in the approximately 20% of the cells where DAX-1 was nuclear, GFP-AR-LBD and DAX-1 colocalized in the nucleus in the presence of ligand, whereas cells containing GFP-AR-
LBD showed no similarities with the DAX-1 pattern in the nucleus (data not shown).
To prove that colocalization was presumably due to physical interaction of DAX-1 with AR, we performed coimmunoprecipitations from transfected Cos-7 cells (Fig. 4C
). DAX-1 was expressed in the absence or presence of different AR domains (ARwt, -AR-LBD, -AR-
LBD), proteins were extracted and subjected to immunoprecipitation using a mouse monoclonal AR antibody. Precipitated AR and DAX-1 proteins were visualized by immunoblotting using specific antibodies. We found that DAX-1 was only detected in association with ARwt or LBD (Fig. 4C
, lanes 2 and 3), whereas no DAX-1 was precipitated in the absence of AR or with AR-
LBD (Fig. 4C
, lanes 1 and 4). This indicates that the two receptors interact in cells and that this interaction requires the LBD of AR, consistent with the colocalization data described above. Similar results were obtained in immunoprecipitations using FLAG-tagged AR, and the direct character of these interactions was supported by the results of GST pull-down assays (see below and Fig. 5C
).

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. Mapping of the DAX-1 Domain Involved in the Interactions with AR
A, Cos-7 cells were cotransfected with pEGFPC2-DAX-1-NT (0.5 µg) and pSG5-ARwt (0.5 µg). Representative fluorescence images for GFP-DAX-1 (green) are shown in panel I, for AR (red, detected using anti-AR antibody) in panel II, and merged images (yellow) after superimposition of I and II are shown in panel III. Average percentages of cells displaying the depicted phenotype are shown. B, Effect of DAX-1-NT and -LBD on the N- and C-terminal interaction of AR. Cos-7 cells were transfected with 100 ng of pGAL4-AR LBD, 100 ng of pVP16-AR NT and 100 ng pEGFPC2 in the absence and presence of 50 or 100 ng of pEGFPC2-DAX-1-NT or -LBD with 200 ng of pG5-LUC and 20 ng of pCMVß. After normalization for transfection efficiency using ß-galactosidase activity, the relative luciferase activity the activity of AR LBD with AR NT in the presence of GFP and T was set 100. The mean ± SD from two independent experiments are shown. C, GST pull-down assay. Partially purified GST-DAX-1wt, NT or LBD proteins bound to glutathione-sepharose beads were incubated with radiolabeled AR generated by in vitro translation in pull-down buffer containing 100 mM NaCl. After extensive washing, the reactions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and bound AR was visualized by autoradiography. The input represents 20% of the labeled AR used for the pull-down assay. The interaction study was performed in absence or presence of 1 µM DHT.
|
|
We further wanted to investigate whether the N-terminal repeat region of DAX-1, which contains LXXLL motifs and represents the interaction domain for both SF-1 and ERs (8, 9), was sufficient for tethering of the AR. To this end, we performed localization studies using GFP-DAX-1-NT, the localization of which was very similar to that of wt DAX-1 (data not shown). When GFP-DAX-1-NT was coexpressed with AR, the two proteins colocalized in the cytoplasm (Fig. 5A
) irrespective of the ligand status (data not shown), indicating that the N-terminal part of DAX-1 is sufficient for the tethering of AR in the cytoplasm. Unfortunately, when analyzing the GFP-DAX-1-LBD, the interpretation of the microscopic images appeared difficult because the distribution of GFP-DAX-1-LBD equals GFP alone and the number of cytoplasmic dots indicating colocalization was significantly lower when compared with GFP-DAX-1-NT (data not shown). Therefore, we investigated in the next experiment whether DAX-1 N- or C-terminal domains would interfere with the interdomain communication of AR and performed a mammalian two-hybrid assay with VP16-AR-NT and GAL4-AR-LBD (as described in Fig. 1D
) in the presence of GFP, GFP-DAX-1-NT or GFP-DAX-1-LBD (Fig. 5B
). Intriguingly, the DAX-1 N-terminal repeat domain and to a lesser extend also the putative LBD, but not GFP alone, inhibited the AR domain interaction, most likely due to competitive binding of DAX-1 to the AR C-terminus.
To obtain additional evidence for presumably direct interactions of AR with DAX-1, we performed GST pull-down assays with partially purified GST-DAX-1 fusion proteins and radiolabeled AR synthesized by in vitro translation. As seen in Fig. 5C
, all three GST-DAX-1 fusion proteins, but not GST alone, were able to adsorb AR. Apparent quantitative differences may not necessarily be relevant for the in vivo situation because the GST-DAX-1 proteins are highly insoluble proteins whose quality and functionality might be not equal. However, binding of AR to GST-DAX-1 was considerably stronger than to a GST-TIF2 LXXLL- domain protein (data not shown), whereas the ERs bound well to both GST-TIF2 and GST-DAX-1 (9, 38). Furthermore, the lack of ligand effects on the AR interactions with DAX-1 is in agreement with the ligand-independence seen in the colocalization experiments and contrast the agonist-dependence seen with ERs (Ref. 9 and data not shown). Taken together, these results suggest that DAX-1 binds to the LBD of AR irrespective of its ligand status and that this binding is mediated by the N-terminal repeat domain, possibly with contribution of the putative LBD, of DAX-1.
DAX-1 Expression in the Prostate, a Major Target Tissue of AR Action
While DAX-1 expression is well documented in the testis (14, 15, 16, 17, 39), it was unknown whether DAX-1 is also expressed in the prostate, an important site of AR expression and function in the male (29). Therefore, we analyzed the expression of DAX-1 in human prostate using immunohistochemistry (Fig. 6
). Interestingly, DAX-1 was mainly detected in epithelial cells, which are known to express high levels of both AR and ERß (40, 41, 42). DAX-1 was not detected in the stroma cells, sites of ER
expression (42), and apparently weakly expressed in the basal cell layer adjacent to the epithelial cell layer. DAX-1 expression was similarly observed in the rat prostate but interestingly seems to be lost in the AR-positive human prostate cancer LNCaP cell line (data not shown).

View larger version (85K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. DAX-1 Expression in Human Prostate
DAX-1 protein was detected by immunohistochemistry in human prostate tissues using a polyclonal rabbit anti-DAX-1 antibody. Two different and representative tissue samples are shown in panel I and II. EC, Epithelial cells; SC, stromal cells.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION
|
---|
Relationship between DAX-1 and Previously Characterized AR Coregulators
Studies in the past revealed a number of potential mechanisms for how the atypical orphan receptor DAX-1 might inhibit the transcriptional activity of (typical) ligand-activated nuclear receptors. Initially, competition for promoter DNA binding had been suggested in case of the RAR (5). Subsequent work established that DAX-1 inhibits SF-1 activity through direct protein-protein-interactions and the recruitment of the corepressors N-CoR and Alien (6, 8, 11, 33). Recently, we suggested competition for coactivator binding to the ligand-inducible AF-2 activation domain of the ERs, possibly in conjunction with active repression, as the mechanism behind DAX-1 inhibition (9). In this study, we identify DAX-1 as an inhibitor of AR activation that presumably acts by both transcriptional and nontranscriptional mechanisms.
A model aiming at integrating these alternative mechanisms is presented in Fig. 7
. Androgen signaling via the AR can be envisaged as a multistep cascade involving the dissociation of cytoplasmic chaperone/heat shock protein complexes upon ligand-binding, nuclear localization, DNA binding, and the association of AR with various bona fide coactivators (reviewed in Ref. 31) such as histone acetyltransferases [p160s, cAMP response element binding protein (CREB) binding protein (CBP), p300, p300/CBP-associated factor (PCAF), Tat-interacting protein 60 TIP60)] and a number of unrelated proteins, such as PIAS (protein inhibitor of activated STAT) proteins (43), AR-interacting protein (ARIP)/small nuclear ring finger protein (SNURF)/RNF4s, and AR-interacting nuclear protein kinase (ANPK) (reviewed in Ref. 32). Considerably less is known about the mechanisms by which androgen-dependent transcription is inhibited, and candidate corepressors have only recently been identified. They include the amino- terminal enhancer of split, a member of the groucho/transducin-like enhancer of split family of corepressors, that is not associated with histone deacetylases but instead functions through direct contacts to the basal transcription factor TFIIE (44). Other repressors of androgen action include cyclin D1, which directly antagonizes the acetyltransferase PCAF (45); SMAD3, an intracellular mediator of the TGFß pathway (46); and the protein kinases PAK6 and Akt, which presumably repress AR activity via direct phosphorylation (47, 48). Moreover, a novel covalent modification of AR by attachment of small ubiquitin-related modifier 1 in certain contexts inhibits the transcriptional activity of AR (49).

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7. Model: DAX-1 Antagonism of AR Activation and AR-Dependent Gene Expression
A, Mechanisms of AR activation. A multistep activation cascade involving dissociation of cytoplasmic chaperone complexes upon ligand binding, nuclear localization, DNA binding, and the association of AR with multiple bona fide coactivators and other coregulatory factors. B, Nontranscriptional inhibition of AR activation. DAX-1 lowers the concentration of nuclear AR by cytoplasmic tethering. Alternatively, nuclear tethering by DAX-1 may modulate the amount of DNA-bound AR (not included in the model). C, Transcriptional inhibition of AR activation. DAX-1 binds to AR in the nucleus and antagonizes coactivator function. Stoichiometric details remain to be clarified, as well as the precise mechanisms of antagonism, which may involve both coactivator competition and active repression by recruitment of bona fide corepressors.
|
|
Compared with these putative AR corepressors, DAX-1 appears quite unique both in its structure (it consists of a unique N-terminal coregulator domain and of a putative receptor LBD) and in its mode of action. Our data suggest that the DAX-1 repeat domain in the N-terminus, previously recognized as the LXXLL-containing interaction domain with the ERs (9), appears sufficient for the interaction with AR. Consistent with the involvement of the DAX-1 N-terminus, interaction and colocalization required the AR LBD. This is interesting because most identified AR coregulators have been implicated to function by binding to the AF-1 rather than the LBD/AF-2 domain, and interactions of the latter with prototypical LXXLL-containing coactivators and peptides appear comparatively weak (32). Although the interactions of AR with DAX-1 were not affected by ligands, ligand independence does not necessarily contradict an LXXLL-dependence, as ligands primarily may act to regulate the intracellular localization and the intra-molecular conformation of AR. Also, we have previously observed ligand-independent interactions of the DAX-1 LXXLL domain with ERß (9). Possibly, DAX-1 interactions with unliganded vs. liganded AR might not be identical, which would resemble the mode of interaction of p160 coactivators with the AR (50). Future experimental analysis will be necessary to dissect these presumably more complex interactions of DAX-1 with AR.
Modulation of AR Signaling by DAX-1 at Multiple Levels
The results of our study imply intracellular (i.e. cytoplasmic or nuclear) tethering of AR by DAX-1 as a novel strategy to modulate hormone signaling, which may possibly apply to other DAX-1 targets as well. Unfortunately, structural and functional parameters regulating the intracellular localization of DAX-1 are largely unknown and remain to be elucidated to verify the physiological significance of this strategy. Regarding nuclear import, atypical NLS sequences seem to reside within the N-terminal repeat domain of DAX-1 (13). Regarding nuclear export, there is evidence showing that both AR and DAX-1 are actively exported into the cytoplasm, and that this export is unaffected by leptomycin B, a specific inhibitor of the exportin CRM1 (7, 37). Similarly, the signals regulating the intracellular localization of DAX-1 are unknown, but as yet unidentified ligands or protein modifications are good candidates (see below).
We have demonstrated here that DAX-1 can sequester AR in the cytoplasm, indicating a possible function of DAX-1 as a cytoplasmic retention factor. While the precise mechanisms behind these phenomena remain unclear, DAX-1 most likely interferes with events required for AR activation in the cytoplasm. This may include interference with the association and dissociation of chaperones or interference with nuclear import by masking nuclear localization signals of AR (see model Fig. 7
). In support of the generality of this mechanism, we have obtained preliminary evidence that DAX-1 also is able to sequester GFP-ERß in the cytoplasm in an agonist-dependent manner (Holter, E., and E. Treuter, unpublished data). We further believe, that the cytoplasmic structures of the AR associated with DAX-1 described here seem substantially distinct from the previously described cytoplasmic aggregates formed by overexpressed polyglutamine-expanded GFP-AR (51). Although our results are based on ectopic expression of DAX-1, results from a previous study argue that the cytoplasmic pattern of endogenous DAX-1 in an adrenal cell line resembles that of DAX-1 expressed in Cos-7 cells (7). In support of the in vivo relevance is the fact that endogenous DAX-1 can be detected by immunohistochemistry, using different antibodies, in the cytoplasmic compartments of adrenal, testis, and prostate cells (7, 16, 52). Numerous previous studies have addressed the subcellular distribution and dynamics of AR and nuclear cofactors in cells (36, 37, 51, 53), but only a few cytoplasmic target proteins have been identified so far. These include, in addition to the well-studied heat shock protein chaperone complexes, the actin-binding protein filamin (53), and the membrane protein caveolin-1 (54). Interestingly, AR shuttling was defective in filamin-deficient cell lines, implying that disruption of AR interactions with cytoplasmic structural components provides yet another possibility for DAX-1 to interfere with the translocation of AR to the nucleus. Moreover, recent work that has indicated distinct nongenomic effects for AR and ERs (55, 56), suggesting a novel paradigm for steroid hormone action that involves the activation of a cytoplasmic kinase signaling pathway and attenuation of apoptosis. However, a direct visualization of the postulated endogenous AR complexes in the cytoplasm remains to be accomplished in future studies.
In view of previous evidence suggesting nuclear mechanisms of DAX-1 inhibition of SF-1 and ER- mediated transcriptional activation (8, 9, 11, 33), our study does not exclude the possibility that DAX-1 also inhibits AR function as a corepressor in the nucleus. This would be consistent with our observation that in a significant percentage of transfected cells liganded AR colocalized with DAX-1 in the nucleus (Fig. 3C
). Moreover, we have demonstrated that DAX-1 can inhibit the AR-specific interdomain communication between AF-1 and AF-2 (Fig. 1D
), suggesting that DAX-1 is able to interfere with a crucial event for AR activation in the nucleus (34, 35, 57). Interestingly, DNA-dependent protein-protein-interaction assays suggest the existence of DAX-1 containing ternary complexes with DNA-bound AR (Holter, E., and E. Treuter, unpublished data), which would be consistent with our previous demonstration of DNA-bound ER-DAX-1 complexes (9).
Conceivably, complexity for the in vivo situation certainly arises from the fact that DAX-1 is an orphan receptor that could have ligands. Because ligand binding is expected to change the structure and subsequently features of the DAX-1 LBD, caution must be exercised when speculating about the relative importance of transcriptional vs. nontranscriptional pathways. Regulation of DAX-1 localization by yet unidentified ligands or protein modifications may increase the amount of nuclear DAX-1 in a cell-type specific manner. Indeed, immunohistochemistry revealed that DAX-1 in the adrenal cortex is localized in both cytoplasmic and nuclear compartments, whereas entirely nuclear localization was seen in Sertoli cells of the testes (52). Ligand binding or modifications could also alter the interaction characteristics of DAX-1 with associated proteins, which include target nuclear receptors and coregulatory proteins.
Implications for AR Regulation in Normal and Malignant Reproductive Tissues
AR function is often changed in humans with reproductive abnormalities as well as in prostate cancer due to mutations within the LBD (26, 29). While some of these mutations have been demonstrated to affect the ligand-binding capacity and specificity, others are proposed to influence interdomain communication or direct interactions with coactivators (35, 58, 59, 60, 61). Similarly, multiple DAX-1 mutations have been detected that primarily target the putative LBD of DAX-1 (12, 18, 19). One of these mutations (DAX-1 R267P) was used in this study and found to be less potent in AR inhibition, consistent with previous results on ER inhibition (9). However, as this mutation presumably affects several features of the DAX-1 LBD, further investigations have to determine whether mutated DAX-1 displays changes with respect to intracellular tethering, coactivator competition or corepressor recruitment (see model Fig. 7
). AR and DAX-1 are the only two reproductive nuclear receptors in which high numbers of natural mutations have been detected in male human beings (20). Notably, the genes for both AR and DAX-1 are on the X-chromosome; therefore, all mutations affecting the function yield a phenotype. Interactions between DAX-1 and AR may be important for the proper development of the male reproductive system, and it remains to be seen whether inappropriate interactions due to mutations in AR or DAX-1 may play roles in cancer development as well.
In addition to AR mutations, AR-associated coregulators have been considered as possible factors contributing to the development and maintenance of prostate cancer by altering the normal function of AR (29, 32). However, more direct evidence came only recently when two coactivators of the p160 family, namely TIF2 and SRC-1, were found to be overexpressed in AR-positive recurrent prostate cancer (62). These findings suggested that the association of overexpressed coactivators with AR provides a mechanism for AR-mediated transactivation in the absence of circulating androgens, which could account for the growth of recurrent prostate cancer after androgen deprivation. Here we demonstrate that DAX-1 is expressed in the epithelial cells of the prostate, which express high levels of the DAX-1 target receptors AR and ERß (41). Intriguingly, ERß appears to be a candidate regulator of AR expression in prostate and in ovary, and it has been suggested that loss of ERß could be associated with prostate cancer progression (63). Indeed, similar observations have been made for other putative corepressors such as SMAD3 (46) and the p21-activated kinase PAK6 (48). Conceivably, the lack of association of AR with inhibitory coregulators such as DAX-1 might contribute to the increased AR-transactivation potency in prostate cancer, and coactivator antagonism could play a physiological role in balancing transcriptional androgen responses in the normal prostate. Important physiological implications further arise from the possibility that DAX-1 expression could be regulated by sex hormones. Indeed, DAX-1 expression in testis has been found to peak during the androgen-sensitive phase of spermatogenesis (39). It remains to be seen whether male estrogens, which in the prostate may include the ERß agonist 5
-androstane-3ß,17ß-diol rather than 17ß-E2 (41), also affect the expression of DAX-1. Finally, the possibility that either expression or function of DAX-1 could be regulated by ligands bears an exciting therapeutic potential in the treatment of reproductive organ cancers.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
---|
Plasmids
Construction of pEGFPC2-hDAX-1-NT [amino acids (aa) 1253], pEGFPC2-hDAX-1-LBD (aa 200470) and pGEX4T1-hDAX1-LBD (aa 200470) was performed using PCR with human DAX-1 cDNA as a template. The PCR fragments were inserted into pEGFPC2 (CLONTECH Laboratories, Inc., Palo Alto, CA) and pGEX4T1 (Pharmacia, Piscataway, NJ.) vectors using EcoRI-SalI sites or EcoRI sites for DAX-1-NT and DAX-1-LBD respectively. The following plasmids have been described previously: AR plasmids pSG5-rARwt, pSG5-rAR-LBD (
aa 149295), pSG5-rAR-
LBD (
aa 641902), pcDNA3-Flag-hARwt, pEGFPC1-hARwt, pEGFPC1-hAR-LBD (aa 658919), pEGFPC1-hAR-
LBD (aa 1657), pVP16-hAR-NT (aa 5538), pGAL4-hAR-LBD (aa 624919) (36, 57, 64, 65); reporter plasmids pPB (-285/+32)-LUC, pARE2-TATA-LUC, pG5-LUC (35, 36, 65) and DAX-1 plasmids pSG5-hDAX-1, pSG5-hDAX-1 R267P, pGEX4T1-hDAX-1wt, pGEX4T1-hDAX1-NT (aa 1253) (9).
Mammalian Cell Transfections
Cos-7 monkey kidney cells were maintained in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS, penicillin (100 µl/ml), and streptomycin (10 µl/ml) (Life Technologies, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD) For assaying the transactivation by AR, Cos-7 cells on 12-well plates received fresh medium containing 10% charcoal-stripped (CS) FBS 4 h before transfection. The cells were transfected with 20 ng pSG5-ARwt, 50200 ng pSG5-DAX-1 or pSG5-DAX-1 R267P and 200 ng pARE2-TATA-LUC or pPB(-285/+32) with 20 ng ß-galactosidase internal control plasmid (pCMVß) using FuGene (Roche Molecular Biochemicals, Indianapolis, IN). Eighteen hours after transfection, the cells received fresh medium containing 2% CS FBS and 100 nM T or vehicle. Thirty hours after transfection, the cells were harvested and luciferase activities were measured (43). For the mammalian two-hybrid assay, the transfections were performed with 100 ng pGAL4-AR-LBD, 100 ng pVP16-AR-NT, 50100 ng pSG5-DAX-1, or pEGFPC2-DAX-1-NT or pEGFPC2-DAX-1-LBD and 200 ng pG5-LUC.
Coimmunoprecipitations
For preparation of whole cell extracts, Cos-7 cells were plated on 150-mm diameter plates and transfected with total 10 µg expression plasmid (pSG5-ARwt/LBD/
LBD, pSG5-DAX-1) using DEAE dextran (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). After 24 h, the cells were collected in PBS and the extracts were prepared in 10 mM HEPES-KOH buffer (pH 7.9) containing 400 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA, 5% glycerol and protease inhibitor cocktail (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). Protein extract was incubated with protein A/G agarose beads (sc-2002, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA) for 15 min at 4 C to minimize unspecific binding. After washing, the extract was further incubated with mouse monoclonal AR antibody Ab-1 (NeoMarkers, MS-443-P1ABX, raised against aa299315 of hAR) at 4 C in IP-T150 buffer containing 50 mM Tris HCl (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 0.2% NP40, 1 mM EDTA, and protease inhibitors in the presence of 100 nM DHT. After 1 h Protein A/G Plus-Agarose beads were added and the incubation continued over night at 4 C. After three washes in IP-T150 buffer, the pellets were resuspended in electrophoresis sample buffer, boiled for 5 min, and analyzed on 12% SDS polyacrylamide gel. Proteins were transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane and visualized using the mouse monoclonal anti-AR antibody Ab-1 (dilution 1:1000) or a polyclonal rabbit anti-DAX-1 antibody (K-17, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.) (dilution 1:4000), respectively.
GST Pull-Down Assays
Interaction studies were performed essentially as described previously (9). Briefly, partially purified GST-DAX-1wt, -NT, or -LBD and in vitro translated [35S]methionine-labeled Flag-AR were incubated in pull-down buffer containing 50 mM KPi (pH 7.4), 100 mM NaCl, 1 mM MgCl2, 10% glycerol, 0.1% Tween 20, and 1.5% BSA for 2 h at room temperature in the absence or presence of 1 µM DHT. After extensive washing with pull-down buffer lacking BSA, bound AR protein was analyzed by SDS-PAGE and visualized by autoradiography.
Analysis of Intracellular Localization Using Confocal Microscopy
Cos-7 cells were plated on glass coverslips in six-well cell culture plates and grown in DMEM supplemented with 10% CS FBS, penicillin and streptomycin for 12 h. The cells were transfected for 8 h with 0.5 µg of each plasmid (total amount 1 µg) using Lipofectin (Life Technologies, Inc.). The cells were grown for 24 h after transfection before fixing with 3% paraformaldehyde in 5% sucrose/PBS for 20 min at room temperature. Four hours before fixing, 10 nM DHT was added. For indirect immunofluorescence, fixed cells were rinsed three times with PBS before being permeabilized with PBS/Tween (0.1%) three times for 5 min at room temperature. The cells were blocked with 5% goat serum (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, Inc., West Grove, PA) in PBS/Tween (1 h at room temperature) before incubating with polyclonal rabbit anti-DAX-1 antibody (K-17, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.) for 1 h (diluted 1:200 in PBS/Tween). After removal of the DAX-1 antibody by washing three times 5 min with PBS/Tween, cells were treated with Lissamine Rhodamine-conjugated AffiniPure goat antirabbit IgG (H + L) (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, Inc.) for 1 h at room temperature. Cells were washed five times for 5 min in PBS/Tween before being fixed to slides using antiphotobleaching fluorosave (Calbiochem, La Jolla, CA). Subcellular localization was determined using a TCS SP Multiband Confocal Imaging System (Leica Corp., Deerfield, IL). AR was detected in similar manner using monoclonal mouse anti-AR antibody Ab-1 (NeoMarkers, MS-443-P1ABX) (diluted 1:200 in PBS/Tween) followed by tetramethyl rhodamine isothiocyanate-conjugated goat antimouse IgG (H + L) (Jackson ImmunoResearch) when used together with GFP-DAX-1-NT.
Immunohistochemistry
The immunohistochemical staining was performed as described previously (66) with the following modifications. Frozen tissues from human prostate were thawed and then fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde. Blocking with 1% hydrogen peroxidase in 50% methanol/50%PBS and incubation with 10% rabbit or goat serum were performed to block the endogenous peroxidase and to reduce nonspecific staining of the secondary antibody. Between each step, washing with PBS was performed. The sections were treated with 0.5% Triton X-100 in PBS before they were incubated overnight at 4 C with rabbit polyclonal anti-DAX-1 (K-17, Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.) diluted in PBS with 3% BSA (1:1000). The sections were washed with PBS and incubated for 1 h at room temperature with the secondary peroxidase-conjugated goat antirabbit antibody (Sigma) diluted in PBS with 3% human serum albumin (1:400), followed by washing. 3,3'-diaminobenzidine tetrahydrochloride liquid (DAKO Corp. A/S, Glostrup, Denmark) was used for color development. After coloring and rinsing with distilled water, the sections were counterstained slightly with Mayers hematoxylin, dehydrated in graded alcohols, cleared in xylene and mounted using Pertex (Histolab).
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
---|
We thank Drs. P. Sassone-Corsi and E. Lalli for providing DAX-1 R267P cDNA. We thank members of the Unit for Receptor Biology at the Department of Biosciences (Karolinska Institute) for sharing materials and for stimulating discussions.
 |
FOOTNOTES
|
---|
This study was supported by grants from the Swedish Cancer Society, the Karo Bio AB, the Academy of Finland, the Finnish Cancer Foundation, the National Technology Agency of Finland, and the Sigrid Juselius Foundation.
Abbreviations: aa, Amino acids; AHC, adrenal hypoplasia congenita; DAX-1, dosage-sensitive sex reversal, AHC critical region on the X chromosome, gene 1; DHT, 5
-dihydrotestosterone; GFP, green fluorescent protein; LBD, ligand-binding domain; SF-1, steroidogenic factor 1.
Received for publication August 13, 2001.
Accepted for publication December 6, 2001.
 |
REFERENCES
|
---|
-
Mangelsdorf DJ, Thummel C, Beato M, Herrlich P, Schutz G, Umesono K, Blumberg B, Kastner P, Mark M, Chambon P 1995 The nuclear receptor superfamily: the second decade. Cell 83:835839[Medline]
-
Giguere V 1999 Orphan nuclear receptors: from gene to function. Endocr Rev 20:689725[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Escriva H, Delaunay F, Laudet V 2000 Ligand binding and nuclear receptor evolution. Bioessays 22:717727[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Maglich JM, Sluder A, Guan X, Shi Y, McKee DD, Carrick K, Kamdar K, Willson TM, Moore JT 2001 Comparison of complete nuclear receptor sets from the human, Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila genomes. Genome Biol 2:0029.10029.7
-
Zanaria E, Muscatelli F, Bardoni B, Strom TM, Guioli S, Guo W, Lalli E, Moser C, Walker AP, McCabe ERB, Meitinger T, Monaco AP, Sassone-Corsi P, Camerino G 1994 An unusual member of the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily responsible for X-linked adrenal hypoplasia congenita. Nature 372:635641[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Zazopoulos E, Lalli E, Stocco DM, Sassone-Corsi P 1997 DNA binding and transcriptional repression by DAX-1 blocks steroidogenesis. Nature 390:311315[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Lalli E, Ohe K, Hindelang C, Sassone-Corsi P 2000 Orphan receptor DAX-1 is a shuttling RNA binding protein associated with polyribosomes via mRNA. Mol Cell Biol 20:49104921[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Crawford PA, Dorn C, Sadovsky Y, Milbrandt J 1998 Nuclear receptor DAX-1 recruits nuclear receptor corepressor N-CoR to steroidogenic factor 1. Mol Cell Biol 18:29492956[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Zhang H, Thomsen JS, Johansson L, Gustafsson JÅ, Treuter E 2000 DAX-1 functions as an LXXLL-containing corepressor for activated estrogen receptors. J Biol Chem 275:3985539859[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Johansson L, Bavner A, Thomsen JS, Farnegardh M, Gustafsson JÅ, Treuter E 2000 The orphan nuclear receptor SHP utilizes conserved LXXLL-related motifs for interactions with ligand-activated estrogen receptors. Mol Cell Biol 20:11241133[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ito M, Yu R, Jameson JL 1997 DAX-1 inhibits SF-1-mediated transactivation via a carboxy-terminal domain that is deleted in adrenal hypoplasia congenita. Mol Cell Biol 17:14761483[Abstract]
-
Lalli E, Bardoni B, Zazopoulos E, Wurtz JM, Strom TM, Moras D, Sassone-Corsi P 1997 A transcriptional silencing domain in DAX-1 whose mutation causes adrenal hypoplasia congenita. Mol Endocrinol 11:19501960[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Nachtigal MW, Hirokawa Y, Enyeart-VanHouten DL, Flanagan JN, Hammer GD, Ingraham HA 1998 Wilms tumor 1 and Dax-1 modulate the orphan nuclear receptor SF-1 in sex-specific gene expression. Cell 93:445454[Medline]
-
Bae DS, Schaefer ML, Partan BW, Muglia L 1996 Characterization of the mouse DAX-1 gene reveals evolutionary conservation of a unique amino-terminal motif and widespread expression in mouse tissue. Endocrinology 137:39213927[Abstract]
-
Ikeda Y, Swain A, Weber TJ, Hentges KE, Zanaria E, Lalli E, Tamai KT, Sassone-Corsi P, Lovell-Badge R, Camerino G, Parker KL 1996 Steroidogenic factor 1 and Dax-1 colocalize in multiple cell lineages: potential links in endocrine development. Mol Endocrinol 10:12611272[Abstract]
-
Majdic G, Saunders PT 1996 Differential patterns of expression of DAX-1 and steroidogenic factor-1 (SF-1) in the fetal rat testis. Endocrinology 137:35863589[Abstract]
-
Swain A, Zanaria E, Hacker A, Lovell-Badge R, Camerino G 1996 Mouse Dax1 expression is consistent with a role in sex determination as well as in adrenal and hypothalamus function. Nat Genet 12:404409[Medline]
-
Muscatelli F, Strom TM, Walker AP, Zanaria E, Recan D, Meindl A, Bardoni B, Guioli S, Zehetner G, Rabl W, Schwarz HP, Kaplan JC, Camerino G, Meitinger T, Monaco AR 1994 Mutations in the DAX-1 gene give rise to both X-linked adrenal hypoplasia congenita and hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Nature 372:672676[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Reutens AT, Achermann JC, Ito M, Gu WX, Habiby RL, Donohoue PA, Pang S, Hindmarsh PC, Jameson JL 1999 Clinical and functional effects of mutations in the DAX-1 gene in patients with adrenal hypoplasia congenita. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 84:504511[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Achermann JC, Jameson JL 1999 Fertility and infertility: genetic contributions from the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. Mol Endocrinol 13:812818[Free Full Text]
-
Yu RN, Ito M, Saunders TL, Camper SA, Jameson JL 1998 Role of Ahch in gonadal development and gametogenesis. Nat Genet 20:353357[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Yu RN, Achermann JC, Ito M, Jameson JL 1998 The role of DAX-1 in reproduction. Trends Endocrinol Metab 9:169175[CrossRef]
-
Wang ZJ, Jeffs B, Ito M, Achermann JC, Yu RN, Hales DB, Jameson JL 2001 Aromatase (Cyp19) expression is up-regulated by targeted disruption of Dax1. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:79887993[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Beato M, Herrlich P, Schutz G 1995 Steroid hormone receptors: many actors in search of a plot. Cell 83:851857[Medline]
-
Hughes IA 2001 Minireview: sex differentiation. Endocrinology 142: 32813287
-
Yong EL, Lim J, Qi W, Ong V, Mifsud A 2000 Molecular basis of androgen receptor diseases. Ann Med 32:1522
-
Yong EL, Ghadessy F, Wang Q, Mifsud A, Ng SC 1998 Androgen receptor transactivation domain and control of spermatogenesis. Rev Reprod 3:141144[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
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 16:271321[Medline]
-
Culig Z, Hobisch A, Bartsch G, Klocker H 2000 Androgen receptoran update of mechanisms of action in prostate cancer. Urol Res 28:211219[CrossRef][Medline]
-
Matias PM, Donner P, Coelho R, Thomaz M, Peixoto C, Macedo S, Otto N, Joschko S, Scholz P, Wegg A, Basler S, Schafer M, Egner U, Carrondo MA 2000 Structural evidence for ligand specificity in the binding domain of the human androgen receptor. Implications for pathogenic gene mutations. J Biol Chem 275:2616426171[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Glass CK, Rosenfeld MG 2000 The coregulator exchange in transcriptional functions of nuclear receptors. Genes Dev 14:121141[Free Full Text]
-
Jänne OA, Moilanen AM, Poukka H, Rouleau N, Karvonen U, Kotaja N, Hakli M, Palvimo JJ 2000 Androgen-receptor-interacting nuclear proteins. Biochem Soc Trans 28:401405[Medline]
-
Altincicek B, Tenbaum SP, Dressel U, Thormeyer D, Renkawitz R, Baniahmad A 2000 Interaction of the corepressor Alien with DAX-1 is abrogated by mutations of DAX-1 involved in adrenal hypoplasia congenita. J Biol Chem 275:76627667[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
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 275:2298622994[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Thompson J, Saatcioglu F, Jänne OA, Palvimo JJ 2001 Disrupted Amino- and carboxyl-terminal interactions of the androgen receptor are linked to androgen insensitivity. Mol Endocrinol 15:923935[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Poukka H, Karvonen U, Yoshikawa N, Tanaka H, Palvimo JJ, Jänne OA 2000 The RING finger protein SNURF modulates nuclear trafficking of the androgen receptor. J Cell Sci 113:29913001[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Tyagi RK, Lavrovsky Y, Ahn SC, Song CS, Chatterjee B, Roy AK 2000 Dynamics of intracellular movement and nucleocytoplasmic recycling of the ligand-activated androgen receptor in living cells. Mol Endocrinol 14:11621174[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Wärnmark A, Almlof T, Leers J, Gustafsson JÅ, Treuter E 2001 Differential recruitment of the mammalian mediator subunit TRAP220 by estrogen receptors ER
and ER ß. J Biol Chem 276:2339723404[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Tamai KT, Monaco L, Alastalo TP, Lalli E, Parvinen M, Sassone-Corsi P 1996 Hormonal and developmental regulation of DAX-1 expression in Sertoli cells. Mol Endocrinol 10:15611569[Abstract]
-
Waller AS, Sharrard RM, Berthon P, Maitland NJ 2000 Androgen receptor localisation and turnover in human prostate epithelium treated with the antiandrogen, casodex. J Mol Endocrinol 24:339351[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Weihua Z, Makela S, Andersson LC, Salmi S, Saji S, Webster JI, Jensen EV, Nilsson S, Warner M, Gustafsson JÅ 2001 A role for estrogen receptor ß in the regulation of growth of the ventral prostate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:63306335[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Royuela M, de Miguel MP, Bethencourt FR, Sanchez-Chapado M, Fraile B, Arenas MI, Paniagua R 2001 Estrogen receptors
and ß in the normal, hyperplastic and carcinomatous human prostate. J Endocrinol 168:447454[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kotaja N, Aittomaki S, Silvennoinen O, Palvimo JJ, Jänne OA 2000 ARIP3 (androgen receptor-interacting protein 3) and other PIAS (protein inhibitor of activated STAT) proteins differ in their ability to modulate steroid receptor-dependent transcriptional activation. Mol Endocrinol 14:19862000[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Yu X, Li P, Roeder RG, Wang Z 2001 Inhibition of androgen receptor-mediated transcription by amino-terminal enhancer of split. Mol Cell Biol 21:46144625[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Reutens AT, Fu M, Wang C, Albanese C, McPhaul MJ, Sun Z, Balk SP, Jänne OA, Palvimo JJ, Pestell RG 2001 Cyclin D1 binds the androgen receptor and regulates hormone-dependent signaling in a p300/CBP-associated factor (P/CAF)-dependent manner. Mol Endocrinol 15:797811[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Hayes SA, Zarnegar M, Sharma M, Yang F, Peehl DM, ten Dijke P, Sun Z 2001 SMAD3 represses androgen receptor-mediated transcription. Cancer Res 61:21122118[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lin HK, Yeh S, Kang HY, Chang C 2001 Akt suppresses androgen-induced apoptosis by phosphorylating and inhibiting androgen receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:72007205[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Yang F, Li X, Sharma M, Zarnegar M, Lim B, Sun Z 2001 Androgen receptor specifically interacts with a novel p21-activated kinase, PAK6. J Biol Chem 276:1534515353[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Poukka H, Karvonen U, Jänne OA, Palvimo JJ 2000 Covalent modification of the androgen receptor by small ubiquitin-like modifier 1 (SUMO-1). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:1414514150[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
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 19:83838392[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Stenoien DL, Cummings CJ, Adams HP, Mancini MG, Patel K, DeMartino GN, Marcelli M, Weigel NL, Mancini MA 1999 Polyglutamine-expanded androgen receptors form aggregates that sequester heat shock proteins, proteasome components and SRC-1, and are suppressed by the HDJ-2 chaperone. Hum Mol Genet 8:731741[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kawabe K, Shikayama T, Tsuboi H, Oka S, Oba K, Yanase T, Nawata H, Morohashi K 1999 Dax-1 as one of the target genes of Ad4BP/SF-1. Mol Endocrinol 13:12671284[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ozanne DM, Brady ME, Cook S, Gaughan L, Neal DE, Robson CN 2000 Androgen receptor nuclear translocation is facilitated by the f-actin cross-linking protein filamin. Mol Endocrinol 14:16181626[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
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 276:1344213451[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Migliaccio A, Castoria G, Di Domenico M, de Falco A, Bilancio A, Lombardi M, Barone MV, Ametrano D, Zannini MS, Abbondanza C, Auricchio F 2000 Steroid-induced androgen receptor-oestradiol receptor ß-Src complex triggers prostate cancer cell proliferation. EMBO J 19:54065417[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Kousteni S, Bellido T, Plotkin LI, OBrien CA, Bodenner DL, Han L, Han K, DiGregorio GB, Katzenellenbogen JA, Katzenellenbogen BS, Roberson PK, Weinstein RS, Jilka RL, Manolagas SC 2001 Nongenotropic, sex-nonspecific signaling through the estrogen or androgen receptors: dissociation from transcriptional activity. Cell 104:719730[Medline]
-
Ikonen T, Palvimo JJ, Jänne OA 1997 Interaction between the amino- and carboxyl-terminal regions of the rat androgen receptor modulates transcriptional activity and is influenced by nuclear receptor coactivators. J Biol Chem 272:2982129828[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Slagsvold T, Kraus I, Bentzen T, Palvimo J, Saatcioglu F 2000 Mutational analysis of the androgen receptor AF-2 (activation function 2) core domain reveals functional and mechanistic differences of conserved residues compared with other nuclear receptors. Mol Endocrinol 14:16031617[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lim J, Ghadessy FJ, Abdullah AA, Pinsky L, Trifiro M, Yong EL 197 2000 Human androgen receptor mutation disrupts ternary interactions between ligand, receptor domains, and the coactivator TIF2 (transcription intermediary factor 2). Mol Endocrinol 14:11871191[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Buchanan G, Yang M, Harris JM, Nahm HS, Han G, Moore N, Bentel JM, Matusik RJ, Horsfall DJ, Marshall VR, Greenberg NM, Tilley WD 2001 Mutations at the boundary of the hinge and ligand binding domain of the androgen receptor confer increased transactivation function. Mol Endocrinol 15:4656[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Beilin J, Ball EM, Favaloro JM, Zajac JD 2000 Effect of the androgen receptor CAG repeat polymorphism on transcriptional activity: specificity in prostate and non-prostate cell lines. J Mol Endocrinol 25:8596[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gregory CW, He B, Johnson RT, Ford OH, Mohler JL, French FS, Wilson EM 2001 A mechanism for androgen receptor-mediated prostate cancer recurrence after androgen deprivation therapy. Cancer Res 61:43154319[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Horvath LG, Henshall SM, Lee CS, Head DR, Quinn DI, Makela S, Delprado W, Golovsky D, Brenner PC, ONeill G, Kooner R, Stricker PD, Grygiel JJ, Gustafsson JÅ, Sutherland RL 2001 Frequent loss of estrogen receptor-ß expression in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 61:53315335[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Aarnisalo P, Palvimo JJ, Jänne OA 1998 CREB-binding protein in androgen receptor-mediated signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:21222127[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Palvimo JJ, Reinikainen P, Ikonen T, Kallio PJ, Moilanen A, Jänne OA 1996 Mutual transcriptional interference between RelA and androgen receptor. J Biol Chem 271:2415124156[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Makinen S, Makela S, Weihua Z, Warner M, Rosenlund B, Salmi S, Hovatta O, Gustafsson JÅ 2001 Localization of oestrogen receptors
and ß in human testis. Mol Hum Reprod 7:497503[Abstract/Free Full Text]