Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M001286200 on July 21, 2000
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 39, 30232-30239, September 29, 2000
C/EBP Regulates Hepatic Transcription of 11
-Hydroxysteroid
Dehydrogenase Type 1
A NOVEL MECHANISM FOR CROSS-TALK BETWEEN THE C/EBP AND
GLUCOCORTICOID SIGNALING PATHWAYS*
Louise J. S.
Williams
§,
Val
Lyons
,
Iolaina
MacLeod
,
Vidya
Rajan
,
Gretchen J.
Darlington¶,
Valeria
Poli
,
Jonathan R.
Seckl
, and
Karen E.
Chapman
**
From the
Molecular Endocrinology group, University of
Edinburgh, Molecular Medicine Centre, Western General Hospital, Crewe
Road, Edinburgh EH4 2XU, United Kingdom, the ¶ Huffington Center
on Aging, N805, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas 77030, and
the
Department of Biochemistry, University of Dundee, Dundee DD1
4HN, United Kingdom
Received for publication, February 15, 2000, and in revised form, June 30, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Glucocorticoid action within individual cells is
potently modulated by 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (11
-HSD),
which, by interconverting active and inert glucocorticoids, determines steroid access to receptors. Type 1 11
-HSD (11
-HSD1) is highly expressed in liver where it regenerates glucocorticoids, thus amplifying their action and contributing to induction of
glucocorticoid-responsive genes, most of which are also regulated by
members of the C/EBP (CAAT/enhancer-binding protein) family of
transcription factors. Here we demonstrate that C/EBP
is a potent
activator of the 11
-HSD1 gene in hepatoma cells and that
mice deficient in C/EBP
have reduced hepatic 11
-HSD1
expression. In contrast, C/EBP
is a relatively weak activator
of 11
-HSD1 transcription in hepatoma cells and
attenuates C/EBP
induction, and mice that lack C/EBP
have
increased hepatic 11
-HSD1 mRNA. The 11
-HSD1
promoter (between
812 and +76) contains 10 C/EBP binding sites,
and mutation of the promoter proximal sites decreases the C/EBP
inducibility of the promoter. One site encompasses the transcription
start, and both C/EBP
and C/EBP
are present in complexes formed
by liver nuclear proteins at this site. The regulation of 11
-HSD1
expression, and hence intracellular glucocorticoid levels, by members
of the C/EBP family provides a novel mechanism for cross-talk between the C/EBP family of transcription factors and the glucocorticoid signaling pathway.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Glucocorticoids, synthesized and secreted by the adrenal cortex,
play a vital role in maintaining homeostasis, particularly during
stress. The control of energy metabolism is central to the maintenance
of homeostasis, and glucocorticoids play an important role in
regulating glucose availability and utilization. In addition, during
inflammation or injury, glucocorticoids potently suppress the immune
response and play a role in the acute phase response in liver (1). The
actions of glucocorticoids are principally mediated by the type
II or glucocorticoid receptor and, in a limited number of
tissues, by the related type I or mineralocorticoid receptor. The
interaction between glucocorticoid hormone and receptors is
crucially modulated by the glucocorticoid-metabolizing
11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (11
-HSD; EC
1.1.1.146)1 enzymes (reviewed
in Refs. 2 and 3).
11
-HSD interconverts active glucocorticoid hormones (corticosterone,
cortisol) and inert 11-keto metabolites (11-dehydrocorticosterone, cortisone), thus controlling intracellular availability of active glucocorticoids. Two isozymes of 11
-HSD have been identified; type 1 (11
-HSD1) and type 2 (11
-HSD2). 11
-HSD2 is a high affinity NAD+-dependent enzyme. It functions exclusively
as a dehydrogenase (inactivating glucocorticoids) (4, 5) and is
expressed in placenta and in aldosterone target tissues
(e.g. kidney) where it protects otherwise non-selective
mineralocorticoid receptors from occupation by glucocorticoids (6-8).
In contrast, 11
-HSD1 is a lower affinity,
NADP(H)-dependent enzyme, which is widely expressed, with
highest levels in liver (9). Although 11
-HSD1 is bi-directional in
cell homogenates, in intact cells, including primary rat hepatocytes,
the enzyme is predominantly a reductase, regenerating active
glucocorticoids from inactive 11-dehydroglucocorticoids (10, 11). Mice
homozygous for a targeted disruption of the 11
-HSD1 gene
cannot reduce 11-keto glucocorticoids to active 11-hydroxy steroids
(12). Hepatic 11
-HSD1 is the major site of regeneration of active
glucocorticoids; in humans, inert cortisone administered orally is
rapidly converted to cortisol, predominantly by the liver (13). As well
as contributing toward plasma glucocorticoid levels, 11
-HSD1
increases intracellular glucocorticoid levels, amplifying
glucocorticoid action. 11
-HSD1-deficient mice show impaired
activation of gluconeogenic enzymes upon starvation, resulting in lower
blood glucose levels than their wild-type littermates, and resist
hyperglycemia provoked by obesity or stress (12). In humans, 11
-HSD
inhibition leads to increased insulin sensitivity, presumably by
attenuating glucocorticoid antagonism of hepatic insulin action (14).
The enzyme thus provides a novel control of hepatic glucose/insulin
relationships and represents a potential therapeutic target for the
manipulation of hepatic glucose homeostasis and insulin sensitivity.
Clearly, the regulation of hepatic 11
-HSD1 expression is of
substantial interest. Although the control of 11
-HSD1 expression has
been widely studied in vivo and in cell culture (reviewed in
Ref. 2), the molecular mechanisms governing 11
-HSD1 transcription
have yet to be determined.
The promoter region of the rat 11
-HSD1 gene has been
cloned (15). A single major promoter is active in liver and
hippocampus, although kidney utilizes two additional promoters (15).
The promoter used in liver lacks a TATA box, but has a CCAAT sequence at
73 to
69 (the transcription start site is designated +1) as well
as a GCAAT sequence in the inverse orientation between
63 and
67.
In this study, we have investigated the transcriptional control of the
11
-HSD1 gene in liver and demonstrate the essential role
played by C/EBP
in the regulation of the gene encoding this key
glucocorticoid-metabolizing enzyme.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Subcloning and Sequence Analysis of the Rat 11
-HSD1
Promoter
A 6.8-kb EcoRI fragment encoding part of the rat
11
-HSD1 gene was subcloned from
A (15) and sequenced
using Sequenase II (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Putative transcription
factor binding sites were identified using computer software available at the UK Medical Research Council Human Genome Mapping Project Resource Center.
Construction and Transfection of 11
-HSD1 Promoter-Luciferase
Fusion Genes
pr11
1(
1799/+49) has been previously described (16) and
encodes
1799 to +49 (relative to the transcription start) of the rat
11
-HSD1 gene fused to the promoterless
luciferase gene of pSV0L (17). pr11
1(
3618/+49),
pr11
1(
599/+49), pr11
1(
174/+49), and pr11
1(
88/+49) were
created from pr11
1(
1799/+49) by the addition or removal of
restriction fragments. Exonuclease III/mung bean nuclease digestion was
used to generate the remaining plasmids fusing 11
-HSD1 5'-flanking
DNA and the first 49 bp of exon 1 to luciferase. Mutagenesis
reactions were carried out using a QuikChange site-directed mutagenesis
kit (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) according to the manufacturer's
instructions, and constructs were verified by sequencing.
Oligonucleotides used to introduce mutations were mFP2,
5'-CTCCCCCGTCCCTGATGTAAAAATTCAGAGGCTGCTGC-3' (encoding
19 to +19; mutated nucleotides are underlined; the transcription start is in boldface); mFP1,
5'-GAGGCTGCTGCCTGCCTGGAAGCTTGTAGAAAGAGCTGCAGG-3' (+9 to +50); mFP3,
5'-GGAGTAAACATTGTCCATTATAGGGCCCATCACGCAGGCTGCC-3' (
142 to
100); and mFP4,
5'-CTGGAAGTTGCCTCTTACTTGGCAAAATGGAGTAAACATTGTCC-3' (encoding
170 to
127). pr11
1(
812/
599)-PSV
and pr11
1(
599/
88)-PSV were made by subcloning
restriction fragments into pGL2-promoter (Promega). pMSV-C/EBP
and
pMSV-C/EBP
were a gift from S. L. McKnight and W.-C. Yeh.
pMSV-C/EBP
(t), predicted to encode an N-terminally truncated
C/EBP
, was created by deletion of a
5'-EcoRI-NcoI fragment. Plasmid DNAs were
purified by CsCl density gradient centrifugation.
HepG2 cells were maintained and transfected as described previously
(16). 5 × 105 cells seeded per 60-mm dish were
transfected using the calcium phosphate procedure with 5 µg of test
plasmid, 1 µg of pCH110 (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) (as internal
control), 1 µg of C/EBP expression plasmid (0.5 µg of each when
added together), made to a total of 10 µg with pGEM3 (Promega). In
some experiments, pMSV was used in control transfections that did not
include C/EBP; results for transfections with pMSV were not
significantly different to those in which no "empty" vector was
used. 48 h after transfection, luciferase activity was assayed in
cell lysates as described previously (16).
-Galactosidase activity
was assayed using the Tropix Galacto-Light kit (Cambridge Bioscience,
Cambridge, UK).
DNase I Footprinting and Electrophoretic Mobility Shift
Assays
DNA Fragments and Oligonucleotides--
Complementary
oligonucleotides were synthesized by OSWEL (Department of Chemistry,
University of Southampton, UK) and are shown in Table
I. A series of overlapping restriction
fragments covering the 11
-HSD1 promoter between
812 and
+76 were each labeled at the 5'-end on the lower strand. In most cases
the fragment was first subcloned into pGEM-3 (Promega) to generate
suitable restriction sites for end labeling. DNA fragments and double
stranded oligonucleotides were end-labeled using
[
-32P]dATP and the Klenow fragment of DNA polymerase
I.
Preparation of Nuclear Extracts--
Nuclei were purified from
rat liver by centrifugation through buffered sucrose as described (18).
Nuclear extracts were prepared by the method of Dignam et
al. (19) and stored in liquid N2.
Bacterial Expression of Recombinant C/EBP
--
pT5, encoding
a 35-kDa fragment of rat C/EBP
lacking the N-terminal 60 amino acids
(a gift of W.-C. Yeh and S. L. McKnight) was used to express
recombinant C/EBP
(rC/EBP
) in Escherichia coli BL21,
as described (20). rC/EBP
was partially purified over a
DEAE-cellulose column (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, St. Albans, UK)
according to a previous study (20), and fractions containing rC/EBP
were identified by EMSA analysis, as described below, using
oligonucleotide OE.
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assays--
EMSA reactions (20 µl) contained 5-10 µg of rat liver nuclear extract or 0.5 µg of
bacterial extract containing rC/EBP
, 3 µg of poly(dI-dC) (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech), 4 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 100 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM EDTA, 10% glycerol, 0.2% Triton X-100 and were
preincubated at 22 °C for 15 min prior to addition of 0.1 pmol of
32P-labeled DNA. After a further 15-min incubation,
reactions were electrophoresed on 5% non-denaturing polyacrylamide
gels containing 350 mM Tris, 450 mM boric acid,
100 mM EDTA. Where appropriate, a 10- or 100-fold molar
excess of competitor DNA was included in the preincubation, prior to
addition of 32P-labeled DNA. For antibody supershift
assays, 1 µl of C/EBP
antiserum or C/EBP
antiserum (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology Inc., Santa Cruz, CA) or, as a control, COUP
transcription factor (COUP TF) antiserum (a gift of M. Parker) were
included in the preincubation before addition of
32P-labeled DNA.
DNase I Protection Analysis--
50 µg of rat liver nuclear
extract or 2 µg of bacterial extract containing rC/EBP
were
preincubated on ice for 15 min in 30 µl containing 10% glycerol, 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 2.5 mM MgCl2,
1 mM CaCl2, 0.1 mM EDTA, 75 mM KCl, 4 mM spermidine, 0.5 mM
dithiothreitol, 1 µg of poly(dI-dC). Reactions were incubated for 15 min on ice after addition of 32P-labeled DNA then DNase I
added for 1.5 min. Reactions were terminated by addition of EDTA and
NaCl to final concentrations of 21 and 400 mM,
respectively. DNA was purified using protein removal cartridges (NBL
Gene Sciences Ltd., Cramlington, UK), precipitated with ethanol, resuspended, and separated on a 10% polyacrylamide gel containing 7 M urea. Size markers were produced by carrying out Maxam
and Gilbert DNA sequencing reactions using the same
32P-labeled DNA fragment.
Analysis of 11
-HSD1 mRNA in Livers of C/EBP
and
C/EBP
Knock-out Mice
Mice homozygous for deletions in the genes encoding C/EBP
and
C/EBP
were generated as described in References 21 and 22, respectively. 10 µg of total RNA isolated from livers of newborn homozygous C/EBP
-deficient mice or from the livers of 16-week-old male mice deficient in C/EBP
was analyzed by Northern blotting as
described previously (23). cDNA probes used for hybridization were:
11
-HSD1, a mouse cDNA probe encoding nucleotides 158-618 (24)
and 7S, a cDNA encoding mouse 7S RNA (25). Hybridization signals
were quantified by phosphorimaging (Fuji FLA-2000).
Statistics
Data were analyzed using analysis of variance. Significance was
set at p < 0.05. Values are mean ± S.E.
 |
RESULTS |
Subcloning and Sequence Analysis of the 11
-HSD1 Gene
Promoter--
To identify putative regulatory sequence elements in the
rat 11
-HSD1 gene, we extended the previous limited
sequence analysis (15) and determined the complete sequence of a 6.8-kb
EcoRI fragment encoding 5287 nucleotides of 5'-flanking DNA
and part of the structural gene, including the first two exons. Several microsatellite sequences are present 5' of
2500, including a 170-bp
polypurine sequence and a 300-bp (NA)n repeat. At
462 there is a (CT)26 repeat, immediately followed by
(GT)19 and 65 nucleotides rich in CCTT repeats. Several
putative transcription factor binding sites were noted, including
sequences corresponding to glucocorticoid response element consensus
half sites and putative binding sites for HNF1, HNF3, and the C/EBP
family of transcription factors.
Transfection of HepG2 Cells Identifies C/EBP-responsive Sequences
in the 11
-HSD1 Gene Promoter--
Because the region 5' to the
11
-HSD1 gene contains several putative C/EBP binding
sites, the involvement of C/EBP in the transcriptional control of the
promoter was investigated in HepG2 cells (a human hepatoma cell line)
using a series of plasmids fusing 5'-flanking DNA and 49 bp of exon 1 of the rat 11
-HSD1 gene to a luciferase
reporter gene. HepG2 cells express low levels of endogenous 11
-HSD1
(data not shown) and have been extensively used to characterize gene
regulation by C/EBP. Basal expression of pr11
1(
3618/+49) was low
in transfected HepG2 cells, and deletion of 5'-flanking DNA to
812
had no significant effect on luciferase activity (Fig.
1A). Deletion of DNA between
812 and
754 resulted in higher basal activity, which was not
significantly altered with further deletion to
88 (Fig.
1A). Co-transfection of C/EBP
with pr11
1(
3618/+49)
increased luciferase reporter activity approximately 15- to 20-fold
(Fig. 1A), and deletion of 11
-HSD1 5'-flanking
DNA to
579 had no significant effect on the magnitude of the C/EBP
induction (Fig. 1A). However, deletion of DNA between
579
and
322 reduced C/EBP
induction (approximately 3-fold), with a
further reduction on deletion to
124 and elimination with deletion to
88 (Fig. 1A). These results show that a repressor element
lies between
812 and
754 and that several regions of the
11
-HSD1 promoter, particularly between
579 and
88,
contribute to C/EBP
inducibility.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Transactivation of the 11 -HSD1
promoter by C/EBP and
C/EBP . Luciferase activities
determined in extracts of HepG2 cells transfected with a series of
11 -HSD1 promoter-luciferase plasmids as follows:
A, plasmids fusing variable amounts of the rat
11 -HSD1 gene to luciferase, all fused at +49 within exon
1, co-transfected with or without C/EBP ; B,
pr11 1( 599/ 88)-PSV and
pr11 1( 812/ 599)-PSV in which 11 -HSD1
DNA has been fused to the SV40 promoter present in the vector
pGL2-promoter, co-transfected with or without C/EBP ; C,
pr11 1( 1799/+49) co-transfected with or without C/EBP ,
C/EBP (t) (encoding C/EBP lacking the N-terminal 21 amino acids)
and/or C/EBP . Luciferase values are expressed relative to the
internal -galactosidase control activity. Values represent
means ± S.E. derived from normalized data from at least three
experiments in which transfections were performed in triplicate. *,
indicates significant induction by C/EBP (p < 0.05).
|
|
Both the DNA fragment encoding
599 to
88 and that encoding
812 to
599 of the rat 11
-HSD1 gene were able to confer
induction by C/EBP
on the SV40 promoter (Fig. 1B),
demonstrating that the promoter contained at least two C/EBP
responsive regions. Neither fragment, however, conferred the same
magnitude of inducibility as seen with pr11
1(
812/+49) or
pr11
1(
599/+49) (Fig. 1B). In addition, the fragment
encoding
812 to
599 significantly decreased the activity of the
SV40 promoter in the absence of C/EBP
(Fig. 1B),
consistent with the location of a repressor element in the region
between
812 and
754.
Under normal conditions in rat liver, most of the C/EBP-binding
activity is attributable to C/EBP
and C/EBP
(26). To see if
C/EBP
is also able to activate the 11
-HSD1 promoter,
HepG2 cells were co-transfected with pMSV-C/EBP
and
pr11
1(
1799/+49). Full-length C/EBP
caused a small but
significant induction of transcription from the rat
11
-HSD1 promoter (Fig. 1C) and, when co-transfected with C/EBP
, resulted in a similar level of
pr11
1(
1799/+49) activity to that induced by C/EBP
alone (Fig.
1C). However, it has been previously shown that removal of
the N-terminal 21 amino acids of C/EBP
decreases production of LIP,
an inhibitor of C/EBP activity produced from the C/EBP
mRNA by translation initiating at a downstream ATG (27). When an
N-terminally truncated C/EBP
, C/EBP
(t), was co-transfected into
HepG2 cells, it activated transcription from pr11
1(
1799/+49),
although to a lesser extent than C/EBP
(Fig. 1C). As with
C/EBP
, co-transfection of C/EBP
(t) and C/EBP
resulted in a
similar level of pr11
1(
1799/+49) activity to that induced by
C/EBP
(t) alone (Fig. 1C).
Footprint Analysis of the 11
-HSD1 Gene Promoter--
DNase I
protection analysis was used to identify sites of rat liver nuclear
protein interaction with the 11
-HSD1 promoter between
812 and +76 using a series of overlapping restriction fragments, each
labeled at the 5'-end on the non-coding strand. Parallel reactions were
carried out with bacterially expressed rC/EBP
protein to identify
the footprints that may be due to C/EBP-related factors (control
bacterial extracts that did not express rC/EBP
did not show any
binding to 11
-HSD1 DNA; data not shown). Representative
results from the DNase I protection analysis are shown in Fig.
2 and summarized in Fig.
3. Liver nuclear proteins bind to at
least 11 sites on the 11
-HSD1 promoter between
812 and
+76. Furthermore, 10 of these sites can be wholly or partially occupied
by C/EBP-related proteins.

View larger version (70K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
DNase I footprinting analysis of rat liver
nuclear protein binding sites on the rat 11 -HSD1 gene
5'-flanking region. Representative examples of DNase I footprint
analysis of the 11 -HSD1 promoter. DNase I cleavage
patterns are shown without protein extract (O), with 50 µg
of rat liver nuclear extract (L) and with 2 µg of
rC/EBP (C); M, indicates size markers obtained
from Maxam-Gilbert sequencing reactions. Footprinted regions are
indicated by boxes; sites of DNase I hypersensitivity
induced by protein binding are indicated by arrows.
|
|

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Summary of the sites of rat liver nuclear
protein binding on the rat 11 -HSD1 gene
between 812 and +76. Regions footprinted on the non-coding
strand by rat liver nuclear extract are indicated by boxes
below the sequence. For clarity, the coding (top)
strand only is shown. The start of transcription (+1) is indicated by a
bent arrow. *, indicates the 5'-nucleotide present in the
5'-deletion plasmid series. Sequences that match consensus C/EBP
binding sites are underlined.
|
|
In the proximal region between
88 and +76 there were two clear
regions of protection, FP1 and FP2, within the transcribed region and
spanning the transcription start, respectively (Fig. 2). The CCAAT
sequence at
73 to
69 and the GCAAT sequence in the inverse
orientation between
63 and
67 were weakly protected only with high
concentrations of liver nuclear extract (data not shown), suggesting
that these sequences, present in a position typical of such regulatory
elements, play little or no role in the expression of 11
-HSD1 in rat liver.
Between
599 and
88, six regions, FP3-8, were protected from DNase
I digestion by rat liver nuclear extract, all of which were similarly
protected by rC/EBP
protein (Fig. 2). In some experiments FP5
appeared to extend to
255, however, in all experiments the region
between
224 and
244 was clearly protected. Hypersensitive sites
induced by liver nuclear extract (but not by rC/EBP
) were also
observed at
498,
510, and
550.
Between
812 and
599 two regions, FP9 and FP11, were protected both
by liver nuclear extract and by rC/EBP
(Fig. 2). A third region,
FP10, was protected by liver nuclear extract but weakly, if at all, by
rC/EBP
(Fig. 2). Although this footprint clearly includes
768 to
759, in some experiments protection appeared to extend as far in the
3' direction as
747 (data not shown), possibly as a result of
DNA distortion by liver nuclear extract (see below). rC/EBP
and
liver nuclear proteins produced identical footprints at FP11; however,
several differences were observed at FP9. Rat liver nuclear extract,
but not rC/EBP
, induced a DNase I hypersensitive site at
694,
within the protected region (Fig. 2) and also induced a region of
hypersensitivity 3' to FP9 (enhanced cleavage at
663,
661, and
655) (Fig. 2), the extent of which varied with different preparations
of extract. Furthermore, those preparations of liver nuclear extract
that resulted in the appearance of strong hypersensitive sites at
663
to
655 apparently protected the adjacent DNA (
704 to
664 and
approximately
647 to
616) from DNase I digestion as well (Fig. 2
and data not shown). Because the adjacent "protected" regions were
only seen with preparations of extract that strongly induced the DNase
I hypersensitivity, it is likely that they are due to exclusion of
DNase I by distortion of DNA rather than protection from DNase I by
direct protein binding.
The Promoter Proximal Footprints, FP1, -2, -3, and -4 Are Required
for Full C/EBP
Inducibility--
The introduction of a mutation
into FP2, which dramatically reduced C/EBP binding (data not shown),
reduced C/EBP
inducibility of pr11
1(
196/+49) (Fig.
4), although it also diminished basal levels of transcription (Fig. 4). Mutation of FP1, within the transcribed region, eliminated C/EBP
induction, while having no
effect on basal transcription (Fig. 4). Similarly, mutation of either
FP3 or FP4 alone reduced the C/EBP
effect (Fig. 4). Mutation of any
two of the footprinted sites together further diminished or even
eliminated induction by C/EBP
(Fig. 4), and mutation of FP2, -3, and
-4 together both eliminated the induction by C/EBP
and decreased
basal levels of transcription (Fig. 4). These data confirm the
requirement for C/EBP
binding in the transcriptional activation of
the rat 11
-HSD1 promoter.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
FP1, -2, -3, or -4 are required for the
maximal response of the 11 -HSD1 promoter to
C/EBP . Luciferase activities determined
in extracts of HepG2 cells transfected with derivatives of
pr11 1( 196/+49) in which FP1, -2, -3, or -4 have been mutated,
either singly or in combination. A, diagrammatic
representation of constructs used in transfection analysis; all mutated
plasmids were derived from pr11 1( 196/+49). FP1-FP4 are shown as
ovals; mutations within footprinted regions are indicated by
a cross. The transcription start is indicated by an
arrow. B, promoter activity of constructs shown
in A. Activity of pr11 1( 196/+49) in the absence of
C/EBP was nominally set to 1, and activities of the other constructs
were expressed relative to this value. Plasmids were co-transfected
with either C/EBP (solid bars) or "empty vector,"
pMSV (hatched bars). Luciferase values are expressed
relative to the internal -galactosidase control activity. Values
represent means ± S.E. derived from normalized data from at least
three experiments in which transfections were performed in triplicate.
*, indicates significant induction by C/EBP (p < 0.05).
|
|
C/EBP Binds to at Least Two of the Footprinted Sites--
The
similarity between the footprints produced by liver nuclear extract and
rC/EBP
strongly suggested that the factors present in liver nuclear
extract, which bind to the rat 11
-HSD1 promoter, belong
to the C/EBP family. To characterize the liver nuclear protein(s)
binding to these sites, EMSA analysis was carried out on FP2, spanning
the transcription start, and FP9, which exhibited differences between
liver nuclear extract and rC/EBP
binding.
Several specific protein-DNA complexes were formed on oligonucleotide
OA (encoding FP2) by rat liver nuclear extract (Fig. 5A). Competition assays
demonstrated that all the specific complexes contained
proteins with DNA-binding specificity related to C/EBP; all were
similarly competed by OE and OD (encoding an
optimal C/EBP binding site and the P3(I) C/EBP binding site from the
PEPCK gene, respectively). Oligonucleotides encoding
cAMP-responsive elements or AP-1 binding sites also competed for
liver nuclear protein binding to a limited extent (data not shown)
consistent with the pattern of specificity previously described for
C/EBP (28). Little or no competition was seen when oligonucleotides OB and OC (encompassing the CCAAT box at
73
and the GCAAT sequence at
67, respectively, of the
11
-HSD1 gene) were included in EMSA reactions (Fig.
5A). rC/EBP
bound to oligonucleotide OA as a single specific complex of similar electrophoretic mobility to the
major complex formed by liver nuclear proteins, and the
rC/EBP
-OA complex showed similar (although not
identical) competition by oligonucleotides as seen with liver nuclear
proteins (Fig. 5B). Very similar results were obtained with
rat liver nuclear extract and rC/EBP
binding to oligonucleotide
OF, encompassing FP9 (data not shown), with rank order of
competition of oligonucleotides OF
OE > OA > OD
OC
OB = ONS, showing that FP9 also represents a high affinity
site for C/EBP-related proteins.

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
The liver nuclear proteins that bind to FP2
have C/EBP-related specificity and include C/EBP
and C/EBP . EMSAs demonstrating
(A) specific binding of rat liver nuclear extract to
oligonucleotide OA (encoding FP2), (B) specific
binding of rC/EBP to oligonucleotide OA and
(C) complexes formed by rat liver nuclear proteins on
OA were supershifted by C/EBP or C/EBP antisera. Rat
liver nuclear extract or rC/EBP was incubated with
32P-labeled oligonucleotide in the absence of either
competitor DNA or antiserum (lanes 2) or in the presence of
a 10- or 100-fold molar excess of competitor oligonucleotide
(A, B; lanes 3-14) or in the presence
of added antisera (C, lanes 3-6) as indicated
above the lanes. L indicates the lane contains liver nuclear
extract (B, lane 15). Lanes 1 contained no protein extract. Supershifted complexes are indicated by
an arrowhead; *, indicates a nonspecific complex.
|
|
C/EBP
Is the Major Isoform of C/EBP Binding in Liver Nuclear
Extracts--
Addition of antiserum specific for C/EBP
to EMSAs
demonstrated that the majority of the complexes formed by liver nuclear extract on OA include C/EBP
(Fig. 5C).
Addition of C/EBP
antiserum supershifted a minor proportion of the
complexes, however, addition of both antisera together supershifted all
but one specific complex (Fig. 5C). Very similar results
were obtained when oligonucleotide OF was used in
supershift EMSA analysis (data not shown).
Hepatic Expression of 11
-HSD1 mRNA Is Reduced in C/EBP
Knock-out Mice, but Increased in C/EBP
Knock-out Mice--
To
examine the relative importance of C/EBP
and C/EBP
in hepatic
expression of 11
-HSD1 mRNA in vivo, we
carried out Northern analysis on RNA isolated from livers of mice that
lack either C/EBP
(21) or C/EBP
(22). 11
-HSD1
mRNA was dramatically reduced in livers of mice deficient in
C/EBP
, compared with wild-type littermates (Fig.
6A). In marked contrast,
11
-HSD1 mRNA was increased 2-fold relative to 7S RNA
in the livers of C/EBP
-deficient mice (Fig. 6, B and
C).

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Analysis of 11 -HSD1 mRNA
in livers of mice deficient in either C/EBP or
C/EBP . Autoradiograph of a Northern blot
analysis of total RNA isolated from livers of C/EBP (A)-
or C/EBP (B)-deficient mice. A, 10 µg of
total RNA from wild type mice (+/+) or mice homozygous for a targeted
deletion of the C/EBP gene ( / ); B, 10 µg
of total RNA from wild type (+/+) mice or mice homozygous for a
targeted deletion of the C/EBP gene ( / ), hybridized
to 32P-labeled cDNAs encoding mouse
11 -HSD1 and 7S RNA. C, 11 -HSD1
mRNA is increased relative to 7S RNA in the livers of mice
deficient in C/EBP . 11 -HSD1 mRNA/7S RNA levels are
expressed relative to wild type (+/+), nominally set to 100 (*,
p < 0.01; n = 5).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
11
-HSD1 is highly expressed in liver where it
regenerates active steroids from inert 11-keto forms. Hepatic
11
-HSD1 controls induction of glucocorticoid-responsive
genes (12, 29), most, if not all of which are also regulated by members
of the C/EBP family of transcription factors (30-33). Here we show
that C/EBP
is a potent activator of the 11
-HSD1 gene
in hepatic cells both in vivo and in vitro. In
contrast, C/EBP
, a weak activator of 11
-HSD1
transcription, acts as a relative inhibitor of C/EBP
-stimulated 11
-HSD1 promoter activity in vitro, and mice
lacking C/EBP
have increased hepatic 11
-HSD1 mRNA.
The 11
-HSD1 gene has an unusually large number of C/EBP
binding sites in the proximal promoter region, including one
overlapping the transcriptional start site, suggesting that the
regulation by C/EBP may be of particular physiological significance.
The promoter of the 11
-HSD1 gene, between
812 and +76,
contains 11 binding sites for liver nuclear proteins (FP1-11). In transfected HepG2 cells plasmids containing at least 812 nucleotides, and up to 5 kb of 5'-flanking DNA from the rat 11
-HSD1
gene showed low basal promoter activity, which was dramatically
increased by C/EBP
. Although C/EBP
is highly abundant in liver,
it is present at very low levels in HepG2 cells (34) but may be
sufficient to give rise to the low basal activity of the
11
-HSD1 promoter seen in these cells. Deletion of
11
-HSD1 DNA from
812 to
754, removing FP10 and FP11,
increased basal promoter activity, and fusion of DNA encoding
812 to
599 (encompassing FP9, -10, and -11) upstream of the SV40 promoter
decreased promoter activity, consistent with the presence of a
repressor element between
812 and
754. The repressor element may
correspond to FP10, the only site in the rat 11
-HSD1
promoter that was bound by liver nuclear extract but not by rC/EBP
.
The identity of the liver nuclear factor(s) protecting this site is
currently unknown.
The 11
-HSD1 promoter is inducible by C/EBP, with C/EBP
having a much greater effect than C/EBP
on the activity of
pr11
1(
1799/+49). 5' deletion of 11
-HSD1 DNA to
579
had little or no effect on C/EBP
inducibility, despite the presence
of at least two binding sites (FP9 and FP11) for C/EBP-related proteins
in this region. However, the fragment encoding
812 to
599 conferred
C/EBP
inducibility upon the SV40 promoter, demonstrating that FP9,
FP11, or both, represent functional C/EBP sites. Furthermore, EMSA
analysis using an oligonucleotide corresponding to FP9 demonstrated
high affinity binding by rC/EBP
, at least equivalent to that seen
with a consensus C/EBP site. Deletion of 11
-HSD1 DNA from
579 to
322, removing FP5, -6, -7, and -8, reduced the C/EBP
induction by 3-fold, with the remainder lost with deletion of the
region between
174 and
88, removing FP3 and -4. Mutation of either
FP3 or FP4 diminished the C/EBP
inducibility of constructs
containing just the four footprinted regions between
196 and +49, and
mutation of both together had a similar effect on promoter activity to
5' deletion of DNA to
88, confirming the functional importance of FP3
and -4 in mediating the effects of C/EBP
. The region between
88 and +49, encoding FP1 and FP2 alone was unable to respond significantly to C/EBP
. However, it was required for the maximal response of the
promoter to C/EBP
. The magnitude of the C/EBP
-induction conferred
on the SV40 promoter by the fragment encoding
599 to
88 (containing
FP3-8, all attributable to C/EBP) was considerably less than the
induction of the intact 11
-HSD1 promoter, encoding
599
to +49. Moreover, the C/EBP
inducibility of the proximal 11
-HSD1 promoter was abolished by mutation of FP1 alone
and reduced by mutation of FP2. Together, these data demonstrate that
the C/EBP binding sites between
599 and
88 represent functional C/EBP sites, which act synergistically with the C/EBP binding sites FP1
and FP2 situated between
88 and +49.
The positions of FP1 and FP2, within the transcribed region and
spanning the transcription start of 11
-HSD1,
respectively, are unusual. As well as reducing the C/EBP
inducibility of the proximal promoter, mutation of FP2 also reduced
basal transcription by 2-fold. C/EBP may be functioning as an initiator
(Inr)-binding protein in binding to FP2 at the transcription start of
the 11
-HSD1 gene. Inr sequences overlap the transcription
start site and determine the start of transcription in promoters that
lack a TATA box (reviewed in Ref. 35). The 11
-HSD1
promoter lacks a TATA box; the possibility that C/EBP performs the
function of an Inr-binding protein remains to be tested.
The C/EBP family of transcription factors contains six members,
although only two, C/EBP
and C/EBP
, are expressed at significant levels in liver under basal conditions (36). "Supershift" EMSA analysis demonstrated that C/EBP
was present in the majority of
complexes formed on FP2 and FP9, with C/EBP
present in a substantial minority, suggesting that these footprints are indeed primarily due to
C/EBP
and C/EBP
. In both cases, a minor high mobility complex
with C/EBP-related DNA binding specificity was unaffected by addition
of C/EBP
or C/EBP
antisera. This complex is unlikely to contain
C/EBP
(C/EBP
antiserum had no effect on the complex in
EMSAs)2 nor is it likely to
contain a degradation product or an alternative translation product of
either C/EBP
or C/EBP
(the antisera recognize epitopes within the
leucine zipper/DNA binding domains of the proteins). The identity of
the protein present in the high mobility complex thus remains to be determined.
The involvement of members of the C/EBP family in the hepatic
regulation of 11
-HSD1 was confirmed in vivo in
mice deficient in either C/EBP
(21) or C/EBP
(22). In striking
contrast to C/EBP
-deficient mice, which showed a dramatic decrease
in hepatic expression of 11
-HSD1 mRNA, mice that
lacked C/EBP
showed increased expression of
11
-HSD1 mRNA in their livers. Although it is possible
that the increase in 11
-HSD1 is secondary to increasing levels of circulating IL-6 in these animals (22), it is more likely
that it is due to direct unopposed action of C/EBP
on the
11
-HSD1 promoter. The majority of liver nuclear protein
complexes formed on FP2 and FP9 contained homo- or heterodimers of
C/EBP
. However, C/EBP
was present in a substantial minority.
Similarly, both C/EBP
and C/EBP
were present in the majority of
complexes formed on the haptoglobin C C/EBP binding site by
liver nuclear proteins; these were replaced by complexes containing
just C/EBP
when livers from C/EBP
-deficient mice were examined
(37). In transiently transfected hepatoma cells, C/EBP
, itself a
relatively weak activator of the 11
-HSD1 promoter, acted
as a dominant negative inhibitor of C/EBP
. These data are consistent
with C/EBP
acting as a relative inhibitor of
11
-HSD1 transcription, at least under basal conditions,
in vivo, as in vitro.
C/EBP
is a central regulator of energy metabolism (30) and loss of
C/EBP
in transgenic mice dramatically alters energy metabolism (21).
Similarly, C/EBP
deficiency is associated with perinatal death due
to hypoglycemia (33, 38) and, in surviving adults, with
immunodeficiency (22). The involvement of both C/EBP
and C/EBP
(and possibly other members of the C/EBP family) in the hepatic
regulation of the 11
-HSD1 gene suggests that C/EBP
indirectly regulates the level of active intracellular glucocorticoids
in liver by governing the transcription of hepatic 11
-HSD1. Glucocorticoids are also important regulators of
C/EBP transcription, markedly inducing C/EBP
and C/EBP
mRNAs
(39-41), and with differing temporal and tissue-specific effects on
C/EBP
mRNA (42, 43). Under basal conditions in liver, the
ratio of C/EBP
to C/EBP
will be high, favoring high levels of
11
-HSD1 transcription and hence local production of
active glucocorticoids. Treatments that decrease the ratio of
C/EBP
/C/EBP
, for example glucagon (which increases intracellular
cAMP) or glucocorticoid administration, would be predicted to decrease
11
-HSD1 transcription, as found in some studies in
vitro (16, 44) and in vivo (23, 45). In addition,
C/EBP
is regulated both at the level of translation and
post-translationally (reviewed in Refs. 32 and 36). The increased
activation of the 11
-HSD1 promoter in transfected HepG2 cells by the N-terminally truncated form of C/EBP
compared with the
full-length form suggests that translational and/or post-translational regulation of C/EBP
is crucial in determining the ability of C/EBP
to transactivate the 11
-HSD1 gene, and thus,
ultimately determining ligand supply to the glucocorticoid receptor.
Mechanisms have been described by which "cross-talk" occurs between
glucocorticoid receptor and the immune system, involving direct
protein-protein interactions between glucocorticoid receptor and
transcriptional regulators of the immune response as well as indirect
mechanisms (46-50). We here describe a novel mechanism by which this
cross-talk can occur, both in immune cells and metabolic organs
such as liver and adipose tissue. This invokes control of
11
-HSD1 transcription, and hence steroid ligand
availability, by members of the C/EBP family, permitting a complex
coordinated control of the networks of genes involved in energy
metabolism and the cellular response to stress.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank W.-C. Yeh and S. L. McKnight
for pT5, pMSV-C/EBP
, and pMSV-C/EBP
, and we are grateful to M. Parker for COUP-TF antiserum. We thank M. Wilde for technical
assistance and H. Harris and M. Holmes for comments on the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by a Medical Research Council
project grant (to K. E. C. and J. R. S.), a Wellcome Trust program
grant, and a Wellcome Senior Clinical Research Fellowship (to
J. R. S.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
The nucleotide sequence(s) reported in this paper has been submitted to the GenBankTM/EMBL Data Bank with accession number(s) Y10420.
§
Current address, Endocrine Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital,
BUL-327, Boston, MA 02114.
**
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Tel.: 44-131-651-1033;
Fax: 44-131-651-1085; E-mail: karen.chapman@ed.ac.uk.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, July 21, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M001286200
2
L. J. S. Williams and K. E. Chapman, unpublished data.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
11
-HSD, 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase;
C/EBP, CAAT/enhancer binding
protein;
kb, kilobase(s);
bp, base pair(s);
EMSA, electrophoretic
mobility shift assay;
rC/EBP
, recombinant C/EBP
;
PEPCK, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase;
AP-1, activating protein-1.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Baumann, H.,
and Gauldie, J.
(1994)
Immunol. Today
15,
74-80
|
| 2.
|
Chapman, K. E.,
Kotelevtsev, Y. V.,
Jamieson, P. M.,
Williams, L. J. S.,
Mullins, J. J.,
and Seckl, J. R.
(1997)
Biochem. Soc. Trans.
25,
583-587
|
| 3.
|
Seckl, J. R.,
and Chapman, K. E.
(1997)
Eur. J. Biochem.
249,
361-364
|
| 4.
|
Albiston, A. L.,
Obeyesekere, V. R.,
Smith, R. E.,
and Krozowski, Z. S.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
105,
R11-R17
|
| 5.
|
Brown, R. W.,
Chapman, K. E.,
Kotelevtsev, Y.,
Yau, J. L. W.,
Lindsay, R. S.,
Brett, L.,
Leckie, C.,
Murad, P.,
Lyons, V.,
Mullins, J. J.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
and Seckl, J. R.
(1996)
Biochem. J.
313,
1007-1017
|
| 6.
|
Edwards, C. R. W.,
Stewart, P. M.,
Burt, D.,
Brett, L.,
McIntyre, M. A.,
Sutanto, W. S.,
de Kloet, E. R.,
and Monder, C.
(1988)
Lancet
ii,
986-989
|
| 7.
|
Funder, J. W.,
Pearce, P. T.,
Smith, R.,
and Smith, A. I.
(1988)
Science
242,
583-585
|
| 8.
|
Kotelevtsev, Y.,
Brown, R. W.,
Fleming, S.,
Kenyon, C.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
Seckl, J. R.,
and Mullins, J. J.
(1999)
J. Clin. Invest.
103,
683-689
|
| 9.
|
Agarwal, A. K.,
Monder, C.,
Eckstein, B.,
and White, P. C.
(1989)
J. Biol. Chem.
264,
18939-18943
|
| 10.
|
Low, S. C.,
Chapman, K. E.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
and Seckl, J. R.
(1994)
J. Mol. Endocrinol.
13,
167-174
|
| 11.
|
Jamieson, P. M.,
Chapman, K. E.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
and Seckl, J. R.
(1995)
Endocrinology
136,
4754-4761
|
| 12.
|
Kotelevtsev, Y.,
Holmes, M. C.,
Burchell, A.,
Houston, P. M.,
Schmoll, D.,
Jamieson, P.,
Best, R.,
Brown, R.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
Seckl, J. R.,
and Mullins, J. J.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
14924-14929
|
| 13.
|
Walker, B. R.,
Campbell, J. C.,
Fraser, R.,
Stewart, P. M.,
and Edwards, C. R. W.
(1992)
Clin. Endocrinol.
37,
483-492
|
| 14.
|
Walker, B. R.,
Connacher, A. A.,
Lindsay, R. M.,
Webb, D. J.,
and Edwards, C. R. W.
(1995)
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.
80,
3155-3159
|
| 15.
|
Moisan, M.-P.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
and Seckl, J. R.
(1992)
Mol. Endocrinol.
6,
1082-1087
|
| 16.
|
Voice, M. W.,
Seckl, J. R.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
and Chapman, K. E.
(1996)
Biochem. J.
317,
621-625
|
| 17.
|
de Wet, J. R.,
Wood, K. V.,
de Luca, M.,
Helsinki, D. R.,
and Subramani, S.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
725-737
|
| 18.
|
Sierra, F.,
Tian, J.-M.,
and Schibler, U.
(1993)
in
Gene Transcription: A Practical Approach
(Hames, B. D.
, and Higgins, S. J., eds)
, pp. 125-152, Oxford University Press, Oxford
|
| 19.
|
Dignam, J. D.,
Lebovitz, R. M.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1983)
Nucleic Acids Res.
11,
1475-1489
|
| 20.
|
Landschulz, W. H.,
Johnson, P. F.,
and McKnight, S. L.
(1989)
Science
243,
1681-1688
|
| 21.
|
Wang, N. D.,
Finegold, M. J.,
Bradley, A.,
Ou, C. N.,
Abdelsayed, S. V.,
Wilde, M. D.,
Taylor, L. R.,
Wilson, D. R.,
and Darlington, G. J.
(1995)
Science
269,
1108-1112
|
| 22.
|
Screpanti, I.,
Romani, L.,
Musiani, P.,
Modesti, A.,
Fattori, E.,
Lazzaro, D.,
Sellitto, C.,
Scarpa, S.,
Bellavia, D.,
Lattanzio, G.,
Bistoni, F.,
Frati, L.,
Cortese, R.,
Gulino, A.,
Ciliberto, G.,
Costantini, F.,
and Poli, V.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
1932-1941
|
| 23.
|
Jamieson, P. M.,
Chapman, K. E.,
and Seckl, J. R.
(1999)
J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.
68,
245-250
|
| 24.
|
Rajan, V.,
Chapman, K. E.,
Lyons, V.,
Jamieson, P.,
Mullins, J. J.,
Edwards, C. R. W.,
and Seckl, J. R.
(1995)
J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.
52,
141-147
|
| 25.
|
Balmain, A.,
Krumlauf, R.,
Vass, J. K.,
and Birnie, G. D.
(1982)
Nucleic Acids Res.
10,
4259-4277
|
| 26.
|
Williams, S. C.,
Cantwell, C. A.,
and Johnson, P. F.
(1991)
Genes Dev.
5,
1553-1567
|
| 27.
|
Descombes, P.,
and Schibler, U.
(1991)
Cell
67,
569-579
|
| 28.
|
Bakker, O.,
and Parker, M. G.
(1991)
Nucleic Acids Res.
19,
1213-1217
|
|