|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M107098200 on September 27, 2001
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 276, Issue 50, 47371-47378, December 14, 2001
Functional Modulation of the Glucocorticoid
Receptor and Suppression of NF- B-dependent Transcription
by Ursodeoxycholic Acid*
Takanori
Miura §,
Rika
Ouchida§¶,
Noritada
Yoshikawa ¶,
Kensaku
Okamoto ,
Yuichi
Makino¶,
Tetsuya
Nakamura¶,
Chikao
Morimoto¶,
Isao
Makino , and
Hirotoshi
Tanaka¶
From the Second Department of Internal Medicine,
Asahikawa Medical College, 2-1-1, Midorigaoka-higashi, Asahikawa
078-8510 and ¶ Division of Clinical Immunology, Advanced Clinical
Research Center, Institute of Medical Science, University of Tokyo,
4-6-1, Shirokanedai, Minato-ku, Tokyo 108-8639, Japan
Received for publication, July 26, 2001, and in revised form, September 20, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is the
current mainstay of treatment for various liver diseases including
primary biliary cirrhosis. UDCA acts as a bile secretagogue,
cytoprotective agent, immunomodulator, and inhibitor of cellular
apoptosis. Despite this cumulative evidence of the cytoprotective and
immunosuppressive effects of UDCA, both the target molecule and pathway
of UDCA action remain unknown. We previously described that, in the
absence of glucocorticoid ligand, UDCA activates the glucocorticoid
receptor (GR) into DNA binding species but does not elicit its
transactivational function in a transient transfection assay. Here we
further studied the molecular mechanism of UDCA action and revealed
that the ligand binding domain of the GR is responsible for
UDCA-dependent nuclear translocation of the GR. Indeed, we
demonstrated that UDCA acts on the distinct region of the ligand
binding domain when compared with the classical GR agonist
dexamethasone, resulting in loss of coactivator recruitment and
differential regulation of gene expression by the GR. Our data clearly
indicated that UDCA, at least in part via activation of the GR,
suppresses NF- B-dependent transcription through the
intervention of GR-p65 interaction. Together with the established
clinical safety of UDCA, we may propose that UDCA could be a
prototypical compound for development of a novel and selective GR modifier.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Ursodeoxycholic acid
(UDCA)1 is the current
mainstay of treatment for primary biliary cirrhosis, which is a chronic
cholestatic liver disease characterized by the destruction of biliary
epithelial cells (i.e. cholangiocytes), presumably by
autoimmune mechanism(s) (1-3). This hydrophilic bile acid is reported
to induce biochemical, histological, and prognostic improvement in
patients with primary biliary cirrhosis in the virtual absence of
adverse reactions (3). UDCA acts as a bile secretagogue and
cytoprotective agent (1) and exerts diverse immunomodulatory actions
in vitro: suppression of immunoglobulin, interleukin-2,
interleukin-4, and interferon- production from lymphocytes;
attenuation of major histocompatibility complex expression on
hepatocytes and cholangiocytes; increase in natural killer cell
activity; and inhibition of eosinophil degranulation (1, 4-9).
Recently, it has been shown that UDCA inhibits cellular apoptosis via
stabilization of the mitochondria membrane (10, 11). Despite this
cumulative evidence of the cytoprotective and immunosuppressive effects
of UDCA, both the target molecule and pathway of UDCA action remain unknown.
The glucocorticoid receptor (GR) is a member of the nuclear receptors
and an important transcriptional regulator involved in widely diverse
physiological functions such as control of embryonic development, cell
differentiation, and metabolic homeostasis (12, 13). Moreover,
therapeutic activities of glucocorticoids are believed to inevitably be
mediated by the GR (14). The nuclear receptors share several structural
features (e.g. the ligand binding domain (LBD), DNA binding
domain (DBD), and several transactivation domains (15)). Concerning the
GR, the NH2-terminal domain activation function-1 contains
sequences responsible for activation of target genes and presumably
interacts with the components of the basal transcription machinery
and/or with cofactors and other transcription factors, largely in a
cell- or tissue-specific context. The central part of the receptor
constitutes the DBD, which participates in receptor dimerization,
nuclear translocation, and transactivation. The structural motif of the
DBD is two zinc fingers formed by the coordination of four cysteines to
one zinc atom. Adjacent to the second zinc finger, the amino acids
responsible for the nuclear localization, the nuclear localization
signal, exist. The carboxyl-terminal portion of the receptor includes
the LBD and the sequences for heat shock protein 90 (hsp90) binding,
nuclear translocation, dimerization, and transactivation. The
COOH-terminal transcriptional activation domain is
hormone-dependent and termed activation function-2. The
very COOH-terminal portion of the receptor, activation function-2 core,
serves as a molecular switch that recruits coactivator proteins and
activates the transcription of target genes when flipped into the
active conformation by hormone binding (12, 16-18). On the other hand,
the GR can also mutually interfere with other signaling pathways such
as those mediated by the transcription factor NF- B (19), which is an
inducible transcription factor that regulates expression of various
genes involved in inflammation and immune responses (20-22). NF- B
consists of a dimer from five related proteins, most typically a
heterodimer composed of p65/RelA and p50 subunits. The regulation of
NF- B is achieved through interaction with an inhibitory protein
known as I B that binds to NF- B and sequesters it in the
cytoplasm. Once cells are stimulated with inducers such as
proinflammatory cytokines (e.g. tumor necrosis factor and interleukin-1), two serine residues of the I B protein are
phosphorylated by I B kinases. Phosphorylation of I B targets it
for ubiquitination and subsequent degradation by the 26 S proteasome
and renders the nuclear localization signal of NF- B unmasked. Then
NF- B translocates from the cytoplasm into the nucleus and regulates
the transcription of target genes (23, 24). In addition to this
"classical" milieu, recent reports have suggested that several
alternative pathways lead not only to activation but also to repression
of NF- B (25-27). Inhibition of NF- B by glucocorticoids has been
well documented, which may constitute a plausible mechanism of
anti-inflammation and immunosuppression by glucocorticoids (19).
Although several possibilities have been proposed as an inhibitory
mechanism, involvement of the GR appears to be consistent (28-32).
Despite possible therapeutic antagonism of NF- B by the GR in
inflammatory disorders, however, side effects such as
hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis insufficiency, diabetes, altered
lipid metabolism, osteoporosis, steroid myopathy, and infectious and
neuropsychiatric complications limit the therapeutic use of the
classical glucocorticoid agonists (14). In this line, dissociation of
glucocorticoid-dependent transactivation and
transrepression may lead to the development of better tolerated drugs
(20). Already several compounds have been reported to exhibit strong inhibition of NF- B but weak induction of the
GRE-dependent reporter gene; however, clinical application
of those compounds is still pending (33-36).
We previously described that UDCA, without direct binding to the GR,
activates the GR into DNA binding species but does not elicit its
transactivational function in a transient transfection assay (37).
Moreover, we predicted that the target domain in the GR of UDCA might
be the LBD (37). Here we further studied the molecular mechanism of
UDCA action and revealed that the LBD is responsible for
UDCA-dependent nuclear translocation of the GR. Indeed, it
is suggested that UDCA interacts with the distinct region of the LBD
when compared with a classical GR agonist dexamethasone, resulting in
differential regulation of gene expression by the GR. Our data clearly
indicated that UDCA-activated GR suppresses NF- B-dependent transcription via interaction with the
p65 subunit. Taking into consideration the established clinical
safety of UDCA, we propose that UDCA could be a prototypical compound
for the development of a novel and selective GR modifier.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Reagents--
UDCA was donated by Mitsubishi-Tokyo
Pharmaceutical Co., Tokyo, Japan. Dexamethasone was purchased from
Sigma, and other chemicals were purchased from Wako Pure Chemical
(Osaka, Japan) unless otherwise specified. Antibodies against the GR
(PA1-512) and hsp90 (3B6 and 3G3) were purchased from Affinity
Bioreagents (Golden, CO), and those against TIF2 (sc-6264), p65
(sc-372), p50 (sc-1190), and I B (sc-371) were from Santa Cruz
Biotechnology, Inc. (Santa Cruz, CA). Antibodies against phosphorylated
I B and paxillin were from New England Biolabs (Beverly, MA) and
Transduction Laboratories (Lexington, KY), respectively.
Plasmids--
The expression plasmids for the chimeric protein
of GFP and the human GR, mineralocorticoid receptor (MR), progesterone
receptor (PR), and androgen receptor (AR) were kindly provided by Drs. H. Ogawa (Kyoto University) (for GR and MR), G. Hager (National Institutes of Health) (for PR), and J. Palvimo (Helsinki University) (for AR). The expression plasmid for TIF2, pSG5-TIF2, was a generous gift from Dr. P. Chambon (Institut de Génétique et de
Biologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, Strasbourg, France).
The expression plasmid for the fusion protein of the Gal4 DBD and the
LBD of the GR, pCMX-Gal4-GR LBD, and that for the VP16 activation
domain (VP16AD), pCMX-VP16AD, and the Gal4-driven luciferase reporter plasmid, ptk-GALpx3-LUC, were from Dr. Kazuhiko Umesono (Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan). To construct the chimeric plasmids for
NF- B p65 and the DBD of Gal4 (amino acids 1-147), the fragments containing cDNA encoding either wild-type (amino acids 1-549), the
NH2-terminal half (residues 1-285), or the COOH-terminal
half (residues 286-549) of mouse p65 were generated by polymerase
chain reaction using pCAGGS-p65 (a gift from Dr. H. Handa, Tokyo
Institute of Technology, Yokohama, Japan) as a template. Those
fragments were then cloned into EcoRI and EcoRV
sites of Gal4 DBD expression plasmid pCMX-Gal4 (a gift from K. Umesono)
in frame, resulting in pCMX-Gal4-p65/1-549, pCMX-Gal4-p65/1-285, and
pCMX-Gal4-p65/286-549, respectively. To construct an expression
plasmid for the chimeric protein of VP16AD and nuclear receptor
interaction domain (NID) of TIF2, the DNA fragment encoding 173 amino
acids (glutamic acid 594 to leucine 766) of the human TIF2 was
amplified by polymerase chain reaction using pSG5-TIF2 as a template,
and this fragment was inserted into the parent pCMX-VP16AD plasmid,
resulting in VP16AD-TIF2/NID. All plasmids constructed as above were
verified by sequencing. The glucocorticoid-responsive reporter plasmid pGRE-Luc was described elsewhere (38).
Cell Culture--
COS7, CV-1 and HeLa cells were obtained from
the RIKEN Cell Bank (Tsukuba Science City, Japan) and maintained in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Iwaki Glass, Chiba, Japan).
CHO-K1 cells were obtained from the RIKEN Cell Bank and maintained in
Ham's F-12 medium (Iwaki Glass). All media used in this study were
phenol red-free and supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (FCS) and antibiotics. Serum steroids were stripped from FCS with dextran-coated charcoal, and cells were cultured in a humidified atmosphere at 37 °C with 5% CO2 unless otherwise specified.
Immunocytochemical Analysis--
Cells grown on eight-chambered
sterile glass slides (Nippon Becton & Dickinson, Tokyo, Japan) were
fixed for immunostaining using a freshly prepared solution of 4%
paraformaldehyde (w/v) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) overnight at
4 °C. Immunocytochemistry was carried out as described previously
(37) with small modification. Briefly, cells were washed with PBS at
room temperature and incubated with appropriate antibodies at 2 µg/ml
in PBS containing 0.1% Triton X-100 for 9 h at 4 °C. The cells
were washed and incubated with biotinylated second antibody from
donkeys (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) at a dilution of 1:200 in PBS
containing 0.1% Triton X-100 for 1 h at room temperature, and
then the cells were washed and incubated with fluorescein
isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated streptavidin at a dilution of 1:100 in
PBS containing 0.1% Triton X-100 for 1 h at room temperature.
Finally, the cells were mounted with GEL/MOUNTTM (Biomeda Co. Ltd.,
Foster, CA) and then examined by an Olympus Fluoview microscope
(Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) equipped with an FITC filter set.
Transfection and Reporter Gene Assay--
Before transfection,
cell culture medium was replaced with OPTI-MEM medium lacking phenol
red (Life Technologies, Inc.). Plasmid mixture containing pGRE-Luc in
the presence or absence of the GR expression plasmid was mixed with
TransIT-LT1 reagent (Panvera Corp., Madison, WI) and added to the
culture. The total amount of plasmid was kept constant by adding an
irrelevant plasmid (pGEM3Z was used unless otherwise specified). After
6 h of incubation, the medium was replaced with fresh Dulbecco's
modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 2% dextran-coated
charcoal-treated FCS, and the cells were further cultured in the
presence or absence of various ligands for 24 h. Luciferase enzyme
activity was determined using a luminometer (Berthold GmbH & Co. KG,
Bad Wildbad, Germany) essentially as described before (38).
Visualization of Intracellular Trafficking of GFP Fusion Proteins
in Living Cells--
For analysis of nuclear translocation of the
GFP-GR, we transiently expressed GFP-tagged human GR or its mutants in
COS7 cells as previously described (39). The cells were cultured on the silane-coated coverslips in 6-cm diameter plastic dishes, and the
medium was changed to OPTI-MEM medium lacking phenol red before transfection. The plasmid mixture containing 6 µg of the expression plasmids was mixed with 12 µl of TransIT-LT1 reagent and added to the
culture. After 6 h of incubation, the medium was replaced with
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 2%
dextran-coated charcoal-treated FCS, and the cells were cultured at
37 °C. GFP was expressed at detectable levels between 24 and 72 h after transfection. Routinely, cells were used for further
experiments 48 h after transfection. After various treatments,
cells were examined using an Olympus Fluoview microscope enclosed by an
incubator and equipped with a heating stage and an FITC filter set.
Quantitative assessment of the subcellular localization of expressed
GFP fusion proteins was performed according to the method of Okamoto
et al. (39). In brief, subcellular localization analysis of
GFP-tagged proteins was performed by blinded observers who were asked
to classify ~200 GFP-positive cells. The GFP fluorescence-positive
cells were classified into four different categories: N < C for cytoplasmic dominant fluorescence;
N = C, cells having equal distribution of
fluorescence in the cytoplasmic and nuclear compartments;
N > C for nuclear dominant fluorescence;
N for exclusive nuclear fluorescence.
Immunoprecipitation and Western Immunoblot Assays--
Whole
cell extract was prepared by lysing cells in 25 mM
N-Tris(hydroxymethyl)methyl-2-aminoethanesulfonic acid
(pH 8.2), 1 mM EDTA, 50 mM NaCl, 2.5 mM molybdate, and 10% glycerol. Immunoprecipitation experiments, with either the anti-hsp90 IgM antibody 3G3 (Affinity Bioreagents) or control mouse IgM antibody TEPC 183 (Sigma), were carried out as described previously (39). Briefly, goat anti-mouse IgM
(Sigma) was coupled to CNBr-activated Sepharose 4B (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech) by incubating in the coupling buffer (0.1 M NaHCO3, 0.5 M NaCl, pH 8.3) overnight at
4 °C. 35 µg of either the monoclonal anti-hsp90 IgM antibody or
control mouse IgM antibody was then incubated with 80 µl of a 1:1
suspension of the goat anti-mouse IgM antibody coupled with Sepharose
in MENG buffer (25 mM Mops (pH 7.5), 1 mM EDTA,
0.02% NaN3, 10% glycerol) on ice for 90 min. This
Sepharose-adsorbed material was then pelleted and washed successively
once with 1 ml of MENG buffer containing 0.5 M NaCl and
twice with MENG buffer containing 20 mM sodium molybdate.
After brief centrifugation, the pellet was resuspended in 80 µl of
MENG buffer containing 20 mM sodium molybdate, 2 mM dithiothreitol, 0.25 M NaCl, and 2.5% (w/v)
bovine serum albumin. In immunoprecipitation experiments, 66 µg of
cellular protein was added to the resuspension. The reaction mixtures
were incubated on ice for 90 min, after which Sepharose beads were
pelleted by centrifugation and washed three times with MENG buffer
containing 20 mM sodium molybdate and 2 mM
dithiothreitol. Immunoprecipitated proteins were eluted by boiling in
SDS sample buffer, analyzed by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis,
and electrically transferred to an Immobilon-NC Pure nitrocellulose
membrane (Millipore Corp., Bedford, MA). Subsequently,
immunoblotting was performed with a monoclonal anti-GFP antibody
(CLONTECH Laboratories, Palo Alto, CA) diluted at
1:500 followed by horseradish peroxidase-conjugated sheep anti-mouse
immunoglobulin (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) diluted at 1:750. In
parallel, 20 µg of whole cell extract was independently used for
immunodetection of the GFP-GR and hsp90. Western immunoblot analysis
for detection of hsp90 was performed in the same membrane, after
stripping off the immune complex for the detection of the GFP-GR, using
monoclonal mouse anti-hsp90 immunoglobulin G antibody 3B6 (Affinity
Bioreagents) diluted at 1:500 followed by horseradish peroxidase-conjugated sheep anti-mouse immunoglobulin diluted at 1:750.
Antibody-protein complexes were visualized using the enhanced
chemiluminescence method according to the manufacturer's protocol
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
 |
RESULTS |
Effect of UDCA on the Subcellular Localization of the GR--
As
described in the Introduction, we previously suggested that, although
UDCA does not bind to the GR, the receptor translocates into the
nucleus in the presence of UDCA in GR-overexpressing CHO cells (37). In
the present study, we first addressed the specificity of such UDCA
action and examined the effect of treatment with UDCA on subcellular
localization of various steroid receptors, all of which are believed to
be predominantly docked in the cytoplasm in the absence of cognate
ligands. For this purpose, we transfected the expression plasmids for
GFP-tagged MR, PR, and AR as well as GFP-GR and microscopically
observed their subcellular localization after 6-h treatment with their
cognate ligands (100 nM) or 200 µM UDCA. As
shown in Fig. 1, some of those receptors
showed weak nuclear fluorescence in the absence of ligand; however,
treatment with their ligands promoted complete nuclear condensation of
green fluorescence, indicating that the chimeric proteins between GFP and these nuclear receptors are capable of ligand-dependent
nuclear localization. Treatment with UDCA did not significantly
influence the subcellular localization of either the MR, PR, or AR;
however, it preferentially induced nuclear localization of the GR (Fig. 1).

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Effect of UDCA on subcellular
localization of steroid receptors. COS7 cells were transfected
with the expression plasmids for GFP-tagged steroid receptors and
cultured in the presence of a 100 nM concentration of their
cognate steroid ligands (dexamethasone, progesterone, aldosterone, and
dihydroxytestosterone for GR, PR, MR, and AR, respectively) or 200 µM of UDCA for 6 h. Cells were fixed and
examined with a confocal laser microscope with an FITC filter
set, and photographs were taken as described under "Experimental
Procedures." Representative photographs were presented. GR,
glucocorticoid receptor; PR, progesterone receptor; MR,
mineralocorticoid receptor; AR, androgen receptor.
|
|
To further confirm UDCA's effect on subcellular trafficking of the GR,
we transfected COS7 cells with the GR expression plasmid pCMX-GR and
cultured cells in the presence of UDCA for the indicated periods of
time. Immunocytochemical analysis revealed that expressed GR localized
in the cytoplasm in the absence of ligand (data not shown) and rapidly
translocated into the nucleus after the addition of dexamethasone (Fig.
2). In the presence of UDCA, the GR
revealed nuclear localization in a concentration- and
time-dependent manner at a slower rate when compared with
that of dexamethasone-induced translocation (Fig. 2).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Effect of UDCA on the intracellular
trafficking of the GR. COS7 cells were transfected with the
expression plasmid for the GR and treated with 100 nM
dexamethasone (Dex) or the indicated concentrations of UDCA
and then microscopically examined at the indicated time points, and
photographs were taken. The procedure for quantitative analysis is
described under "Experimental Procedures." In brief, %N
and %N > C represent percentages of the
cells that underwent complete nuclear (%N) and nuclear
dominant localization of the GR, respectively.
|
|
The Ligand-binding Domain Is a Target of UDCA--
We previously
predicted that the LBD is involved in UDCA action on the GR (37). To
confirm this, we tested the effect of treatment with UDCA on the
subcellular localization of the chimeric protein of Gal4 DBD and the
COOH-terminal half of the GR, Gal4-GR LBD, which encompasses the
NH2-terminal nuclear localization signal, NL1, and the
entire LBD of the GR. After transfection of this Gal4-GR LBD expression
plasmid into COS7 cells, we immunocytochemically examined the effect of
treatment with UDCA on the subcellular localization of the expressed
protein using anti-Gal4 antibody. In the absence of ligand, Gal4-GR LBD
exclusively showed cytoplasmic localization (data not shown). After
treatment with dexamethasone, Gal4-GR LBD moved into the nucleus in a
time-dependent manner (Fig.
3A). Indeed, treatment with
UDCA promoted nuclear translocation of the Gal4-GR LBD even in the
absence of dexamethasone (Fig. 3A). When the
transactivational potential of this chimeric protein was assessed in a
transient transfection assay, dexamethasone, not UDCA, induced
expression of the reporter gene (Fig. 3B), as in the case of
the wild-type GR (37).

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
UDCA targets the LBD of the GR.
A, effect of dexamethasone (Dex) and UDCA on the
intracellular trafficking of the fusion protein between Gal4
DNA-binding domain and the COOH-terminal half of the GR involving the
LBD (Gal4-GR LBD). COS7 cells were transfected with pCMX-Gal4-GR LBD
and treated with 100 nM Dex and 200 µM UDCA.
At the indicated time points, cells were fixed and stained with
rhodamine-conjugated anti-Gal4 antibodies, and then photographs were
taken and results were quantitatively presented. B, effect
of UDCA on the transactivation potential of Gal4-GR LBD. COS7 cells
were transfected with pGal4-GR LBD and the Gal4-dependent
luciferase reporter plasmid ptk-GALpx3-LUC and cultured in the presence
of 100 nM Dex or 200 µM UDCA for 12 h.
Cells were then harvested, and cellular lysates were assayed for
luciferase activity. Experiments were repeated twice with almost
identical results, and the representative results were presented.
|
|
Next, we constructed the expression plasmids for a chimeric protein of
GFP and GR, the COOH-terminal end of the LBD of which was deleted to
assess the region responsible for UDCA action (Fig. 4A). It is believed that
association of hsp90 is a prerequisite for cytoplasmic docking of the
GR. In this line, we examined the interaction between GFP-tagged
GR mutants and hsp90 using an immunoprecipitation assay, for a start.
After transfection of these expression plasmids for GFP-tagged GR,
whole cell extracts were prepared and immunoprecipitated with
anti-hsp90 antibody, and then complex formation between the GR and
hsp90 was analyzed by Western blot as described under "Experimental Procedures." As shown in Fig. 4B, all expressed mutant
proteins, as well as the GFP-GR, interacted with hsp90 in the absence
of ligand, with slightly less efficiency in the case of
GFP-GR-(1-730). When the cells expressing those mutant proteins
were heat-shocked at 43 °C, all mutants moved into the
nucleus at similar rates (data not shown), suggesting that those mutant
proteins associate with hsp90, and dissociation of hsp90, by heat shock
in this case, results in movement toward the nucleus. Given this, we
tested the effect of UDCA on the subcellular localization of those
mutants. When transfected cells were treated with dexamethasone,
nuclear translocation was observed only in the GFP-fused wild-type GR and not in GFP-GR-(1-765), GFP-GR-(1-750), or GFP-GR-(1-740) (Fig. 4C). In contrast, treatment with UDCA caused nuclear
translocation of every GFP-GR mutant except for GFP-GR-(1-730) (Fig.
4C). GFP-GR-(1-730) partially docked in the nucleus before
treatment with ligand, and the effect of dexamethasone and UDCA was not
apparent (Fig. 4C). This leakiness and unresponsiveness to
the ligand of GFP-GR-(1-730) might be related to weak association of
this mutant with hsp90 (Fig. 4B). In any case, we may
conclude that the COOH-terminal end of the LBD is essential not only
for eliciting the effect of UDCA but also for dissociation of UDCA and
dexamethasone in terms of GR activation.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Mutational analysis of the ligand binding
domain of the GR. A, schematic drawing of the GR and
its mutants used in the present study. Numbers depict the
positions of amino acids. AF1 and AF2, activation
function-1 and -2, respectively. Horizontal bars
show the positions of -helices (H1 to H12).
B, immunoprecipitation analysis of the association of the GR
and hsp90. COS7 cells were transfected with pCMX vector alone or the
expression plasmids for the full-length and COOH-terminal deleted GR
with GFP tag. Whole cell lysates were, either directly
(IP( )) or after immunoprecipitation with anti-hsp90
antibodies (IP(+)), analyzed in Western blots using anti-GFP
or hsp90 antibodies. C, cellular distribution of the GFP-GR
after treatment with 100 nM dexamethasone (D) or
200 µM UDCA (U).
|
|
UDCA Attenuates the Interaction between the GR and
Coactivator--
The very COOH-terminal end of the LBD is also known
to interact with various coactivators including p160 family protein
TIF2 (40). In a transient cotransfection assay, when the wild-type GR
was expressed, coexpression of TIF2 increased
ligand-dependent transactivation of GRE-driven reporter
gene expression (Fig. 5A). However, in the presence of UDCA, coexpression of TIF2 did not influence reporter gene expression (Fig. 5A), suggesting
that UDCA-activated GR cannot productively communicate with TIF2. This issue was further tested in a mammalian two-hybrid assay in which the
expression plasmids for Gal4-GR LBD and VP16-TIF2/NID, and Gal4-dependent reporter plasmid were cotransfected. When
Gal4-GR LBD was introduced, treatment with dexamethasone increased
reporter gene expression as a function of dexamethasone concentration, most possibly due to ligand-dependent transactivational
potential of Gal4-GR LBD (Fig. 5B). Moreover, coexpression
of VP16AD-TIF2/NID further enhanced reporter gene expression,
indicating the interaction between Gal4-GR LBD and TIF2/NID (Fig.
5B). However, reporter gene expression was not influenced in
the presence of UDCA either in the absence or presence of
VP16AD-TIF2/NID (Fig. 5B). Since the nuclear translocation
of Gal4-GR LBD was shown to be less efficient in the presence of UDCA
than dexamethasone (Fig. 3), we took another immunocytochemical
approach to confirm the interaction between the GR and TIF2 in
situ. It has already been shown that ligand-activated steroid
receptors tend to be condensed in the particular regions in the nucleus
with forming discrete foci (41), in which coactivators are often found
with the receptors (42). We overexpressed the expression plasmids for
the GR and TIF2, and intracellular localization of these molecules was
studied using anti-GR and anti-TIF2 polyclonal antibodies with a
confocal laser microscopy. As shown in Fig. 5C, the GR
showed diffuse cytoplasmic distribution in the absence of ligand,
whereas TIF2 revealed distinct dot-like localization in the nucleus.
Upon exposure to dexamethasone, GR-specific fluorescence tended to form
distinct foci, most of which overlapped with TIF2 foci (Fig.
5C). On the contrary, treatment with UDCA resulted in
diffuse nuclear fluorescence of the GR, which did not merge with
TIF2-related foci (Fig. 5C). It may thus be concluded that
UDCA-activated GR does not communicate with TIF2 in the nucleus.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Effect of UDCA on the interaction between the
GR and p160 coactivator TIF2. A, reporter gene assay.
COS7 cells were transfected with the expression plasmids for the GR and
TIF2 and pGRE-Luc reporter plasmid and cultured in the presence of 100 nM dexamethasone (Dex) or the indicated
concentrations of UDCA for 12 h, and then cellular lysates were
assayed for luciferase activity. B, two-hybrid assay. CV-1
cells were transfected with the expression plasmids for either
herpesvirus VP-16 activation domain (VP16AD) or the fusion protein of
VP16AD and the nuclear receptor interacting domain of TIF2
(VP16AD-TIF2/NID), Gal4-GR LBD, and the Gal4-driven reporter plasmid.
After transfection, cells were cultured in the presence of the
indicated concentrations of Dex or UDCA for 12 h, and cellular
lysates were assayed for luciferase activity. Experiments were repeated
three times, and means and S.D. values are shown. C,
colocalization assay. COS7 cells were transfected with the expression
plasmids for the GR and TIF2 and cultured in the presence of 100 nM dexamethasone and 200 µM UDCA for 6 h. Cells were fixed and double-stained with FITC-conjugated anti-GR and
rhodamine-conjugated anti-TIF2 antibodies. For visualization, a
confocal laser microscope was used, and images were digitally analyzed
using Adobe PhotoShop software.
|
|
Effect of UDCA on GR-NF- B Interaction--
We next examined the
effect of dexamethasone and UDCA on another function of the GR,
repression of NF- B. Treatment with PMA induced expression of
NF- B-responsive reporter gene by ~10-fold (Fig.
6, columns 1 and
2). Dexamethasone alone did not significantly suppress the
PMA-induced response of reporter gene expression (columns
3 and 4). When the wild-type GR expression
plasmid pCMX-GR was cotransfected, treatment with dexamethasone
resulted in marked reduction of NF- B activity (columns
7-10). The inhibitory effects on NF- B activity were
abolished when the COOH-terminal truncated receptor GR1-750 was
expressed (columns 13-16), indicating that dexamethasone-mediated suppression of NF- B may again require the
COOH-terminal end of the LBD. When the effect of UDCA was assessed,
NF- B activity was slightly decreased in the absence of the GR
expression plasmid (columns 5 and 6).
Moreover, transfection of the wild-type GR expression plasmid, as
expected, resulted in further suppression of NF- B activity in the
presence of UDCA (column 12). Notably, the
COOH-terminal truncated mutant GR-(1-750) still maintained this
suppressive effect of UDCA (column 18). The
UDCA-mediated suppression of NF- B activity was increased along with
the increment of GR expression plasmid or UDCA concentrations (data not
shown).

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Effect of UDCA on transactivational function
of NF- B. HeLa cells were transfected with
the GR expression plasmids and pNF- B-Luc reporter plasmid and
cultured in the absence or presence of either 100 nM
dexamethasone (Dex) or 200 µM UDCA for 6 h and stimulated with PMA for 12 h, and then cellular lysates were
assayed for luciferase activity. Experiments were repeated three times,
and means and S.D. values are shown.
|
|
To analyze the molecular mechanism of GR-mediated suppression of
NF- B activity, we examined the effect of UDCA on subcellular localization of the p65 subunit of NF- B, since it has been shown that the major constituents of NF- B are p65 and p50, and
transactivational activity of NF- B is considered to rely on p65 (23,
24). For this purpose, pCMX-GR was transfected into HeLa cells, and
subcellular localization of the exogenous GR and endogenous p65 was
immunocytochemically assessed (Fig. 7).
In the absence of treatment, both the GR and p65 docked in the
cytoplasm. Once treated with either dexamethasone or PMA, the GR or p65
exhibited distinct nuclear fluorescence, respectively. When the cells
were treated with both agents, the nuclear translocation of p65 in
GR-positive cells did not appear to be different from that of
GR-negative cells. It thus appears that neither dexamethasone nor UDCA
affected PMA-induced movement of p65 to the nucleus (Fig.
7A). We next performed Western immunoblot experiments to
test the protein levels of NF- B components. In the absence of UDCA,
PMA induced rapid phosphorylation of the inhibitory protein I B,
resulting in a gradual decrease in I B protein levels. Protein
expression of p65 and p50 appeared to be constant. In the presence of
UDCA, almost identical results were obtained, as in the case of
treatment with dexamethasone (Fig. 7B, data not shown).
Taken together, it is strongly indicated that UDCA does not affect the
activation process of NF- B in the cytoplasm (e.g.
phosphorylation and degradation of I B and the following nuclear
translocation of p65/p50 heterodimer). Alternatively, UDCA might affect
the transcription function of NF- B in the nucleus. To test this
hypothesis, we assessed the effect on transactivational function of p65
using Gal4-p65 fusion proteins (Fig. 7C). Transactivational activity of Gal4-VP16 was not significantly influenced by treatment with either dexamethasone or UDCA. When Gal4 DBD was fused with full-length p65 (Gal4-p65/1-549), the transcriptional activity was
repressed by dexamethasone and UDCA in the presence of introduced GR
(Fig. 7C, columns 2 and 3).
This suppressive effect of dexamethasone and UDCA is not observed when
Gal4-p65/1-285 was used (columns 4 and
5), but was observed when Gal4-p65/286-549 was used
(columns 6 and 7). Although the
suppressive effect of dexamethasone was greater against Gal4-p65/1-549
than against Gal4-p65/286-549, UDCA equally repressed transactivation
of either Gal4-p65/1-549 or Gal4-p65/286-549 (compare
columns 3 and 7).

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Mechanism of GR-mediated repression of
NF- B. A, subcellular
localization of GR and NF- B p65. HeLa cells were transfected with GR
expression plasmid pCMX-GR and cultured in the absence or presence of
either 100 nM dexamethasone (Dex) or 200 µM UDCA for 6 h and stimulated with
Me2SO (PMA( )) or PMA (PMA(+)) for
1 h. Cells were fixed and stained for GR (green) and
p65 (red) and examined using confocal laser microscopy.
B, effect of UDCA on the protein components of NF- B.
After transfection of pCMX-GR, HeLa cells were cultured in the absence
or presence of 200 µM UDCA for 6 h and then treated
with PMA for 2 h. At the indicated time points, cells were
harvested, and whole cell lysates were prepared and assayed for p65,
p50, I B , and phosphorylated I B (P-I B ), using Western
blot. Paxillin serves as the loading control. C, one-hybrid
assay. HeLa cells were transfected with the expression plasmids for
Gal4 DBD and its fusion proteins with p65, GR expression plasmid
pCMX-GR, and the Gal4-dependent luciferase reporter plasmid
ptk-GALpx3-LUC and cultured in the absence or presence of 100 nM dexamethasone or 200 µM UDCA for 12 h, and then cellular lysates were assayed for luciferase activity.
Open column, vehicle; hatched
column, dexamethasone; solid column,
UDCA.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Although it is known that UDCA modulates various
cellular and immunological processes in vitro and influences
the clinical course and pathology of inflammatory liver diseases, its
molecular mechanism has remained unknown (43). We previously reported that UDCA activates the GR into DNA binding species in the absence of
steroid ligand (37). We here describe that UDCA interacts with the GR
through the LBD, with neither recruitment of p160 coactivator TIF-2 nor
eliciting transactivational function of the GR. Moreover, we indicate
that UDCA-activated GR represses NF- B-dependent transcription.
Recent emerging studies have widened the spectrum of ligand for the
nuclear receptors. Among others, it is revealed that a number of bile
acids, including chenodeoxycholic, cholic, deoxycholic, and lithocholic
acids, bind and activate the nuclear receptor FXR/BAR in cultured cells
(44-46). The identification of the target genes for FXR and FXR gene
disruption in mice provided the first clues to the physiological
function of the interaction between bile acids and the receptor (47,
48). FXR heterodimerizes with the common heterodimeric partner RXR and
constitutively resides in the nucleus (48). Therefore, their ligands
necessarily pass through not only the plasma membrane but also the
nuclear envelope. In this line, the fact that FXR ligand bile acids
have considerable lipophilicity appears to be rational. Moreover,
overexpression of their transporter potentiates the effect of those
bile acids on FXR (45). In clear contrast, UDCA, which is a relatively hydrophilic bile acid compared with FXR ligands, does not activate the
FXR (45) but rather with the GR as we have shown (37). Previous
reports showed that various actions of UDCA could chiefly be ascribed
to its effects on the cell membrane, since it is not conceivable that
the hydrophilic bile acid UDCA readily penetrates the cell membrane and
directly influences intracellular processes (49). It may thus be
speculated that UDCA initially interacts with the cell membrane and
then modulates cytoplasmic events, one of which may be connected to GR
activation. For example, UDCA, via interaction with an as yet unknown
target machinery or receptor on the membrane, may generate such
secondary signals that dissociate hsp90 from the GR even in the absence
of glucocorticoid ligands. This perspective is indirectly supported by
the fact that overexpression of the ilial bile acid transporter did not
influence UDCA-dependent nuclear translocation or
transactivation of the GR (data not shown). In the case of heat shock
experiments, it has been shown that hsp90 is a target of
heat-shock-induced cellular signals (50, 51). Taking the relative GR
specificity of UDCA action into consideration, however, not hsp90 but
GR itself might be the final target of such signals, since all steroid
receptors used in the present study have been shown to associate with
hsp90. Although the precise mechanism still remains unknown, the
interplay between UDCA and the GR could be mechanistically distinct
from that between other hydrophobic bile acids and FXR.
We indicated here that one of the target domains of UDCA (or
UDCA-generated signal) on the GR is the LBD, since expressed Gal4-GR
LBD still moves into the nucleus after treatment with UDCA. This fusion
protein has been shown to have a ligand-inducible transactivational
potential (52). However, UDCA did not elicit induction of
GRE-dependent reporter gene expression in the present study. Again, UDCA induces nuclear translocation and DNA binding activity of the wild-type GR, whereas UDCA-activated GR lacks transactivational potential (37). Our data may suggest that UDCA,
despite interacting with the LBD, cannot activate activation function-2. Already a number of reports have described that the LBD has
multiple functions distributed throughout the very domain, and not only
steroid ligands but also various stimuli may differentially influence
its functionality (53-55). For example, the interaction with
coactivators is elicited by the majority of glucocorticoid ligands but
not by certain steroids including RU486, although RU486 can bind with
the LBD and RU486-bound GR could translocate into the nucleus as a
DNA-binding species (56, 57). Since we showed in two independent
experiments that UDCA-activated GR cannot communicate with a
coactivator TIF2 in the nucleus, UDCA-activated GR appears to be
extremely similar to RU486-activated GR. Interestingly, the domain
requirement for UDCA-dependent nuclear translocation is
distinct from that for dexamethasone. Our results indicate that UDCA or
UDCA-provoked secondary signals influence a broader region of the LBD
than dexamethasone; GR-(1-765), in which the very COOH-terminal end of
the LBD was chopped off, could not be activated by dexamethasone but
was by UDCA, and the effect of UDCA was observed when COOH-terminal
deletion progressed to amino acid position 740. Note that these
deletion mutants of the GR lack helix 12, which forms an interaction
surface with coactivators (Fig. 4A). We thus may speculate
that UDCA, either directly or indirectly, modulates the LBD structure
of the GR into such a unique conformation that the GR can translocate
into the nucleus and bind DNA but no longer interacts with the
coactivators to elicit transcriptional activation. Of course, for
confirmation of this scenario, structural analysis of the GR is
essential. At this moment, however, we are confronted with several
difficulties in performing such experiments. For example, the
three-dimensional structure of the LBD of the GR has not yet been made
clear, and current structural discussion of the GR LBD, therefore,
ought to be based on the knowledge of other nuclear receptors. More importantly, it is likely that the GR is indirectly modulated within
the cells after treatment with UDCA via generation of as yet
unidentified secondary signal, and at this moment there is no way to
reconstitute such activation process in vitro. To overcome these issues, it is necessary to clarify the pathway for UDCA-mediated activation of the GR.
We also showed that UDCA suppresses NF- B-dependent
transcription, and this inhibitory effect, at least in part, is
mediated by the GR. Various mechanisms have been presented for
GR-dependent NF- B suppression (See the Introduction).
Given the data showing that the protein amounts of the NF- B
components (p65, p50, or I B ), phosphorylation of I B , and
nuclear translocation of p65 were not significantly influenced after
treatment with UDCA, we, among others, favor the idea that UDCA
represses transcriptional activity of NF- B in the nucleus via
activation of the GR. Notably, a helix 12-lacking GR-(1-750) does not
activate GRE-dependent transcription but suppresses
NF- B-dependent transcription in the presence of UDCA,
suggesting that UDCA-dependent suppression of NF- B does
not involve either induction of I B synthesis or competition of a
limiting amount of coactivators. On the other hand, a one-hybrid assay
indicates that COOH-terminal transactivation domain of p65 could be a
target of UDCA-activated GR; UDCA-activated GR may interact with the
p65 subunit in the nucleus and repress NF- B activity. In the
meantime, negative regulation by the GR was more marked in full-length
p65 when treated with dexamethasone. However, UDCA-mediated repression
was almost comparable between full-length and the COOH-terminal half of
p65. It thus is tempting to speculate that UDCA-activated GR may
suppress NF- B in such a manner distinct from dexamethasone-activated
GR, at least not involving the NH2-terminal half of p65.
From the pharmacological viewpoint, GR is still considered to be one of
the therapeutic targets for anti-inflammation and immunosuppression
(14). Several steroid compounds have enabled partial dissociation of
these pharmacological actions from metabolic side effects (33, 36, 58).
However, it has not been elucidated whether these compounds reproduce
such distinction in vivo (36). Moreover, their receptor
specificity has not been critically evaluated. We here showed that UDCA
is extremely specific to the GR and represses NF- B without induction
of transactivation function of the GR. Since UDCA is not defined as a
classical glucocorticoid despite carrying a steroid structure but as a
bile acid, it is plausible that UDCA is a prototype of a novel and
selective GR modifier. However, we should state again that the UDCA
concentrations required for nuclear translocation and transrepression
in our experiments appear to be extraordinarily high as a therapeutic
drug. Indeed, it is known that in patients treated with UDCA, serum
levels of UDCA are lower than the concentrations used in the present
study (59-61). We therefore cannot directly link UDCA action observed in the present study with the therapeutic mechanism of UDCA in inflammatory liver diseases. On the other hand, it has been shown that
the concentrations of UDCA are extremely elevated in the liver and bile
ducts in patients taking UDCA (62). Given the beneficial effect of UDCA
in a number of hepatobiliary diseases, it is possible that UDCA,
because of its differences in regional concentration, acts only in such
regions where UDCA is concentrated (i.e. liver and bile
ducts) as an organ-specific immunomodulator. Of course, further
identification of the molecular mechanism for UDCA action
(e.g. identification of its receptor and signal transducer) would develop a novel pharmacological approach that may act in a more
systemic fashion.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Drs. H. Ogawa, G. Hager, J. Palvimo,
P. Chambon, and K. Umesono for the plasmids and Mitsubishi-Tokyo
Pharmaceutical Co. for supplying UDCA.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by grants from the Ministry
of Education, Science, Technology, Sports, and Culture; the Ministry of
Health, Labor, and Welfare; the Takeda Science Foundation; the Suzuken
Memorial Foundation; the Japan Owner's Association; and the Cell
Science Research Foundation.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.
§
These authors contributed equally to this work.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Division of
Clinical Immunology, Advanced Clinical Research Center, Institute of
Medical Science, University of Tokyo, 4-6-1, Shirokanedai, Minato-ku,
Tokyo 108-8639, Japan. Tel./Fax: 81-3-5449-5547; E-mail: hirotnk@ims.u-tokyo.ac.jp.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, September 27, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M107098200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
UDCA, ursodeoxycholic acid;
AR, androgen receptor;
DBD, DNA binding domain;
FCS, fetal calf serum;
FITC, fluorescein isothiocyanate;
GFP, green
fluorescent protein;
GR, glucocorticoid receptor;
GRE, glucocorticoid
response element;
hsp90, heat shock protein 90;
LBD, ligand binding
domain;
MR, mineralocorticoid receptor;
NID, nuclear receptor
interaction domain;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
PMA, phorbol
12-myristate acetate;
PR, progesterone receptor;
TIF2, transcription
intermediary factor 2;
Mops, 4-morpholinepropanesulfonic acid.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Makino, I.,
and Tanaka, H.
(1998)
J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol.
13,
659-664[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Gershwin, M. E.,
Ansari, A. A.,
Mackay, I. R.,
Nakanuma, Y.,
Nishio, A.,
Rowley, M. J.,
and Coppel, R. L.
(2000)
Immunol. Rev.
174,
210-225[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Heathcote, E. J.
(2000)
Hepatology
31,
1005-1013[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Lacaille, F.,
and Paradis, K.
(1993)
Hepatology
18,
165-172[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Nishigaki, Y.,
Ohnishi, H.,
Moriwaki, H.,
and Muto, Y.
(1996)
Dig. Dis. Sci.
41,
1487-1493[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Yamazaki, K.,
Suzuki, K.,
Nakamura, A.,
Sato, S.,
Lindor, K. D.,
Batts, K. P.,
Tarara, J. E.,
Kephart, G. M.,
Kita, H.,
and Gleich, G. J.
(1999)
Hepatology
30,
71-78[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Yoshikawa, M.,
Tsujii, T.,
Matsumura, K.,
Yamao, J.,
Matsumura, Y.,
Kubo, R.,
Fukui, H.,
and Ishizaka, S.
(1992)
Hepatology
16,
358-364[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Calmus, Y.,
Guechot, J.,
Podevin, P.,
Bonnefis, M. T.,
Giboudeau, J.,
and Poupon, R.
(1992)
Hepatology
16,
719-723[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Hirano, F.,
Tanaka, H.,
Makino, Y.,
Okamoto, K.,
and Makino, I.
(1996)
J. Gastroenterol.
31,
55-60[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Botla, R.,
Spivey, J. R.,
Aguilar, H.,
Bronk, S. F.,
and Gores, G. J.
(1995)
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.
272,
930-938[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Rodrigues, C. M.,
Fan, G.,
Ma, X.,
Kren, B. T.,
and Steer, C. J.
(1998)
J. Clin. Invest.
101,
2790-2799[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Gustafsson, J. A.,
Carlstedt-Duke, J.,
Poellinger, L.,
Okret, S.,
Wikstrom, A. C.,
Bronnegard, M.,
Gillner, M.,
Dong, Y.,
Fuxe, K.,
and Cintra, A.
(1987)
Endocr. Rev.
8,
185-234[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Reichardt, H. M.,
Tronche, F.,
Berger, S.,
Kellendonk, C.,
and Schutz, G.
(2000)
Adv. Pharmacol.
47,
1-21
|
| 14.
|
Boumpas, D. T.,
Chrousos, G. P.,
Wilder, R. L.,
Cupps, T. R.,
and Balow, J. E.
(1993)
Ann. Intern. Med.
119,
1198-1208[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Lee, K. C.,
and Lee Kraus, W.
(2001)
Trends Endocrinol. Metab.
12,
191-197[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Evans, R. M.
(1989)
Recent Prog. Horm. Res.
45,
1-22
|
| 17.
|
Kumar, R.,
and Thompson, E. B.
(1999)
Steroids
64,
310-319[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Picard, D.,
Kumar, V.,
Chambon, P.,
and Yamamoto, K. R.
(1990)
Cell Regul.
1,
291-299[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Gottlicher, M.,
Heck, S.,
and Herrlich, P.
(1998)
J. Mol. Med.
76,
480-489[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Barnes, P. J.,
and Karin, M.
(1997)
N. Engl. J. Med.
336,
1066-1071[Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Ghosh, S.,
May, M. J.,
and Kopp, E. B.
(1998)
Annu. Rev. Immunol.
16,
225-260[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Baldwin, A. S., Jr.
(2001)
J. Clin. Invest.
107,
3-6[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Karin, M.
(1999)
Oncogene
18,
6867-6874[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Ghosh, S.
(1999)
Immunol. Res.
19,
183-189[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Uranishi, H.,
Tetsuka, T.,
Yamashita, M.,
Asamitsu, K.,
Shimizu, M.,
Itoh, M.,
and Okamoto, T.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
13395-13401[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Hiramoto, M.,
Shimizu, N.,
Sugimoto, K.,
Tang, J.,
Kawakami, Y.,
Ito, M.,
Aizawa, S.,
Tanaka, H.,
Makino, I.,
and Handa, H.
(1998)
J. Immunol.
160,
810-819[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Shimizu, N.,
Sugimoto, K.,
Tang, J.,
Nishi, T.,
Sato, I.,
Hiramoto, M.,
Aizawa, S.,
Hatakeyama, M.,
Ohba, R.,
Hatori, H.,
Yoshikawa, T.,
Suzuki, F.,
Oomori, A.,
Tanaka, H.,
Kawaguchi, H.,
Watanabe, H.,
and Handa, H.
(2000)
Nat. Biotechnol.
18,
877-881[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Auphan, N.,
DiDonato, J. A.,
Rosette, C.,
Helmberg, A.,
and Karin, M.
(1995)
Science
270,
286-290[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Scheinman, R. I.,
Gualberto, A.,
Jewell, C. M.,
Cidlowski, J. A.,
and Baldwin, A. S., Jr.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
943-953[Abstract]
|
| 30.
|
Liden, J.,
Delaunay, F.,
Rafter, I.,
Gustafsson, J.,
and Okret, S.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
21467-21472[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
De Bosscher, K.,
Vanden Berghe, W.,
Vermeulen, L.,
Plaisance, S.,
Boone, E.,
and Haegeman, G.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
3919-3924[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Nissen, R. M.,
and Yamamoto, K. R.
(2000)
Genes Dev.
14,
2314-2329[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Adcock, I. M.,
Nasuhara, Y.,
Stevens, D. A.,
and Barnes, P. J.
(1999)
Br. J. Pharmacol.
127,
1003-1011[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Vayssiere, B. M.,
Dupont, S.,
Choquart, A.,
Petit, F.,
Garcia, T.,
Marchandeau, C.,
Gronemeyer, H.,
and Resche-Rigon, M.
(1997)
Mol. Endocrinol.
11,
1245-1255[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Hofmann, T. G.,
Hehner, S. P.,
Bacher, S.,
Droge, W.,
and Schmitz, M. L.
(1998)
FEBS Lett.
441,
441-446[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Belvisi, M. G.,
Wicks, S. L.,
Battram, C. H.,
Bottoms, S. E.,
Redford, J. E.,
Woodman, P.,
Brown, T. J.,
Webber, S. E.,
and Foster, M. L.
(2001)
J. Immunol.
166,
1975-1982[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Tanaka, H.,
Makino, Y.,
Miura, T.,
Hirano, F.,
Okamoto, K.,
Komura, K.,
Sato, Y.,
and Makino, I.
(1996)
J. Immunol.
156,
1601-1608[Abstract]
|
| 38.
|
Makino, Y.,
Okamoto, K.,
Yoshikawa, N.,
Aoshima, M.,
Hirota, K.,
Yodoi, J.,
Umesono, K.,
Makino, I.,
and Tanaka, H.
(1996)
J. Clin. Invest.
98,
2469-2477[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Okamoto, K.,
Tanaka, H.,
Ogawa, H.,
Makino, Y.,
Eguchi, H.,
Hayashi, S.,
Yoshikawa, N.,
Poellinger, L.,
Umesono, K.,
and Makino, I.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
10363-10371[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Hong, H.,
Kohli, K.,
Garabedian, M. J.,
and Stallcup, M. R.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
2735-2744[Abstract]
|
| 41.
|
Htun, H.,
Barsony, J.,
Renyi, I.,
Gould, D. L.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
4845-4850[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Baumann, C. T.,
Ma, H.,
Wolford, R.,
Reyes, J. C.,
Maruvada, P.,
Lim, C.,
Yen, P. M.,
Stallcup, M. R.,
and Hager, G. L.
(2001)
Mol. Endocrinol.
15,
485-500[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Poupon, R.,
Chazouilleres, O.,
Balkau, B.,
and Poupon, R. E.
(1999)
J. Hepatol.
30,
408-412[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Parks, D. J.,
Blanchard, S. G.,
Bledsoe, R. K.,
Chandra, G.,
Consler, T. G.,
Kliewer, S. A.,
Stimmel, J. B.,
Willson, T. M.,
Zavacki, A. M.,
Moore, D. D.,
and Lehmann, J. M.
(1999)
Science
284,
1365-1368[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 45.
|
Makishima, M.,
Okamoto, A. Y.,
Repa, J. J.,
Tu, H.,
Learned, R. M.,
Luk, A.,
Hull, M. V.,
Lustig, K. D.,
Mangelsdorf, D. J.,
and Shan, B.
(1999)
Science
284,
1362-1365[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Wang, H.,
Chen, J.,
Hollister, K.,
Sowers, L. C.,
and Forman, B. M.
(1999)
Mol. Cell
3,
543-553[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Sinal, C. J.,
Tohkin, M.,
Miyata, M.,
Ward, J. M.,
Lambert, G.,
and Gonzalez, F. J.
(2000)
Cell
102,
731-744[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 48.
|
Tu, H.,
Okamoto, A. Y.,
and Shan, B.
(2000)
Trends Cardiovasc. Med.
10,
30-35[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Bouscarel, B.,
Fromm, H.,
and Nussbaum, R.
(1993)
Am. J. Physiol.
264,
G243-G251[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 50.
|
Sanchez, E. R.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
17-20[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 51.
|
Galigniana, M. D.,
Scruggs, J. L.,
Herrington, J.,
Welsh, M. J.,
Carter-Su, C.,
Housley, P. R.,
and Pratt, W. B.
(1998)
Mol. Endocrinol.
12,
1903-1913[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 52.
|
Hollenberg, S. M.,
and Evans, R. M.
(1988)
Cell
55,
899-906[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 53.
|
Gustafsson, J. A.,
Dahlman-Wright, K.,
Stromstedt, P. E.,
Wright, T.,
and Carlstedt-Duke, J.
(1990)
Princess Takamatsu Symp.
21,
137-155[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
Wan, Y.,
Coxe, K. K.,
Thackray, V. G.,
Housley, P. R.,
and Nordeen, S. K.
(2001)
Mol. Endocrinol.
15,
17-31[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 55.
|
Sheldon, L. A.,
Smith, C. L.,
Bodwell, J. E.,
Munck, A. U.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
8146-8157[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 56.
|
Roux, S.,
Terouanne, B.,
Couette, B.,
Rafestin-Oblin, M. E.,
and Nicolas, J. C.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
10059-10065[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 57.
|
Prima, V.,
Depoix, C.,
Masselot, B.,
Formstecher, P.,
and Lefebvre, P.
(2000)
J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol.
72,
1-12[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 58.
|
Vanden Berghe, W.,
Francesconi, E.,
De Bosscher, K.,
Resche-Rigon, M.,
and Haegeman, G.
(1999)
Mol. Pharmacol.
56,
797-806[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 59.
|
Ozaki, S.,
Tashiro, A.,
Makino, I.,
Nakagawa, S.,
and Yoshizawa, I.
(1979)
J. Lipid Res.
20,
240-245[Abstract]
|
| 60.
|
Lianidou, E. S.,
Papastathopoulos, D. S.,
and Siskos, P. A.
(1989)
Anal. Biochem.
179,
341-346[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 61.
|
Ewerth, S.,
Angelin, B.,
Einarsson, K.,
Nilsell, K.,
and Bjorkhem, I.
(1985)
Gastroenterology
88,
126-133[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 62.
|
Setchell, K. D. R.,
Rodrigues, C. M. P.,
Clerici, C.,
Solinas, A.,
Morelli, A.,
Gartung, C.,
and Boyer, J.
(1997)
Gastroenterology
112,
226-235[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
Copyright © 2001 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Okada, J. Shoda, K. Taguchi, J. M. Maher, K. Ishizaki, Y. Inoue, M. Ohtsuki, N. Goto, K. Takeda, H. Utsunomiya, et al.
Ursodeoxycholic acid stimulates Nrf2-mediated hepatocellular transport, detoxification, and antioxidative stress systems in mice
Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol,
October 1, 2008;
295(4):
G735 - G747.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Omata, H. Yoshida, J. Toyota, E. Tomita, S. Nishiguchi, N. Hayashi, S. Iino, I. Makino, K. Okita, G. Toda, et al.
A large-scale, multicentre, double-blind trial of ursodeoxycholic acid in patients with chronic hepatitis C
Gut,
December 1, 2007;
56(12):
1747 - 1753.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. D. Amaral, R. E. Castro, S. Sola, C. J. Steer, and C. M. P. Rodrigues
p53 Is a Key Molecular Target of Ursodeoxycholic Acid in Regulating Apoptosis
J. Biol. Chem.,
November 23, 2007;
282(47):
34250 - 34259.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Sola, J. D. Amaral, P. M. Borralho, R. M. Ramalho, R. E. Castro, M. M. Aranha, C. J. Steer, and C. M. P. Rodrigues
Functional Modulation of Nuclear Steroid Receptors by Tauroursodeoxycholic Acid Reduces Amyloid {beta}-Peptide-Induced Apoptosis
Mol. Endocrinol.,
October 1, 2006;
20(10):
2292 - 2303.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Marzioni, H. Francis, A. Benedetti, Y. Ueno, G. Fava, J. Venter, R. Reichenbach, M. G. Mancino, R. Summers, G. Alpini, et al.
Ca2+-Dependent Cytoprotective Effects of Ursodeoxycholic and Tauroursodeoxycholic Acid on the Biliary Epithelium in a Rat Model of Cholestasis and Loss of Bile Ducts
Am. J. Pathol.,
February 1, 2006;
168(2):
398 - 409.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Yoshikawa, K. Yamamoto, N. Shimizu, S. Yamada, C. Morimoto, and H. Tanaka
The Distinct Agonistic Properties of the Phenylpyrazolosteroid Cortivazol Reveal Interdomain Communication within the Glucocorticoid Receptor
Mol. Endocrinol.,
May 1, 2005;
19(5):
1110 - 1124.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Higuchi, A. Grambihler, A. Canbay, S. F. Bronk, and G. J. Gores
Bile Acids Up-regulate Death Receptor 5/TRAIL-receptor 2 Expression via a c-Jun N-terminal Kinase-dependent Pathway Involving Sp1
J. Biol. Chem.,
January 2, 2004;
279(1):
51 - 60.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. Kodama, N. Shimizu, N. Yoshikawa, Y. Makino, R. Ouchida, K. Okamoto, T. Hisada, H. Nakamura, C. Morimoto, and H. Tanaka
Role of the Glucocorticoid Receptor for Regulation of Hypoxia-dependent Gene Expression
J. Biol. Chem.,
August 29, 2003;
278(35):
33384 - 33391.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. De Bosscher, W. Vanden Berghe, and G. Haegeman
The Interplay between the Glucocorticoid Receptor and Nuclear Factor-{kappa}B or Activator Protein-1: Molecular Mechanisms for Gene Repression
Endocr. Rev.,
August 1, 2003;
24(4):
488 - 522.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Khare, S. Cerda, R. K. Wali, F. C. von Lintig, M. Tretiakova, L. Joseph, D. Stoiber, G. Cohen, K. Nimmagadda, J. Hart, et al.
Ursodeoxycholic Acid Inhibits Ras Mutations, Wild-type Ras Activation, and Cyclooxygenase-2 Expression in Colon Cancer
Cancer Res.,
July 1, 2003;
63(13):
3517 - 3523.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. K. Wali, S. Khare, M. Tretiakova, G. Cohen, L. Nguyen, J. Hart, J. Wang, M. Wen, A. Ramaswamy, L. Joseph, et al.
Ursodeoxycholic Acid and F6-D3 Inhibit Aberrant Crypt Proliferation in the Rat Azoxymethane Model of Colon Cancer: Roles of Cyclin D1 and E-Cadherin
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.,
December 1, 2002;
11(12):
1653 - 1662.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. K. Wali, D. Stoiber, L. Nguyen, J. Hart, M. D. Sitrin, T. Brasitus, and M. Bissonnette
Ursodeoxycholic Acid Inhibits the Initiation and Postinitiation Phases of Azoxymethane-induced Colonic Tumor Development
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.,
November 1, 2002;
11(11):
1316 - 1321.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Abdel-Hafiz, G. S. Takimoto, L. Tung, and K. B. Horwitz
The Inhibitory Function in Human Progesterone Receptor N Termini Binds SUMO-1 Protein to Regulate Autoinhibition and Transrepression
J. Biol. Chem.,
September 6, 2002;
277(37):
33950 - 33956.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. T. Stauffer, M. K. Rochat, B. Dick, F. J. Frey, and A. Odermatt
Chenodeoxycholic Acid and Deoxycholic Acid Inhibit 11beta -Hydroxysteroid Dehydrogenase Type 2 and Cause Cortisol-induced Transcriptional Activation of the Mineralocorticoid Receptor
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 12, 2002;
277(29):
26286 - 26292.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|