Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M111549200 on February 15, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 17, 14647-14656, April 26, 2002
In Vivo Footprinting of the Human
11
-Hydroxysteroid Dehydrogenase Type 2 Promoter
EVIDENCE FOR CELL-SPECIFIC REGULATION BY Sp1 AND Sp3*
Andrea R.
Nawrocki
,
Christopher E.
Goldring§,
Radina M.
Kostadinova,
Felix J.
Frey, and
Brigitte M.
Frey
From the Division of Nephrology and Hypertension, Departments of
Internal Medicine and Clinical Research, Freiburgstrasse 15, University
Hospital of Berne, CH-3010 Berne, Switzerland
Received for publication, December 4, 2001, and in revised form, February 13, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
11
-Hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 is
selectively expressed in aldosterone target tissues, where it confers
aldosterone selectivity for the mineralocorticoid receptor by
inactivating 11
-hydroxyglucocorticoids with a high affinity for the
mineralocorticoid receptor. The present investigation aimed to
elucidate the mechanisms accounting for the rigorous control of the
HSD11B2 gene in humans. Using dimethyl sulfate
in vivo footprinting via ligation-mediated PCR, we
identified potentially important regions for HSD11B2
regulation in human cell lines: two GC-rich regions in the first exon
(I and II) and two upstream elements (III and IV). The footprints suggest a correlation between the extent of in vivo protein
occupancy at three of these regions (I, II, and III) and the rate of
HSD11B2 transcription in cells with high (SW620),
intermediate (HCD, MCF-7, and HK-2), or low HSD11B2
mRNA levels (SUT). Moreover, gel shift assays with nuclear extracts
from these cell lines revealed that decreased HSD11B2
expression is related to a decreased binding activity with
oligonucleotides containing the putative regulatory elements. Antibody
supershifts identified the majority of the components of the binding
complexes as the transcription factors Sp1 and Sp3. Finally,
transient transfections with various deletion mutant reporters define
positive regulatory elements that might account for basal and selective
expression of 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The intracellular access of glucocorticoids to mineralocorticoid
or glucocorticoid receptors is modulated by the 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase enzymes, which interconvert biologically active 11
-hydroxyglucocorticoids and inactive 11-ketosteroids (1-4). Two
kinetically distinct isoforms, 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type
1 and 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2, differentiate in
cofactor specificity, substrate affinity, and directionality of the
reaction (2, 4). The 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2 (11
HSD2)1 isoform
catalyzes the dehydrogenation of 11
-hydroxyglucocorticoids, has a
nanomolar Km for glucocorticoids, utilizes
NAD+ as a cofactor, and is localized in the endoplasmatic
reticulum membrane with a cytoplasmic orientation of its catalytic
domain (5, 6). The enzyme exhibits a remarkable cell-specific
constitutive expression in mineralocorticoid target tissues, such as
epithelial cells from the renal cortical collecting tubule and the
distal colon, where its primary function is to protect the nonselective mineralocorticoid receptor from promiscuous activation by
11
-hydroxyglucocorticoids (4, 5, 7-9).
Impaired 11
HSD2 function leads to clinical symptoms in which
cortisol is acting as a mineralocorticoid. A potentially fatal genetic
disorder, the syndrome of "apparent mineralocorticoid excess," has
been attributed to mutations in the HSD11B2 gene (5, 9). The
phenotype is characterized by increased tubular sodium retention with
low renin, low aldosterone hypertension. Moreover, some studies suggest
that variations in HSD11B2 gene expression may play a role
in the development of essential hypertension and explain salt
sensitivity of blood pressure in humans (10, 11).
Control of the constitutive pattern of gene expression in different
cells and tissues occurs most commonly at the level of gene
transcription. Typically, regulatory DNA elements located cis to the target gene, in cooperation with a distinct and
sometimes gene-specific array of trans-acting DNA-binding
proteins, control the processes of transcription initiation and
elongation by the RNA polymerase II enzyme. The transcriptional
activity is highly dependent on the presence and activity of these
DNA-binding proteins, encompassing the number of molecules and their
transcription activation status. With respect to the HSD11B2
proximal promoter sequence, little information is available on the
basal and/or tissue-specific transcriptional regulation. The highly
GC-rich promoter lacks a TATA-like element but contains several
putative Sp1 binding sites. Two Sp1 elements at positions
80 and
145 were previously analyzed using in vitro techniques,
including EMSA, DNase I footprinting, and transient transfections of
promoter reporter constructs (12). In the present study, we
investigated the HSD11B2 promoter by in vivo
dimethyl sulfate (DMS) footprinting via ligation-mediated PCR (LMPCR).
This technique allows a view of gene-regulatory regions during
transcription in an intact chromosomal environment, so it may be the
most relevant and informative method to locate regulatory sites. We
compared protein binding events in a number of appropriate cell lines
that differentially express the HSD11B2 gene to uncover the
transcriptional mechanisms that may govern cell-specific regulation in vivo.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Supplies--
Chemicals were of a high quality commercial grade
and were purchased from Sigma, Roche Diagnostics, Fluka, or Merck.
Radiochemicals were obtained from Amersham Biosciences.
Oligonucleotides were synthesized by Microsynth. Vent polymerase was
from New England Biolabs; other enzymes were obtained from Roche
Diagnostics, Invitrogen, or Promega. TLC plates (G-25 fluorescence
indicator UV 254) coated with silica gel were from Macherey-Nagel.
Cell Culture--
SW620, a human colon carcinoma cell line,
MCF-7, a human breast adenocarcinoma cell line, and SUT, a human lung
carcinoma cell line, were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (Invitrogen). Human cortical
collecting duct cells (HCD cells) were a generous gift from P. M. Ronco (13). HCD cells were cultured in Ham's F-12 nutrient
mix/Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (1:1, v/v) supplemented with
2% newborn calf serum (Sigma), 20 mM HEPES (Invitrogen), 5 µg/ml transferrin, 5 ng/ml sodium selenate, 5 µg/ml insulin, and 50 nM dexamethasone (all from Sigma). A human proximal
tubule-derived cell line (HK-2) was purchased from American Type
Culture Collection and grown in keratinocyte serum-free medium (K-SFM;
Invitrogen) supplemented with 5 ng/ml epidermal growth factor and 40 µg/ml bovine pituitary extract (14). The cell lines were complemented
with 2 mM glutamine, 100 units/ml penicillin, and 100 µg/ml streptomycin and maintained in a 37 °C, 5% CO2
humidified atmosphere.
RNA Extraction and Reverse Transcription--
Total RNA was
extracted using Trizol reagent (Invitrogen) and further treated with
RNase-free DNase I for 15 min at 37 °C. The RNA concentration was
determined by measuring the absorption at 260 nm, and quality was
estimated by the ratio to the absorption at 280 nm. Reverse
transcription was performed in reverse transcription buffer containing
50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.2), 6 mM
MgCl2, 10 mM dithiothreitol, 100 mM
NaCl, 250 nM deoxynucleotide triphosphates, 2 units of ribonuclease inhibitor RNAsin, 1 unit avian myeloblastosis virus reverse transcriptase, 2 µl of random hexanucleotide mix (10-fold concentrated), and 2 µg of total RNA in a volume of 20 µl for 1 h at 42 °C.
Quantitative PCR--
PCR was performed using the TaqMan system
from Applied Biosystems. The reaction mixture contained 1-fold
concentrated TaqMan universal PCR master mix, 500 nM each
of the appropriate forward and reverse primers, 200 nM
specific TaqMan probe, and 100 ng of reverse-transcribed total RNA in a
final volume of 25 µl. Primers and probe were designed with Primer
Express 1.0 software (Applied Biosystems), optimized, and validated.
They were complementary to human HSD11B2 cDNA (forward
primer position, 802-821; reverse primer position, 850-869; probe
primer position, 823-847). TaqMan ribosomal RNA control reagents were
used to normalize for the S 18 rRNA gene (20-fold concentrate; Applied
Biosystems). Probes were labeled with the reporter fluorescent dye
6-carboxyfluorescein and with 6-carboxy-tetramethyl-rhodamine as
quencher. The pre-run cycling conditions were 2 min at 50 °C and 10 min at 95 °C. Thermal cycling involved 40 cycles at 95 °C for
15 s and 1 min at 60 °C (15, 16).
11
HSD2 Activity Assay--
Approximately 150,000 trypsinized
cells from each cell line were resuspended in reaction buffer
containing 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 1 mM EGTA, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM MgCl2, 100 mM NaCl, and 250 mM sucrose and subjected to
three freeze/thaw cycles. Enzymatic activity was determined in
vitro by measuring the rate of conversion of corticosterone to
11-dehydrocorticosterone. Cellular lysates were mixed with 100 µM NAD, 5 nM corticosterone, and 1.26 nM [3H]corticosterone (specific activity 79 Ci/mmol) in 20 µl of reaction buffer and incubated for different time
periods at 37 °C. As a control, 0.2% Triton X-100 was added to
inhibit 11
HSD2 activity. The reactions were stopped by the addition
of an excess of corticosterone and dehydrocorticosterone (10 µg).
Finally, the steroids were separated by thin-layer chromatography and
analyzed as described previously (3).
In Vivo Footprinting via LMPCR--
Genomic footprinting
analysis was carried out using DMS methylation and the
ligation-mediated PCR method (17, 18) as adapted by us for the analysis
of extremely GC-rich regions (19). Nested primer sets were selected to
cover about 500 bp of the 5'-flanking region and exon 1 of the
HSD11B2 gene. The primer sequences were as follows: PA.-1,
5'-GGGCTCTTCATAAGCTCG-3'; PA.-2, 5'-AGGGCGAGCAGAGAAAGCGAGT-3'; PA.-3,
5'-AGGGCGAGCAGAGAAAGCGAGTGTCCCTCT-3'; PB.1, 5'-TGGCACAGCCAGTCGA-3'; PB.2, 5'-AGACGCAGGTCTGAGCGCAGCA-3'; PB.3,
5'-ACGCAGGTCTGAGCGCAGCAGCTGCAGCA-3'; PC.-1, 5'-ATGCCGGTTGTGCGTGT-3';
PC.-2, 5'-CGAACAAGCGTGAGTGGCATGTG-3'; PC.-3,
5'-CAAGCGTGAGTGGCATGTGCTCACCTGAG-3'; PD.-1, 5'-TCCTCGAGCGCAGCAA-3'; PD.-2, 5'-GCAACTTTGGGACTTTGTTCCGGC-3'; PD.-3,
5'-CCGGCTTTTTCCAAATCGAATCTGGTCGAGGGGG-3'; PE.1,
5'-GGAGAGAGAGCTTCTAGG-3', PE.2, 5'-AGAGGGACACTCGCTTTCTCTGCT-3'; and
PE.3, 5'-TTTCTCTGCTCGCCCTCGGGCCGAGCTTAT-3'.
Footprinting results were visualized on a PhosphorImager screen
(Cyclone; Canberra Packard) and analyzed with ScionImage software.
EMSAs--
Nuclear protein extractions were carried out as
described previously (20). The sequences (top strand) of synthetic
complementary oligonucleotides used were as indicated in Figs. 9, 10,
and 12, with the exception of GSIV, which was 5'-
GCTCCTCGAGCGCAGCAACTTTGGGACTTTGTTCC- 3'. Nuclear extracts (3-4 µg)
were incubated with 35 fmol of [
-32P]ATP-labeled
oligonucleotides for 10 min at room temperature in a final reaction
volume of 10 µl. Binding buffer contained 4% Ficoll, 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 35 mM NaCl, 60 mM
KCl, 0.01% Nonidet P-40, 2 mM dithiothreitol, and 1 µg
of poly(dI-dC). Where indicated, specific binding was competed
with unlabeled competitor oligonucleotides at a 100-fold molar excess.
For antibody supershift experiments, 1 µl of the corresponding
antibody solution (TransCruz Gel Supershift reagents; Santa Cruz
Biotechnology) was added to the nuclear extracts, and then the extracts
were kept on ice for 10 min before mixing them with the labeled
oligonucleotides. DNA-protein complexes were separated by
electrophoresis on 5% polyacrylamide/0.5× Tris-borate EDTA
gels, dried, and analyzed on a PhosphorImager.
Plasmid Constructions--
The reporter plasmid p
400/+260 was
obtained by PCR cloning. Genomic DNA was isolated from SW620 cells and
amplified using forward primer 5'-CTCCTCGAGCGCAGCAACT-3' and reverse
primer 5'-TGGCACAGCCAGTCGA-3'. The PCR product was subcloned into the
pCRII-TOPO TA cloning vector (Invitrogen) and transferred into the
pGL3-Basic vector (Promega) by KpnI/EcoRV
digestion and ligation via KpnI/SmaI sites.
Deletion mutants p
400/+260
GCI and p
400/+260
GCII are
derivatives of plasmid p
400/+260 and were generated via PCR-based
whole plasmid synthesis using Vent polymerase with proofreading
activity and the following primers: for deletion GCI, forward primer
5'-CTGCAGCTGCTGCGCTCAG-3' and reverse primer 5'-AAGGCCAGCGCTCCATGG-3';
and for deletion GCII, forward primer 5'-ATGGAGCGCTGGCCTTGGCC-3' and
reverse primer 5'-AGAGAGAGCTTCTAGGCGG-3'. Parental templates were
digested with the methylation-sensitive restriction enzyme
DpnI, and the remaining PCR products were circularized with
T4 DNA ligase.
Transfections, Luciferase, and
-Galactosidase
Assays--
Plasmid DNA was prepared using QIAfilter columns (Qiagen).
Transfections were performed with FuGENE 6 transfection reagent (Roche
Molecular Biochemicals) following the manufacturer's recommendations. FuGENE 6 (1.2 µl) and 0.8 µg of plasmid DNA were incubated in serum-free medium for 15 min before application on subconfluent cells
in 24-well plates. The reporter plasmids were co-transfected with 0.05 µg of a pCMV-LacZ control plasmid to correct for transfection efficiency. After a 24-h incubation, the medium was removed, and the
cells were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline, lysed in 100 µl of lysis buffer, and assayed for luciferase and
-galactosidase activity using the Dual-Light system (Tropix). Chemiluminescence was
measured with a MediatorsPhL luminometer (Mediators Diagnostic Systems). The normalized values from triplicate samples varied by
<10%.
 |
RESULTS |
Transcriptional Activity of the HSD11B2 Gene in Different
Epithelial Cell Types--
A selection of human epithelial-like
carcinoma cell lines were tested for their HSD11B2
transcriptional activity by a real-time quantitative reverse
transcription-PCR method (TaqMan) (15). The results are listed in Table
I. The lowest HSD11B2 mRNA
levels were measured in the lung-derived SUT cell line. Thus, we used SUT values as a reference for calculation of the relative transcript number in other cell types. The SW620 colon carcinoma cell line contained the highest HSD11B2 mRNA levels (~50-fold
higher than SUT) and was therefore included for in-depth analyses. A
physiologically relevant locus for 11
HSD2 activity is the kidney;
accordingly, we selected two kidney cell lines, HCD derived from the
cortical collecting duct and HK-2 from the proximal tubule. Both cell
types expressed intermediate amounts of HSD11B2 transcripts
(~16-fold higher than SUT). Similar intermediate levels were found in
the human breast cancer cell line MCF-7 (Table I).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Relative quantification of HSD11B2 mRNA levels in different human
cell types
The relative amount of HSD11B2 mRNA was detected by
real-time quantitative reverse transcription-PCR as described under
"Experimental Procedures." The relative copy number was calculated
according to the comparative Ct method, whereby the threshold cycle Ct
corresponds to the PCR cycle number at which the amount of amplified
template reaches a fixed threshold. PCRs were run in triplicates in
separate tubes, and the samples were normalized to ribosomal S 18 rRNA
as internal, endogenous control. The HSD11B2N values
were estimated in relation to SUT values.
|
|
Enzymatic Activity of 11
HSD2--
To establish a correlation
between the relative number of transcripts and the occurrence of
functional proteins, we measured the oxidative activity of 11
HSD2 in
lysates of the five cell types mentioned above. Conversion of
radiolabeled corticosterone into 11-dehydrocorticosterone was assayed
as a function of various incubation periods at constant protein
concentrations (Fig. 1). In SW620 cells,
high mRNA expression levels were translated into a high rate of
substrate conversion, which reached about 80% after 4 h of
incubation. HCD and HK-2 cells expressed a relatively small catalytic
activity with up to 20% conversion. MCF-7 extracts converted about
52% of substrate in 4 h. In contrast to the HSD11B2
mRNA, which was virtually absent, we measured 64% substrate
conversion in SUT extracts. Finally, residual oxidative activity of
related enzymes such as the 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 isoform was established in the presence of 0.2% Triton X-100. Such
treatment was observed to completely eradicate 11
HSD2 activity, but
not 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 activity (21). Upon addition of Triton X-100, the conversion rate could be reduced to
<10% in all cellular extracts except those of SUT (Fig. 1,
),
suggesting that the 11
-dehydrogenase activity in SW620, MCF-7, HCD,
and HK-2, but not SUT cells, is attributable to the 11
HSD2 isoform.
Therefore, the factual 11
HSD2 activity in SUT cells was estimated as
the difference between the conversion rates in the absence and presence
of Triton X-100 and was very low (around 10%).

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Enzymatic activity of
11 HSD2 in selected human cell lines.
Equal numbers of HCD, HK-2, SW620, MCF-7, and SUT cells were lysed and
measured for their endogenous 11 HSD2 activity. The oxidative
activity was determined as the percentage of conversion of
corticosterone into 11-dehydrocorticosterone at 30 min, 1 h, and
4 h after the addition of [3H]corticosterone,
corticosterone, and NAD. Control samples from each cell line were
incubated for 4 h in presence of Triton X-100 to abrogate
11 HSD2 activity ( ). The data are shown as the means + S.D.
from triplicate samples of a representative experiment.
|
|
Transcriptional Control of HSD11B2 in Different Cell
Lines--
Because of the probable transcriptional nature of the
control of HSD11B2 gene expression, we investigated the
potential of its upstream sequences to induce transcription in the five
cell lines. Approximately 1800 bp of the 5'-flanking region of the HSD11B2 gene were cloned in front of a luciferase marker
gene and analyzed using classical transient transfection assays. In addition, a set of progressive deletion mutants was generated and
analyzed. As expected, the overall luciferase activity was highest in
SW620 cells, intermediate in MCF-7 cells, and relatively low in HCD,
HK-2, and SUT cells (data not shown). Consistent with previous
observations (12), a fragment ranging from
210 to +117 was sufficient
for maximal promoter activity, and critical transcriptional-enhancing
elements were localized to a region between
220 and
45 relative to
the kidney transcription start site of the HSD11B2 gene
(data not shown) (22).
In Vivo Footprinting of the HSD11B2 Gene--
DMS in
vivo footprinting was used to determine the regions that
contribute to the differential expression pattern in human tissues in
an in vivo setting. Using this method, we analyzed chromosomal protein-DNA contacts occurring at the HSD11B2
locus in intact cells. In principle, the small molecule DMS diffuses rapidly into the nuclei of living cells and methylates guanine residues
in the major groove of DNA and, to a lesser extent, adenine residues in
the minor groove (17, 23). Transcription factors binding to the DNA
inhibit or stimulate guanine methylation, leading to protection or
hypermethylation, respectively. Such genomic footprints were visualized
by comparing samples of DNA that have been exposed to the methylating
agent DMS in the living cell (in vivo) with samples treated
with this agent, in the absence of proteins, after the DNA has been
extracted from the cells (in vitro). Using LMPCR allows for
single copy gene control regions to be analyzed from a whole genome. We
have selected several sets of nested primers (PA, PB, PC, PD, and PE)
to map ~500 bp of the HSD11B2 proximal promoter and exon 1 sequence (Fig. 2). A modified LMPCR
procedure was employed for the amplification of highly GC-rich regions,
such as those found in this sequence (19).

View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Localization of LMPCR primer sets and EMSA
probes to map HSD11B2 regulatory regions. The
5'-flanking region and parts of the first exon of the
HSD11B2 gene are indicated. Numbers refer to the
position relative to the transcription initiation site of the kidney
transcript (asterisk). Arrows indicate the
relative positions of LMPCR primer sets PA, PB, PC, PD, and PE used to
analyze the top or the bottom strand, respectively. The locations of
EMSA probes GSI, GSII, GSIII, and GSIV are shown.
|
|
Throughout the HSD11B2 upstream region and the first exon,
we detected multiple differences in the guanine-specific DNA ladders obtained from different cell types. Initially, using primer set PA to
amplify the bottom strand, we identified a prominent hypersensitive band within a GC-rich region referred to as region I (nt +153) (Fig.
3). Moving from 3' to 5', we detected an
assembly of footprinted guanines within a second highly GC-rich region
(designated region II). Region II encompasses several overlapping
consensus binding sites for proteins from the Sp1 transcription factor
family. In region II, protein occupancy was discovered by three
protected guanines and one hypersensitive guanine (nt +84, +88, and +93 and nt +90, respectively) (Fig. 3). Furthermore, when amplifying the
top strand with primer set PB, we detected a protected guanine (nt
+92), along with two hypersensitive guanines at positions +81 and +97
within region II (Fig. 4A). To
better visualize these differences, the guanine ladders were analyzed
by densitometry (histograms in Fig. 4B). Variations in the
methylation pattern were discovered not only between in
vitro- and in vivo-treated DNA but also within the
different cell types. For example, protection at guanine +92 and both
hypermethylations guanine +81 and guanine +97 were clearly visible in
SW620 cells (Fig. 4, A and B; compare lanes
1 and 2), which express high levels of
HSD11B2. Histograms from cells expressing intermediate
(MCF-7, HCD, and HK-2) and low levels (SUT) of 11
HSD2 exhibited a
similar, albeit less pronounced, pattern (Fig. 4B, compare
lane 3 with lanes 4-7). Similar cell type
dependence was seen with primer set PA, where a decreasing intensity of
footprints was accompanied by decreasing HSD11B2 transcript
levels (Fig. 3). These observations strongly suggest cell line-specific
differences in the quantity and/or the quality of the factors binding
to these sites.

View larger version (60K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
DMS in vivo footprints in
different cell types visualized by LMPCR. Intact SW620, MCF-7,
HCD, HK-2, and SUT cells were treated in vivo with DMS, and
subsequently, the genomic DNA was isolated. In parallel, deproteinated,
naked DNA was methylated in vitro to obtain control DNA
samples. Both in vitro- and in vivo-methylated
DNA were treated with piperidine to introduce strand cleavage at
methylated guanine or adenine residues. Resulting fragments were
amplified by LMPCR and radioactively end-labeled using primer set PA.
The fragments were separated on a 5% sequencing gel and exposed to a
PhosphorImager screen. Results were confirmed with at least two
separate DNA preparations and three LMPCR reactions. Numbers
indicate the nucleotide position relative to the HSD11B2
transcriptional start site. Protected and hypermethylated nucleotides
are indicated by open or filled arrowheads,
respectively. Areas indicative of protein-DNA interactions and regions
of putative transcription factor binding are summarized as regions I
and II (boxed).
|
|

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Top strand analysis of regions I and II
within the first exon of HSD11B2. LMPCR of the
top strand using primer set PB. A, comparison of SW620,
MCF-7, HCD, HK-2, and SUT cells (lanes 2, 4, and
5-7) treated with DMS in vivo to genomic DNA
treated in the absence of proteins (SW620 and MCF-7, lanes 1 and 3). Experimental procedures were as described for Fig.
3. Open arrowhead, protected nucleotide; filled
arrowhead, hypermethylated nucleotide. B,
histogram analysis of the PhosphorImager scan. Profiles correspond to
the intensity of each represented guanine residue around region
II.
|
|
In Vivo Nuclear Protein Interactions within the
5'-Flank--
Upstream to the HSD11B2 transcriptional start
site, DMS in vivo footprints were detected in two regions:
region III from
75 to
122, and region IV from
173 to
208.
Indicative for protein binding, we found a strong footprint covering an
Sp1 and an overlapping nuclear factor
B motif in region III, where a
hypersensitive guanine (nt
89) was located next to two protected
guanine residues (nt
86 and nt
91) (Fig.
5A). These differences could
be best resolved with primer set PC for bottom strand analysis and were confirmed using primer set PD (Fig. 5, A and B).
Additional evidence for protein occupancy in this region came from two
neighboring adenine residues, which were hypermethylated (Fig. 5; nt
101 and nt
115).

View larger version (85K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
In vivo footprinting data from the
5'-flank of the HSD11B2 gene. A, bottom strand
analysis from nucleotide 30 to 280 using primer set PC.
B, bottom strand analysis from 150 to +5 using primer set
PD. Symbols are as described in the Fig. 3 legend. SW620,
MCF-7, HCD, HK-2, and SUT genomic DNA was treated in the absence
(in vitro) and in the presence (in vivo) of
nuclear proteins, and footprints were visualized using LMPCR.
|
|
Region IV is characterized by a consensus RFX1 and an overlapping
Ikaros-2 motif and was identified by a series of hypermethylated guanine and adenine residues on the bottom strand (Fig.
5B; nt
186 to nt
199). These footprints were
complementary to a single hypersensitive adenine (nt
200) that could
be observed by top strand analysis with primer set PE (Fig.
6).

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
HSD11B2 top strand footprinting
analysis. The top strand of genomic DNA prepared from SW620
and SUT was amplified with primer set PE. The position of a
hypermethylated adenine residue is shown ( 200).
Experimental procedures were as described for Fig. 3.
|
|
The sum of DMS in vivo footprints identified by our
experiments and their exact position on the HSD11B2 genomic
sequence are summarized in Fig. 7.
Putative transcription factor recognition sites are indicated according
to the results of a Transfac Matrix Data base search (24).

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Summary of DMS in vivo
footprints on the HSD11B2 gene. Partial
nucleotide sequences around the HSD11B2 transcriptional
start site are shown. Motifs with strong homology to known
transcription factor binding sites are underlined. Protected
nucleotides are indicated by open arrowheads, and
hypermethylated nucleotides are indicated by filled
arrowheads, as detected by DMS in vivo footprinting.
Putative regulatory elements are summarized and designated regions I to
IV (boxed).
|
|
EMSA to Discover the Nature of Binding Proteins--
Our in
vivo footprinting experiments suggested numerous protein
interactions with widespread regions along the HSD11B2
promoter. To further characterize these interactions and to determine
the identity of the binding proteins, in vitro studies were
necessary. EMSAs were carried out using nuclear extracts from the
previously described cell types and radiolabeled probes matching the
sequences around regions I to IV (GSI, GSII, GSIII, and GSIV) as
described in Fig. 2.
Several abundant protein-DNA complexes were formed with probe GSI (Fig.
8). The most abundant complex, C1, and a
faint complex, C2, proved to bind specifically because binding was
inhibited in the presence of a 100-fold molar excess of unlabeled
oligonucleotide (wtGSI). In addition, complex C3 partially disappeared
upon the addition of the wild-type competitor (wtGSI),
whereas another two fast-migrating bands were considered as unspecific
bands (ns). Moreover, competition with an oligonucleotide in
which the Sp1 site was point-mutated by the exchange of TA for GC bases
(Fig. 8, mutX) abolished the ability to compete for
complexes C1, C2, and C3 using extracts from SW620 cells. These results
suggested a strong binding activity through the GC-rich element as
attributed to members of the Sp1 family of zinc finger DNA-binding
proteins (25). Interestingly, the intensity of the major complex, C1, was significantly higher using extracts from high-level
HSD11B2 expresser cells (SW620), compared with the other
four cell types (MCF-7, HCD, HK-2, and SUT). Other intercellular
variations were less pronounced (C2 and C3), with the exception of the
weak complex C4 that repeatedly appeared using HCD extracts.

View larger version (82K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
In vitro binding activities of
nuclear proteins on individual putative regulatory regions of the
HSD11B2 gene. EMSA competition and supershift
experiments were preformed using nuclear extracts from SW620, MCF-7,
HCD, HK-2, and SUT cells in separate binding reactions. 35 fmol of
radioactively labeled probe GSI containing sequence motifs of region I
was assayed in the absence ( ) or presence of a 100-fold molar excess
of cold wtGSI probe or mutX probe as competitors. Complex formation was
determined by migration retardation in nondenaturating 5%
polyacrylamide gels and visualized by phosphorimaging. The positions of
specific complexes (C1, C2, and C3) or
nonspecific bands (ns) are indicated. Supershift experiments
were performed in the presence of Sp1- or Sp3-specific antibodies
( Sp1 or Sp3), combinations of Sp1- and
Sp3-specific antibodies
( Sp1+ Sp3), or an unrelated
anti-gelatinase antibody as nonspecific control ( NS).
Protein extracts obtained from SW620 nuclei were combined before the
binding reaction with the respective antibodies for 10 min at
4 °C.
|
|
The only proteins implicated in the binding to probe GSI were the Sp1
and Sp3 members of the Sp1 family of zinc finger transcription factors.
In supershift assays, nuclear extracts from SW620 cells were incubated
with antibodies specific to Sp1 or Sp3 (Fig. 8,
Sp1 and
Sp3). These antibodies were able to considerably reduce C1 and C2 complex formation. Nuclear extracts from the other four cell
types reacted in a similar manner (data not shown).
Sp1 and Sp3 Protein Binding Activity to Multiple GC-rich Elements
Present in the HSD11B2 Promoter--
We next sought to determine
whether Sp1 family members were able to interact with other GC-rich
regions as exposed by in vivo footprinting experiments.
Representative EMSAs with radiolabeled probe GSII are shown in Fig.
9. The probe encompasses three nested, homologous Sp1 binding sites. Indeed, abundant formation of protein-DNA complexes was discovered by the presence of an intense, retarded band
C5. A faster-migrating band, C6, was specific but of low affinity, as
determined by competition with an excess of cold oligonucleotide (Fig.
9A, wtGSII). Furthermore, point mutations designed to individually abrogate Sp1 binding sites were not
sufficiently able to compete for binding, with the exception of an
impaired competition when mutation B was introduced (mutB).
The destruction of two or more of the Sp1 sites present, as realized by
mutCD or mutABCD, was necessary to partially or completely inhibit
competition (Fig. 9A).

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
EMSA probe GSII binds nuclear factors Sp1 and
Sp3. 32P-labeled GSII probes covering three nested Sp1
consensus sites in region II were incubated with equal amounts of
nuclear extracts from SW620, MCF-7, HCD, HK-2, and SUT cells. The
position of specific binding (C5 and C6) and
nonspecific bands (ns) is indicated. A, the exact
sequences of oligonucleotides used are indicated on the top.
B, antibodies have been included in the binding
reactions as indicated. The location of complexes that reacted with
Sp1 or Sp3 antibodies is referred to as supershift. An
anti-gelatinase antibody was used as a control. Gel retardation assays
were performed as described under "Experimental Procedures."
|
|
Formation of complex C5 was predominant with SW620 extracts relative to
the other four cell types (MCF-7, HCD, HK-2, and SUT). In supershift
assays, complex C5 emerged as a combination of both proteins Sp1 and
Sp3, whereas complex C6 reacted only with Sp3-specific antibodies and
not with Sp1-specific antibodies (Fig. 9B). We did not find
evidence for constitutive binding of Egr-1, Sp2, Sp4, or WT1
proteins to probe GSI or GSII, respectively, despite the fact that
these proteins have a similar potential for binding to such GC-rich
sequence elements (data not shown). This strongly implicates Sp1 and
Sp3 in the transcriptional control of the HSD11B2 gene and
probably rules out a role for Egr-1, Sp2, Sp4, or WT1 in the activation
or repression of transcription of this gene at the constitutive level.
Sp1 and Sp3 may both bind simultaneously to the oligonucleotides, as
has been observed elsewhere (26), or, alternatively, Sp1 and Sp3 may
bind individually to the oligonucleotides, which might not be separated
by EMSA analysis.
We also analyzed Sp1 and Sp3 protein levels in our cell lines by
immunoblotting, but we did not detect obvious variations in endogenous
Sp1 and Sp3 protein content or in the ratios of Sp3 isoforms (data not
shown). This may implicate differences in both the activation status
and the nature of interactions with co-activator/co-repressor proteins
to direct cell-specific expression of the HSD11B2 gene.
Transactivation of the HSD11B2 Promoter through a GC-rich Element
in Exon 1--
To substantiate our findings on the importance of the
exon 1 sites in the tissue-specific regulation of HSD11B2
gene expression, attention was directed to the two sites implicated by
in vivo footprinting and EMSA analysis. We constructed a
luciferase reporter vector under the control of an HSD11B2
genomic sequence extending from
400 to +260 (p
400/+260) (Fig.
10). The sequence included upstream
regions (region II, III, and IV) as well as parts of the coding
sequence of exon 1 (region I) and was found to have strong
transcriptional activity in the HSD11B2 gene-expressing cell
line SW620. The transactivation efficiency, calculated as the ratio of
the experimental vector to constitutive
-galactosidase activity as
an internal standard, was about 2 times lower in MCF-7 cells and ~4
times lower in HCD, HK-2, and SUT cells than in SW620 cells (data not
shown).

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10.
Scheme of HSD11B2 deletion
mutant reporter vectors. Schematic representation of deletion
mutant reporter constructs. Parts of the 5'-flanking sequence
(white box) and the first exon (gray box) of the
HSD11B2 gene were cloned into the pGL3-Basic luciferase
(LUC) reporter vector. Numbers indicate the
position and the approximate length of the inserted fragments relative
to the kidney transcription initiation site (asterisk).
Internal deletions are specified with a X. Roman numerals
indicate GC-rich regions as described under "Results." Graphic
elements are as defined in the Fig. 2 legend. Results from transient
transfections with these vectors are given in Table II.
|
|
We then generated reporter vectors in which either region I or region
II was disrupted, and these deletion mutants were tested for their
transcription-enhancing activity (Table
II). Deletion of region I slightly
impaired promoter activity in high HSD11B2-expressing SW620
cells and, surprisingly, impaired promoter activity to a similar extent
in low 11
HSD2-expressing SUT and HK-2 cells (~30% and ~40%,
respectively), whereas promoter activity remained unchanged in MCF-7
cells and increased ~1.5-fold in HCD cells (p
400/+260
GCI). Whereas the deletion of region I had miscellaneous effects in the
different cell types, deletion of region II had a strong and uniform
effect on the transactivation potential in all cell types. Typically,
the overall activity decreased to 20-30% relative to the wild-type
construct when the p
400/+260
GCII vector was transfected into the
cells. Taken together, these data suggest that sites in the first exon
and upstream elements may act cooperatively to regulate
HSD11B2 expression.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Relative activity of luciferase reporters under the control of HSD11B2
promoter deletion mutants
A schematic diagram of the constructs is given in Fig. 10. Different
cell lines were transiently transfected with the respective reporter
plasmid (0.8 µg) along with a constitutive -galactosidase
expression vector (0.05 µg) as internal control. The effect of
deletions on the HSD11B2 promoter activity is expressed as
relative luciferase activity. For details, see "Experimental
Procedures."
|
|
EMSA Analysis of Putative Regulatory Motifs in the HSD11B2 Upstream
Region--
Initial studies focused on the role of exon 1 sites in the
control of HSD11B2 transcription; therefore, to complete
these studies, in vitro protein binding characteristics were
analyzed using probes GSIII and GSIV. These EMSA probes encompass
in vivo-footprinted areas upstream to the transcriptional
start site. Specific retarded bands (C7, C8, and C9) were detected
using probe GSIII containing overlapping Sp1 and nuclear factor
B
elements and nuclear extracts under the conditions reported above (Fig.
11). Intercellular variations existed,
as seen with probes GSI and GSII, in the binding activity of Sp1 and
Sp3 using nuclear extracts from the different cell types (Fig.
11A). Protein-DNA interactions were directed via the Sp1
sites, but no evidence for nuclear factor
B binding was found by
competition (Fig. 11A) or supershift assays (Fig.
11B). The identity of the components of complex C9 remains
unclear because it did not react with specific antibodies against
nuclear factor
B subunits p65, p50, or c-Rel or Sp2, Sp4, Ap2, or
Ikaros-2 proteins (Fig. 11B; data not shown).

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 11.
EMSA analysis of Sp1 motifs in the upstream
regions. EMSA assays with radiolabeled probe GSIII and nuclear
extracts from various cell lines. A, competition analyses
were carried out with a 100-fold excess of unlabeled oligonucleotides
as indicated on the top. The positions of specific
(C7, C8, and C9) and nonspecific
(ns) bands are indicated. B, antibodies included
in the binding reactions and the location of supershifted complexes are
shown (supershift). Anti-gelatinase antibody was used as a
nonspecific control ( NS). Reaction conditions were as
described under "Experimental Procedures."
|
|
Finally, weak binding activity was found using the GSIV probe covering
an Ikaros-2 and a RFX1 consensus motif and nuclear extracts from all
analyzed cell lines. The Ikaros zinc finger family of transcription
factors plays a role in hematopoietic cell differentiation (27). RFX
proteins are ubiquitously expressed in mammalian cells and are
essential for transactivation of major histocompatibility complex class
II and some viral promoters (28). However, competition was not
inhibited upon addition of an excess of unlabeled oligonucleotides that
were mutated in either of the two binding sites, hence we did not
further analyze region IV (data not shown).
 |
DISCUSSION |
The best-established role of 11
HSD2 is the regulation of salt
homeostasis by preventing access of glucocorticoids to the mineralocorticoid receptor in sodium-transporting epithelia (1, 2, 5,
8). To accomplish this task, a distinct tissue-specific expression of
the enzyme is required (4, 5, 7, 9). To elucidate the molecular
mechanism underlying this selective expression, we performed for the
first time an in vivo genomic footprinting analysis of the
human HSD11B2 promoter and describe regulatory elements in
the first exon, which were not identified earlier. Furthermore, we
provide evidence for an involvement of Sp1 and Sp3 transcription
factors in the tissue-specific regulation of the gene, rather than a
specific individual or set of nuclear protein factors that repress or
induce HSD11B2 transcription in different cell types.
We have based our studies on cellular models to unravel regulatory
mechanisms at the level of DNA interacting with regulatory proteins in
the context of an intact chromosomal architecture. HSD11B2
transcript levels ranged over 50-fold in cell lines originating from
human kidney (HCD and HK-2), colon (SW620), breast (MCF-7), and lung
(SUT) cancers (Table I). Thus, these cell lines appeared to be
appropriate models to study basal and cell-specific transcriptional regulation of the HSD11B2 gene.
The DMS in vivo footprinting experiments pointed to the
existence of DNA-protein interactions within three GC-rich DNA elements in the first exon (regions I and II) and upstream to the
transcriptional start site (region III) of the HSD11B2 gene.
Each of these elements contains one or more homologous Sp1 binding
motifs and was indeed shown to bind Sp1 and Sp3 proteins with high
affinity under in vitro conditions such as in EMSA and
supershift assays (Figs. 8, 9, and 11). The functional roles of these
regions were further evaluated by transfecting deletion mutant reporter
vectors. Our results matched previous observations (12) suggesting the
presence of strong transcription-enhancing elements between nucleotides
210 and
45 because the removal of these resulted in a significant loss of promoter activity (data not shown). However, deletion of
downstream elements equally altered the promoter activity; removal of
region II severely affected the transactivating potential (70-80%
less active), whereas deletion of region I had moderate effects and was
strongly dependent on the cellular background. These experiments
indicated that both regions contain important cis-acting
elements but are not fully capable of independently driving the
HSD11B2 promoter (Table II). Similar cooperative regulation of neighboring Sp1 binding sites has been reported previously (29).
The footprints obtained in our study by in vivo footprinting
differed from those described earlier by in vitro
footprinting techniques, firstly through the identification of
sensitive areas in the first exon of the HSD11B2 gene, and
secondly through the inability to detect protein occupancy at an
additional GC-rich site located between regions III and IV (12). This
element was described previously as being capable of binding Sp1
proteins in vitro in nuclear extracts from a human
choriocarcinoma cell line. We could not confirm this finding in our
cell lines using DMS footprinting. It has been shown that protein
binding in vitro does not necessarily reflect the
transcriptional involvement and occupation of a binding site in
vivo (30, 31). The DMS in vivo footprinting technique
cannot be criticized, as can classical in vitro assays, for
not taking into account the genomic architecture of a regulatory region.
Our results implicate a role for the Sp1 transcription factor and a
closely related member of the same family, Sp3, in the control of
transcription of the gene. Crucially, we observe variations in the
protection patterns among cell lines that differentially express
HSD11B2, thus reflecting an altered availability of these sequences for protein binding in vivo (Figs. 3 and 4).
Differential binding of Sp1 and Sp3 proteins to the HSD11B2
promoter is also observed in vitro, whereby the binding
activity appears to correlate positively with 11
HSD2 expression in
our cells (Figs. 8, 9, and 11). Based on the virtually ubiquitous
expression of Sp1 and Sp3 (29, 32), one might anticipate that these
transcription factors alone cannot play a pivotal role in the
regulation of tissue-specific expression. In fact, they have been
implicated many times in the specific expression of a number of genes
(33-35). Generally, Sp1 and Sp3 are assumed to be activators of
transcription, although a repression domain has been identified in both
(36, 37), and internally initiated translation sites in Sp3 mRNA
can lead to smaller, inhibitory Sp3 species (38). There is no obvious support for an HSD11B2 transcription repressing activity of
Sp1 or Sp3 in our system, but we cannot rule out this possibility because our data for this were obtained in vitro.
The specificity of expression of genes dependent on Sp1/Sp3 can be
derived from a number of different mechanisms: (i) the relative
abundance of Sp1 and Sp3 in the nucleus. Immunoblot data indicated that
variations in Sp1 and Sp3 binding on EMSAs were not due to
the quantity of these proteins in nuclear extracts (data not shown).
However, previous reports have demonstrated that exogenous factors may
influence Sp1 transcriptional function without affecting overall
nuclear levels (35); (ii) interaction with enhancers or inhibitory
nuclear proteins. Cell type-specific, direct protein-protein
interactions might modulate the binding activity of Sp1 transcription
factors (39-41); (iii) posttranslational modifications. Sp1 is known
to be phosphorylated (42-44) and glycosylated (45). Increasing
evidence exists for an influence of the phosphorylation status of Sp1
on its specific DNA affinity (35, 44). This may play a role in the
different binding activities detected, although we cannot speculate
further without additional data; and (iv) interaction with methylated
CpG sites. The HSD11B2 gene sequence surrounding the
transcriptional start site is extremely GC-rich and may function as a
CpG methylation-free island, as has been shown to exist in many
housekeeping but also tissue-specifically expressed gene promoters
(46). Sp1 has been shown to protect CpG islands from methylation (47),
although it may not be the only factor involved in vivo
(48). On the other hand, binding of the methyl-CpG-binding protein
MeCP2, which is thought to be responsible for the
trans-repression of methylated promoters, can repress
Sp1-activated transcription (49).
Although there still remains the possibility that other transcription
factors and DNA recognition elements not detected in our current
experiments play a role in the cell-specific expression of the
HSD11B2 gene, the results from the present investigation add
to a growing weight of evidence supporting the notion that Sp1 is
associated with the transcriptional activation of a number of genes
involved in control of sodium metabolism and hemodynamics. For
instance, basal and hyperoxia-induced Na,K-ATPase
1 transcription has been shown to be mediated by Sp1 and Sp3 in Madin-Darby canine kidney cells (50), and Sp1 and Sp3 binding regulate the Na,K-ATPase
1 subunit in rats (51). Furthermore, rat type A natriuretic peptide
receptor (52), human endothelial nitric oxide synthase (53), and
thromboxane synthase, a vasoconstriction-involved gene, have been
linked to Sp1 activity (54).
Of potential interest for understanding of the co-localization of
11
HSD2 and mineralocorticoid receptors is the observation of Zennaro
et al. (55), who showed Sp1 binding to defined sequences of
the promoter of the human mineralocorticoid receptor. Although the
large number of genes regulated by Sp1 and/or Sp3 probably precludes
the pharmacological use of Sp1 effectors in the treatment of
hemodynamic pathologies, information on exactly which genes are
dependent on these factors is relevant for the understanding of the
pathogenesis of these disease states. For instance, we and others have
recently presented evidence for a reduced activity of 11
HSD2 in
humans exhibiting a salt-sensitive blood pressure regulation (11, 56).
The probability of identifying exonic mutations as a mechanism for this
decreased 11
HSD2 activity is extremely low (57). Thus, alternative
explanations, such as an altered transcriptional activity, should be considered.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Pascal Rameil and Dr. Jean Imbert
(INSERM U119, Marseille, France) for invaluable advice about the
in vivo footprinting method. We thank Dr. Perrin White
(Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX) for the generous gift
of the 11
HSD2 promoter construct and Pierre M. Ronco (Hopital Tenon,
INSERM U489, Paris, France) for kindly donating the HCD cell line.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Swiss National Foundation for
Scientific Research Grant 31.061505.00.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.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 41-31-632-9476;
Fax: 41-31-632-9444; E-mail: andrea.nawrocki@dkf2.unibe.ch.
§
Present address: Department of Pharmacology, University of
Liverpool, 70 Pembroke Place, Liverpool L69 3BX, United Kingdom.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, February 15, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M111549200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
11
HSD2, 11
-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 2;
DMS, dimethyl sulfate;
LMPCR, ligation-mediated PCR;
nt, nucleotide(s);
EMSA, electrophoretic
mobility shift assay.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Funder, J. W.,
Pearce, P. T.,
Smith, R.,
and Smith, A. I.
(1988)
Science
242,
583-585[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Tannin, G. M.,
Agarwal, A. K.,
Monder, C.,
New, M. I.,
and White, P. C.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
16653-16658[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Escher, G.,
Galli, I.,
Vishwanath, B. S.,
Frey, B. M.,
and Frey, F. J.
(1997)
J. Exp. Med.
186,
189-198[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Albiston, A. L.,
Obeyesekere, V. R.,
Smith, R. E.,
and Krozowski, Z. S.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
105,
R11-R17[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Stewart, P. M.,
and Krozowski, Z. S.
(1999)
Vitam. Horm.
57,
249-324[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Odermatt, A.,
Arnold, P.,
Stauffer, A.,
Frey, B. M.,
and Frey, F. J.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
28762-28770[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Bostanjoglo, M.,
Reeves, W. B.,
Reilly, R. F.,
Velazquez, H.,
Robertson, N.,
Litwack, G.,
Morsing, P.,
Dorup, J.,
Bachmann, S.,
Ellison, D. H.,
and Bostonjoglo, M.
(1998)
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.
9,
1347-1358[Abstract]
|
| 8.
|
Biller, K. J.,
Unwin, R. J.,
and Shirley, D. G.
(2001)
Am. J. Physiol. Renal Physiol.
280,
F172-F179[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
White, P. C.,
Mune, T.,
and Agarwal, A. K.
(1997)
Endocr. Rev.
18,
135-156[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Poch, E.,
Gonzalez, D.,
Giner, V.,
Bragulat, E.,
Coca, A.,
and de La Sierra, A.
(2001)
Hypertension
38,
1204-1209[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Lovati, E.,
Ferrari, P.,
Dick, B.,
Jostarndt, K.,
Frey, B. M.,
Frey, F. J.,
Schorr, U.,
and Sharma, A. M.
(1999)
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.
84,
3745-3749[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Agarwal, A. K.,
and White, P. C.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
121,
93-99[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Prie, D.,
Friedlander, G.,
Coureau, C.,
Vandewalle, A.,
Cassingena, R.,
and Ronco, P. M.
(1995)
Kidney Int.
47,
1310-1318[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Ryan, M. J.,
Johnson, G.,
Kirk, J.,
Fuerstenberg, S. M.,
Zager, R. A.,
and Torok-Storb, B.
(1994)
Kidney Int.
45,
48-57[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Aarskog, N. K.,
and Vedeler, C. A.
(2000)
Hum. Genet.
107,
494-498[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Pfaffl, P. M.
(2001)
Nucleic Acids Res.
29,
E45[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Mueller, P. R.,
and Wold, B.
(1989)
Science
246,
780-786[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Garrity, P. A.,
and Wold, B. J.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
1021-1025[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Nawrocki, A.,
Goldring, C. E.,
and Frey, B. M.
(1999)
Anal. Biochem.
272,
280-282[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Israel, N.,
Gougerot-Pocidalo, M. A.,
Aillet, F.,
and Virelizier, J. L.
(1992)
J. Immunol.
149,
3386-3393[Abstract]
|
| 21.
|
Escher, G.,
Vogt, B.,
Beck, T.,
Guntern, D.,
Frey, B. M.,
and Frey, F. J.
(1998)
Endocrinology
139,
1533-1539[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Agarwal, A. K.,
Rogerson, F. M.,
Mune, T.,
and White, P. C.
(1995)
Genomics
29,
195-199[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Maxam, A. M.,
and Gilbert, W.
(1980)
Methods Enzymol.
65,
499-560[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Wingender, E.,
Chen, X.,
Hehl, R.,
Karas, H.,
Liebich, I.,
Matys, V.,
Meinhardt, T.,
Pruss, M.,
Reuter, I.,
and Schacherer, F.
(2000)
Nucleic Acids Res.
28,
316-319[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Berg, J. M.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
11109-11110[Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Ding, H.,
Benotmane, A. M.,
Suske, G.,
Collen, D.,
and Belayew, A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
19573-19580[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Osborne, B. A.
(2000)
Curr. Opin. Immunol.
12,
301-306[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Chen, L.,
Smith, L.,
Johnson, M. R.,
Wang, K.,
Diasio, R. B.,
and Smith, J. B.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
32227-32233[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Suske, G.
(1999)
Gene (Amst.)
238,
291-300[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Smith, C. L.,
and Hager, G. L.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
27493-27496[Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Strauss, E. C.,
and Orkin, S. H.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
5809-5813[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Lania, L.,
Majello, B.,
and De Luca, P.
(1997)
Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol.
29,
1313-1323[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Philipsen, S.,
and Suske, G.
(1999)
Nucleic Acids Res.
27,
2991-3000[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Patterson, C., Wu, Y.,
Lee, M. E.,
DeVault, J. D.,
Runge, M. S.,
and Haber, E.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
8410-8416[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Ge, Y.,
Matherly, L. H.,
and Tau |