Activation of Fibroblast Procollagen
1(I) Transcription by
Mechanical Strain Is Transforming Growth
Factor-
-dependent and Involves Increased Binding of
CCAAT-binding Factor (CBF/NF-Y) at the Proximal Promoter*
Gisela E.
Lindahl
§,
Rachel C.
Chambers
,
Jenny
Papakrivopoulou
,
Sally J.
Dawson¶,
Marianne C.
Jacobsen
,
Jill E.
Bishop
, and
Geoffrey J.
Laurent
From the
Centre for Cardiopulmonary Biochemistry and
Respiratory Medicine, Department of Medicine, Royal Free and University
College Medical School, The Rayne Institute, 5 University Street,
London WC1E 6JJ and ¶ Molecular Audiology, Department of
Immunology and Molecular Pathology, Windeyer Institute, Royal Free and
University College Medical School, 46 Cleveland St.,
London W1T 4JF, United Kingdom
Received for publication, September 17, 2001, and in revised form, December 7, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
During normal developmental tissue growth and in
a number of diseases of the cardiopulmonary system, adventitial and
interstitial fibroblasts are subjected to increased mechanical strain.
This leads to fibroblast activation and enhanced collagen synthesis, but the underlying mechanisms involved remain poorly understood. In
this study, we have begun to identify and characterize mechanical strain-responsive elements in the rat procollagen
1(I)
(COL1A1) gene and show that the activity of
COL1A1 promoter constructs, transiently transfected into
cardiac fibroblasts, was increased between 2- and 4-fold by continuous
cyclic mechanical strain. This was accompanied by a ~3-fold increase
in the levels of total active transforming growth factor-
(TGF-
)
released into the medium. Inclusion of a pan-specific TGF-
neutralizing antibody inhibited strain-induced COL1A1
promoter activation. Deletion analysis revealed the presence of two
potential strain response regions within the proximal promoter, one of
which contains an inverted CCAAT-box overlapping a GC-rich element.
Both mechanical strain and exogenously added TGF-
1 enhanced the
binding activity of CCAAT-binding factor, CBF/NF-Y, at this site.
Moreover, this element was sufficient to confer strain-responsiveness
to an otherwise unresponsive SV40 promoter. In summary, this study
demonstrates that strain-induced COL1A1 promoter activation
in cardiac fibroblasts is TGF-
-dependent and involves
increased binding of CCAAT-binding factor at the proximal
promoter. Furthermore, these findings suggest a novel and potentially
important TGF-
response element in the rat COL1A1 gene.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Cells of the cardiopulmonary system are constantly exposed to
mechanical stimulation from shear and tensile stresses, and in a number
of pathological states, e.g. systemic hypertension, these
stresses are significantly exaggerated (1). There is increasing
evidence that mechanical strain plays an important role in maintaining
normal tissue architecture by influencing cell function and behavior
and may also be involved in the pathogenesis of disease (2). This area
of research has recently gained much interest with respect to tissue
remodeling seen in fibrosis and tissue repair in major organs,
including the heart and lung, because increased mechanical force
(strain, shear stress, and pressure) has been shown to activate a
multitude of intracellular signaling pathways and alter the expression
of a large number of genes in cells from these organs (1, 3). In the
cardiopulmonary system, interstitial fibroblasts are believed to play a
central role in orchestrating tissue remodeling in response to
mechanical strain, both by increasing the release of auto/paracrine
factors leading to proliferation and by altering their expression of
extracellular matrix genes (1).
Type I collagen, the most abundant protein in the interstitium of major
organs, plays a critical structural role and influences numerous
cellular responses (4). Excessive production of type I collagen is a
key feature of fibrotic disorders of the lung, liver, kidney, skin, and
heart and multisystem diseases such as systemic sclerosis and
hypertension, often leading to severe organ dysfunction (5-7). Novel
therapeutic approaches for these disorders will come from a thorough
understanding of the molecular mechanisms involved in the regulation of
the type I collagen genes in such pathological conditions. The
expression of the genes COL1A1 and COL1A2,
encoding the
1 and
2 chains of type I collagen, respectively, is
controlled primarily at the level of transcription and is tightly regulated to allow physiologic modulation during development and tissue
repair (8, 9). Numerous mediators, including transforming growth
factor-
(TGF-
),1
connective tissue growth factor, insulin-like growth factor-I, prostaglandine-E2, and interferon-
, have been shown to
up- or down-regulate type I collagen gene expression in
vitro. Moreover, changes in the relative levels of these mediators
have been associated with fibrotic disorders (4). TGF-
1, a member of
a family of cytokines with pleiotropic effects on fibroblasts, has
emerged as a pivotal mediator in tissue repair (10) and in the
development of fibrosis (11, 12) and is the most potent inducer of
procollagen I gene expression characterized to date (4).
The role of TGF-
in pressure overload-induced cardiac fibrosis is
currently being explored. It was recently reported that transforming-growth factor-
-activated kinase, TAK1, a mediator of
TGF-
signaling, is activated as a delayed response to mechanical stress in mouse myocardium. Furthermore, a constitutively active form
of TAK1 expressed in the mouse heart was sufficient to cause cardiac
hypertrophy, interstitial fibrosis, and severe myocardial dysfunction
(13). We and others have shown that increased mechanical load enhances
the expression of the COL1A1 gene both in vivo
(1) and in isolated fibroblasts in vitro (14); however, the
underlying molecular mechanisms leading to this change remain poorly
understood. There is evidence from studies in mesangial (15) and smooth muscle cells (16) that enhanced COL1A1 expression in response to
mechanical strain is TGF-
-dependent. Increased
activation of TGF-
has also been demonstrated for fibroblasts
subjected to strain (17); however, whether this was sufficient to cause an increase in COL1A1 expression was not examined.
A major TGF-
1 response element has been reported at position
1624
in the rat COL1A1 gene (18), but the functional importance of this site has subsequently been questioned (19). Moreover, results
from two studies, including the original report, suggest the existence
of other, as yet unidentified, response elements (18, 20). Several
additional regulatory elements and their cognate transcription factors
have been implicated in TGF-
transactivation of type I collagen
genes in other species. Because of the high sequence homology in
certain regions of the type I collagen promoters across species, these
elements may represent potential additional candidates for mediating
the response to TGF-
and mechanical strain in the rat
COL1A1 gene. These elements have been shown to bind
transcription factors Sp1, NF-I, and AP1 (1), and more recently also
Smad proteins (21), the major effector molecules responsible for
propagating TGF-
signaling following receptor activation (22). Early
activation of the human procollagen
2(I) (COL1A2) gene by
TGF-
was shown to involve interaction of Smad3/Smad4 with Sp1 in
both fibroblasts (23) and mesangial cells (24). Smad proteins can also
interact with components of the AP1 complex, as has been demonstrated
in the activation of the collagenase I promoter (25). In addition,
there is accumulating evidence that Smad3 plays a major role in
mediating the fibrotic responses of TGF-
(26), but whether Smad
complexes are directly involved in the activation of the type I
collagen genes during prolonged cellular stress leading to fibrosis
remains to be established.
With this background we hypothesized that transcriptional activation of
the rat COL1A1 gene in cardiac fibroblasts subjected to
mechanical strain is mediated by autocrine stimulation by TGF-
and
that this activation involves TGF-
response elements in the promoter
region of the gene. To address this hypothesis, rat cardiac fibroblasts
were transiently transfected with rat COL1A1
promoter/reporter gene constructs and subjected to mechanical strain.
Here we show that cyclic mechanical strain activates the rat
COL1A1 promoter in cardiac fibroblasts via a
TGF-
-dependent pathway. Furthermore, at least two
regions in the proximal promoter, including an inverted CCAAT-box at
position
100/
94, appear to be involved in the response. Finally,
increased binding of CBF/NF-Y to this inverted CCAAT-box was shown to
contribute to the transcriptional activation by mechanical strain.
These findings have important implications for our understanding of the
mechanism by which mechanical force increases COL1A1 gene activation. Importantly, these findings identify an as yet
unappreciated role for CBF/NF-Y in regulating COL1A1 transcription in
response to extracellular signals associated with enhanced
extracellular matrix deposition.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Cell Culture and Cyclic Mechanical Strain Applied to
Fibroblasts--
Primary cultures of fetal Sprague-Dawley rat cardiac
fibroblasts were prepared by collagenase digestion as previously
described (27), and maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
(DMEM) containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2 mM glutamine,
and antibiotics (Invitrogen). Cells were used at passages 6-9 and
plated on collagen I-coated elastic silicon membranes in 6-well (25-mm
diameter) Flex I plates (FlexCell International). Confluent cells were
preincubated in serum-free DMEM containing serum replacement 1 and
HEPES buffer (Sigma), glutamine, and antibiotics. After 24 h, the
medium was replaced with fresh serum-free medium, either alone or
supplemented with either 50 ng/ml mithramycin (Sigma), 1 ng/ml porcine
TGF-
1 (R&D Systems), 75 µg/ml pan-specific TGF-
neutralizing
antibody (AB-100-NA, R&D Systems, which, according to the manufacturer, was sufficient to block 90% of the effect of 1 ng/ml TGF-
1), or
equivalent amounts of IgG control antibody. The TGF-
neutralizing antibody and mithramycin was added 1 h prior to subjecting the cells to mechanical strain. The cells were subjected to mechanical strain for 24-48 h using the Flexercell FX-3000 apparatus (Flexcell International), which applies controlled cyclic or static strain to
cell monolayers in culture. The strain applied was such as to give an
average of 10% elongation of the membrane and a cycle frequency of 1 Hz. This strain regimen was chosen because it is similar to
physiological/pathological tension experienced by cells in the heart
(28).
Plasmids and Generation of 5' Deletion
Constructs--
pColCAT3.6/1.6 (also denoted B16) was a gift from A. Lichtler and D. Rowe (University of Connecticut Health Center). This plasmid construct is identical to B15, described by Breault et al. (29), except an EcoRV site in the polylinker has
been converted to a ClaI site. The construct contains
sequences between
3518 and +1594 (relative to the transcription start
site) of the rat COL1A1 gene, which includes the upstream
promoter region, the first exon (the translational start site, ATG, has
been converted to a NotI site), and most of the first intron
(3.6/1.6 refers to 3.6 kb of upstream promoter sequence and 1.6 kb of
downstream sequence). To create the promoter deletion constructs
pCOLCAT-1.3/1.6 and
0.4/1.6, B16 was digested with NheI
(all restriction enzymes were purchased from MBI Fermentas) at position
3382, together with Tth111I at
1282 to create
pColCAT-1.3/1.6, or MunI at
395 to create pColCAT-0.4/1.6.
The ends were blunted and the constructs religated. The intronless
pColCAT3.6/0 has the first intron and the distal third of the first
exon replaced with the 16 S splice donor site from the SV40 virus
(compare B47 in Ref. 29). The set of proximal promoter deletion
constructs were generated using an ExoIII/Mung Bean deletion
kit (Stratagene) following the manufacturer's recommendations.
MunI restriction enzyme was used to linearize B16 after
which exonuclease treatment generated small deletions of various
lengths in both directions. The constructs were subsequently digested
with NheI and religated to generate promoter fragments with
different 5' ends but which were ligated to an identical upstream
cloning site, equivalent to that of constructs pCOLCAT-1.3/1.6 and
0.4/1.6. The exact extent of the deletions and the sequence across
cloning sites were determined by automated DNA sequencing (377 DNA
Sequencer, Applied Biosystems) using the Dye Terminator Cycle
Sequencing Kit (Amersham Biosciences). The sequence numbering in the
proximal promoter is according to the rat COL1A1 promoter sequence reported by Lichtler et al. (30)
(GenBankTM accession number J04464). The heterologous
promoter constructs were generated by ligating double-stranded
oligonucleotides containing the wild-type or mutated Region A sequence
(Fig. 4A), with additional restriction enzyme sites at
either end, to the SV40 promoter-driven (enhancer-less) luciferase
pGL2P vector (Promega). The correct sequence was confirmed by DNA
sequencing as described above.
Transcient Transfections and Promoter Activity
Assays--
Transfections of rat COL1A1 promoter-reporter
constructs into rat cardiac fibroblasts (at ~90% confluence) were
performed using the calcium phosphate ProFection Mammalian Transfection System (Promega) according to the manufacturer's recommendations 3 h after the addition of fresh serum-containing medium. At least two different plasmid DNA preparations (EndoFree, Qiagen) were tested
to eliminate potential preparation artifacts. Cells were transfected
with 0.5 µg of DNA per well (25-mm diameter) overnight (16 h), rinsed
twice with phosphate-buffered saline and then treated as described
above. At the appropriate time points, the cells were lysed and
luciferase activity measured as chemiluminescence in a TD-20/20
luminometer from Turner designs (Promega) using the Luciferase Assay
System (Promega). The data are presented as relative light units
(RLU). Chloramphenicol acetyl transferase (CAT) protein
levels in the cell lysates were measured by ELISA (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals), were within the linear range of the standard curve and
expressed as relative absorbance units (RAU). Because many
viral promoters driving reporter genes in transfection control plasmids
are regulated by mechanical strain (personal observation), a Hirt's
assay was performed as described in Clark et al. (31) to
determine the relative transfection efficiency between constructs used
and between experimental conditions. Briefly, a DNA fragment from the
vector backbone part of the COL1A1 promoter/reporter
construct was radiolabeled and used as a probe in hybridizations to DNA
from 30 µl of cell lysate that had been denatured and immobilized on
a nylon membrane. The relative radioactive signal representing the
amount of plasmid DNA in the cell lysate was measured by
phosphorimaging densitometry. No significant difference in transfection
efficiency was observed between the constructs or between experimental
conditions. Transfections were performed three or more times in
triplicate wells, unless otherwise indicated in the figure legends.
Because the study was performed using primary fibroblasts and
significant variation was observed in the fold induction of promoter
activity between experiments, the data presented are from one
representative experiment showing mean and standard error within that
experiment. The statistical significance of the data was, however,
evaluated by the Mann-Whitney U test of combined experiments.
TGF-
Bioassay--
Levels of total active TGF-
in the
conditioned medium was determined using the method developed by Abe
et al. (32). This assay is based on the capability of
TGF-
to induce plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) expression
and uses mink lung epithelial cells (Mv1Lu) stably transfected with a
truncated PAI-1 promoter fused to the firefly luciferase reporter gene.
Porcine TGF-
1 (R&D Systems) was used to generate a standard curve
for the estimation of active TGF-
concentrations in the medium. The
statistical significance was evaluated by the Mann-Whitney U
test using the raw data (relative luciferase activity).
Preparation of Nuclear Extracts and Electrophoresis Mobility
Shift Assays (EMSA)--
Nuclear extracts were prepared according to
the method of Schreiber et al. (33) from mechanically
strained and rigid rat cardiac fibroblasts that had been pooled from
six wells. Briefly, dishes were placed on ice and the cells washed
twice with ice-cold Tris-buffered saline without Ca2+ and
Mg2+. Nuclear proteins were extracted in 20 mM
HEPES (pH 7.9), 400 mM NaCl, 1mMEGTA, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and protease inhibitor mixture (CompleteTM, Roche Diagnostics). The concentration was determined by the BCA protein assay (Pierce). Extracts were stored
in aliquots at
80 °C prior to use and only freeze-thawed once.
EMSAs, using radiolabeled probes, were performed essentially as
described previously (34) with 3 µg of nuclear extract per binding
reaction using standard conditions of a gel-shift kit from Promega. For
competition assays, 125-fold molar excess of unlabeled oligonucleotides
were added to the binding reaction 15 min prior to the addition of the
labeled oligonucleotide. The oligonucleotides used are listed in Fig.
4A and were purchased from Invitrogen when custom made and
Santa Cruz Biotechnology for standard transcription factor consensus
binding sites. Antibody supershift assays were performed using
anti-CBF-A or anti-NF-1 antibodies (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) or
nonimmune IgG control antibodies added to the nuclear extracts and
incubated for 30 min at room temperature prior to the addition of
labeled oligonucleotides. The protein/DNA complexes were separated in a
4% acrylamide/bis (29:1) gel in 1× Tris borate/EDTA buffer.
The relative intensities of the complex bands were calculated from the
radioactive signal measured by phosphorimaging densitometry.
 |
RESULTS |
Cyclic Mechanical Strain of Cardiac Fibroblasts Leads to
Transactivation of the Rat COL1A1 Promoter--
Previous work has
shown that COL1A1 mRNA levels are increased in rat
cardiac fibroblasts subjected to mechanical strain (14). To begin to
elucidate the transcriptional mechanisms involved, we initially used
four rat COL1A1 promoter CAT-reporter constructs in
transient transfection assays and exposed rat cardiac fibroblasts to
continuous cyclic mechanical stretch (strain) for 48 h. All responses were compared with cells transfected with the same construct, but kept static under otherwise identical conditions (rigid controls) (Fig. 1). The full-length construct,
pColCAT-3.6/1.6, contains 3.6 kb of the 5' upstream promoter sequence
and 1.6 kb of sequence downstream of the transcription start site,
including the first exon and most of the first intron. This construct
was chosen because these regions of the COL1A1 gene,
including the first intron, are known to contain potentially important
positive and negative regulatory sequences (29, 35-37), and it
therefore provides a suitable starting point for modeling responses of
the endogenous gene. Cells transfected with the full-length
pColCAT-3.6/1.6 construct displayed an ~2-fold increase in CAT
protein levels in response to continuous cyclic strain for 48 h
compared with rigid control cells. Similar responses were obtained with
a deletion construct in which sequences upstream of position
1.3 kb
had been removed (pColCAT-1.3/1.6), whereas the response with a
construct lacking sequences upstream of
0.4 kb (pColCAT-0.4/1.6) was
significantly greater (p < 0.01). Taken together,
these results indicate that repressor element(s) located in the region
between
0.4 and
1.3 kb may dampen the stimulatory effect of
mechanical strain. We also tested a construct in which the first intron
had been deleted, pColCAT-3.6/0. The response to strain was greater
compared with that obtained with construct pColCAT-3.6/1.6 containing
the intron, suggesting that the first intron is unlikely to contain
important strain response elements and that sequences within the intron may be involved in modulating the magnitude of the transcriptional response.

View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Cyclic mechanical strain activates the rat
COL1A1 promoter. Serum-starved rat cardiac
fibroblasts were transfected with four collagen promoter deletion CAT
reporter constructs shown schematically on the left. The
1.6 mark in the full-length construct indicates a region around
position 1.6 kb, upstream of the transcription start site, in which a
major TAE has previously been reported (18). Dashed lines
represent deleted sequences. Angled arrow indicates the
transcription start site. The graph on the right shows fold
increase in CAT protein levels in response to 48 h of mechanical
strain (black bars) over rigid control cells (white
bars) for each construct. CAT protein levels in cell lysates were
measured by ELISA as described in "Experimental Procedures."
Transfection efficiency was controlled for by using the Hirt's assay.
Data shown are mean ± S.E. (n = 3 wells) from a
representative experiment repeated four times. All constructs displayed
a significant increase (p < 0.01) in promoter activity
in response to mechanical strain compared with rigid controls as
estimated by the Mann-Whitney U test of data from combined
experiments.
|
|
The data suggest that increased COL1A1 gene expression by
mechanical strain is mediated, at least in part, by increased
transcription and that regulatory sequences around the transcription
start site, within the
0.4/1.6 construct, are involved in mediating
this response. In addition, because the pColCAT-3.6/1.6 and
pColCAT-1.3/1.6 constructs responded in a similar manner, the only
previously reported TGF-
activation element (TAE) in the rat
COL1A1 gene at position
1624 (18) appears not to be
involved. This raised two possibilities: either the induction of COL1A1
transcriptional activation by mechanical strain in rat cardiac
fibroblasts is independent of TGF-
or other important TGF-
response elements, apart from the site reported (18), are present in
the rat COL1A1 gene.
TGF-
Activity Is Increased by Cyclic Mechanical Strain in
Cardiac Fibroblasts and Is Necessary for Strain-induced COL1A1
Transcriptional Activation--
To examine whether TGF-
activity is
necessary for strain-induced transactivation of the COL1A1
promoter, we determined the effect of mechanical strain on the activity
of a promoter construct lacking the previously described TAE at
position
1624 (pColCAT-1.3/1.6) in the presence of a pan-specific
TGF-
neutralizing antibody. Fig.
2A shows that mechanical
strain increased activation of the pColCAT-1.3/1.6 construct ~3-fold
and that this increase was almost completely blocked in the presence of
the antibody. In addition, the activity of this promoter construct was
strongly induced by TGF-
1 added exogenously as a positive control.
Involvement of TGF-
was further examined by determining levels of
total active TGF-
in the media from mechanically strained and rigid
control cells using a TGF-
bioassay based on Mv1Lu stably
transfected with a TGF-
-responsive PAI-1 promoter luciferase
reporter construct (32). PAI-1 promoter activity of these cells in the
presence of conditioned medium from mechanically strained cells was
2.6-fold higher compared with medium from rigid control cells (Fig.
2B). These concentrations were equivalent to 30 and 12 pg/ml
of active TGF-
, respectively, extrapolated from a TGF-
1 standard
curve. Taken together, these results suggest that the induction of the rat COL1A1 promoter by mechanical strain in cardiac
fibroblasts requires TGF-
and that mechanical strain leads to the
release of active TGF-
into the medium. It follows that the
COL1A1 promoter activation may be directly mediated by the
increase in TGF-
activity. The finding that the previously reported
TAE was not required, further suggests that, in the present study, the
transcriptional activation in response to mechanical strain and TGF-
is mediated through other regions in the promoter and that these
regions lie within the pColCAT-0.4/1.6 construct.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Activation of the rat COL1A1
promoter is
TGF- -dependent. A,
CAT protein levels were measured in rigid (white bars) and
strained (black bars) cells, which had been transfected with
the pColCAT-1.3/1.6 construct (lacks the reported TAE at position
1624, Ref. 18), in the presence (+Ab) or absence ( Ab) of a
pan-specific TGF- neutralizing antibody. The amount of TGF-
antibody (75 µg/ml) was such that it neutralized 90% of 1 ng/ml
TGF- 1 added exogenously as determined by the manufacturer. The same
amount of IgG control antibody was added as a negative control.
TGF- 1 (1 ng/ml) was added to some cells as a positive control for
TGF- responsiveness of this construct (gray bar). Values
presented are the mean relative absorbance units (RAU) ± S.E. from a representative experiment (n = 3 wells).
B, conditioned medium from the cells in A was
analyzed in a TGF- bioassay based on Mv1Lu stably transfected with a
TGF- -responsive PAI-1 promoter luciferase reporter (32). Data
presented are mean ± S.E. luciferase activity expressed as
relative light units (RLU). Medium from strained fibroblasts
gave a 2.6-fold increase in luciferase activity in Mv1Lu cells,
compared with medium from rigid cells (p < 0.01 by
Mann-Whitney). These luciferase activities were equivalent to 12 versus 30 pg/ml of TGF- 1 in medium from rigid and
strained fibroblasts, respectively, as extrapolated from a standard
curve from mink lung cells treated with exogenous porcine
TGF- 1.
|
|
Identification of Two Putative Strain Response Regions in the
Proximal Promoter--
To delineate mechanical strain response regions
in the proximal promoter, constructs with small deletions were
generated by sequential 5'-end digestion of the pColCAT-0.4/1.6
construct, which has its 5'-end at position
395 relative to the
transcription start site. The relative activities of these promoter
constructs, both under basal conditions and in response to mechanical
strain, were examined in transient transfection assays. Fig.
3 shows that the longest construct,
truncated at position
247, responded strongly to strain (3-fold
relative to rigid control) and in a similar fashion to the
395
construct. In contrast, basal activity of the construct truncated at
position
197 was about 3.5-fold higher than the two longer constructs
and was not further increased in response to strain. Interestingly, the
construct truncated at
129 had lower basal activity compared with the
197 construct and also responded significantly to strain. A further
deletion that created a construct truncated at position
84,
just downstream of a proximal inverted CCAAT-box previously reported to
be essential for efficient basal transcription of the mouse
COL1A1 gene (38), resulted in very low transcriptional
activity and no response to mechanical strain.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Identification of two putative strain
response regions in the proximal promoter. A, promoter
activity of deletion constructs of the proximal promoter in rigid
(white bars) and mechanically strained (black
bars) cells. The number under each set of bars indicates the
5'-end position (in base pairs from the transcription start site) of
the promoter fragment for that construct. Asterisk denotes a
significant increase compared with rigid controls for each construct at
p < 0.01 estimated by the Mann-Whitney U
test from combined experiments. B, proposed mechanisms of
transactivation of the rat COL1A1 promoter under basal
condition and during mechanical strain (arrows). Up
arrow indicates lifting of repression in Region C and down
arrow indicates increased transactivation in Region A by
mechanical strain. Angled arrow indicates the transcription
start site.
|
|
Based on these results, we propose the model illustrated in Fig.
3B as a mechanism for transactivation of the rat
COL1A1 promoter by mechanical strain. The region between
position
247 and
197 (Region C) contains a strong repressor
element, which under basal conditions counteracts a positive element in
the region between
197 and
129 (Region B). During mechanical strain
the repression in Region C is lifted (indicated by the
up-arrow in Fig. 3B) leading to activation of
transcription. In addition, a significant portion of the strain
response appears to be mediated via sequences downstream of position
129. Taking into account evidence from our initial experiments, which
excluded the first intron as containing important region(s) for
promoter transactivation in response to mechanical strain (Fig. 1), as
well as previously reported studies on basal COL1A1 transcription (see
below), we propose that the fragment denoted Region A (
129 to
84)
may be involved in mediating the strain response observed using
construct
129. Transcriptional activation of the COL1A1
gene by mechanical strain is, therefore, a complex process involving at
least two regions (Region A and B/C) in the proximal promoter, which,
estimating from the activities of the individual constructs, contribute
approximately equally to the response.
In this study we have focused on Region A and explored the possibility
that changes in transcription factor binding in this region during
mechanical strain is responsible for increased transcriptional activity. Based on previously reported studies on basal
COL1A1 promoter regulation and activation by TGF-
, the
region between
129 and
84 (Region A) is of particular interest. It
contains an inverted CCAAT-box around position
100 to which either
CBF (38) or NF-I (39) can bind. It is flanked by GC-rich binding sites,
shown to bind Sp1 (39), or an inhibitory factor designated IF2
(40). The binding of CBF to this site is important for basal COL1A1 promoter activity, as demonstrated by previously
reported mutation analyses (38) and more recently for the
COL1A2 gene using a dominant-negative form of CBF-A (41).
CBF has also been suggested to play a critical role in the coordinate
regulation of the two type I procollagen genes (42). Moreover, both
NF-I and Sp1, which can act as transactivators at this site, have been implicated in TGF-
-induced collagen type I gene transcription in
other species (43, 44); however, their binding activities at this
particular site have not been investigated with respect to TGF-
stimulation or in response to mechanical strain. Finally, the fact that
COL1A1 promoter activation via the mitogen-activated protein
kinase (MAPK) ERK1/2 signaling pathway has been mapped to this specific
region in activated hepatic stellate cells (45) and that the ERK1/2
pathway can be activated both in response to TGF-
(46, 47) and
mechanical strain (48) lend further support for the involvement of this
site in mediating the transcriptional activation of COL1A1 by
mechanical strain.
Mechanical Strain and TGF-
1 Increases Binding Activity of
CBF/NF-Y to the Inverted CCAAT-box in the Proximal Promoter--
To
determine which factors bind to Region A, and therefore are potentially
involved in promoter activation in response to mechanical strain, EMSAs
were performed using nuclear extracts from mechanically strained and
rigid rat cardiac fibroblasts (Fig. 4).
The oligonucleotides used in these experiments are shown in Fig.
4A and include the Region A oligonucleotide spanning the overlapping inverted CCAAT-box and juxtaposed downstream GC-box described in the previous section. Using this oligonucleotide as a
probe, one predominant complex (Complex I) and two weaker broad
complexes (Complexes II and III) were detected by EMSA (Fig. 4B). The intensity of the major complex was greater
(indicating increased binding activity) using nuclear extracts from
both strained cells and cells treated with TGF-
1, compared with
nuclear extract from rigid control cells (Fig. 4B,
left panel). Densitometric quantitation by phosphorimage
analysis showed that the intensity of the Complex I band was increased
by ~75% in response to both stimuli for 24 h. Furthermore, in
parallel with enhanced formation of Complex I, the formation of one of
the weaker complexes, Complex III, appeared to be diminished in
response to TGF-
1 and mechanical strain. This is likely because of
either competition for binding at this site between the factors forming
Complexes I and III or an actual reduced binding activity of Complex
III (e.g. caused by reduced abundance or change in
phosphorylation) in response to the two stimuli. Binding specificity
and the identity of the factor(s) present in Complex I were further
investigated by competition and supershift assays using unlabeled
consensus sequence oligonucleotides and specific antibodies to known
transcription factors. In competition assays (Fig. 4B,
middle panel), a CBF consensus oligonucleotide abolished
Complex I formation only, whereas a consensus oligonucleotide for NF-1
diminished Complex II formation. These data are consistent with CBF
being present in Complex I. In addition, neither a mutated CBF
(CBF mut) oligonucleotide nor a wild-type Sp1
consensus oligonucleotide competed with any of the complexes (Fig.
4B, middle panel). Moreover, when a Region A
oligonucleotide with two base pair substitutions in the inverted
CCAAT-box (Region A mut) was used as a probe, neither
Complex I nor II formed. In contrast, when a CBF consensus oligonucleotide was used as a probe, only Complex I formed
(middle panel, far right lane), confirming that
Complex I formation involved binding to the CCAAT-box and again,
strongly implicating CBF in Complex I formation. To confirm the
presence of CBF within Complex I, DNA protein binding assays were
performed with specific antibodies. The right panel in Fig.
4B shows that a CBF antibody supershifts Complex I, whereas
control IgGs and an antibody to NF-1 have no effect.

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Mechanical strain and
TGF- 1 increases binding activity of CBF/NF-Y
to the inverted CCAAT-box in the proximal promoter. A,
upper-strand of double-stranded oligonucleotides used as probes in
EMSAs. The Region A oligonucleotide contains the sequence between 119
and 89 of rat COL1A1 according to Lichtler et
al. (30) (GenBank accession number J04464). The core binding
sites, including the inverted CCAAT-box (italics) are
bold, and mutated bases are underlined.
B, EMSA of Region A, left panel; left
lane shows radioactively labeled Region A oligonucleotide as a
probe without nuclear extract in the binding reaction. The following
three lanes contain binding reactions with nuclear extracts
(3 µg/reaction) from cells that had been rigid, mechanically
strained, or treated with 1 ng/ml TGF- 1 for 24 h. Complexes
formed are denoted Complex I-III. The intensity of the
Complex I band was increased by ~75% in
response to both stimuli in three separate experiments, one of which is
shown here. Middle panel, competition analysis using cold
consensus binding site oligonucleotides (as indicated above the
lanes) at 125-fold excess and Region A oligonucleotide as
probe or Region A mut and CBF oligonucleotides as probes (as indicated
below the panel), suggesting that Complex I contains CBF.
Right panel, EMSA using specific antibodies against CBF and
NF-I and control IgG antibodies as indicated above the
panel, and Region A oligonucleotide as probe confirming that
Complex I contains CBF.
|
|
These results demonstrate that CBF, an activator of COL1A1
transcription, is the predominant factor binding to the inverted CCAAT-box in Region A in rat cardiac fibroblasts. Furthermore, this is
the first report showing that binding of CBF to the proximal inverted
CCAAT-box in the COL1A1 promoter is enhanced by mechanical strain, as well as by TGF-
1, and is consistent with the notion that
the strain-induced activation of COL1A1 transcription, at least at this
site, is a direct effect of the increase in TGF-
activity.
A Region A Oligonucleotide Can Confer Strain-induced
Transactivation on a Heterologous Promoter--
We further assessed
the functional role of the inverted CCAAT-box in Region A in mechanical
strain-induced promoter activation by mutation analysis. Because
specific mutations in the inverted CCAAT-box within the
COL1A1 promoter have been reported to strongly reduce basal
transcriptional activity (38), we decided to investigate the
functionality of this site by assessing its ability to confer strain
response to an otherwise unresponsive heterologous promoter (SV40). The
wild-type Region A oligonucleotide (Region A wt) containing the
overlapping CCAAT- and GC-boxes used in the EMSAs (Fig. 4) was cloned
into the luciferase reporter gene vector pGL2P (Fig. 5B). Fig. 5A shows
that promoter activity of this construct was significantly higher in
mechanically strained cells, compared with rigid controls, and similar
in magnitude to that obtained with construct
129 in which Region A is
located within the context of the COL1A1 promoter. In
contrast, pGL2P itself did not respond to strain, indicating that the
response obtained with the Region A wild-type construct is controlled
by sequences within the oligonucleotide itself. Furthermore, a
construct containing the Region A oligonucleotide with a mutated
CCAAT-box (Figs. 4A and 5B, Region A
mut) displayed a significantly reduced strain response
(p < 0.01), confirming that factor(s) binding to the
CCAAT-box play a significant role in the activation. Although much
smaller in magnitude than the response with the wild-type construct,
the strain-induced promoter activation observed with the Region A mut
construct was still significant. This suggested that factors binding to
another site, such as the GC-box, may also contribute to
transcriptional activation induced in response to strain, at least
under circumstances when there is no binding at the inverted CCAAT-box.
To test this, mithramycin, an inhibitor of protein binding to GC-rich
sequences, was added to the culture medium. This resulted in an overall
reduction in promoter activity of all three constructs, which is likely
because of inhibition of protein binding to Sp1 sites (GC-boxes) in the SV40 sequence, known to drive transcription from this promoter. Nevertheless, there was still a significant induction of the activity of the Region A wt construct with mechanical strain, confirming the
important contribution by the CCAAT-box in mediating a strain response.
In contrast, mithramycin caused a total loss of induction of the Region
A mut construct, suggesting that the remaining small activation
obtained in response to mechanical strain in the absence of CBF binding
is contributed by factors binding to the GC-box in Region A. Because
the only binding activity detected by EMSA using the mutated Region A
oligonucleotide as a probe is Complex III, which consistently displayed
diminished binding during mechanical strain (Fig. 4B,
left panel), it is possible that this protein complex
contains a transcriptional repressor and that activation may involve
lifting of this repression. A model describing transcription factor
binding to the Region A sequence, and the effects of mutations in the
CCAAT-box and addition of mithramycin (M) on binding, is illustrated in Fig. 5B where R represents the
putative repressor binding to the GC-box.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
A Region A oligonucleotide containing the
overlapping proximal inverted CCAAT-box and downstream GC-box can
confer strain-induced transactivation on a heterologous promoter.
A, promoter activity of the pGL2P vector with the wild-type
Region A oligonucleotide (wt), mutated Region A
oligonucleotide (mut), or pGL2P alone in cells after 30 h of rigid (white bars) or strained (black bars)
conditions, with and without 50 nM mithramycin
(M). Data presented are from one representative experiment
(n = 3 wells) of two repeats, which gave similar
results. Asterisk denotes a significant increase compared
with rigid controls for each construct/condition at p < 0.01 calculated by the Mann-Whitney U test from combined
experiments. In the absence of mithramycin, there was a significant
reduction in strain response for the mutated construct compared with
the wild type at p < 0.01 by analysis of variance
(indicated by the line above the two-strain data
bars). B, diagram of heterologous promoter
construct (Region A oligonucleotide cloned in front of the SV40
promoter without enhancer in pGL2P) and proposed transcription factor
binding to the Region A (wt) sequence (top), the
mutated Region A (mut) sequence in the absence
(middle), or presence (bottom), of mithramycin
(M). R represents an uncharacterized
transcription factor, likely to be a repressor, previously designated
IF2 (40). CBF and the repressor compete for binding at this site, with
CBF having higher affinity. Crosses denote inhibition of
binding, either to the CCAAT-box by mutations or to the GC-box by
mithramycin.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Enhanced type I collagen expression plays an important role in
driving excessive matrix deposition in a number of fibrotic disorders.
Despite a long-established correlation between increased mechanical
strain on tissues and extracellular matrix accumulation, and more
recent in vitro studies confirming a direct link, very little is known about the underlying mechanisms of this phenomenon. The
present study begins to elucidate a complex regulation of the
COL1A1 gene by mechanical strain by demonstrating for the first time that strain-induced transcriptional activation in cardiac fibroblasts is: (a) dependent on the release of active
TGF-
, (b) mediated by at least two regions in the
proximal promoter, and (c) involves increased binding of CBF
to an inverted CCAAT-box.
The activation of TGF-
by mechanical forces has been demonstrated
previously in a number of cell types, including mesangial cells (49)
and cardiac fibroblasts (17). Because TGF-
is the most potent
activator of collagen gene expression identified to date (4), there is
a strong possibility that the induction of collagen transcription by
mechanical stress is mediated through the autocrine stimulation by
TGF-
. Hori et al. (15) provided experimental evidence
that this is the case in mesangial cells, and were supported by a
subsequent study of intestinal smooth muscle cells (16). With
the results presented here, obtained with cardiac fibroblasts, it is
now evident that a mechanism of mechanical strain-induced COL1A1
expression dependent on autocrine TGF-
stimulation exists for a wide
range of mesenchymal cells. There are several mechanisms by which
active TGF-
may contribute to the strain-induced activation of
COL1A1 transcription observed. First, the increase in
COL1A1 promoter activity may be directly caused by the
increase in TGF-
activity and, therefore, involve a novel TGF-
response element in the COL1A1 gene. Second, TGF-
may
have a permissive function and contribute indirectly by providing a
cell-signaling pathway (e.g. by stimulating the synthesis of a signaling molecule) without which strain-induced activation of the
COL1A1 gene cannot occur. Such synergistic effects have been
observed in several recent studies, for example, those involving intracellular signals from growth factor receptors and integrins (50).
Given the recognized effect of TGF-
on COL1A1 transcription, combined with our findings that the proximal inverted CCAAT-box mediates strain-induced transcriptional activation, and that TGF-
alone can cause increased binding activity of CBF at this site, it is
highly likely that, at least at this site, the COL1A1 transcriptional activation by mechanical strain is a direct effect of TGF-
stimulation.
A major TGF-
activation element has previously been identified by
Ritzenthaler et al. (18) at position
1624 in the rat COL1A1 gene. It is, therefore, of interest that in our study
mechanical strain did not require this TGF-
response element. The
reason for this apparent discrepancy is not clear; however, some
differences in the experimental model between our study and that of
Ritzenthaler et al. may be significant, for example, the
choice of cell-type. We used the rat promoter constructs transfected
into rat cardiac fibroblasts, whereas Ritzenthaler et al.
used human embryonic lung fibroblasts (IMR-90). Another difference
between the two studies, which may be a more likely cause of the
discrepancy, is the fact that we employed promoter constructs
containing the first intron of the gene. The first intron has been
shown to contain important repressor elements (36), and it is therefore
possible that in our experiments the TAE at position
1624 is
counteracted by these repressor elements. The original study by
Ritzenthaler et al. (18), although demonstrating a dramatic
decrease in promoter activation in response to TGF-
by deleting the
TAE, provided some evidence for the existence of additional response
elements because the response was still ~2-fold in the absence of the
TAE. These observations were subsequently confirmed by a second
independent study by King et al. (20) employing rat lung
fibroblasts. Interestingly, a recent in vivo study by the
group originally reporting the TAE, using transgenic mice carrying 3.6 kb of the rat COL1A1 promoter gene with or without mutations
in the TAE, has provided evidence that questions the critical role of
this site (19). In this study, both the wild-type and mutated
constructs showed a similar up-regulation of reporter gene expression
during bleomycin-induced fibrosis, which is mediated in part by
TGF-
, supporting the notion that other important TGF-
response
elements exist in the rat COL1A1 promoter.
Previously reported studies mapping TGF-
response elements in the
two type I collagen genes from different species collectively suggest
that the regulation is complex, involving diverse transcription factors
binding to several distinct sites (21, 43, 44, 51, 52). Results from
our study strongly suggest that the site comprising the proximal
inverted CCAAT-box and adjacent GC-box around position
100 is one of
the so far unidentified TGF-
response elements in the rat
COL1A1 gene. The predominant factor shown to bind to this
site, CBF (also known as NF-Y or CP1), is a ubiquitous transcription factor important for efficient basal transcription of several mammalian
genes containing CCAAT-box elements, including the serum albumin and
major histocompatibility complex class II genes (53). It acts by
disrupting the nucleosome structure (54) and cooperatively interacts
with promoter-specific transcription factors to activate transcription
(53, 55). More recent studies have shown that CBF also plays a role in
regulating a number of genes during conditions of cellular stress, for
example, in the activation of the multiple drug resistance gene MDR1 by
UV radiation (56), and activation of the tissue inhibitor of the
metalloproteinases-2 (TIMP-2) gene in response to cAMP (57).
A specific role for CBF in the induction of COL1A1 transcription had
not previously been investigated. Our findings that CBF binding
activity is increased during mechanical strain, and in response to
TGF-
1, in cardiac fibroblasts are novel and suggest a wider role for
CBF in regulating type I collagen expression. A recent report published
during the course of this study supports this notion by demonstrating
increased binding activity of CBF in dermal fibroblasts from patients
with systemic sclerosis (58), a multisystem fibrotic disorder in which
TGF-
has been strongly implicated. Moreover, in a recent study
performed in our laboratory using microarray technology, mRNA
levels of CBF-C, one of the three CBF subunits, were increased 4.6-fold in fibroblasts exposed to TGF-
1 compared with untreated
controls,2 demonstrating a
direct link between TGF-
signaling and CBF regulation. A detailed
study of the induction of the CBF subunits in response to TGF-
is in
progress in our laboratory.
In our experiments, investigating a functional role for Region A in a
heterologous promoter construct, a second factor(s) (Complex III),
binding to the GC-box immediately downstream of the inverted CCAAT-box,
also appeared to be involved in the mechanical strain response. The
fact that its binding activity demonstrated in EMSA is consistently
reduced in response to mechanical strain and TGF-
(Fig.
4B), suggests that this factor may be a repressor. The
identity of this factor is currently unknown, although Sp1 or Sp3 could
be excluded because an Sp1 consensus oligonucleotide was unable to
compete with its binding in EMSA. Another likely possibility is the
repressor IF2, previously reported by Karsenty and de Crombrugghe (40).
However, antibodies to this factor are not commercially available. The
small but significant contribution from the GC-box to strain-induced
transcriptional activation suggests a functional involvement of this
site. However, this observation was made in the absence of binding of
CBF to the CCAAT-box (i.e. using the Region A mut
construct). Competitive and mutually exclusive binding to these two
overlapping sites has been demonstrated together with a higher binding
affinity of CBF for the CCAAT-box (59). Because CBF is the predominant
factor binding to this site in the experimental conditions used here,
we propose that the major contribution from this element to the
mechanical strain response is attributed to the increased binding of
CBF to the inverted CCAAT-box. We also suggest that the reduction in
binding activity of Complex III observed in the EMSA in response to
TGF-
and mechanical strain is because of competition by the increase
in CBF binding. Further experiments, however, will be required to
firmly exclude an involvement of the GC-box and Complex III in
mechanical strain-induced COL1A1 promoter activation.
This study also identified a more distal region in the proximal
promoter (Region B/C), which appears to be involved in the mechanical
strain response and which, therefore, may also contain a TGF-
activation element. Previous results from studies of basal regulation
are in accordance with our proposed model of mechanical strain
activation in this region (Fig. 3B). A repressor element, known to bind cKrox (60) or BFCOL-1 (61) under basal conditions, has
been mapped to the sequence spanning the junction between regions in
the mouse gene equivalent to Regions B and C. However, the role of this
element in regulating COL1A1 transcription during cellular stress and
in response to TGF-
has not been evaluated. Furthermore, in rat
cardiac fibroblasts a strong positive element has been mapped to Region
B under basal conditions, and an upstream repressor has been suggested
to counteract the effect of this positive element (62). Our data agree
with this because the reported repressor element would be disrupted in
the
197 construct and give rise to high basal levels. Furthermore, if
the repression is alleviated by mechanical strain, this may explain the
increase in activity in response to strain observed with the
247
construct, as well as the lack of increase of the already high activity
seen with the
197 construct. Moreover, in a study by Jimenez et
al. (51), a region in the human gene equivalent to the region
containing the positive element identified in the rat gene (Region B)
was shown to contain a TGF-
response element. The factors binding at
this site have not been characterized, and although there are areas of
significant sequence homology between species in this region, TGF-
responsiveness at this site has not been evaluated in the murine or rat
COL1A1 genes. A detailed study is currently underway to
characterize transcription factor binding in this region of the rat
COL1A1 gene during stimulation by mechanical strain and in
response to TGF-
.
In summary, this study demonstrates that activation of the rat
COL1A1 gene by mechanical strain involves at least two
regions within the proximal promoter. Our data further suggest that
this response is TGF-
-dependent and involves increased
binding of the ubiquitous transcription factor CBF at the proximal
inverted CCAAT-box element. Based on these findings, and the fact that functional CBF-binding sites in both COL1A1 and
COL1A2 genes are highly conserved between species, we
propose that CBF may play an important role in the up-regulation of
type I collagen expression in response to cellular stresses mediated by
TGF-
stimulation. Overexpression of the type I collagen genes is
believed to be a key event leading to excess deposition of
extracellular matrix in tissue fibrosis. A closer investigation of the
role of CBF in fibrotic conditions is therefore warranted.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank A. Lichtler and D. Rowe for kindly
providing the parent rat COL1A1 promoter reporter construct
and D. Rifkin for permission to use the stably transfected Mv1Lu
cells. We are also grateful to J. Norman, Center for Nephrology and
Urology, Department of Medicine, Royal Free and University College
Medical School (RFUCLMS) for helpful discussions and critical review of
the manuscript and J. Palmen, Cardiovascular Genetics, Department of
Medicine (RFUCLMS) for help with DNA sequencing.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by The Wellcome Trust Program Grant
051154, The Wellcome Trust Project Grant 044502, and the Royal Free and
University College Medical School.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.: 44-207-679-6976;
Fax: 44-207-679-6973; E-mail: g.lindahl@ucl.ac.uk.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, December 17, 2001,DOI 10.1074/jbc.M108966200
2
R. C. Chambers, personal communication.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
TGF-
, transforming growth factor-
;
CBF/NF-Y, CCAAT-binding factor;
TAK1, transforming-growth factor
-activated kinase;
CAT, chloramphenicol
acetyl transferase;
ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay;
PAI-1, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1;
EMSA, electrophoresis mobility shift
assays;
TAE, TGF-
activation element;
wt, wild type.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Bishop, J. E.,
and Lindahl, G.
(1999)
Cardiovasc. Res.
42,
27-44[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Watson, P. A.
(1991)
FASEB J.
5,
2013-2019[Abstract]
|
| 3.
|
Liu, M.,
Tanswell, A. K.,
and Post, M.
(1999)
Am. J. Physiol.
277,
L667-L683
|
| 4.
|
Chambers, R. C.,
and Laurent, G. J.
(1997)
in
The Lung: Scientific Foundations
(Crystal, R. D.
, West, J. B.
, Weibel, E. R.
, and Barnes, P. J., eds)
, pp. 709-727, Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia
|
| 5.
|
McAnulty, R. J.,
and Laurent, G. J.
(1995)
in
Pulmonary Fibrosis
(Phan, S. H.
, and Thrall, R. S., eds)
, pp. 135-171, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York
|
| 6.
|
Varga, J.,
and Jimenez, S. A.
(1995)
Ann. Intern. Med.
122,
60-62[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Trojanowska, M.,
Leroy, E. C.,
Eckes, B.,
and Krieg, T.
(1998)
J. Mol. Med.
76,
266-274[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Slack, J. L.,
Liska, D. J.,
and Bornstein, P.
(1993)
Am. J. Med. Genet.
45,
140-151[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Karsenty, G.,
and Park, R. W.
(1995)
Int. Rev. Immunol.
12,
177-185[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
O'Kane, S.,
and Ferguson, M. W.
(1997)
Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol.
29,
63-78[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Sime, P. J.,
Xing, Z.,
Graham, F. L.,
Csaky, K. G.,
and Gauldie, J.
(1997)
J. Clin. Invest.
100,
768-776[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Lijnen, P. J.,
Petrov, V. V.,
and Fagard, R. H.
(2000)
Mol. Genet. Metab.
71,
418-435[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Zhang, D.,
Gaussin, V.,
Taffet, G. E.,
Belaguli, N. S.,
Yamada, M.,
Schwartz, R. J.,
Michael, L. H.,
Overbeek, P. A.,
and Schneider, M. D.
(2000)
Nat. Med.
6,
556-563[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Butt, R. P.,
and Bishop, J. E.
(1997)
J. Mol. Cell Cardiol.
29,
1141-1151[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Hori, Y.,
Katoh, T.,
Hirakata, M.,
Joki, N.,
Kaname, S.,
Fukagawa, M.,
Okuda, T.,
Ohashi, H.,
Fujita, T.,
Miyazono, K.,
and Kurokawa, K.
(1998)
Kidney Int.
53,
1616-1625[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Gutierrez, J. A.,
and Perr, H. A.
(1999)
Am. J. Physiol.
277,
G1074-G1080[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Lee, A. A.,
Delhaas, T.,
McCulloch, A. D.,
and Villarreal, F. J.
(1999)
J. Mol. Cell Cardiol.
31,
1833-1843[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Ritzenthaler, J. D.,
Goldstein, R. H.,
Fine, A.,
Lichtler, A.,
Rowe, D. W.,
and Smith, B. D.
(1991)
Biochem. J.
280,
157-162
|
| 19.
|
Stoddart, J. H., Jr.,
Ladd, D.,
Bronson, R. T.,
Harmon, M.,
Jaworski, J.,
Pritzker, C.,
Lausen, N.,
and Smith, B. D.
(2000)
J. Cell. Biochem.
77,
135-148[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
King, S. L.,
Lichtler, A. C.,
Rowe, D. W.,
Xie, R.,
Long, G. L.,
Absher, M. P.,
and Cutroneo, K. R.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
13156-13161[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Chen, S. J.,
Yuan, W.,
Mori, Y.,
Levenson, A.,
Trojanowska, M.,
and Varga, J.
(1999)
J. Invest Dermatol.
112,
49-57[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Massague, J.,
and Wotton, D.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
1745-1754[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Zhang, W., Ou, J.,
Inagaki, Y.,
Greenwel, P.,
and Ramirez, F.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
39237-39245[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Poncelet, A. C.,
and Schnaper, H. W.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
6983-6992[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Qing, J.,
Zhang, Y.,
and Derynck, R.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
38802-38812[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Roberts, A. B.,
Piek, E.,
Bottinger, E. P.,
Ashcroft, G.,
Mitchell, J. B.,
and Flanders, K. C.
(2001)
Chest
120,
43S-47S
|
| 27.
|
Butt, R. P.,
Laurent, G. J.,
and Bishop, J. E.
(1995)
Eur. J. Cell Biol.
68,
330-335[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Ono, S.,
Waldman, L. K.,
Yamashita, H.,
Covell, J. W.,
and Ross, J., Jr.
(1995)
Circulation
91,
1143-1153[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Breault, D. T.,
Lichtler, A. C.,
and Rowe, D. W.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
31241-31250[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 30.
|
Lichtler, A.,
Stover, M. L.,
Angilly, J.,
Kream, B.,
and Rowe, D. W.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
16518[Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Clark, I. M.,
Rowan, A. D.,
Edwards, D. R.,
Bech-Hansen, T.,
Mann, D. A.,
Bahr, M. J.,
and Cawston, T. E.
(1997)
Biochem. J.
324,
611-617
|
| 32.
|
Abe, M.,
Harpel, J. G.,
Metz, C. N.,
Nunes, I.,
Loskutoff, D. J.,
and Rifkin, D. B.
(1994)
Anal. Biochem.
216,
276-284[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Schreiber, E.,
Matthias, P.,
Muller, M. M.,
and Schaffner, W.
(1989)
Nucleic Acids Res.
17,
6419[Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Wade, D. P.,
Lindahl, G. E.,
and Lawn, R. M.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
19757-19765[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Raisz, L. G.,
Fall, P. M.,
Petersen, D. N.,
Lichtler, A.,
and Kream, B. E.
(1993)
Mol. Endocrinol.
7,
17-22[Abstract]
|
| 36.
|
Bornstein, P.
(1996)
Matrix Biol.
15,
3-10[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Chen, A.,
and Davis, B. H.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
2818-2826[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Maity, S. N.,
Golumbek, P. T.,
Karsenty, G.,
and de Crombrugg |