Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M607908200 on December 12, 2006

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 282, Issue 7, 4830-4840, February 16, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
282/7/4830    most recent
M607908200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sanchez, M.
Right arrow Articles by Tremblay, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sanchez, M.
Right arrow Articles by Tremblay, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Hormonal Response of Estrogen Receptor beta Is Decreased by the Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase/Akt Pathway via a Phosphorylation-dependent Release of CREB-binding Protein*

Mélanie Sanchez{ddagger}, Karine Sauvé{ddagger}, Nathalie Picard{ddagger}, and André Tremblay{ddagger}§1

From the Research Center, Sainte-Justine Hospital, and the {ddagger}Departments of Biochemistry and §Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Montreal, Montréal H3T 1C5, Québec, Canada

Received for publication, August 17, 2006 , and in revised form, November 17, 2006.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The hormonal response of estrogen receptors (ER) {alpha} and ERbeta is controlled by a number of cofactors, including the general transcriptional coactivator CREB-binding protein (CBP). Growing evidence suggests that specific kinase signaling events also modulate the formation and activity of the ER coactivation complex. Here we show that ERbeta activity and target gene expression are decreased upon activation of ErbB2/ErbB3 receptors despite the presence of CBP. This inhibition of ERbeta involved activation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt pathway, abrogating the potential of CBP to facilitate ERbeta response to estrogen. Such reduced activity was associated with an impaired ability of ERbeta to recruit CBP upon activation of Akt. Mutation of serine 255, an Akt consensus site contained in the hinge region of ERbeta, prevented the release of CBP and rendered ERbeta transcriptionally more responsive to CBP coactivation, suggesting that Ser-255 may serve as a regulatory site to restrain ERbeta activity in Akt-activated cells. In contrast, we found that CBP intrinsic activity was increased by Akt through threonine 1872, a consensus site for Akt in the cysteine- and histidine-rich 3 domain of CBP, indicating that such enhanced transcriptional potential of CBP did not serve to activate ERbeta. Interestingly, nuclear receptors sharing a conserved Akt consensus site with ERbeta also exhibit a reduced ability to be coactivated by CBP, whereas others missing that site were able to benefit from the activation of CBP by Akt. These results therefore outline a regulatory mechanism by which the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt pathway may discriminate nuclear receptor response through coactivator transcriptional competence.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Estrogen mediates many aspects in growth, development, and reproduction, through its interaction with estrogen receptors ER2 {alpha} and ERbeta. Although encoded by unique genes, the two ERs share the functional domains characteristic of the nuclear hormone receptor family (1). These consist of an N-terminal region (also termed AB region), which confers ligand-independent activation of ERs through its activation function (AF)-1, a highly conserved DNA-binding domain (C) that allows specific binding to genomic response elements, a flexible hinge region (D) that includes signals for nuclear localization and the binding of heat shock proteins, and finally a C-terminal region (EF) that contains the ligand binding domain, and the AF-2 function that mediates hormone-dependent activation.

Increasing evidence suggests that, beside hormonal activation, ER function can be modulated by phosphorylation-dependent mechanisms, involving a wide variety of protein kinases that mostly target the AF-1 domain (2, 3). In particular, direct phosphorylation of ER{alpha} AF-1 by MAPK/ERK in response to EGF was shown to induce ER{alpha} transactivation in the absence of ligand (4, 5). Similarly, phosphorylation of Ser-167 by pp90RSK1 was described to promote ER{alpha} AF-1 activity (6). Activation of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) and Akt/protein kinase B also contributed to phosphorylate ER{alpha} and mediate its ligand-independent activation, an effect shown to oppose the tamoxifen-induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells (7). Although phosphorylation of ERbeta has not been examined in detail, ERbeta has been proposed as a potential target for intracellular kinases that modulate its transactivation properties. It was found that the ability of EGF and the oncogene Ras to activate ERbeta resulted from the MAPK-directed phosphorylation of Ser-106 and Ser-124 within the AF-1 domain leading to favored recruitment of coactivators SRC-1 and CBP (8, 9). Furthermore, the ligand-dependent activation of ERbeta by the protooncogene Brx was shown to involve phosphorylation of ERbeta in a p38-dependent manner, although the exact site(s) were not described (10). More recently, we reported that activation of ErbB2 and ErbB3, which belong to the EGFR/ErbB receptor tyrosine kinase family, by growth factor heregulin resulted in a decrease in the estrogen-dependent cell growth and activity of ER{alpha} and ERbeta in breast cancer cells (11). However, unlike ER{alpha}, this transcriptional repression of liganded ERbeta by heregulin was dependent upon ERbeta AF-1 function, thereby supporting a repressive role for kinase-mediated pathways in regulating ERbeta AF-1 and AF-2 functions. Taken together, the regulation of estrogen receptor activity by phosphorylation is intricate and could dictate receptor function, whether it involves activation or repression.

Recent evidence has emerged suggesting that nuclear receptor coactivators may also serve as points of convergence between the ER and growth factor signaling pathways. Phosphorylation of SRC coactivators has been described to modulate their intrinsic activities in mediating nuclear receptor transcription (12). Coregulatory proteins are often present in limiting concentrations in the nucleus so that modifications of their level of expression as well as their activity can lead to alterations in nuclear receptor signaling. The transcriptional coactivators CREB-binding protein (CBP) and p300 are evolutionary highly conserved proteins, and genetic evidence supports their availability to be critical. In humans, loss of one functional copy of cbp leads to Rubenstein-Taybi syndrome, a haploinsufficiency disorder resulting in mental retardation (13). Through their extremely versatile ability in bridging numerous transcription factors, including most nuclear receptors, with the basal transcription machinery, recruitment of CBP/p300 is important to maintain appropriate transcriptional events (14). One of the likely mechanisms responsible for CBP/p300 recruitment involves phosphorylation. It was reported that phosphorylation of CBP promotes its interaction with several transcription factors, including CREB, Smad3, NF{kappa}B p65 subunit, and p53 (15, 16). We have recently shown that MAPK-dependent phosphorylation of ERbeta also facilitates the recruitment of CBP to potentiate the ligand-independent activation of ERbeta in response to growth factors (9). Given such diversity in the signaling pathways integrated by CBP, it is believed that phosphorylation-mediated events may compete at various levels for the limited availability of CBP.

Here we describe a molecular mechanism by which ErbB2/ErbB3 and PI3K/Akt signaling impairs the activity of ERbeta by reducing its ability to recruit and use CBP as a coactivator. The repression by Akt was also found for other nuclear receptors, for which a conserved Akt site may also participate in a manner similar to ERbeta. In contrast, nuclear receptors that do not share such homology yielded increased responsiveness to CBP and benefit from the enhanced intrinsic activity of CBP by Akt.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Plasmid Constructs—Expression of pCMX plasmids coding for ER{alpha}, ERbeta, CBP, ErbB2, its constitutive variant V659E and ErbB3 receptors, and luciferase reporter constructs vitA2-ERE-tkLuc and UAStkLuc have been described previously (8, 9, 11). ERbeta fragments corresponding to the AB (amino acids 1-167) and DEF (amino acids 234-549) regions were obtained by PCR amplification and fused in-frame with the Gal4 DNA binding domain. The ERbeta Ser-255 to alanine and the CBP Thr-1872 to alanine mutants were generated by PCR mutagenesis using Pfu polymerase (Stratagene). All constructs were verified by automated sequencing. The expression plasmid coding for the constitutively active PI3K p110{alpha} catalytic subunit was a kind gift from J. Downward, and plasmids expressing Akt and K179M kinase dead Akt were generously provided by T. Chan and P. Tsichlis.

Cell Culture, DNA Transfection, and Luciferase Assay—Human embryonic kidney 293T cells were cultured in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM) supplemented with 5% fetal bovine serum (FBS). The cells were maintained at 37 °C in a humidified atmosphere with 5% CO2. For transient transfection, cells were seeded in phenol red-free DMEM supplemented with 5% charcoal dextran-treated FBS, and plasmid constructs were introduced into cells using the calcium phosphate precipitation method as described (11). Typically, 50-60% confluent cells were transfected with 2 µg of DNA per well, which include 500 ng of reporter plasmid, 100 ng of receptor expression vector, 250 ng of CMX-betagal, 100 ng each of PI3K and Akt expression vector, and 30 ng of CBP plasmid when indicated. After 5-8 h, the medium was changed, and cells were stimulated with 10 nM estradiol (E2; Sigma) and/or 50 ng/ml heregulin-beta (R&D Systems) for 16-20 h or left untreated. For luciferase assay, cells were lysed in potassium phosphate buffer containing 1% Triton X-100, and light emission was measured using a luminometer (Wallac) after the addition of luciferin. Luciferase assays were performed in duplicate from at least three independent experiments, and values were expressed as relative light units normalized to the beta-galactosidase activity of each sample.

Western Analysis and Immunoprecipitation Assay—Western analysis for the determination of phosphorylated and total Akt was performed as described with minor modifications (11). Briefly, transfected 293T cells were treated with 50 ng/ml heregulin-beta for 20 min, washed in ice-cold PBS, and lysed in PBS containing 0.5% sodium deoxycholate, 0.1% SDS, 1% Triton X-100, 1 mM sodium orthovanadate, 1 mM sodium fluoride, 1mM phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride, and protease inhibitors (Roche Applied Science). Cell lysates were then subjected to SDS-PAGE and proteins transferred to nitrocellulose for immunoblotting. Membranes were incubated at 4 °C with blocking reagent (Roche Applied Science) in TBS, probed with either a rabbit polyclonal antibody against phosphorylated Akt (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) or a mouse anti-Akt monoclonal antibody (Cell Signaling Technology), and signals revealed by ECL using appropriate horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibodies. The same procedure was used to determine the levels of ERbeta, except that cells were transfected with HA-tagged ERbeta (WT or S255A) and analyzed by Western using an anti-HA antibody (12CA5). For immunoprecipitation assay, transfected cells were washed in ice-cold PBS and lysed as described above. Cell lysates were precleared before incubation with an anti-CBP antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) and protein A-Sepharose beads at 4 °C. Immunoprecipitates were then washed in lysis buffer, resolved by SDS-PAGE, and analyzed by Western blotting using an anti-HA antibody. Membranes were also probed with an anti-CBP antibody for standardization of CBP levels in each well.

Generation of Hs-ER-stable Clones and RT-PCR—ER-negative Hs578t breast cancer cells were maintained in DMEM containing 10% FBS and transfected with expression vectors for ER{alpha} and ERbeta as described previously (11), and resistant clones were isolated in the presence of G418 (0.6 mg/ml; Invitrogen) to generate Hs-ER{alpha} and Hs-ERbeta cell lines, respectively. Stable clones were functionally validated for their respective expression of ER{alpha} or ERbeta by Western analysis and for their estrogenic response by luciferase assay, compared with mock-transfected Hs578t cells. Total RNA was isolated from cells using TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen), and RT-PCR analysis was performed as described (17). The relative signal intensity was analyzed (Alpha Innotech, San Leandro, CA) from three separate experiments.


Figure 1
View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 1.
ErbB2/ErbB3 signaling impairs the hormonal response and coactivation of ERbeta by CBP. A, 293-T cells were transfected with an ERbeta plasmid and an EREtkLuc reporter, and expression vectors encoding ErbB2 and ErbB3, or a constitutively active ErbB2 (V659E) mutant in the presence or absence of CBP. Cells were then treated with 10 nM E2 and/or 50 ng/ml heregulin (Hrg-beta) for 20 h and harvested for transcriptional activity. Luciferase values were normalized to beta-galactosidase activity and expressed as fold activation compared with untreated cells set at 1.0. B, 293-T cells were transfected with ErbB plasmids and treated with 50 ng/ml heregulin for 20 min as indicated. Total cell extracts were analyzed by electrophoresis, and endogenous Akt phosphorylation was monitored by Western blotting using a specific anti-phospho Akt. Cell lysates were also analyzed for Akt content using an anti-Akt antibody.

 
In Vitro Phosphorylation Assay—Bacterially expressed and purified GST fusions of wild type and S255A mutated ERbeta were prepared as described (18). For in vitro phosphorylation assay, GST-ERbeta fusions immobilized on glutathione-Sepharose 4B beads were resuspended in kinase buffer containing [{gamma}-32P]ATP (Amersham Biosciences) and active Akt1 (Cell Signaling) and incubated at 30 °C for 30 min according to the manufacturer's instructions. Beads were then washed twice in kinase buffer and twice in PBS, and 32P incorporation was determined following SDS-PAGE and autoradiography. Gels were stained with Coomassie Blue to monitor for equal loading.

Fluorescence Microscopy—Cells were seeded on coverslips in a 6-well plate overnight prior to transfection in phenol red-free DMEM supplemented with 5% charcoal dextran-treated FBS. Transient transfections were carried as above using the expression plasmids YFP-CBP and CFP-ERbeta. 20 h after transfection, cells were washed twice with cold PBS and fixed in 4% formaldehyde. The coverslips were mounted on microscope slides and examined in fluorescence with excitation/emission filters of 435/470 nm (for CFP) and 480/535 nm (for YFP) using a Nikon TE-2000 inverted microscope.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
ErbB2/ErbB3 Receptor Dimer Activation Impairs the Hormonal Response and Coactivation of ERbeta by CBP—Activation of the epidermal growth factor receptor EGFR/ErbB1, a member of the ErbB receptor tyrosine kinase family, is well recognized to promote ER{alpha} and ERbeta transcriptional activation (4, 8). However, we have recently reported that activation of the ErbB2/ErbB3 heterodimer combination led to a decreased transcriptional activity of ERbeta (11). Given the ability of CBP to associate and promote the activation of ERbeta by a growth factor such as EGF (9), we addressed how CBP could modulate ERbeta activity in response to ErbB2/ErbB3 activation. ER-negative human embryonic kidney 293T cells were transfected with an EREtkLuc reporter and an ERbeta plasmid. Cotransfection with CBP conferred a 2-fold increase in ERbeta basal activity and a 7-fold increase in the presence of hormone (Fig. 1A). As reported previously (11), the activation of the ErbB2/ErbB3 heterodimer by growth factor heregulin-beta, which binds ErbB3, resulted in a reduced activation of ERbeta by estrogen. Such impaired response was also mimicked using a constitutive variant of human ErbB2 (V659E), which corresponds to the natural mutation found in the rat Neu oncogene (19). However, although CBP strongly transactivates ERbeta in control cells, it is unable to prevent the inhibition of the hormonal response of ERbeta when the ErbB2/ErbB3 heterodimer is not only expressed but is also stimulated by heregulin-beta (Fig. 1A). Despite the presence of CBP, the transcriptional activity of ERbeta was decreased in both a hormone-independent and -dependent manner. This inhibition was even more pronounced in cells expressing the constitutive ErbB2 V659E mutant.

Signaling of the EGFR/ErbB family members involves the activation of a variety of kinase pathways. More specifically, activation of the ErbB2/ErbB3 heterodimer has been shown to efficiently couple with the PI3K/Akt pathway, mainly through the intrinsic ability of numerous Src homology 2-binding motifs within ErbB3 that recognize the p85 regulatory subunit of PI3K (20, 21). To evaluate the impact of ErbB2/ErbB3 activation on the Akt pathway, the activity of endogenous Akt was determined by Western analysis using a phospho-specific antibody against Ser-473. Although treatment of mock-transfected 293T cells with heregulin-beta did not lead to activation of Akt, indicating that endogenous expression of ErbB3 is negligible, if not absent, an increase in phosphorylated Akt was observed in cells expressing ErbB2/ErbB3 and treated with heregulin-beta (Fig. 1B). Similarly, cells expressing the ErbB2 V659E variant in the presence of ErbB3 also showed increased levels of phosphorylated Akt.

Activation of the PI3K/Akt Pathway Mimics the Inhibition of ERbeta Response to Hormone in the Presence of CBP through the C-terminal Region of ERbeta—The possibility that ErbB2/ErbB3 activation by heregulin-beta decreases ERbeta activity and its coactivation by CBP by enhancing the activity of Akt was further tested by transient expression of a membrane-bound and constitutively active p110{alpha} subunit (CAAX) of PI3K. Expression of the p110{alpha} mutant was sufficient to activate endogenous Akt in 293T cells, which was further enhanced when cells were cotransfected with a plasmid for WT Akt, as determined by Western blot analysis (see Ref. 22; data not shown). Under these conditions, we found that the estrogen-dependent activation of ERbeta in the presence of CBP, which reached almost 12-fold compared with untreated cells, was strongly impaired dropping to a 3-fold response in Akt-activated cells (Fig. 2A). As observed previously in ErbB2 V659E-expressing cells in response to Akt activation (Fig. 1A), the addition of CBP reduces further the response of ERbeta to estrogen when compared with cells without exogenous CBP. These results suggest that ectopic expression of CBP could not relieve the inhibition of ERbeta by the PI3K/Akt pathway, therefore mimicking the results in ErbB2/ErbB3-expressing cells. The repression of ERbeta by activated Akt in the presence of CBP was partially relieved in cells expressing a dominant negative form of Akt (K179M), suggesting that the effects of activated PI3K on ERbeta mainly transit through Akt (Fig. 2A). We next performed Western analysis to ascertain whether the modulation of ERbeta activity was not a direct effect of its protein concentration under the conditions used. As shown in Fig. 2B, activation of the Akt pathway led to an accumulation of ERbeta in untreated cells. A similar increase was also observed in the presence of estrogen, although the levels of ERbeta were slightly lower compared with untreated cells, probably reflecting an increase in ER turnover in response to hormone as reported previously (23). These results suggest that the inhibition in ERbeta activity to Akt activation is not related to a decrease in ERbeta protein levels.


Figure 2
View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 2.
The effect of Akt activation on ERbeta response to CBP coactivation is mediated by the C-terminal region of ERbeta. A, 293T cells were transfected with the EREtkLuc reporter and expression plasmid for ERbeta in the presence or absence of CBP. Cells were also transfected with plasmids for Akt or its kinase dead K179M mutant form in the presence of the constitutively active p110{alpha} subunit of PI3K, as indicated. Cells were then treated with 10 nM E2 for 20 h and harvested for transcriptional activity. Luciferase values were normalized to beta-galactosidase activity and expressed as fold activation compared with untreated cells set at 1.0. B, Western analysis of ERbeta in response to Akt activation. 293T cells were transfected with ERbeta in the absence or presence of p110{alpha} PI3K and Akt plasmids to trigger the Akt pathway. Cells were then treated with 10 nM E2 or left untreated for 20 h and harvested for Western analysis using an anti-ERbeta antibody. Loading was monitored with beta-actin for each sample. C, cells were transfected with a UAStkLuc reporter and truncated forms of ERbeta corresponding to the N-terminal or AB region (left) or the C-terminal or DEF region (right) fused to the Gal-4 DNA binding domain. Cells were also transfected with p110{alpha} and Akt plasmids and treated with 10 nM E2 for 20 h prior to luciferase assay. Luciferase values are expressed as in A.

 
CBP is known to transactivate estrogen receptors through both its AF-1 and AF-2 activities (9, 24). In an attempt to identify the functional domain within ERbeta responsible for its impaired ability to be coactivated by CBP in response to Akt, we used Gal4 fusions of truncated forms of ERbeta for which each respective AF-containing domain has been removed. Fig. 2C shows that in Akt-activated cells, the activation of a Gal4-ABbeta (corresponding to ERbeta amino acids 1-167) on a UAStkLuc reporter was further enhanced by CBP, reaching a near 5-fold increase compared with control cells. The N-terminal domain of ERbeta is known to contain several serine residues that are conserved within the recognition motifs for Ser/Thr kinases of the MAPK family, and phosphorylation of specific residues was shown to allow for coactivators such as CBP to be recruited and to potentiate ERbeta AF-1 activity (8, 9). However, none of the potential phosphorylation sites within ERbeta AB region belongs to a consensus Akt site, suggesting that the enhanced activity of ERbeta AF-1 by CBP in response to Akt might possibly result from other kinase pathways activated by Akt or direct effects on CBP itself. We next tested the role of the C-terminal region of ERbeta in the same conditions. Cells transfected with a Gal4-DEFbeta (amino acids 234-549) showed a reduced hormone-dependent activity to Akt activation in the presence of CBP, mimicking the response observed with full-length ERbeta (Fig. 2C, right panel). These results indicate that the repressive effect of activated Akt on CBP-mediated transactivation of ERbeta is mediated through a region contained in the C-terminal portion of ERbeta, which in the context of the full-length receptor seems to counteract the positive effect on the AF-1 activity.

Serine 255 in the Hinge Region Mediates ERbeta Inhibition to ErbB2/ErbB3 Signaling—Our examination of the C-terminal sequence of mouse ERbeta revealed a consensus sequence RQRSAS255 in the hinge region of ERbeta that corresponds to the recognition motif RXRXX(S/T) for the kinase Akt (Fig. 3A). To determine whether Ser-255 is a direct target for Akt-mediated phosphorylation, we used site-directed mutagenesis to convert the serine at position 255 into an alanine and performed an in vitro kinase assay. Fig. 3B shows that disruption of Ser-255 strongly abolished the phosphorylation of ERbeta by Akt compared with wild type, indicating that Ser-255 can be efficiently phosphorylated by Akt. We then tested whether Ser-255 was involved in the inhibition of ERbeta activity to ErbB2/ErbB3 activation as observed in Fig. 1A. Using the S255A mutant in luciferase assay, we found that the inhibition observed for WT ERbeta by either ErbB2/ErbB3 dimer expression or its activation with heregulin-beta was completely abrogated by disruption of Ser-255 (compare Figs. 1A and 3C). Noticeably, the hormonal response of S255A was enhanced upon ErbB2/ErbB3 activation and further potentiated by CBP. This enhanced response to hormone by the S255A mutant was also observed in response to Akt activation using the constitutively active p110{alpha} PI3K construct in transfection (Fig. 3C). Therefore, the results indicate the hinge region of ERbeta contains a specific site that not only can be targeted by Akt but also dictates responsiveness of ERbeta to CBP coactivation in response to Akt signaling pathway. To determine whether Ser-255 is involved in the regulation of ERbeta in terms of protein levels, we next performed Western analysis on cells expressing the ERbeta S255A mutant. As compared with wild type ERbeta (Fig. 2B), the disruption of Ser-255 completely abrogated the accumulation of ERbeta in response to Akt activation (Fig. 3D), indicating that Ser-255 is a critical site in the regulation of ERbeta levels by the PI3K/Akt pathway.


Figure 3
View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 3.
Ser-255 in the hinge region of ERbeta is a target for Akt phosphorylation and mediates the inhibition of ERbeta activity to ErbB2/ErbB3 signaling. A, schematic representation of Ser-255 that resides within a consensus recognition motif for Akt in the hinge region of ERbeta. B, in vitro phosphorylation assay of partially purified WT and S255A GST fusions of ERbeta using activated Akt. 32P-Labeled proteins were analyzed by autoradiography (upper panel). Proteins were stained with Coomassie to ensure equal loading (lower panel). C, 293T cells were transfected with an EREtkLuc reporter and an expression vector encoding the ERbeta S255A mutant. Transcriptional activity was assessed in cells expressing either ErbB2/ErbB3 receptors activated by heregulin-beta or p110 {alpha}/Akt in the presence or absence of CBP. Treatments were 10 nM E2 and/or 50 ng/ml heregulin-beta for 20 h. Normalized luciferase values are expressed as fold activation compared with untreated cells set at 1.0. D, Western analysis of ERbeta S255A mutant in response to Akt activation. Cells transfected with S255A mutant with or without p110 {alpha}/Akt plasmids were treated or not with 10 nM E2 and then harvested for Western analysis using an anti-ERbeta antibody. Loading was monitored with beta-actin for each sample.

 


Figure 4
View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 4.
Ser-255 of ERbeta modulates the intranuclear behavior of CBP and its release from ERbeta in response to Akt activation. A, subnuclear localization of CBP and ERbeta by fluorescence microscopy. 293T cells were transfected with YFP-CBP in the absence or presence of CFP-ERbeta or CFP-ERbeta S255A plasmids. Akt was activated by cotransfecting cells with p110{alpha} and Akt plasmids. Fluorescence signals were visualized using filters for YFP and CFP shown alone and merged. Cell nuclei were also stained with 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). B, CBP is released from ERbeta through Ser-255 in Akt-activated cells. Cells were cotransfected with HA-tagged WT or S255A ERbeta in the presence of CBP and then treated or not with 10 nM E2 for 20 h. To activate the Akt pathway, cells were also transfected with PI3K p110{alpha} and Akt plasmids. Immunoprecipitation was carried out with an anti-CBP antibody, and ERbeta was analyzed by Western blot. CBP was also monitored in each sample by Western analysis. IB, immunoblot.

 
ERbeta Modulates the Intranuclear Behavior of CBP in an Akt-dependent Manner through Serine 255—Studies using fluorescent-tagged proteins have demonstrated that expression of the estrogen receptor, in particular ER{alpha}, affects the intranuclear organization of coactivators of the SRC/p160 family in response to hormone or anti-estrogens (25-27). Based on our results on the transcriptional response of ERbeta to CBP in Akt-activated cells, we investigated whether ERbeta could modulate the intranuclear behavior of CBP in response to Akt activation. Expression plasmids encoding a YFP-tagged full-length CBP and a CFP-fused ERbeta were generated and functionally validated in luciferase coactivation assay (data not shown). We first determined the intranuclear distribution of CBP by transfecting cells with YFP-CBP in the absence of ERbeta. In these conditions, CBP mainly localized into discrete clustered nuclear regions or foci, with a subpopulation showing a more diffuse pattern throughout the nucleus (Fig. 4A). This particular behavior of CBP has been observed in different cell types under basal or nonactivated conditions, and although not fully characterized, such a pattern was associated to poorly transcribing or transcriptional inactive compartments devoid of nascent mRNA transcription and active RNA polymerase II (28-30). Given our results on the effects of CBP on ERbeta activity, we tested whether ERbeta could modulate the intranuclear distribution of CBP by cotransfecting cells with YFP-CBP and CFP-ERbeta. Both proteins were shown to colocalize to the nucleus, but the ectopic expression of ERbeta strongly diminished the formation of CBP-related speckles, resulting in a more dispersed distribution of CBP throughout the nucleus (Fig. 4A). Interestingly, when the Akt pathway was activated in cells expressing both YFP-CBP and CFP-ERbeta, CBP appeared to readopt the formation into speckles, whereas the dispersion of ERbeta remained unaffected, indicating that Akt can induce a relocalization of CBP within the nucleus in the presence of ERbeta (Fig. 4A). Given the role of ERbeta Ser-255 to impair CBP-mediated coactivation of ERbeta in response to Akt, we next tested a CFP-ERbeta S255A construct on CBP intranuclear distribution. We observed that as opposed to WT ERbeta, expression of the S255A mutant did not favor CBP to fully reform into speckles, but instead CBP remained in a more diffuse pattern (Fig. 4A). This distinct behavior of CBP in response to WT versus S255A ERbeta expression was also observed in the presence of hormone (data not shown), indicating that both the unliganded and liganded receptor affect CBP nuclear distribution to Akt activation in a similar manner. These results suggest that CBP relocalizes within the nucleus in response to Akt activation and that this behavior depends on the presence of ERbeta in a manner specific to Ser-255.


Figure 5
View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 5.
Akt promotes the intrinsic transcriptional activity of CBP through Thr-1872. A, intrinsic ability of CBP to activate transcription was assessed by transfecting cells with a UAStkLuc reporter in the presence or absence of Gal4 fusions of CBP or CBP T1872A mutant and p110 {alpha}/Akt plasmids. Cells were harvested 20 h after transfection and analyzed for luciferase activity. B, Western analysis of CBP and T1872A mutant in response to Akt activation. Loading was monitored with beta-actin for each sample. C, Thr-1872 of CBP is not involved in the response of ERbeta to Akt. 293T cells were transfected with a EREtkLuc reporter and expression vectors encoding ERbeta, ERbeta S255A mutant, or ER{alpha} in the presence of CBP or CBP T1872A plasmid. The p110 {alpha}/Akt plasmids were used to trigger Akt in cells. After transfections, cells were treated with 10 nM E2 for 20 h or vehicle, and transcriptional activity was measured. Normalized luciferase values are expressed as fold activation compared with control cells set at 1.0.

 
Cellular Activation of Akt Releases CBP from ERbeta through Serine 255—The observation that CBP could relocalize within the nucleus in a manner dependent of ERbeta, and that Ser-255 seems to modulate that behavior in response to Akt activation prompted us to determine the effect of activation of the PI3K/Akt pathway on the interaction of ERbeta with coactivator CBP. We found that under basal conditions CBP potently coimmunoprecipitated with ERbeta and that this interaction was further stabilized in the presence of estradiol (Fig. 4B), thus correlating with the enhanced activation of ERbeta by hormone and CBP (Figs. 1A and 2A). However, such interaction was strongly disrupted in Akt-activated cells independently on the presence of hormone (Fig. 4B). We then tested the S255A mutant using similar conditions and found that, as opposed to WT ERbeta, CBP could efficiently immunoprecipitate the mutant ERbeta in the absence or in the presence of estradiol despite activation of Akt in cells (Fig. 4B). These results therefore provide a role for ERbeta Ser-255 to induce a release of CBP from ERbeta in response to Akt activation.

Akt Promotes the Intrinsic Transcriptional Activity of CBP through Thr-1872—CBP can be phosphorylated by several kinase signaling pathways, such as cyclin-dependent kinase or MAPK/ERK, leading to up-regulation of its histone acetyltransferase activity and therefore its intrinsic potential to activate transcription (31). To determine how CBP could affect transcription by ERbeta in response to Akt, we generated a Gal4 fusion of full-length CBP which, by interacting onto a UAStkLuc reporter, allows us to monitor directly CBP transcriptional activity in a luciferase assay. Cells transfected with Gal4-CBP showed a 4-fold activation in luciferase activity compared with cells expressing an empty Gal4 plasmid (Fig. 5A), indicating that CBP was able to promote transcription under these conditions. A further increase in CBP activity, reaching 8-fold activation compared with control, was observed upon expression of constitutive p110{alpha} PI3K and Akt in cells, suggesting that the intrinsic ability of CBP to promote transcription can be enhanced by Akt. By looking at the sequence of CBP, only one putative site (Thr-1872) is contained within the consensus motif for Akt. Interestingly, this site corresponds to Ser-1834 of p300, which was recently described as a target of Akt that promotes p300 activity (32). We therefore substituted Thr-1872 by an alanine residue and tested a Gal4-CBP T1872A mutant for its activity. We found that not only was the response to Akt activation completely abrogated by the mutation, but the basal activity was also severely impaired (Fig. 5A), indicating that Thr-1872 is a crucial regulatory site for CBP activity. The T1872A mutation did not significantly affect the steady-state levels of CBP expressed in cells, and Akt activation did not modulate wild type or mutated CBP levels as shown by Western analysis (Fig. 5B). Given the ability of CBP to respond to Akt through Thr-1872, we next tested whether this site was involved in the response of ERbeta and of ER{alpha} to Akt. Although the CBP T1872A mutant was less efficient in promoting ERbeta response to estrogen, we found that it behaves similarly as WT CBP in the inhibition of ERbeta by Akt, indicating that these effects were independent of CBP Thr-1872 (Fig. 5C). However, the activation of ERbeta S255A by Akt in the presence of WT CBP was lost when CBP T1872A mutant was expressed in cells. Similar results were obtained with ER{alpha} (Fig. 5C), suggesting that in contrast to ERbeta, ER{alpha} seems to benefit from the enhanced activity of CBP to Akt in a manner dependent on Thr-1872.

Estrogen-responsive Genes Are Regulated Differently by Heregulin in ER-expressing Stable Clones—Based on our results on the apparent difference between the ER{alpha} and ERbeta response to CBP when Akt is activated and to delineate each ER contribution, we generated ER{alpha}- and ERbeta-expressing stable clones using ER-negative Hs578t breast cancer cells. Hs578t cells are an appropriate model to study the effect of Akt because they exhibit high basal Akt activity through ErbB receptor signaling and mutated active Ras (33, 34). In addition, Akt can be further activated by heregulin-beta in each Hs-ER stable clone in a time-dependent fashion (Fig. 6A), indicating that these cells maintain the ability to respond to heregulin-beta (35). Stable expression of ER{alpha} or ERbeta also confers enhanced estrogen-dependent activation of Akt compared with negative cells (Fig. 6A). Using RTPCR analysis on cathepsin D1 (CatD1) and progesterone receptor (PR), two recognized estrogen-responsive genes, we found their expressions were enhanced by estradiol in both ER stable clones, compared with negative control cells (Fig. 6B). However, these increases were severely impaired by the addition of heregulin-beta to Hs-ERbeta cells, therefore correlating with the results obtained in luciferase assays. In contrast, treatment of Hs-ER{alpha} cells with heregulin-beta further potentiated the estrogen-stimulated expression of both genes (Fig. 6B). This suggests that the regulation of CatD1 and PR expression by ERbeta was more dependent on the effect of heregulin-beta than the one through ER{alpha} (Fig. 6B). Under these conditions, the CBP steady-state levels were not significantly modified in Hs-ER{alpha} and HsERbeta cells (Fig. 6C).


Figure 6
View larger version (55K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 6.
Estrogen-responsive genes are regulated differently by ER{alpha} and ERbeta in response to heregulin-beta. A, activation of Akt in stable Hs-ER{alpha} and Hs-ERbeta clones in response to heregulin-beta and estrogen. ER{alpha} and ERbeta-expressing stable clones have been generated using ER-negative Hs578t cells (control) and were treated with 50 ng/ml heregulin-beta for the indicated time or 10 nM E2 for 60 min. Endogenous Akt phosphorylation was monitored by Western blotting using a specific anti-phospho Akt. Cell lysates were also analyzed for Akt content using an anti-Akt antibody. B, RT-PCR analysis of ER-responsive genes from Hs-ER clones and Hs control cells treated with 10 ng/ml heregulin-beta and/or 50 nM E2 for 20 h prior to RNA isolation. Representative images are shown from at least three separate experiments. Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) expression was used to normalize samples. C, Western analysis of CBP in Hs-ER stable clones and Hs control cells treated as above. Samples were normalized for protein loading with beta-actin.

 


Figure 7
View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		FIGURE 7.
A conserved Akt site dictates the transcriptional response of nuclear receptors to CBP. A, sequence alignment for predicted Akt phosphorylation site of nuclear receptors. Shown are the predicted phosphorylated serines (arrow) with the obligatory arginine residues at position -3 and the less stringent arginine/lysine residues at position -5 of the receptor sequences aligned with mouse ERbeta. The predicted Akt site is conserved in human and mouse ERRbeta and GR. B, response of nuclear receptors to Akt and CBP coactivation. 293T cells were transfected with expression plasmids for the indicated nuclear receptors with their respective luciferase reporter as follows: EREtkLuc for ER{alpha} and the estrogen-related receptor ERR isoforms; GREtkLuc for GR and PR; PPREtkLuc for PPAR{gamma}; and CREtkLuc for the cAMP-responsive binding protein CREB. Cells were also transfected with CBP and/or p110 {alpha}/Akt plasmids and treated with ligands as follows: 10 nM E2 (ER{alpha}), 10 nM dexamethasone (GR), 10 nM progesterone (PR), or 1 µM troglitazone (PPAR{gamma}) for 20 h prior to determination of luciferase activity. Normalized luciferase values are expressed as fold activation compared with untreated cells set at 1.0 for each receptor.

 
A Conserved Akt Site Can Predict the Transcriptional Response of Nuclear Receptors to CBP—Based on our results on the critical role of Ser-255 in regulating the response of mouse ERbeta to Akt and CBP coactivation, we checked whether the Akt motif containing Ser-255 was conserved within the nuclear receptor family. It should be noted that Ser-255 is located within the hinge region of ERbeta, which is generally more conserved between ERs and orphan estrogen-related ERRs than with other nuclear receptors. As such, the sequence alignment in Fig. 7A showed that although ER{alpha} and all three isoforms of ERR contain the necessary arginine residue at position -3, and the less stringent arginine/lysine residues at position -5 of the canonical site for Akt (36) in their respective hinge regions, only ERRbeta possesses the expected phosphorylated serine (Fig. 7A). It is interesting to note that as opposed to the mouse and rat isoforms, human ERbeta does not contain a serine at the corresponding position but rather has a negatively charged aspartic acid residue. In addition, human, mouse, and rat forms of ER{alpha} do not share the conserved serine residue, having a glycine or leucine when aligned with ERbeta Ser-255 (mER{alpha} is shown in Fig. 7A). Although no perfect consensus site for Akt could be found in glucocorticoid receptor (GR) and PR, a putative Akt site conserved in mouse and human GR was found with the required arginine residue at position -3 and was aligned with ERbeta.To address how other nuclear receptors responded to Akt- and CBP-mediated coactivation and to find a possible correlation with respect to their sequence homology with ERbeta Ser-255, we tested various nuclear receptors in the luciferase assay. Using an ERE-driven luciferase reporter known to bind and respond to ERRs as dimers (37), we found that coexpression of CBP increased the activity of the three ERR isoforms by 2-3-fold in 293 cells (Fig. 7B). Interestingly, when Akt activation was induced with p110{alpha} PI3K expression, CBP only failed to further transactivate ERRbeta, whereas ERR{alpha} and ERR{gamma} reached 3- and 5-fold activation, respectively, compared with controls. Under these conditions, the response of ERRbeta to Akt activation and the inability of CBP to potentiate transactivation strongly correlate with what we observed with ERbeta, and therefore point to a shared role for the putative Ser-191 Akt site of ERRbeta that overlaps with Ser-255 of ERbeta. This observation also applies to GR for which CBP-mediated coactivation was severely abrogated in response to Akt. Conversely, among the receptors tested that do not share homology with ERbeta Ser-255, we found that ER{alpha}, PR, and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor PPAR{gamma} were all further activated by CBP in Akt-activated cells in the presence of their respective ligand (Fig. 7B). CBP, which has originally been described to directly interact with the cAMP-responsive binding protein CREB, also potentiated CREB activation to Akt. Hence, the impaired ability of CBP to transactivate ERbeta in response to Akt can be transposed to other receptors that share an apparent homology with the ERbeta Ser-255-containing motif. Accordingly, at least for those receptors tested that do not fit into that category, they seem to benefit from the enhanced intrinsic activity of CBP in response to activation of the PI3K/Akt pathway.


   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
Increasing evidence suggests that besides ligand activation, nuclear receptors are responsive to kinase signaling mechanisms, and for estrogen-responsive tissues in particular, this may represent a mean to regulate the different ER-mediated transcriptional pathways (2, 3). More recently the idea that signaling pathways can also mediate transcriptional repression of estrogen receptors has led us to further investigate how these pathways are tightly controlled (11, 38). Here we show that activation of ErbB2/ErbB3 receptors and the PI3K/Akt pathway can impair the transcriptional response of ERbeta to estrogen and its coactivation by CBP. The mechanism underlying ERbeta inhibition involves Ser-255, which upon its phosphorylation by Akt prevents CBP from interacting with ERbeta, therefore abrogating ERbeta activity.

Dimerization of ErbB3 with its preferred partner ErbB2 is considered the most potent combination of ErbB receptors in terms of cellular growth and transformation (39). Deregulated signaling by ErbB2/ErbB3 has been associated with detrimental mitogenic potential in a number of reproductive cancers and the correlation of ErbB2 with ER{alpha} status has served as a predictive factor in endocrine-based therapy (40, 41). However, the response of ERbeta to ErbB2/ErbB3 activation is not clearly defined, and the exact role of ERbeta in tumorigenesis remains uncertain. We found that the transcriptional response of ERbeta to estrogen was diminished upon activation of ErbB2/ErbB3 with ErbB3 ligand heregulin or the constitutive ErbB2 variant V659E derived from the Neu oncogene. These results have been transposed to ERbeta-expressing stable breast cancer cells, therefore altering endogenous ER-responsive genes, as observed with the down-regulation of CatD1 and PR. Both conditions were associated with increased cellular activation of Akt. Intriguingly, although the coactivator CBP potently contributes to enhance basal and estrogen-dependent response of ERbeta, it became inefficient to render optimal activation of ERbeta in Akt-activated cells. These effects seem to be specific to CBP because we showed that the coactivator SRC-1 was able to relieve ERbeta inhibition to heregulin signaling (11). Based on our observations that SRC-1 and CBP can trigger ERbeta response to growth factors in an AF-1-dependent manner (8, 9), it was predicted that both coactivators would behave similarly. In an attempt to delineate the role of the AF-1 domain, we found by using an N-terminal form of ERbeta that CBP promoted ERbeta activation to Akt, suggesting a positive effect of the Akt pathway that obviously did not correlate with the response of the full-length receptor. Although the N-terminal region of ERbeta contains phosphorylation sites described to be directly phosphorylated by MAPK conferring AF-1 activity of the receptor in response to EGF or Ras (8, 18), it does not have a consensus site for Akt, and therefore up-regulation in AF-1 activity by Akt might relate to possible indirect effects, including activation of CBP itself, as predicted in Fig. 5A. Removal of the AF-1 region demonstrated a similar inhibitory pattern as observed with the full-length ERbeta, and further identified Ser-255 as a functional site responsible for the inhibition of ERbeta to ErbB2/ErbB3 and Akt signaling. Together, these findings clearly demonstrate that many signaling events converge to ERbeta to regulate cofactor assembly and transcriptional activity either in a positive or negative manner.

Our observation that ERbeta cellular levels were augmented by the PI3K/Akt pathway in the presence or absence of estrogen raised the possibility that ERbeta turnover is regulated by Akt. Interestingly and consistent with this idea is the apparent opposite regulation of the S255A mutant in the same conditions, suggesting that Ser-255 is a determinant involved in ER recycling in response to Akt signaling. Studies using ER{alpha} have integrated the response to estrogen with the cellular degradation of the receptor, thus supporting a means by which target cells can sustain or limit a hormonal response through a continuous receptor turnover. ER{alpha} has been shown to be degraded through the proteasome pathway in a ligand-dependent manner (23, 42), and blocking proteasome activity impaired the ability of ER{alpha} to mediate a transcriptional response to hormone (43-45), suggesting that ER turnover is necessary for receptor activity. Similarly, activation of the PI3K/Akt through platelet-derived growth factor stimulation of smooth muscle cells was shown to target CREB for degradation in a phosphorylation-dependent manner (46).

Recent studies derived from fluorescent-based approaches have revealed the dynamic nature of ER{alpha} within the nucleus and its behavior with transcriptional coactivators in response to hormonal stimuli (26, 44, 47, 48). Under basal conditions and in the absence of ERbeta, CBP adopted a speckled pattern with a subpopulation being more diffuse within the nucleus. The reason for such behavior is unclear, but the ability of CBP to form speckles has been observed in different cell types under nonactivated conditions, and has been associated with poorly transcribing or transcriptionally inactive compartments devoid of nascent mRNA transcription and active RNA polymerase II (28-30). The speckled clustering of CBP has also been shown to not segregate with regions of histone hyperacetylation, suggesting a decreased activity of CBP (49). However, such compartmentalized pattern of CBP was not always related to transcriptional inactivity, as the promyelocytic leukemia protein was identified as a nuclear receptor coactivator that segregates CBP into nuclear bodies (50). Interestingly, the expression of ERbeta resulted in a marked decrease in speckle formation and a more diffuse pattern of CBP throughout the nucleus that overlapped with the distribution of ERbeta. This colocalization of ERbeta and CBP occurred in the absence or presence of estrogen, therefore correlating with the enhanced activation of ERbeta by CBP in luciferase assays. However, the activation of the PI3K/Akt pathway has the distinct effect of driving CBP to readopt a speckled pattern, whereas ERbeta remained diffused, coinciding with a reduced ERbeta activity. Although these studies did not allow assessing directly the interaction between CBP and ERbeta, it is interesting to note that although the S255A mutant was tested, the formation of CBP-related foci was greatly reduced in Akt-activated cells. The expression of ERbeta therefore allows for a redistribution of CBP in the nucleus, which implicates Ser-255 as a determinant in the response to Akt. Consistent with these observations, activation of Akt led to a release of CBP from ERbeta even in the presence of estrogen as determined in the coimmunoprecipitation assay, whereas disruption of Ser-255 was found to stabilize such interaction. These observations emphasize the role of Ser-255 in mediating CBP release from ERbeta in a phosphorylation-dependent process. Although phosphorylation provides an important mechanism by which steroid hormone receptors can be activated (3), increasing evidence suggests that phosphorylation also mediates nuclear receptor inhibition or repression involving various mechanisms and different kinase pathways. Phosphorylation of serine 236 by cAMP-dependent protein kinase was reported to impair ER{alpha} dimerization and hence transcriptional activity (51). Phosphorylation of AF-1 Ser-112 by MAPK reduced the ligand binding affinity and activity of PPAR{gamma} (52). In the case of the androgen receptor, Ser-210 and Ser-790 were identified as phosphorylation sites for Akt, which inhibited the association of AR with coactivator ARA70 (53). Our results therefore provide a mechanism by which ErbB2/ErbB3 and Akt signaling impairs ERbeta activity through a phosphorylation-dependent release of coactivator CBP.

CBP/p300 are general signal integrators common to many transcription factors, and evidence suggests that part of the mechanism that regulates their function involves direct phosphorylation (14). Interestingly, phosphorylation of Ser-1834 by Akt was shown to promote p300 histone acetyltransferase activity and its transcriptional potential (32). By mutating the corresponding site within CBP, we observed that Thr-1872 is essential to promote CBP enhanced transcriptional capacity in response to Akt activation. However, ERbeta was not able to benefit from this improved activity as opposed to the S255A mutant, suggesting that phosphorylation of ERbeta at Ser-255 may prevail in the response of ERbeta to Akt. Indeed, phosphorylation of Ser-255 impaired CBP recruitment to ERbeta and did not allow for proper CBP-mediated coactivation, therefore preventing any potential of CBP to activate ERbeta. A similar mechanism was described in the inhibition of C/EBPbeta-targeted gene expression by insulin, except that the phosphorylation of Ser-1834 in the C/H3 domain of p300 by Akt prevented p300 to interact with C/EBPbeta (54). CBP Thr-1872 is also contained in the C/H3 domain, which is described to mediate the recruitment of many transcription factors to CBP/p300 (14). However, our results suggest that Thr-1872 of CBP does not regulate the transcriptional response of ERbeta to Akt. A recent report has described the interaction of ER{alpha} with the CBP C/H3 domain in the presence of an anti-estrogen, as opposed to the previously recognized N-terminal interaction domain of CBP for agonist-bound nuclear receptors, but whether phosphorylation of CBP was involved has not been determined (55).

Genetic studies have established that the cellular availability of CBP is critical for normal physiologic functions, and as a coactivator that integrates the effects of several transcription factors, this may represent a mean by which CBP can discriminate between various regulatory pathways (16, 56). As such, while testing other members of the nuclear receptor family, we found that unlike ERbeta, the activation of ER{alpha} by Akt was potentiated in the presence of CBP and further contributed to enhance the expression of known ER target genes such as those encoding CatD1 and PR, in stably ER{alpha}-expressing breast cancer cells. ER{alpha} does not contain the corresponding Ser-255 found in ERbeta, but an Akt site within ER{alpha} AF-1 domain, which is absent in ERbeta, has been described to functionally activate ER{alpha} (7, 57). Such isoform-selective coactivation of ERs by CBP may represent a mechanism by which CBP can discriminate between ER{alpha}- and ERbeta-regulated pathways in response to Akt signaling. This mechanism can become important in pathologic conditions such as early breast cancer, in which activation of Akt is extremely frequent as a consequence of ErbB2 amplification (58). Clinically, Akt activation strongly correlates with ER{alpha} in breast tumors, whereas the prognostic value of ERbeta is not established (40, 59). It therefore seems interesting to propose that the negatively charged aspartic residue that corresponds to mouse Ser-255 could predict a reduced response of human ERbeta to CBP coactivation. Clearly, further studies are needed to unravel these distinctions.

The ER isoform-specific effect of CBP by the PI3K/Akt pathway has also been observed between ERR members. As opposed to ERR{alpha} and ERR{gamma}, ERRbeta contains a consensus for Akt found within the same region as ERbeta and was found negatively regulated by Akt in the presence of CBP. Although structurally closely related to the ERs, the ERRs do not exhibit estrogen binding and are still considered orphan receptors without a known endogenous ligand. However, our results predict that ERRs can be selectively regulated by kinase signaling pathways such as PI3K/Akt. With the emerging role of ERR isoforms in modulating ER functions and target gene expression (37, 60), it will be of interest to investigate whether such regulation might influence these aspects.

The present findings demonstrate a molecular mechanism by which the PI3K/Akt pathway may dictate the activity of ERbeta and other nuclear receptors, through their selective ability to use CBP as a coactivator. With the impact of ErbB2 signaling and/or Akt activation pathways to also affect CBP intrinsic coactivation properties, elucidation of the various regulatory signals that dictate nuclear receptor-coactivator functions might provide insights into their integrative function.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, the Cancer Research Society Inc., and the Canadian Foundation for Innovation. The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

1 New Investigator of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. To whom correspondence should be addressed: Research Center, Ste-Justine Hospital, 3175 Côte Ste-Catherine, Montréal, Québec H3T 1C5, Canada. Tel.: 514-345-4931, ex. 2830; Fax: 514-345-4988; E-mail: andre.tremblay{at}recherche-ste-justine.qc.ca.

2 The abbreviations used are: ER, estrogen receptor; PI3K, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase; CBP, CREB binding protein; C/H3, cysteine- and histidine-rich 3; SRC, steroid receptor coactivator; ERR, estrogen-related receptor; GR, glucocorticoid receptor; PR, progesterone receptor; PPAR, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor; EGFR, epidermal growth factor receptor; ERE, estrogen response element; CREB, cAMP-response element-binding protein; MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase; ERK, extracellular signal-regulated kinase; WT, wild type; YFP, yellow fluorescent protein; CFP, cyan fluorescent protein; HA, hemagglutinin; GST, glutathione S-transferase; RT, reverse transcription; FBS, fetal bovine serum; DMEM, Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium; EGF, epidermal growth factor; E2, estradiol; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; AF, activation function; CatD1, cathepsin D1. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank J. Downward, T. Chan, P. Tsichlis, and V. Giguere for providing plasmids. We acknowledge the technical assistance of J. Martin and thank members of the laboratory for critical reading and useful comments.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Mangelsdorf, D. J., Thummel, C., Beato, M., Herrlich, P., Schütz, G., Umesono, K., Blumberg, B., Kastner, P., Mark, M., Chambon, P., and Evans, R. M. (1995) Cell 83, 835-839[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Pearce, S. T., and Jordan, V. C. (2004) Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 50, 3-22[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Sanchez, M., and Tremblay, A. (2005) in Molecular Genetics of Cancer (Sinnett, D., ed) pp. 149-185, Research Signpost, Kerala, India
  4. Kato, S., Endoh, H., Masuhiro, Y., Kitamoto, T., Uchiyama, S., Sasaki, H., Masushige, S., Gotoh, Y., Nishida, E., Kawashima, H., Metzger, D., and Chambon, P. (1995) Science 270, 1491-1494[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Bunone, G., Briand, P.-A., Miksicek, R. J., and Picard, D. (1996) EMBO J. 15, 2174-2183[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Joel, P. B., Smith, J., Sturgill, T. W., Fisher, T. L., Blenis, J., and Lannigan, D. A. (1998) Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 1978-1984[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Campbell, R. A., Bhat-Nakshatri, P., Patel, N. M., Constantinidou, D., Ali, S., and Nakshatri, H. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 9817-9824[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Tremblay, A., Tremblay, G. B., Labrie, F., and Giguere, V. (1999) Mol. Cell 3, 513-519[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Tremblay, A., and Giguere, V. (2001) J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 77, 19-27[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Driggers, P. H., Segars, J. H., and Rubino, D. M. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 46792-46797[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. St Laurent, V., Sanchez, M., Charbonneau, C., and Tremblay, A. (2005) J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 94, 23-37[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Wu, R. C., Smith, C. L., and O'Malley, B. W. (2005) Endocr. Rev. 26, 393-399[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Petrij, F., Giles, R. H., Dauwerse, H. G., Saris, J. J., Hennekam, R. C., Masuno, M., Tommerup, N., van Ommen, G. J., Goodman, R. H., and Peters, D. J. (1995) Nature 376, 348-351[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Goodman, R. H., and Smolik, S. (2000) Genes Dev. 14, 1553-1577[Free Full Text]
  15. Vo, N., and Goodman, R. H. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 13505-13508[Free Full Text]
  16. Kalkhoven, E. (2004) Biochem. Pharmacol. 68, 1145-1155[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Avallone, R., Demers, A., Rodrigue-Way, A., Bujold, K., Harb, D., Anghel, S., Wahli, W., Marleau, S., Ong, H., and Tremblay, A. (2006) Mol. Endocrinol. 20, 3165-3178[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Tremblay, G. B., Tremblay, A., Copeland, N. G., Gilbert, D. J., Jenkins, N. A., Labrie, F., and Giguère, V. (1997) Mol. Endocrinol. 11, 353-365[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Weiner, D. B., Liu, J., Cohen, J. A., Williams, W. V., and Greene, M. I. (1989) Nature 339, 230-231[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Fedi, P., Pierce, J. H., Di Fiore, P. P., and Kraus, M. H. (1994) Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 492-500[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Prigent, S. A., and Gullick, W. J. (1994) EMBO J. 13, 2831-2841[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  22. Marte, B. M., Rodriguez-Viciana, P., Wennstrom, S., Warne, P. H., and Downward, J. (1997) Curr. Biol. 7, 63-70[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Nawaz, Z., Lonard, D. M., Dennis, A. P., Smith, C. L., and O'Malley, B. W. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96, 1858-1862[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Kobayashi, Y., Kitamoto, T., Masuhiro, Y., Watanabe, M., Kase, T., Metzger, D., Yanagisawa, J., and Kato, S. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 15645-15651[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Schaufele, F., Chang, C. Y., Liu, W., Baxter, J. D., Nordeen, S. K., Wan, Y., Day, R. N., and McDonnell, D. P. (2000) Mol. Endocrinol. 14, 2024-2039[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Stenoien, D. L., Mancini, M. G., Patel, K., Allegretto, E. A., Smith, C. L., and Mancini, M. A. (2000) Mol. Endocrinol. 14, 518-534[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Stenoien, D. L., Nye, A. C., Mancini, M. G., Patel, K., Dutertre, M., O'Malley, B. W., Smith, C. L., Belmont, A. S., and Mancini, M. A. (2001) Mol. Cell. Biol. 21, 4404-4412[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  28. Zeng, C., Kim, E., Warren, S. L., and Berget, S. M. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 1401-1412[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. von Mikecz, A., Zhang, S., Montminy, M., Tan, E. M., and Hemmerich, P. (2000) J. Cell Biol. 150, 265-273[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Boisvert, F. M., Kruhlak, M. J., Box, A. K., Hendzel, M. J., and Bazett-Jones, D. P. (2001) J. Cell Biol. 152, 1099-1106[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Ait-Si-Ali, S., Carlisi, D., Ramirez, S., Upegui-Gonzalez, L. C., Duquet, A., Robin, P., Rudkin, B., Harel-Bellan, A., and Trouche, D. (1999) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 262, 157-162[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Huang, W. C., and Chen, C. C. (2005) Mol. Cell. Biol. 25, 6592-6602[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Nicholson, K. M., Streuli, C. H., and Anderson, N. G. (2003) Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 81, 117-128[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Eckert, L. B., Repasky, G. A., Ulku, A. S., McFall, A., Zhou, H., Sartor, C. I., and Der, C. J. (2004) Cancer Res. 64, 4585-4592[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. deFazio, A., Chiew, Y. E., Sini, R. L., Janes, P. W., and Sutherland, R. L. (2000) Int. J. Cancer 87, 487-498[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  36. Alessi, D. R., Caudwell, F. B., Andjelkovic, M., Hemmings, B. A., and Cohen, P. (1996) FEBS Lett. 399, 333-338[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  37. Giguere, V. (2002) Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 13, 220-225[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  38. Cvoro, A., Tzagarakis-Foster, C., Tatomer, D., Paruthiyil, S., Fox, M. S., and Leitman, D. C. (2006) Mol. Cell 21, 555-564[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  39. Holbro, T., Beerli, R. R., Maurer, F., Koziczak, M., Barbas, C. F., III, and Hynes, N. E. (2003) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 100, 8933-8938[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Ali, S., and Coombes, R. C. (2002) Nat. Rev. Cancer 2, 101-112[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  41. Holbro, T., Civenni, G., and Hynes, N. E. (2003) Exp. Cell Res. 284, 99-110[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  42. Wijayaratne, A. L., and McDonnell, D. P. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 35684-35692[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Lonard, D. M., Nawaz, Z., Smith, C. L., and O'Malley, B. W. (2000) Mol. Cell 5, 939-948[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  44. Stenoien, D. L., Patel, K., Mancini, M. G., Dutertre, M., Smith, C. L., O'Malley, B. W., and Mancini, M. A. (2001) Nat. Cell Biol. 3, 15-23[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  45. Reid, G., Hubner, M. R., Metivier, R., Brand, H., Denger, S., Manu, D., Beaudouin, J., Ellenberg, J., and Gannon, F. (2003) Mol. Cell 11, 695-707[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  46. Garat, C. V., Fankell, D., Erickson, P. F., Reusch, J. E., Bauer, N. N., McMurtry, I. F., and Klemm, D. J. (2006) Mol. Cell. Biol. 26, 4934-4948[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. DeFranco, D. B. (2002) Mol. Endocrinol. 16, 1449-1455[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Weatherman, R. V., Chang, C. Y., Clegg, N. J., Carroll, D. C., Day, R. N., Baxter, J. D., McDonnell, D. P., Scanlan, T. S., and Schaufele, F. (2002) Mol. Endocrinol. 16, 487-496[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. McManus, K. J., and Hendzel, M. J. (2001) Biochem. Cell Biol. 79, 253-266[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  50. Doucas, V., Tini, M., Egan, D. A., and Evans, R. M. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 96, 2627-2632[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  51. Chen, D., Pace, P. E., Coombes, R. C., and Ali, S. (1999) Mol. Cell. Biol. 19, 1002-1015[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  52. Shao, D., Rangwala, S. M., Bailey, S. T., Krakow, S. L., Reginato, M. J., and Lazar, M. A. (1998) Nature 396, 377-380[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  53. Lin, H. K., Yeh, S., Kang, H. Y., and Chang, C. (2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 98, 7200-7205[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  54. Guo, S., Cichy, S. B., He, X., Yang, Q., Ragland, M., Ghosh, A. K., Johnson, P. F., and Unterman, T. G. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 8516-8523[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  55. Jaber, B. M., Gao, T., Huang, L., Karmakar, S., and Smith, C. L. (2006) Mol. Endocrinol. 20, 2695-2710[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  56. Iyer, N. G., Ozdag, H., and Caldas, C. (2004) Oncogene 23, 4225-4231[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  57. Vilgelm, A., Lian, Z., Wang, H., Beauparlant, S. L., Klein-Szanto, A., Ellenson, L. H., and Di Cristofano, A. (2006) Cancer Res. 66, 3375-3380[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  58. Alimandi, M., Romano, A., Curia, M. C., Muraro, R., Fedi, P., Aaronson, S. A., Di Fiore, P. P., and Kraus, M. H. (1995) Oncogene 10, 1813-1821[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  59. Stal, O., Perez-Tenorio, G., Akerberg, L., Olsson, B., Nordenskjold, B., Skoog, L., and Rutqvist, L. E. (2003) Breast Cancer Res. 5, R37-R44[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  60. Ariazi, E. A., and Jordan, V. C. (2006) Curr. Top Med. Chem. 6, 203-215[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
N. Picard, C. Charbonneau, M. Sanchez, A. Licznar, M. Busson, G. Lazennec, and A. Tremblay
Phosphorylation of Activation Function-1 Regulates Proteasome-Dependent Nuclear Mobility and E6-Associated Protein Ubiquitin Ligase Recruitment to the Estrogen Receptor {beta}
Mol. Endocrinol., February 1, 2008; 22(2): 317 - 330.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
N. L. Weigel and N. L. Moore
Steroid Receptor Phosphorylation: A Key Modulator of Multiple Receptor Functions
Mol. Endocrinol., October 1, 2007; 21(10): 2311 - 2319.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
282/7/4830    most recent
M607908200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Sanchez, M.
Right arrow Articles by Tremblay, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Sanchez, M.
Right arrow Articles by Tremblay, A.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2007 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement